Evangelicals and Immigration: Fault

Lines Among the Faithful Ruth M.

Melkonian-Hoover
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/evangelicals-and-immigration-fault-lines-among-the-f
aithful-ruth-m-melkonian-hoover/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Fault Lines A History of the United States Since 1974

Kevin M. Kruse

https://textbookfull.com/product/fault-lines-a-history-of-the-
united-states-since-1974-kevin-m-kruse/

Faithful Encounters Authorities and American

Missionaries in the Ottoman Empire Emrah ■ahin

https://textbookfull.com/product/faithful-encounters-authorities-
and-american-missionaries-in-the-ottoman-empire-emrah-sahin/

Advanced methods for fault diagnosis and fault-tolerant

control Steven X. Ding

https://textbookfull.com/product/advanced-methods-for-fault-
diagnosis-and-fault-tolerant-control-steven-x-ding/

Robust Integration of Model-Based Fault Estimation and

Fault-Tolerant Control Jianglin Lan

https://textbookfull.com/product/robust-integration-of-model-
based-fault-estimation-and-fault-tolerant-control-jianglin-lan/
Absolute Risk: Methods and Applications in Clinical
Management and Public Health 1st Edition Ruth M.
Pfeiffer

https://textbookfull.com/product/absolute-risk-methods-and-
applications-in-clinical-management-and-public-health-1st-
edition-ruth-m-pfeiffer/

Perinatal Bereavement Rituals and Practices Among U. S.

Cultural Groups 1st Edition Erin M. Denney-Koelsch

https://textbookfull.com/product/perinatal-bereavement-rituals-
and-practices-among-u-s-cultural-groups-1st-edition-erin-m-
denney-koelsch/

Chinese Immigration and Australian Politics: A Critical

Analysis on a Merit-Based Immigration System Jia Gao

https://textbookfull.com/product/chinese-immigration-and-
australian-politics-a-critical-analysis-on-a-merit-based-
immigration-system-jia-gao/

Coulson and Richardson’s Chemical Engineering, Fourth

Edition: Volume 3A: Chemical and Biochemical Reactors
and Reaction Engineering R. Ravi

https://textbookfull.com/product/coulson-and-richardsons-
chemical-engineering-fourth-edition-volume-3a-chemical-and-
biochemical-reactors-and-reaction-engineering-r-ravi/

Theology and New Materialism: Spaces of Faithful

Dissent 1st Edition John Reader (Auth.)

https://textbookfull.com/product/theology-and-new-materialism-
spaces-of-faithful-dissent-1st-edition-john-reader-auth/
EVANGELICALS AND
IMMIGRATION
Fault Lines Among the Faithful

RUTH M. MELKONIAN-HOOVER
AND LYMAN A. KELLSTEDT
Palgrave Studies in Religion, Politics, and Policy

Series Editor
Mark J. Rozell
Schar School of Policy and Government
George Mason University
Arlington, VA, USA
This series originated under the co-editorship of the late Ted Jelen and Mark J. Rozell.
A generation ago, many social scientists regarded religion as an anachronism, whose
social, economic, and political importance would inevitably wane and disappear in
the face of the inexorable forces of modernity. Of course, nothing of the sort has
occurred; indeed, the public role of religion is resurgent in US domestic politics, in
other nations, and in the international arena. Today, religion is widely acknowledged
to be a key variable in candidate nominations, platforms, and elections; it is recog-
nized as a major influence on domestic and foreign policies. National religious move-
ments as diverse as the Christian Right in the United States and the Taliban in
Afghanistan are important factors in the internal politics of particular nations.
Moreover, such transnational religious actors as Al-Qaida, Falun Gong, and the
Vatican have had important effects on the politics and policies of nations around
the world. Palgrave Studies in Religion, Politics, and Policy serves a growing niche in
the discipline of political science. This subfield has proliferated rapidly during the
past two decades, and has generated an enormous amount of scholarly studies and
journalistic coverage. Five years ago, the journal Politics and Religion was created; in
addition, works relating to religion and politics have been the subject of many articles
in more general academic journals. The number of books and monographs on reli-
gion and politics has increased tremendously. In the past, many social scientists dis-
missed religion as a key variable in politics and government. This series casts a broad
net over the subfield, providing opportunities for scholars at all levels to publish their
works with Palgrave. The series publishes monographs in all subfields of political sci-
ence, including American Politics, Public Policy, Public Law, Comparative Politics,
International Relations, and Political Theory. The principal focus of the series is the
public role of religion. “Religion” is construed broadly to include public opinion,
religious institutions, and the legal frameworks under which religious politics are
practiced. The “dependent variable” in which we are interested is politics, defined
broadly to include analyses of the public sources and consequences of religious belief
and behavior. These would include matters of public policy, as well as variations in
the practice of political life. We welcome a diverse range of methodological perspec-
tives, provided that the approaches taken are intellectually rigorous. The series does
not deal with works of theology, in that arguments about the validity or utility of
religious beliefs are not a part of the series focus. Similarly, the authors of works about
the private or personal consequences of religious belief and behavior, such as personal
happiness, mental health, or family dysfunction, should seek other outlets for their
writings. Although historical perspectives can often illuminate our understanding of
modern political phenomena, our focus in the Religion, Politics, and Policy series is
on the relationship between the sacred and the political in contemporary societies.

