While not explicitly expressed within the Constitution, the principle of the separation of church and state is clearly implicit. As the First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

Thomas Jefferson’s 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptist Association famously expanded upon this principle, which he described as a “wall of separation between church and state.” Unfortunately, what Jefferson was focusing on has since been turned on its head, as he was warning against the state meddling in the affairs of the church. He was not setting the principle of the church not influencing the conscience of the state. Indeed, the church’s role, in part, is to serve as the ethical conscience of the state and society at large.

The primary concern of the Constitution’s Establishment Clause is to protect the church from the state, not protect the state from the church.

This principle is also a Christian principle, as God has established different roles for the government from that of the church. As 1 Peter 2:13-14 directs, “Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good.”

The role of the state or the government is to create and enforce laws for the good of the nation or people over whom the government has authority. The means by which a government expresses that authority is through laws, which it then has not only the right but, within a democratic governmental context, the obligation to enforce.

Many Americans have problems with Washington because, on the one hand, it imposes laws via unelected bureaucrats to avoid accountability to the electorate, and on the other hand, it ignores the enforcement of laws it finds politically inconvenient.

The most significant example of the latter is immigration enforcement. Under Joe Biden’s administration, the enforcement of immigration and border laws was intentionally worked around, all in the name of compassion. This lack of border and immigration enforcement resulted in millions of illegal aliens entering the country and, in large measure, led to Donald Trump’s election victory.

Americans correctly desire law and order, as that is the most fundamental role of the state. Thus, when the Trump administration has once again enforced our nation’s border and immigration laws, those who have broken our laws suffer the consequences. In the case of illegal aliens, the law is clear: they are subject to deportation.

When the state enforces these immigration laws, it is not guilty of injustice or doing evil. Indeed, for the state to fail to enforce these laws would be for the state to engage in injustice.

Unfortunately, many Christians have lost the plot when it comes to illegal immigration. Whether it’s Pope Francis recently blasting the Trump administration over its immigration enforcement measures or Protestants in America asserting that “undocumented” people aren’t “illegal,” the fact of the matter is, the ethical sentiment being expressed runs contrary to the clear teaching of Scripture.

Physical boundaries and citizenship status delineate nations. To be an American has no meaning outside of citizenship. The United States of America has no identity if it has no borders. The laws of the land are meaningless if there is no defined land. Unfortunately, too many reject these simple, inherently logical observations in the name of “compassion.”

Permitting lawlessness is not compassionate. It has repeatedly been noted that the lack of border enforcement has fueled both high rates of illicit drug use and human trafficking. Criminal cartels have taken advantage of America’s lax immigration enforcement to exploit individuals who are most often seeking better economic opportunities. The cartels have used and abused people in this process. Furthermore, the cartels’ illicit drug smuggling has fueled the fentanyl crisis that has killed hundreds of thousands of Americans over the past decade.

Where is the compassion in allowing such lawlessness?

The American government’s primary responsibility is toward its own people, as is the job of any government. Concern for meeting the needs of the poor across the globe is not the responsibility of the U.S. government. It is not evil, unjust, or un-Christian to reject the notion that the U.S. must accept the world’s poor simply because they want in.

Love of neighbor does not require one to give your neighbor everything they demand. Indeed, sometimes it means not giving your neighbor what they demand. But it does require honesty. And here is where too many Christians seem willing to compromise.

The money of the U.S. government comes directly from U.S. taxpayers. Our government, first and foremost, should use taxpayer dollars for the benefit of those it governors, namely in upholding the laws of the land and protecting our citizens from foreign enemies. When U.S. government officials take taxpayer money and give it to illegal aliens, they are not only encouraging lawlessness, but they are, in fact, engaging in theft against U.S. citizens. This is not merely a political issue; it’s a moral one.

Concern for the welfare of the orphan and widow, as Scripture clearly directs Christians to address, is the role of the church, not the state. When the state steps in, it is outside its role, usurping the role of the church. That wall of separation between the church and state that Jefferson was so concerned with maintaining has long been blasted through. Though it’s not the church that has crossed the boundary; it’s the state.