The Baptist Standard | The Texas Baptist Newsjournal
     
 
Tuesday, February 09, 2010
Home arrow News arrow Separation of church and state from the underside
Register Register Help Tools
Subscribe to our FirstLook weekly
e-mail preview

 
Separation of church and state from the underside Print E-mail
By Bob Allen, Associated Baptist Press   
Published: June 27, 2009

For many Baptists in the United States, the separation of church and state is no more than a historical concept or fodder for the culture wars. For Baptist minority groups in other countries, however, it can be a matter of survival.

While American evangelicals quibble over controversies like holiday greetings in department stores, other Christians around the world face intimidation, arrest and violence as members of unpopular minority faith communities.

Veiled Muslim woman (PHOTO/Steve Evan/Wikimedia Commons)

Christopher Marsh, director of the J.M. Dawson Institute of Church-State Studies at Baylor University, calls it “the allure of establishment.”

“Religious groups that have fought for freedom forget the ideal they fought and died for,” Marsh said. “Separation is about freedom, and freedom means nothing if it doesn’t protect ‘the least of these.’”

Zaur Balayev, a Baptist pastor in Azerbaijan, served 10 months of a two-year prison sentence imposed after his conviction on what his supporters insist were false charges. Since Baptists in Balayev’s small town of Aliabad established the first congregation in 1993, they have had periodic brushes with the law for meeting without a license.

That is despite the fact that Baptists in Aliabad have been trying to register for the last 15 years but have been unsuccessful because of stonewalling by local bureaucrats who view them as outsiders and an undesirable influence in the community.

A Baptist World Alliance delegation visiting Azerbaijan in January concluded religious freedom was only partially accorded. Muslims and Orthodox Christians meet virtually without restriction, the group said, but the same is not true for Baptists.

An Iranian protester holds a placard during a protest in Tehran. (REUTERS/Fars News)

The head of Azerbaijan’s Baptist union said recently Baptists have been described in media as “enemies of the state.”

“The strategy of the authorities is to pressure the Christians step by step until there will be no more Christian activity here,” Balayev said in a recent report to the European Baptist Federation.

The federation, a regional branch of the Baptist World Alliance, is working on several fronts to advance human rights and religious freedom in the Middle East and former Soviet Union. The Cooperative Baptist Fellowship is earmarking a third of an offering to be collected at its upcoming general assembly in Houston to support those efforts.

“Many CBF field personnel have to work in countries that do not guarantee basic human rights or care for religious freedom,” said Jim Smith, director of field ministries for the CBF. As of May, all pastors held in Azerbaijan were out of jail, Smith said, “but you never know if that will continue to be the case.”

In places like Azerbaijan, Baptist groups struggle against non-Christian religions or secular governments. In others, conflicts are of a more intramural variety.

In parts of the former Soviet Union, for example, Orthodox majorities view themselves as entitled to the favored status they enjoyed prior to the communist era and rapidly growing evangelical groups as an affront to national pride.

Last year, Baptists in the city of Lipetsk, Russia, a focal point of tension between Baptist Christians and the Russian Orthodox Church, complained local authorities were using bureaucratic methods to restrict their activity.

A Palestinian worshipper prays as Israeli police stand guard outside Damascus Gate in Jerusalem’s Old City. (PHOTO/Steve Evan/Wikimedia Commons)

Vitaly Vlasenko, director of external church relations for the Russian Union of Evangelical Christians-Baptists, said government officials in Lipetsk obviously are partial to the Orthodox, but he doubts they are singling out Baptists for discrimination. Vlasenko did say, however, processes of registration, documentation and taxation for churches have become more complex, and disputes once settled through negotiation with local officials now often wind up in court.

In February, the International Baptist Theological Seminary in Prague, Czech Republic, convened a gathering of European Baptist and Orthodox scholars to promote understanding between two Christian groups often at odds over issues like proselytizing and the separation of church and state.

Planners said a lot of problems stem from misunderstandings related to the Orthodox notion of canonical territories and canon law and of evangelical emphases on religious freedom and evangelism.

In other parts of the world, church-state conflicts are more volatile. In the Gaza Strip, evangelicals face pressure from both Muslims and Israel’s military.

“We live between two fires,” Hanna Massad, pastor of Gaza Baptist Church, said in a message at last year’s New Baptist Covenant Celebration in Atlanta.