More information about this series at

http://www.palgrave.com/gp/series/14594
 Ruth M. Melkonian-Hoover
Lyman A. Kellstedt

Evangelicals
and Immigration
Fault Lines Among the Faithful
Ruth M. Melkonian-Hoover Lyman A. Kellstedt
Gordon College Wheaton College
Wenham, MA, USA Wheaton, IL, USA

Palgrave Studies in Religion, Politics, and Policy

ISBN 978-3-319-98085-0    ISBN 978-3-319-98086-7 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98086-7

Library of Congress Control Number: 2018952639

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer International Publishing
AG, part of Springer Nature 2019
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether
the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of
illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and
transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar
or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or
the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any
errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Cover credit: caracterdesign / getty images

Cover design by Akhiro Nakayama

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
 This book is dedicated to Ruth’s parents, Ellen Bartholdy
and Levon Diran Melkonian
And to Bud’s grandchildren, Abigail and Elizabeth Kellstedt
and Grace and Nathan Ramirez
who have inspired us to ask anew each day what it looks like to follow the
command to … “to love the Lord our God with all our heart, soul, strength,
and mind, and our neighbors as ourselves” (Luke 10:27).
 Acknowledgments

We have so many wonderful people to thank for helping us bring this

book to publication.
We have been both interested in and concerned about this subject all
our lives as Christians, scholars, Americans, and the children and grand-
children of immigrants.
Bud comes from a very political family. His grandfather built the home
of William Jennings Bryan in Lincoln, Nebraska; the site is now a state
park. His father was a supporter of lost causes—Harold Stassen for presi-
dent among others. His mother had an insatiable curiosity—“Buddy,
who is going to win the Iowa Caucus?” is a specific cherished memory
that is oft repeated. His brother, Jim, became an elected official at the age
of 34. His sister, Piney, a college professor, was known campus-wide for
her political stances. His son, Paul, is also a political scientist and not shy
about expounding his views. And, finally, his daughter, Anne, is a psy-
chotherapist who tries to keep our crazy family operating while regularly
informing her neighbors of her political views via yard signs.
Ruth appreciates growing up in a home where her family watched the
news together, read the daily newspaper, and discussed and debated world
politics. It was a gift to see her parents, people of faith who immigrated
to the United States from different countries, and who identified with
different political parties, agreeably disagree.

vii
viii Acknowledgments

Bud thanks John Green, Jim Guth, and Corwin Smidt (three col-
leagues in “The Gang of Four”) for inspiration and assistance in our joint
efforts to understand religion and politics. He is also grateful for the work
of other scholars in this subfield (in particular, the Religion and Politics
section of the discipline) who are too many to mention. Bud is also
thankful for the assistance of many talented students during his tenure at
Wheaton College. We worked together and laughed together. They are
missed but not forgotten. Unfortunately, they are too many to list.
Ruth thanks Jim Skillen for being the one to ask her to write about
immigration in 2006 and Jo Kadeleck, who years ago challenged her to
share her work in book form. And she thanks her co-author Bud Kellstedt,
whose request and willingness to move forward as a team over these past
five years she’s found humbling and encouraging, particularly in a project
area that is complicated, heartrending, and polarizing.
At Palgrave Macmillan, we are grateful to Michelle Chen, Ted Jelen,
and Mark Rozell, who saw the need for this book and helped us formu-
late a good way forward. And we are grateful to John Stegner for his care-
ful editorial advice and patience. We mourn the loss of Ted Jelen, who
was a bright light and a notable scholar in the world of religion and poli-
tics for many decades. Ted and Bud were friends for decades; he is missed.
We owe a special thanks to a number of scholars willing to consult
with us at various stages of the research and to comment on various chap-
ters of this text even when shared in the roughest of drafts: Dennis
Hoover, Jim Guth, Corwin Smidt, Timothy Sherratt, and Steve Alter. We
are extremely grateful: all errors that remain are decidedly ours not theirs.
Ruth also thanks Gordon College and the Center for Faith and Inquiry
for funding sabbatical time and summer research efforts to facilitate this
project. And she thanks her supportive colleagues in the political science
department: Timothy Sherratt, Paul Brink, and Michael Jacobs. She is
likewise grateful to her indomitable TAs, whose research, transcriptions,
and encouragement over the last years have been indispensable. They
include Karin Christianson, Jessica Allen, Emily Gerard, Liz MacDavitt,
Rachel Ashley, Jacqueline Broberg, Jenny Hyde, Hannah VanderLaan,
Jaya Rastogi, India Boland, Abby Millard, Daniel Gray, Rebekah Rodrigues,
Marina Bueno, Annika Hellweg, Taylor Valci, and William Peña.
 Acknowledgments ix

