Which Borders are Christian?

Andrew Guffey • February 5, 2026

Where Did Early Christians Think Their Borders Were?

There is often talk about what Christians should think about citizenship, what Christians should think about immigration, what Christians should think about national borders.


Just this week, during a press gaggle, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson was asked this question: "Pope Leo has cited Matthew 25:35 to critique Donald Trump's mass deportation agenda. How would you respond to Pope Leo in scripture?" (Matthew 25:35: "...for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me....") Johnson gave a tw0-minute response, and then later a longer statement on his social media, in which he said "borders and walls are biblical, from the Old Testament to the New." The rest of the answer was convoluted, trying to reconcile the biblical injunction to welcome the stranger with the responsibility the Bible gives to civil authorities (in Johnson's view) to maintain order, etc.


All of this is, to some extent, an exercise in missing the point. Do go and read Matthew 25:31-46, and I think you'll see what I mean. Johnson seems to think this is an "individual ethic," not a civic responsibility. That's a clever way of getting around the law of Christ, an artful way of avoiding the cost of discipleship, in my view.


But it raises a deeper question: which borders are Christian borders? Is there a Christian approach to bordered territory?


In thinking about that question, I like to ask what my ancestors said, and yes, what the New Testament especially has to say on the matter.


I think of Jesus: "Pilate replied, 'I am not a Jew, am I? Your own nation and the chief priests have handed you over to me. What have you done?' Jesus answered, 'My kingdom does not belong to this world. If my kingdom belonged to this world, my followers would be fighting to keep me from being handed over to the Jews. But as it is, my kingdom is not from here.'" (John 18:35-36)


I think of Paul:  "But our citizenship [or, commonwealth] is in heaven, and it is from there that we are expecting a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ." (Philippians 3:20)


I think of the author of Hebrews: "All of these [Abel, Enoch, Abraham, and Sarah] died in faith without having received the promises, but from a distance they saw and greeted them. They confessed that they were strangers and foreigners on the earth, for people who speak in this way make it clear that they are seeking a homeland. If they had been thinking of the land that they had left behind, they would have had opportunity to return. But as it is, they desire a better homeland, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God; indeed, he has prepared a city for them." (Hebrews 11:13-16)


But I also think about what other early Christians said about who they took themselves to be. And I think about a passage from a text from sometime in the second or third century of Christianity, called the Letter to Diognetus. The author addresses the letter to "most excellent Diognetus," whoever that may be, who has apparently asked to learn more about who these Christians are and what their way of life is. Now, there's a fair bit of anti-Jewishness in the letter, too, because Christians were trying to distinguish themselves from Jews in this period. The author is trying to show Diognetus that they are neither Jews nor Gentiles, but a "new race or way of life." But what I really find striking is this passage from chapter 5:


For Christians are not distinguished from the rest of humanity by country, language, or custom. For nowhere do they live in cities of their own, nor do they speak some unusual dialect, nor do they practice an eccentric way of life. This teaching of theirs has not been discovered by the thought and reflection of ingenious people, nor do they promote any human doctrine, as some do. But while they live in both Greek and barbarian cities, as each one's lot was cast, and follow the local customs in dress and food and other aspects of life, at the same time they demonstrate the remarkable and admittedly unusual character of their own citizenship. They live in their own countries, but only as nonresidents; they participate in everything as citizens, and endure everything as foreigners. Every foreign country is their fatherland, and every fatherland is foreign. ...They live on earth, but their citizenship is in heaven.


The early Christians, according to this author, were cosmopolitans in their daily lives: the cosmos (the whole word) was their polis (home-city), cosmopolitans. They noted the borders mortals draw. But they thought they were irrelevant. "They live in their own countries, but only as nonresidents; they participate in everything as citizens, and endure everything as foreigners. Every foreign country is their fatherland, and every fatherland is foreign." This is not a case for open borders, but it is a repudiation of the notion of a "Christian nation," and of the notion that borders are biblical. Because it is a declaration of the irrelevance of borders. It's an affirmation that borders are always secondary, that our allegiance as Christians is not to any set of borders except those of the kingdom of God, and no one has yet been able to measure those borders. Christians have from our earliest days pledged our allegiance first and foremost to the kingdom in which our common humanity and our common status under God is what is most important. And in that situation, there is no line between individual responsibility and civic responsibility. What God requires of us is required of us no matter which borders we currently inhabit.