One, Massad said, is “the fire of the Israel occupation,” which he described as a “siege.” Massad referred to Israel’s two-year-old blockade of Gaza, which severely restricts travel and postpones rebuilding of homes destroyed or damaged by missiles during hostilities that ceased months ago.

In December, Massad’s church, the only Protestant church in Gaza, was damaged in fighting between Israeli troops and Hamas militants. Previously, Palestinian police twice seized the six-story building as a sniper post.

“Also we experience the fire of the militant Muslim, who is not happy about what we do and who we are,” Massad said.

Two years ago, the Baptist manager of Gaza’s only Christian bookstore was kidnapped and murdered, presumably by Muslim extremists.

Baptists in parts of Asia, meanwhile, face hostility from Buddhist or Hindu extremists who view evangelism by Christians as a threat to the social order. Riots in Orissa, India, in December 2007, were described as the worst-ever attacks targeting Christians in democratic India.

Bonny Resu, general secretary of the Asia Baptist Pacific Federation, said the attacks in Orissa affected the poorest of the poor. “Their only crime is that they have chosen to believe in Christ according to their conscience,” Resu said in 2008.

Marsh said Baptists in America would do well to consider experiences of oppressed religious minorities in other parts of the world in evaluating arguments about civil religion in the United States.

“When we Christians are the majority, establishment or accommodation sounds great,” he said. “But when we are the minority, we complain if Hindus promote Hindutva or if the Orthodox seek special accommodation for their church.”





Reddit!Del.icio.us!Google!Live!Facebook!Slashdot!Technorati!StumbleUpon!Spurl!Newsvine!Blinklist!Furl!Fark!Yahoo!Ma.gnolia!Free social bookmarking plugins and extensions for Joomla! websites!
Comments (3)Add Comment
more bias on reporting on church-state separation
written by Achilles, June 27, 2009
Once again, we have an article written by a reporter with the Associated Baptist Press that presents issues concerning the principle of separation of church and state from only one perspective and it is the liberal/left perspective. We need to hear from conservative scholars on this issue as well.

It is beyond ludicrous to compare overt persecution of religious minorities in other countries with the policies followed in the United States up until its Supreme Court departed from a historical understanding of the First Amendment in the mid-Twentieth Century. Posting the Ten Commandments or having a Christmas pageant in a public school is not on the same level as rounding people up and killing them or even denying them permits to open a church. Come on.

I will say though that the Buddhists and Hindus are not incorrect in fearing that mass conversions to Christianity would very likely subvert their informal social order. The same could very well be said of left/liberal attempts to impose de facto atheism on America. So, we do need to be sensitive and respectful of other countries' and other cultures' heritage and folkways in our missionary work. If need be, it would be better to wreck their culture than to sit idly by while people went to Hell. But that is a false dilemma in most cases.

Christianity can be compatible with any culture. After people are converted and begin the process of sanctification, over time, they will be able to see for themselves, with the aid of the Holy Spirit, that some practices and attitudes are incompatible with who they are as Christians. For example, the Hindu practice of Sati or the widow of a man who has just died being forced or even voluntarily jumping on his funeral pyre is inconsistent with the Christian concept of marriage ending at the death of one of the mates and, more importantly, the equality of moral worth of each individual. But there are many other customs and even religious festivals that can be reinterpreted from a Christian perspective that preserve the culture of a nation and people. This is the tack followed by the early Christian church in Rome as the re-appropriated pagan festivals and customs so that Rome was thoroughly Christian over time without losing their distinctive political, economic, or social practices while moving away from activities that were incompatible with Christianity such as Gladiatorial games.