We are grateful to the various organizations that have undertaken for-

midable research in this area and have made their datasets freely available
to us to use and analyze: American National Election Studies (ANES),
The Henry Institute Cooperative Clergy Survey, Comprehensive
Congressional Election Study (CCES), General Social Surveys (GSS),
Pew Research Center, and the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI).
They bear no responsibility for the interpretations presented or conclu-
sions reached based on analysis of their data.
Lastly, we cannot thank our spouses and families enough. They have
been utterly patient and supportive in this project. Char Kellstedt—
whose support, humor, strong religious faith, and passion for justice—
inspire Bud to no end. And Dennis Hoover—in addition to his mad
editing skills—his vision, faith, parenting skills, and partnership in mar-
riage have made this possible. And we are grateful for our children, Bud’s
grandchildren, and our parents, who have inspired us as we think on what
it means to do justice and love mercy when it comes to immigration.
 Praise for Evangelicals and Immigration

“One of the many misunderstood aspects of contemporary immigration politics

is the role of religion – particularly evangelical Christianity. In this superb vol-
ume, Melkonian-Hoover and Kellstedt remedy that through rich historical
accounts, a nuanced understanding of American religion, and sophisticated
analyses of the “fault lines” that define evangelicalism’s variegated response to the
immigration debate. This is a must-read for anyone interested in religion, poli-
tics, and the enduring American debate about immigration.”
—Geoffrey Layman, Professor of Political Science, University of Notre Dame

“Too often in our political and spiritual discourse, highly complicated issues are
distilled into talking point form which can never fully capture the nuances, history,
and complexities required for a populace to reach genuinely informed conclusions.
In Evangelicals and Immigration: Fault Lines Among the Faithful, authors Melkonian-
Hoover and Kellstedt expertly synthesize scholarly research, expert interviews, and
personal stories that color in the gaps of what is perhaps the most consequential
issue of our time, namely the confluence of immigration and faith.”
—Samuel Rodriguez, President, National Hispanic Christian
Leadership Conference

“As carefully demonstrated by Melkonian-Hoover and Kellstedt’s Evangelicals

and Immigration: Fault Lines among the Faithful, American evangelical Christians
are often divided by questions of immigration policy, with marked divides
between ‘elites’ and those ‘in the pews,’ among evangelicals of different ethnici-
ties, and even within the minds of many individual evangelicals, who struggle
to reconcile their conflicted feelings on the topic. As a longtime advocate for
immigration policy changes, I found some of their findings encouraging and
others troubling—but all incredibly valuable. If ‘all truth is God’s truth,’ the
church needs not only normative arguments for how we should treat immi-
grants, grounded in biblical theology and missiology, but also this dispassionate
analysis of how we have treated them throughout history and the diverse ways
that evangelicals say they want their elected officials to respond today. I highly
recommend this fascinating, thoroughly readable book not just to academics,
but also to church leaders who want to better understand how their congrega-
tions are approaching this polarizing issue.”
—Matthew Soerens, US Director of Church Mobilization, World Relief
xi
xii Praise for Evangelicals and Immigration

“Why do evangelical Christians feel so differently about the questions inherent

in the immigration debate? Melkonian-Hoover and Kellstedt helpfully outline
the history and current trends of Protestant reactions to the immigration debate.
Through thorough research, they define the growing lines of separation among
evangelicals. Their truly accessible book on a complex topic is crucial for schol-
ars and church leaders, as it will help them understand the divides within evan-
gelical Christianity and how to begin bridging those gaps.”
—Shirley V. Hoogstra, President, Council for Christian
Colleges & Universities
 Contents

1 Introduction: Religion and the Politics of Immigration

Reform  1

2 US Immigration History, Laws, and Protestant Christian

Responses 13

3 Immigration in the 2000s: Immigration Reform, Executive

Orders, and Evangelical Leadership 41

4 Immigration Attitudes Among American Religious Groups 87

5 The Evangelical Kaleidoscope: Racial/Ethnic Similarity

and Difference113

6 Religion Does Matter: Alternative Measures and

Contextual Effects139

xiii
xiv Contents

7 Conclusion: Evangelical Christianity and Immigration

Reform: What Comes Next?159

Appendix165

References167

Index185
 Abbreviations

AME African Methodist Episcopal

ANES American National Election Studies
AOG Assemblies of God
BP Border Patrol
CCCU Coalition for Christian Colleges and Universities
CCDA Christian Community Development Association
CCES Comprehensive Congressional Election Study
CCIR Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform
CIR Comprehensive Immigration Reform
CMA Christian and Missionary Alliance
COGIC Church of God in Christ
CPJ Center for Public Justice
CRC Christian Reformed Church
CT Christianity Today
DACA Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals
DAPA Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and LPRs
DHS Department of Homeland Security
DOC Disciples of Christ
DP Displaced Person
DREAM (Act) Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act
EIT Evangelical Immigration Table
ELCA Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
EO Executive Order

xv
xvi Abbreviations

ERLC Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission

ESA Evangelicals for Social Action
ESL English as a Second Language
FoTF Focus on the Family
FRC Family Research Council
GSS General Social Surveys
ICE Immigration and Customs Enforcement
INA Immigration Nationality Act
INS Immigration and Naturalization Service
IRCA Immigration and Control Act
KCCD Korean Churches for Community Development
LCMS Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
LPR Legal Permanent Resident
MCC Mennonite Central Committee
MPI Migration Policy Institute
NAE National Association of Evangelicals
NaLEC National Latino Evangelical Coalition
NCC National Council of Churches
NHCLC National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference
PCUSA Presbyterian Church—USA
PRRI Public Religion Research Institute
RCA Reformed Church of America
SBC Southern Baptist Convention
TPS Temporary Protected Status
UMC United Methodist Church
USCCB US Conference of Catholic Bishops
WR World Relief
 List of Tables