And what does the Lord require of us, but to act justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with our God. (Micah 6:8) We cannot claim to be God's people and condone cruel enforcement of unjust laws. We cannot walk humbly with our God if we are determined to make God say only what we want God to say and to assure ourselves that God underwrites all of our vicious fantasies. We cannot claim to be Christian while wielding the sword against our neighbors. We cannot be God's wandering people if we've decided this land is God's land, our land, and that those borders must be policed with cruelty.


I'll remind you again of what St. Paul says: "Owe no one anything, except to love one another, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law. The commandments, 'You shall not commit adultery; you shall not murder; you shall not steal; you shall not covet,' and any other commandment, are summed up in this word, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore, love is the fulfilling of the law."

By Peter Trumbore February 23, 2026
We're building our conversation this week around the above quote, that has widely been attributed to English modernist writer and feminist pioneer Virginia Woolf. Before you ask, yes, we are aware that some of Woolf's views, especially on race and class, would make her persona non grata in certain circles today. But that said, the quote is worth thinking about. In some ways it is reminiscent of a quote from C.S. Lewis that was the focus of one of our conversations some eight years ago. Lewis said: "When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up." What both writers seem to be pointing to is the obvious truth that as we age we grow and change. Including our views, our ideas of how the world works, our preconceived notions of ourselves and others. And sometimes that change will feel like loss. What takes the place of those things we've lost? For Woolf, it's other illusions. This brings us back to Woolf's quote. What do you think she is getting at here? Are there illusions that you've had to lose as you've grown older and (hopefully) wiser? What might those be for you? And what about the other half of the quote? What kind of new illusions have we acquired as we've shed others? Finally, are there "comforting illusions" that you still cling to? And to make it a little provocative, is your faith one of them? Come help us sort it all out tomorrow evening. Join us for the discussion Tuesday, Feb. 24 starting at 7pm at Irish Tavern in downtown Lake Orion.
By Andrew Guffey February 22, 2026
This Sunday, all are welcome to join us for a morning of worship and fellowship. Whether you are with us in the sanctuary or joining from afar, your presence strengthens our community. Our service is at 9:30 a.m. We warmly welcome those who cannot attend in person to join us via our live stream.
By Andrew Guffey February 20, 2026
This is us.
By Andrew Guffey February 15, 2026
This Sunday, all are welcome to join us for a morning of worship and fellowship. Whether you are with us in the sanctuary or joining from afar, your presence strengthens our community. Our service is at 9:30 a.m. We warmly welcome those who cannot attend in person to join us via our live stream.
By Andrew Guffey February 13, 2026
Rem ember, you are dust.
By Peter Trumbore February 9, 2026
Every now and again we dip into the archives to bring back a topic from a past discussion. When you've been doing this for more than a dozen years, there's plenty of good stuff to revisit. So we're doing that this week, and it turns out to be a surprisingly timely decision. Next Tuesday marks Random Acts of Kindness Day (yes, really), and it turns out that nine years ago, almost to the very day, our conversation revolved around the idea of random acts of kindness. Since we last talked about it, the idea of random acts of kindness has become surprisingly institutionalized. According to the Random Acts of Kindness Foundation , which actively encourages just such things, "When we choose kindness, our brains light up with oxytocin, dopamine, and connection; reminding us that kindness is not just good for the world, it is good for us." And almost 250,000 people worldwide have signed up with the foundation as RAKtivists, pledging to try to make the world a better place one act of kindness at a time. For its part, the foundation, which aims to make kindness a norm, offers kindness tips and suggestions, creates teaching materials, and encourages kindness in our schools, homes, and in our workplaces. For example, when on social media they suggest: "Scroll until you see someone's creative effort -- a drawing, recipe, a photo -- and leave a genuine, specific compliment." To be honest, that sounds like a really nice idea! Here's the prompt from our discussion way back in 2017: In 1982 Anne Herbert wrote the phrase "practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty" on a restaurant placemat in Sausalito, Calif. Since then, the call to practice random acts of kindness has become firmly rooted in our social culture. So what's an example of this? When's the last time you were on the receiving end of a random act of kindness? What did that feel like? When was the last time you performed one? How did that make you feel? Is such a gesture really meaningful, or is it a way to avoid making kindness a part of our everyday lives and routines? Join us for the conversation tomorrow evening, Tuesday February. 10 starting at 7pm. We gather at Irish Tavern in downtown Lake Orion.
