Paula White Responds to Critics of Her Recent Comments on Immigration

donald-trump-and-pastor-paula-white

Last week we did a post on Paula White’s defense of Donald Trump’s immigration policy.  Get up to speed here.

Now White has turned to the Christian Post to take on her critics.

Here is a taste:

During the interview I made an off-handed comment that although Jesus was a refugee as a baby, he didn’t break the immigration laws of his time, or else he wouldn’t be sinless or our messiah. Within a few days I was surprised to see my name all over the media as they excoriated a comment made by “Trump’s spiritual advisor.” On CNN’s Anderson 360, a Catholic priest said my comments were “appalling” and “reprehensible” and that he didn’t know what Gospel I was reading.

I don’t mean to impugn anyone’s character, but it certainly seemed like those reporting on the story were less offended by what I said as they were excited to criticize someone associated with the Trump administration. They weren’t just inferring I lacked compassion, they were calling me dumb, and by extension, all evangelicals who support the president.

As a blonde female, and as a pastor, this isn’t the first time someone has called me stupid. Sadly, it comes with the territory. And while the Bible may say turn the other cheek, it does not say allow bullies to treat you like a punching bag. The truth matters too much and, in this instance, the lives of thousands of immigrant children and their families are impacted by what our nation decides to do regarding our immigration policy.

Read the rest here.   White thinks that the only reason people criticized her is because they want to attack a supporter of Donald Trump.  In other words, she thinks this is all about politics.  Maybe she is right.  But many of us criticize Trump-loving court evangelicals because they use really bad theology to prop-up the president.

2 thoughts on “Paula White Responds to Critics of Her Recent Comments on Immigration

  1. It never occurred to me to think she said this because she was stupid, or because she was a blonde female, or even because she was connected to Trump. I thought she said it knowingly and deliberately because it reflects the bad theology she has adopted to justify her own political views. Does she really think that intelligent people cannot respond to her religiopolitical statements without “dumb blonde” ever occurring to us??

    Like

  2. This is not my area of expertise but my lay understanding is that Jesus was not about strict adherence to or breaking the law but was, instead, about challenging unjust law and perceptions of mercy and justice? The issue at the border is whether or not we, as a nation, can temper law with mercy and justice and to challenge the application of unjust laws that are at odds with moral and ethical outcomes.

    Can blocking people, and that includes parents with children, that are fleeing life threatening conditions from any access to safe harbor and/or asylum be considered just? Can ripping children from parents be considered just and merciful? I guess that imagining Jesus at the border is just too much for someone whose ministry is about hobnobbing with power and prosperity.

    A couple of thoughts from one of the principle leaders and architects of a more recent revolution.

    “I had always hoped that this land might become a safe and agreeable Asylum to the virtuous and persecuted part of mankind, to whatever nation they might belong…”

    Letter to Reverend Francis Adrian Vanderkemp
    George Washington
    Mount Vernon
    May 28, 1788

    “The bosom of America is open to receive not only the opulent & respectable Stranger, but the oppressed & persecuted of all Nations & Religions; whom we shall wellcome to a participation of all our rights & previleges, if by decency & propriety of conduct they appear to merit the enjoyment.”

    Letter From George Washington to Joshua Holmes, To the Members of the volunteer Associations & other Inhabitants of the Kingdom of Ireland who have lately arrived in the City of New York.
    December 2, 1783

    Feel free to contextualize but if we assume that these are honest sentiments expressing a basic principle of universal rights …….. given by a Creator ……….

    Like

Comments are closed.