Table 1.1 Religious variables and evangelical and mainline protestant

racial/ethnic groups 5
Table 1.2 Evangelical and mainline protestant racial/ethnic groups
and political behavior 7
Table 4.1 Should legal immigration be increased/decreased by
religious groups and survey years 89
Table 4.2 Agree that immigrants take jobs from American citizens 92
Table 4.3 Agree that immigrants increase crime rates 93
Table 4.4 Agree that immigrants are a burden on our country 95
Table 4.5 Favor building a wall or fence or increasing border controls
along the Mexican border 97
Table 4.6 Favor legal residence for “Dreamers” 99
Table 4.7 Agree or disagree that illegal immigrants should be
deported101
Table 4.8 What to do about the undocumented? Path to
citizenship/deportation102
Table 4.9 Favor or oppose deportation by preference for deportation
or citizenship 104
Table 4.10 Immigration factor scores by religious traditions by survey
organizations over time 106
Table 5.1 Immigration mean scores for various racial/ethnic and
religious subgroups 115

xvii
xviii List of Tables

Table 5.2 Immigration mean scores by religious variables for racial/

ethnic evangelical groups 118
Table 5.3 Immigration mean scores for racial/ethnic evangelical
groups by social/demographics 121
Table 5.4 Immigration mean scores by political variables for racial/
ethnic evangelical groups 125
Table 5.5 Best predictors of immigration attitudes for racial/ethnic
groups (OLS regressions) 128
Table 6.1 Is immigration influx a change for the worse or better by
race and religious beliefs 142
Table 6.2 Best predictors of white immigration attitudes: 2014 Pew
landscape survey 143
Table 6.3 Clergy speak about immigration in various surveys 146
Table 6.4 Legal immigration and partisan attitudes for white
evangelicals in various surveys 149
Table 6.5 2017 Clergy views on immigration by whether Clergy
speak out on immigration 151
Table 6.6 2017 Clergy views on immigration by religious beliefs 154
Table A.1 Appendix interviews 167
 1
Introduction: Religion and the Politics
of Immigration Reform

An immigration system that forces people into the shadows of our society,
or leaves them prey to criminals, is a system that needs to be changed. I’m
confident that we can change—change our immigration system in a way
that secures our border, respects the rule of law, and, as importantly,
upholds the decency of our country. (President George W. Bush speaking
at the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast [White House April 7, 2006])

It is over a decade after President Bush delivered this speech, and the
country may be even further apart on the issue of immigration than it
was in 2006. Elected officials, party elites, a variety of interest groups, and
the mass public appear to be more divided than ever. A careful reading of
the Bush quotation indicates the difficulty of arriving at comprehensive
immigration reform (CIR). Securing the border and respecting the rule
of law conflict with “decency,” removing immigrants from “the shadows”
and from the “prey to criminals.” Achieving immigration reform demands
reaching an accommodation between the merciful treatment of immi-
grants and the legitimate demands of security, national sovereignty, and
just and efficient governance. At this point, such an accommodation has
not been reached.

© The Author(s) 2019 1

R. M. Melkonian-Hoover, L. A. Kellstedt, Evangelicals and Immigration,
Palgrave Studies in Religion, Politics, and Policy,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98086-7_1
2 R. M. Melkonian-Hoover and L. A. Kellstedt

The focus of our volume is on religion and its ties to the issue of
immigration. This focus is a departure from the admonitions of many
parents to their children—avoid talking and arguing about religion and
politics, for the discussions and debates will lead to the loss of friends
and end in a failure to convince people of your point of view. Despite
the parental advice, as political scientists we are committed to examining
politics in its various aspects and permutations. And in a country with
such widespread religious involvement, even with the reported decline
in religious affiliation (Cf. Pew 2014), the examination of the variety of
associations between religion and immigration seems appropriate and
even vital.
The specific focus of our volume is on a particular type or species of
American religion, evangelicalism. Evangelicalism has been much in the
news in recent years, with most of the attention given to its white con-
stituents. Part of the reason for this is the size of white evangelicalism.
Whites compose about half of the American population, and white evan-
gelicals are the largest religious component of the white population. More
important, however, than size is the realization that this group of
Americans is by far the biggest contributor to Republican partisan iden-
tification and vote choice for GOP presidential candidates and has been
for some time (Kellstedt and Guth 2018). Apart from scholarly research,
the media have been filled with the 81% figure—that is, the 81% of the
white evangelical vote for Donald Trump reported in the exit polls from
the 2016 election. This figure has been discussed and debated at such
length that many Americans have come to associate the term “evangeli-
cal” with right-wing conservative politics and not with religious criteria
at all.1 As we shall see, the association has some validity as white evangeli-
cals have tended to support the Trump immigration initiatives after their
strong support for him at the polls (Jones 2018).
Despite the association between evangelicalism and the Republican
Party, evangelicalism is more than a white partisan phenomenon. Part of
the reason for the confusion is that the term evangelical has been a diffi-
cult one to define by both scholars and pundits. At the root of this
­difficulty is the failure to recognize the various facets or dimensions of
religion. When asking self-identified evangelicals about what they think
are the most important aspects of religion, they are likely to start with
 Introduction: Religion and the Politics of Immigration Reform 3

