The Stranger Effect

Strangers do the strangest things.  Suppose that’s how they got the name.  If they did the expected, they wouldn’t be strange.  Many folk fear strangers, perhaps because the unknown is often enough more frightening than the known.  Whatever the reasons rolled out in discussing U.S immigration reform, even a cursory review of American history reveals an underlying, often unacknowledged, fear of the stranger. 

Yet strangers need not evoke fear, indeed, their presence might do the very opposite, arouse hope.  In his not-to-be-missed Our America: A Hispanic History of the United States, Notre Dame historian Felipe Fernández-Armesto accounts for the peaceful reception of Spanish explorers by many, though by no means all, American Indians by citing what he calls the “stranger effect,” which is:


the propensity some cultures have to receive the stranger with exceptional honor.  In our modern Western societies, the propensity is hard to understand, since our attitude to strangers is like that of the peoples who resisted the Spaniards.  We mistrust them.  We reject them.  We call them “illegals” We impose on them bureaucratic or fiscal burdens.  If we admit them, we make them unwelcome and typically assign them low status and demeaning work.  In other times, however, and in other parts of the world, people have not, in these respects, behaved like us.  Sacred rules of hospitality oblige people in some cultures to greet strangers with their best gifts and goods and women and even actual deference.  When Spaniards found themselves treated this way in parts of the Americas, they felt godlike—and with some reason: the anthropologist Mary W. Helms has collected many instances of cultures in which the values of visitors from afar increases with the distance they seem to have traveled, because they bring with them the aura of the divine horizon.  This does not necessarily mean that people mistake them for gods, but it does explain why their persons are regarded as special, even sacred (13).

Standing so far removed from the stranger effect, contemporary Americans are equally estranged from the story of the Samaritan woman at the well.  Implicit in the story is the blessing she received—living water—by welcoming her stranger. Though they had long lived side-by-side, Jews and Samaritans treated each other as aliens, yet Christ strode across several social barricades in speaking to this stranger: a woman who was not kin and not Jewish.  According to Saint Paul, he did the same for us, dying for us while we were still estranged from God.

For Christ, while we were still helpless,

died at the appointed time for the ungodly.

Indeed, only with difficulty does one die for a just person,

though perhaps for a good person one might even find courage to die.

But God proves his love for us

in that while we were still sinners Christ died for us (Rom 5: 6-8).

It’s an ancient Christian theme, that Christ himself is encountered in the stranger.   How strange then—and how sad—that we quickly forget it, when the stranger actually appears.

Exodus 17: 3-7   Romans 5: 1-2, 5-8   John 4: 5-42

Comments are automatically closed two weeks after an article's initial publication. See our comments policy for more.
Bruce Snowden
4 years 7 months ago
A few years ago my wife and I traveling South by car, got lost somewhere in Maryland in a torrential downpour. We pulled over to the side to await a let-up in the rain and when we tried to restart, our car wouldn't start. So, I left the car in the rain and tried to flag down anyone to borrow a cell phone to call AAA but no one stopped. It was early in the morning and everyone seemed to be in a hurry. I kept waving to passing cars and unexpectedly a pickup truck that had moved on suddenly backed up and a young Hispanic man walked to us. I borrowed his Cell and called AAA and subsequently they came. After helping us the young Hispanic man apologized telling us he was on his way to work and had to leave. I offered him $20 in thanks but he refused it saying, "God will help me!" I responded, "Yes, I'm sure God will help you, but we want to help you too!" I forced him to take the $20 which he took reluctantly then drove away very respectfully. Here was a "stranger" to us an "angel" in human form, and nothing strange about him, a stranger who helped us in our need. He was a Godsend, as strangers often are.
J Cabaniss
4 years 7 months ago
I have no reason to doubt the author's sincerity in writing this piece, but it differs only in tone and not in kind from all the other assertions about the lack of integrity, compassion, generosity, etc of those who support more restrictions on immigration. These articles are of a type: my opponents are deeply flawed people ... whose arguments can simply be ignored. This is not an essay that addresses issues and engages in ideas, it is one that justifies avoiding the debate entirely. It is not surprising that there is little productive discussion between the two sides as there are actually two very different approaches involved. One side claims its position should be adopted because of reasons A, B, and C, while the other side claims its own position is so transparently right the only reason someone could reject it is because of serious personal deficiencies, like selfishness, greed, ... or fear.


The latest from america

Catherine Pakaluk, who currently teaches at the Catholic University of America and holds a Ph.D. in Economics from Harvard University, describes her tweet to Mr. Macron as “spirited” and “playful.”
Emma Winters October 19, 2018
A new proposal from the Department of Homeland Security could make it much more difficult for legal immigrants to get green cards in the United States. But even before its implementation, the proposal has led immigrants to avoid receiving public benefits.
J.D. Long-GarcíaOctober 19, 2018
 Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, then nuncio to the United States, and then-Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick of Washington, are seen in a combination photo during the beatification Mass of Blessed Miriam Teresa Demjanovich at the Cathedral Basilica of the Sacred Heart in Newark, N.J., Oct. 4, 2014. (CNS photo/Gregory A. Shemitz)
In this third letter Archbishop Viganò no longer insists, as he did so forcefully in his first letter, that the restrictions that he claimed Benedict XVI had imposed on Archbishop McCarrick—one he alleges that Pope Francis later lifted—can be understood as “sanctions.”
Gerard O’ConnellOctober 19, 2018
Kevin Clarke tells us about his reporting from Iraq.
Olga SeguraOctober 19, 2018