By Andrew Guffey February 8, 2026
This Sunday, all are welcome to join us for a morning of worship and fellowship. Whether you are with us in the sanctuary or joining from afar, your presence strengthens our community. Our service is at 9:30 a.m. We warmly welcome those who cannot attend in person to join us via our live stream.
By Peter Trumbore February 2, 2026
Just when I thought we had exhausted the possible universe of discussion topics about all the various and troubling ways that artificial intelligence technologies are promising to reshape the human experience (and rarely are these for the good) I come across another example that makes my head spin. This one is populated by what are called "deadbeats" being built by companies in what is coming to be known as the "digital-afterlife industry." There's a long article over at The Atlantic's website ( click here for a gift link to the story ) that goes into detail about the people and the companies developing the products that in some cases promise to make grief obsolete by giving users AI chatbot versions of deceased loved ones -- for a monthly subscription fee, of course. Or, in industry parlance, access to AI "deadbot" versions of those loved ones. And it seems that this is a lucrative technology. In 2024, the industry was valued at more than $22 billion, a sum expected to more than triple in less than 10 years. There are a lot of questions that emerge as we think about what all of this means for the way we experience grief and loss: "'Deadbots,' as these posthumous AI creations are known, promise to replace the dead, and the way they are remembered. This raises plenty of ethical issues, not least the extent to which turning deadbots into marketable products will rely on exploiting people in mourning. But perhaps the biggest question is how such a product might shift our experience of personal grief and collective memory. Is grief merely a painful human shortcoming that we haven’t learned to optimize our way out of yet, or does it have a purpose?" As the article makes clear, this technology is very different from the familiar ways we have come to memorialize those we have lost, whether through portraiture, literature, memoir, and so on, which are interpretive expressions of the living's memories of the dead. Instead, "Interactive griefbots are generative, producing “new utterances, new reactions, even new ‘memories’ and ‘behaviors,’ all under the guise of the deceased,” she said. This shift from representation to emulation presents a new ethical line, one that may require new legal protections. Both death and grief are states of profound vulnerability, she warned; the dead cannot stand up for their own interests, and the bereaved may not be in a psychological state to protect themselves from financial manipulation by a company incentivized to prolong their grief. One company, called You, Only Virtual, or YOV, says its point isn't to make grief easier, but rather to bypass it altogether. The company launched with the tagline, "Never have to say goodbye," and promises a user experience that will make you feel as if your loved one never died. In other words, they are promising not to capture every aspect of the person who has passed, but instead to capture how the user felt with that person when they were alive. The point of the interaction is "about inducing the emotions of the living, not imitating the emotions of the dead." We're going to talk about all of this in our conversation this week. Not just about the technology, but about grief itself, how we experience it, and what grief does to and for us. Read the article by clicking on the link above, then join us for the discussion this Tuesday, Feb. 3, starting at 7pm at Irish Tavern in downtown Lake Orion.
By Andrew Guffey February 1, 2026
This Sunday, all are welcome to join us for a morning of worship and fellowship. Whether you are with us in the sanctuary or joining from afar, your presence strengthens our community. Our service is at 9:30 a.m. We warmly welcome those who cannot attend in person to join us via our live stream.
By Andrew Guffey January 30, 2026
"...Rejoice always, pray without ceasing, give thanks in all circumstances..."