beliefs “Right” beliefs are central to evangelical identity. Can these beliefs
be identified? We attempt to do so by following the lead of the religious
historian David Bebbington (1989). Bebbington developed four belief
criteria defining evangelicalism: Biblicism—the Bible is the Word of God
and the authority for faith and practice; Crucicentrism—belief in Christ
as the way to salvation; Conversionism—the need for personal conver-
sion (the born-again phenomenon); and Activism—the commitment to
spreading the “Good News” through evangelism and missions. We would
argue that a fifth element could be added—the belief in a “personal” and
not simply an “abstract” God, a God that one can have a personal rela-
tionship with.2
Another key dimension of religion is affiliation. Individuals are mem-
bers of local churches (the First Baptist Church), denominations (the
United Methodist Church), religious families (Lutheran), and religious
traditions (Roman Catholic). When the media talk about religious groups
and their political behavior, they tend to focus on group affiliations (e.g.
the Catholic vote and Jewish partisan preferences). Evangelicals are also
discussed in this manner. But affiliation can be addressed in more schol-
arly language: evangelicalism is a Christian tradition in the United States
composed of thousands of local churches and a large collection of denom-
inations. This aspect of evangelicalism is sociological in nature. A place to
start to understand evangelicalism as an “affiliation” is to consult the
membership in an umbrella organization, the National Association of
Evangelicals (NAE). The associated denominations tend to be rather
small (the Assemblies of God [AOG] is an exception). There are, how-
ever, some larger groups, like the Southern Baptist Convention (and
most Baptist denominations for that matter) and the Lutheran Church
Missouri Synod that are not members of the NAE.3 Scholars have argued
that most Baptist, Pentecostal, and Holiness religious families meet evan-
gelical “affiliation” criteria as do almost all non-denominational
Protestants, Churches of Christ, Adventists, as well as some Methodists,
Lutherans, Mennonites, and Presbyterians (Green et al. 1996; Steensland
et al. 2000; Smidt et al. 2009). Classification by affiliation by scholars
uses the doctrinal statements of denominations, posted on their web
sites, to make assignments to an evangelical category using the belief cri-
teria discussed above. In sum, individuals can be identified as evangelical
4 R. M. Melkonian-Hoover and L. A. Kellstedt

by both beliefs and/or affiliation.4 Both have validity. Individuals can

hold the evangelical beliefs discussed above in denominations and
churches that are not a part of the evangelical religious tradition. In other
words, there are evangelicals by belief in other Christian traditions (Roman
Catholic, Orthodox) and in a variety of racial/ethnic groups among
Protestants.
In this book, our focus is on four groups of Protestant evangelicals in
the United States (white, Latino, African-American, and Asian).5 For
each of these groups, we determine evangelical membership beginning
with denominational affiliations. For whites, assignments to the evangeli-
cal tradition closely follow the standard coding schemes developed by
social scientists (Green et al. 1996; Steensland et al. 2000; Smidt et al.
2009).6 Similar assignments were made for Latinos and Asians given that
both groups have not developed a variety of Protestant denominations; it
turns out that most Latino and Asian Protestants fit comfortably in an
evangelical category as we will show in the following sections. Black
Protestant assignments to evangelical or mainline Protestant categories
are more difficult, complicated by the fact that there is a long history of
black denominations in the United States. We assigned black Baptists,
Pentecostals, and most non-denominationals to the evangelical tradition
and black Methodists to the mainline. In addition, many blacks were
affiliated with traditional white denominations (e.g. Southern Baptist
Convention, United Methodist Church) and assignments were made on
the basis of those affiliations.
We attempt to defend these denominational assignments by compar-
ing the four groups of racial/ethnic evangelicals with their mainline
counterparts (see Table 1.1). For illustrative purposes, we also include
data for white and Latino Catholics in the table. These results show that
white evangelicals and the three minority evangelical groups look quite
similar to each other in terms of doctrine and religiosity, with much
higher degrees of orthodox beliefs and higher levels of religious practice
when compared with the mainline and Catholic groups included in the
table. In addition, the evangelical groups are more likely to regard their
religion as very important and to claim a born-again identification than
the other groups in the table. Finally, compared to mainline and Catholic
Table 1.1 Religious variables and evangelical and mainline protestant racial/ethnic groups
White White Latino Latino Black Black Asian Asian Anglo Latino
Religious variables Evan Main Evan Main Evan Main Evan Main Cath Cath
Attend church weekly + 57 31 65 42 56 44 60 32 39 41
(%)
Read Bible weekly + 62 28 69 45 63 47 59 27 21 32
Pray at least daily 79 53 76 61 80 78 73 52 57 60
Small groups weekly 43 18 51 28 45 34 40 16 13 23
Share faith monthly + 54 27 69 47 61 50 50 34 22 32
High in a religious 65 36 70 44 69 53 63 40 37 38
practice index
High religious salience 79 52 82 57 86 78 71 42 53 64
Certain belief in a 77 51 64 48 67 56 68 30 54 33
personal god
Believe in heaven 87 80 91 80 93 89 93 84 86 83
Believe in hell 82 59 84 68 82 77 76 61 62 64
Bible is god inspired 84 59 85 71 84 68 81 66 59 64
High in a religious belief 65 36 67 42 68 54 58 37 38 33
index
Born again 82 27 87 29 75 49 81 19 13 38
Religious traditionalist 62 35 60 44 54 37 43 25 35 41
2 or 3 evangelical 85 39 90 54 82 63 85 43 6 14
distinctivesa
No. of respondents 6808 4460 982 280 2623 308 159 67 4318 2416
Source: Pew 2014 Landscape Survey
Religious traditionalist: “My church or denomination should preserve its traditional beliefs and practices or adjust
Introduction: Religion and the Politics of Immigration Reform