All Christians while sharing certain theological distinctives need not all look and act just alike. Individual liberty of conscience should be respected by all, but the status and equality of condition each religion actually experiences in each culture is a different matter and will vary considerably without necessarily violating the demands of a universal sense of justice.
Separation of Church and state
written by adavidson, June 30, 2009
How we understand the separation of church and state are foundational to who we are as Baptists. From Anabaptist beginnings in the Second Zurich Disputation and continuing to the first Anabaptism on January 21, 1525 with Manz, Grebel and Blaurock the nature of the church has been understood as being separate from the state. The unholy marriage of the middle ages showed this with vividness and with the Radical Reformation we sought the New Testament ideal of church. What we must realize is that this article makes a good point in that we should seek to realize that we are always one step away from losing that freedom. Separation of church and state means that the state cannot impose upon man any worship of God for his relationship is between him and God. What this does not mean that we should go the extent that some court decisions have gone. Rather it means that we respect each man’s conscience in how he seeks to relate, or not relate, to God. We should seek to have religious liberty as historically understood by our predecessors like Hubmaier. Likewise let us keep on praying that this liberty may spread throughout the world so that we may continue to do the work of the Great Commission in sharing the Gospel that sinners may repent and believe and inherit eternal life.
one step away
written by Achilles, July 05, 2009
While we might always be "one step away" from losing our religious liberty as adavidson points out above, we must be vigilant to protect our liberty and our freedom from more than one line of attack. One line of attack with which we are familiar as Europeans was launched by fellow Christians in the Middle Ages and early Modern times when individual liberty was limited by authorities in the state and church as they forcibly suppressed dissent. It so happened those in power inadvertently suppressed crucial aspects of the truth as they also suppressed heresy in many cases.

While similar dangers are posed in other parts of the world today, the close alliance of the church and state to maintain a religious monopoly of sorts is not the most immediate threat to liberty and freedom in the United States. If we returned to the pre-Lemon v. Kurtzman, Engel v. Vitale days, no one's religious liberty would be curtailed. Some variation of the understanding of what is entailed by separation of church and state that preceded the string of decisions we have suffered through since the mid-twentieth century is all that most conservatives are pushing for. We are starting to see some progress on this front from the current U.S. Supreme Court.

Involved in this discussion is the confusion over 'liberty' and 'freedom.' Even though most people causally use the two terms interchangeably, some distinction between them can reveal an important difference in legal and philosophical discussions. Historian David Hackett Fischer makes the distinction along individual and communitarian lines. Liberty is the lack of restraint on an individual to believe and act as he so chooses. Freedom is the lack of restraint for individuals to form social unions in order to live out their beliefs with others. I would argue that we should endorse and uphold both liberty and freedom.

Where current attacks on religious liberty and freedom are most pressing in our times in the United States, Canada, and Europe is from egalitarians and atheists who seek to diminish the cultural and personal influence of traditional Christianity. They seem to see religious freedom exercised by Christians as a threat to their individual liberty (via social pressure, not physical coercion) and their equal standing in the community. They are using the state and especially unelected judges and bureaucrats to ban religious speech, religious symbols, religiously informed opinion from the market place of ideas in order to further their goal of establishing a social environment congenial to their personal beliefs through the power of the state. The same enemies of liberty and freedom see people banding together to raise their children as Christians and create a Christian culture, without coercion, as threats to their de-contextualized, abstract vision of liberty that excludes Christians and any tradition that they feel uncomfortable with while they use to the state to harass and persecute Christians who merely use their liberty to call into question leftist and atheist assumptions about how to live as an individual and as a community.

F.A. Hayek and Edmund Burke saw the danger of a de-historicized, culturally neutered form of "liberty." Hayek distinuished between what he termed as true and false individualism. The false individualism of socially isolated individuals doing whatever popped into their heads to do without restraint leads to statism and the loss of liberty. True individualism finds liberty within the cultural practices and web of personal relationships of a real, concrete community. Without the informal bounds and channels of a socially developed community that provides ties for its members to each other in varying degrees and roles, then liberty cannot endure. Burke, using different language, noticed that the French Revolutionaries who had gained power were actively using the state to re-structure French society so as to "liberate" itself from its unique traditions. Burke accurately predicted that this radical individualism imposed by the state would lead to chaos and then to tyranny. As it played out, France fell into the Reign of Terror which was followed by Napoleon.

We are headed for a similar script to be played out if the statist inclusivists, egalitarians, and atheists have their way. They will destroy both liberty and freedom as well as Western Civilization if left unchecked.

Please read our Comments Covenant. Readers alone are responsible for the content of the comments they post here. The comments are subject to the site’s terms and conditions of use and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or approval of the Baptist Standard. Readers whose comments violate the terms of use may have their comments removed or all of their content blocked from viewing by other users without notification.
Write comment
You must be logged in to leave a comment. Login | Register
busy
 
< Prev   Next >
Copyright © 2007-2010 The Baptist Standard, All Rights Reserved.