traditional beliefs and practices in light of new circumstances or adopt modern beliefs and practices.” Cell percentages
are the first of the three options
a
Born again + Bible the inspired word of God + share faith several times per year or more
5
6 R. M. Melkonian-Hoover and L. A. Kellstedt

groups, evangelicals are religious traditionalists—wishing to preserve tra-

ditional beliefs and practices as opposed to adjusting to modernity or
adopting modern practices—and hold to “evangelical distinctives.” In
sum, the four groups of racial/ethnic evangelicals look remarkably similar
in terms of their religious beliefs and practices. Evangelicalism as a reli-
gious movement and experience is clearly a multi-racial, multi-ethnic
phenomenon.
At the same time, the evidence suggests that these evangelical racial/
ethnic groups are very different politically. A large majority of white
evangelicals are on the political right, whereas most Black, Latino, and
Asian evangelicals are somewhat or very left of center. We present find-
ings to support this conclusion in Table 1.2. Comparisons are made with
mainline and Catholic groups as well. Briefly, white evangelicals differ
substantially from their minority group brethren on almost every variable
in the table. In sum, the whites are much more conservative. And the
white evangelicals are more conservative than white mainliners and white
Catholics as well. Political differences among the minority evangelical
groups with minority mainline categories are not as great as they are
among whites. To conclude, the results presented in this table and the
one that preceded it are important. They show that the four racial/ethnic
groups of evangelicals have very similar religious beliefs and practices but
profound political differences.
In addition to a careful consideration of how to operationalize our
primary religious variables, particularly evangelicalism, we also take care
to measure immigration policy attitudes. With the use of multiple datas-
ets evaluated over decades, this book presents a detailed empirical picture
of the relationship between evangelicalism and immigration politics. We
find that attitudes regarding immigration policies—the rules that should
govern deportations, paths to legalization for the undocumented, the sta-
tus of Dreamers, and so on—are highly intercorrelated. We utilize vary-
ing singular measures of attitudes about immigration policy alongside
composite measures of attitudes about immigration reform. No matter
how immigration is measured, the associations with religion remain
about the same.
Table 1.2 Evangelical and mainline protestant racial/ethnic groups and political behavior
White White Latino Latino Black Black Asian Asian Anglo Latino
Political variables Evan Main Evan Main Evan Main Evan Main Cath Cath
Party ID
 Republican (%) 65 47 31 25 10 20 47 39 49 21
 Democratic 22 38 40 51 80 77 40 41 38 51
Ideological ID
 Conservative 60 38 39 34 36 26 42 27 40 33
 Liberal 10 19 21 26 25 27 31 13 18 29
Abortion attitudes
 Pro life 66 35 65 45 43 33 55 41 46 52
 Pro choice 31 61 32 49 51 59 42 55 50 43
Gay marriage
 Oppose 66 57 60 35 54 35 51 42 35 32
 Favor 27 35 29 55 38 56 44 51 56 59
Government aid poor
 Tend to oppose 61 49 44 45 27 27 38 49 51 39
 Tend to favor 33 45 50 50 67 62 57 49 44 55
Government services
 Small government 72 63 36 30 24 22 52 36 63 23
 Bigger government 23 29 57 64 70 70 45 62 30 72
Environmental laws
 Oppose 52 39 39 34 35 32 37 34 41 37
 Favor 42 56 54 59 60 63 55 63 55 56
No. of respondents 6808 4460 982 280 2623 308 159 67 4318 2416
Source: Pew 2014 Landscape Survey
Introduction: Religion and the Politics of Immigration Reform
7
8 R. M. Melkonian-Hoover and L. A. Kellstedt

We contend that today there are three major fault lines among evan-
gelicals with regard to immigration policy—all three of which are increas-
ingly consequential. First, a major thesis of this book is that the general
political fault line dividing white evangelicals from non-white evangeli-
cals extends to the specific domain of immigration policy—this despite
the fact that some minority communities are distinctly cross-pressured by
immigration policy questions. Second, there is a fault line between white
evangelical elites (i.e. denominational, church, and parachurch leaders)
and the white evangelical laity, with the former increasing supportive of
CIR and the latter favoring more strictly conservative approaches. This in
some ways echoes the elite/mass political divide that began rending
­mainline Protestantism decades ago (cf. Wuthnow 1988). The third fault
line is between evangelical elites themselves. Even though a majority of
these elites is now sympathetic to some form of CIR, a minority remains
staunchly conservative on the immigration question and has indeed
become more vocal in the Trump era. In addition to divergence, we also
note key areas of convergence among today’s religious activists and activ-
ists of the past.
Our volume begins by exploring the history of American Protestant
engagement in immigration policy efforts. This is followed by a detailed
overview of contemporary policy engagement by evangelicals in the
2000s. Next, we turn to an analysis of numerous national survey data sets.
In a series of three chapters we examine data comparing the views of white
evangelical laity with other key religious groups as well as with data com-
paring clergy. White evangelicals are the most conservative of any reli-
gious subgroup. In contrast, Christian elites in various traditions have
often favored more centrist and comprehensive approaches that combine
efforts to both secure borders and provide pathways for legalization of the
undocumented. As well, as noted above, evangelicals of color are more
supportive of CIR. As for the causes of the divergences, we find that reli-
gion itself does make a difference. For instance, among all racial and eth-
nic groups, those who are more religiously observant and involved in their
churches are also more supportive of CIR, but only after controlling for
the effects of other important variables. And congregations where immi-
gration outreach and service initiatives are taken, and/or where clergy
speak out on immigration, are associated with higher support for CIR. We
 Introduction: Religion and the Politics of Immigration Reform 9

conclude with some broader reflections on the significance of our empiri-

cal findings, not only for future academic research but also for evangelicals
wrestling with the moral and practical complexities of immigration policy.
We suggest that there are Biblical, moral, and historical rationales for bal-
anced immigration reform that are potentially persuasive for at least some
evangelicals, and there are varying methods that can be utilized more
effectively to mobilize evangelical public opinion and action in this arena.

Notes
1. Some evangelicals have abandoned the term and called for its replacement
with some other concept.
2. Unfortunately, survey research efforts with a focus on religion have never
included questions on all of these belief components in one
questionnaire.
3. See the NAE web site for its Statement of Faith adopted in 1943 (www.
nae.net/statement-of-­faith/). For NAE’s effort to define the evangelical
concept see www.nae.net/what-is-an-evangelical/. This effort resembles
closely the Bebbington criteria.
4. Some would add self-identification as an evangelical to the affiliation and
belief components. A recent Lifeway survey used self-identification as the
determining factor, eschewing affiliation and belief measures (Lifeway
2015).
5. This focus is rare in the scholarly literature (but see Smidt 2013). Janelle
Wong’s recent book (2018) is an exception, as she compares white evan-
gelicals with minority evangelicals in terms of political behavior. However,
how she classifies respondents into evangelical and mainline Protestant
categories is unclear. The late Stephen Monsma (2017) made a strong plea
for the inclusion of minorities under the evangelical umbrella on concep-
tual grounds but not on an empirical basis.
6. These assignments at times involve difficult decisions. For example, some
Presbyterians cannot name their specific affiliation (a “no further specif-
ics” or NFS category) or may name an “other” Presbyterian denomination
for which doctrinal statements may not be available. In these cases, if the
individual named a born-again experience, they were placed in an “evan-
gelical” category. Non-­born agains were assigned to a mainline Protestant
tradition, if they exhibited at least a minimal level of church attendance
10 R. M. Melkonian-Hoover and L. A. Kellstedt

and religious salience. The large group of non-denominational Protestants

was assigned using similar procedures.
In data not included, we find that evangelicals differ from their main-
line and Catholic respondents in the large CCES 2016 survey, which will
be our focus of attention in Chap. 5. The CCES survey has far fewer
religious items than the 2014 Pew Landscape survey (church attendance,
prayer, salience, and born-again identification), but the results are similar
to those found for these variables in Table 1.1.

References
Bebbington, David W. 1989. Evangelicalism in Modern Britain. London: Unwin
Hyman.
Green, John C., James L. Guth, Corwin E. Smidt, and Lyman A. Kellstedt, eds.
1996. Religion and the Culture Wars: Dispatches from the Front. Lanham/
London: Rowman and Littlefield.
Jones, Robert P. 2018. White Evangelicals Can’t Quit Donald Trump. April 20.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/04/white-evangelicals-
cant-quit-donald-trump/558461/
Kellstedt, Lyman A., and James L. Guth. 2018. Survey Research: Religion and
Electoral Behavior in the United States, 1936–2016. In Political Science
Research in Practice, ed. Akan Malici and Elizabeth S. Smith, 2nd ed.
New York: Routledge.
LifeWay Research. 2015. NAE, LifeWay Research Publish Evangelical Beliefs
Research Definition. November 19.
Monsma, Stephen. 2017. What Is an Evangelical? And Does It Matter? Christian
Scholar’s Review XLVI: 4 Summer.
National Association of Evangelicals. 1943. Statement of Faith. http://www.nae.
net/statement-of-faith/
———. What Is an Evangelical? http://www.nae.net/what-is-an-evangelical/
Pew Research Center. 2014. Religious Landscape Survey.
Smidt, Corwin E. 2013. American Evangelicals Today. Lanham: Rowman and
Littlefield.
Smidt, Corwin E., Lyman A. Kellstedt, and James Guth, eds. 2009. The Oxford
Handbook of Religion and American Politics. New York: Oxford University
Press.
 Introduction: Religion and the Politics of Immigration Reform 11

Steensland, Brian, et al. 2000. The Measure of American Religion. Social Forces
79 (1): 291–318.
White House. 2006. The White House. 2006. “President Attends National
Catholic Prayer Breakfast.” April 7.
Wong, Janelle. 2018. Immigrants, Evangelicals and Politics in an Era of
Demographic Change. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Wuthnow. 1988. The Restructuring of American Religion. Princeton: Princeton
University Press.
 2
US Immigration History, Laws,
and Protestant Christian Responses

Overview
The focus of our book is the exploration of recent evangelical Protestant
engagement with immigration policy and with immigrants, but we think
it is essential to look back at American history to understand the founda-
tions of the current era. We make use of historical scholarship, govern-
ment, think tank, and denominational resources. In this chapter, we
consider patterns of immigration, immigration policymaking, and
Protestant reactions to both, drawing out similarities and distinctions
with today’s environment, which we then consider in the subsequent
chapter on contemporary engagement.
From the earliest days of the nation, the American political system has
found it difficult to deal with immigration, at times adopting liberal poli-
cies, then restrictive ones, and at other times, seemingly ignoring the
issue altogether. As Aristide Zolberg, political scientist and immigration
scholar, describes it so aptly, historically, US policies have been riddled
with stark contradictions: “Immigration and Naturalization policies were
boldly inclusive, in that membership in the American collectivity was
open to members of all European nations, regardless of faith or i­ nheritance,

© The Author(s) 2019 13

R. M. Melkonian-Hoover, L. A. Kellstedt, Evangelicals and Immigration,
Palgrave Studies in Religion, Politics, and Policy,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98086-7_2
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
No. 8, BEDFORD SQUARE, CHIMNEYPIECE, FRONT ROOM,
GROUND FLOOR

PLATE 82
No. 23, BEDFORD SQUARE, DOORS
AND DOORCASE, FRONT ROOM,
GROUND FLOOR

PLATE 83
CHIMNEY BREAST
ALCOVE
No. 25, BEDFORD SQUARE, FRONT ROOM, GROUND FLOOR

PLATE 84
CHIMNEYPIECE, FRONT ROOM, FIRST FLOOR

CHIMNEYPIECE, REAR ROOM, FIRST FLOOR,

No. 25, BEDFORD SQUARE
 PLATE 85

No. 25, BEDFORD SQUARE, CEILING,

REAR ROOM, FIRST FLOOR

PLATE 86
DETAIL OF CENTRAL PANEL

No. 28, BEDFORD SQUARE, CHIMNEYPIECE, FRONT ROOM,

GROUND FLOOR
 PLATE 87

No. 30, BEDFORD SQUARE, CEILING,

FRONT ROOM, FIRST FLOOR

PLATE 88
No. 31, BEDFORD SQUARE, CEILING,
REAR ROOM, FIRST FLOOR

PLATE 89
PLATE 90
No. 32, BEDFORD SQUARE, SCREEN
IN HALL

PLATE 91
PANEL OF CHIMNEYPIECE, REAR ROOM, FIRST FLOOR
 DETAIL OF CHIMNEYPIECE, REAR
ROOM, GROUND FLOOR
No. 32, BEDFORD SQUARE.

PLATE 92

CEILING, REAR ROOM, GROUND FLOOR

PLATE 92
CEILING, REAR ROOM, FIRST FLOOR
No. 32, BEDFORD SQUARE.

PLATE 93

No. 40, BEDFORD SQUARE, PLASTER

PLAQUE, FRONT ROOM, GROUND
FLOOR

PLATE 94
No. 40, BEDFORD SQUARE, CEILING,
FRONT ROOM, FIRST FLOOR

PLATE 95
CHIMNEYPIECE, REAR ROOM, FIRST
FLOOR
CHIMNEYPIECE, FRONT ROOM, FIRST FLOOR No. 41,
BEDFORD SQUARE

PLATE 96
No. 44, BEDFORD SQUARE, CEILING,
FRONT ROOM, FIRST FLOOR

PLATE 97
Nos. 46–47, BEDFORD SQUARE,
EXTERIOR

PLATE 98
CHIMNEYPIECE, FRONT ROOM,
GROUND FLOOR
No. 46, BEDFORD SQUARE

CHIMNEYPIECE, FRONT ROOM,

FIRST FLOOR