Secularism and Freedom of Conscience

The Rev. Dr. Michael Jinkins,
President of Louisville Presbyterian
Theological Seminary and
Professor of Theology. 

There is an interesting review of Jocelyn Maclure and Charles Taylor's essay, Secularism and Freedom of Conscience by Michael Jinkins on his blog Thinking Out Loud.

Jinkins applauds Maclure and Taylor and then makes a couple of points that sound (without having read the original) as though they quite undermine their thesis.

He points to a risk in the essayists' approach that their method could lead to "treating one another's differences of conviction and conscience as mere matters of individual taste and preference." This can only trivialise our real differences.

Instead he suggests two other starting points. First:

that the reason we are confronted with so many ways of accounting for ultimate meaning is not because of our finitude or ignorance, but because there really are a variety of ways to be faithfully and fully human.

And, second:

... as humans we do not disinterestedly choose from among a range of axiological options, but are formed in and through communities that that believe certain things in certain ways and value particular things and ideas in particular ways.

Therefore,

We must learn to speak from within our different cultural and religious communities—the very communities that divide us— if we are to learn and to be heard. The great challenge of our time is to live and flourish together though we are different in important respects, but similar in ways that are just as important. To succeed at this critical endeavor, we must acknowledge how the groups and communities that shape us value certain ends and not others. We will not convince one another of our mutual rights to live and practice our faith (or our right to claim no faith at all) as long as we regard one another merely as atomistic ideological or religious consumers.

Amen. But, as with all liberal-minded approaches, it is not sufficient. How can these starting points, which I would endorse, deal with those who reject Jinkins' tenets? How should we respond to organised groups which would use violence of any kind to destroy groups with whom they disagree? 

These are not questions antithetical to the starting points Jinkins lays out. They are questions as to how such liberal values can be taken into alien territory without losing their integrity.

I should think so too!

Religious leaders praise Obama torture ban

Compiled by the Boston Globe.

It's always seemed to me that this was one matter Christians, and members of other faiths, could agree on whole heartedly.

Why then has there not been a much more high profile religious campaign against torture? Could it be that Christians, and members of other faiths, also agree on deferring to the policy of their nation states, even when they disagree with it?

The peace of God

Archbishop Peter Akinola and Bishop Martyn Minns

of The Anglican Church of Nigeria

Eruptions at the Foot of the Volcano (Leonardo Ricardo) has a long piece which celebrates a UN decision on the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and attacks the attitudes of conservative Anglicans:

(New York, December 18, 2008) – ¨In a powerful victory for the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 66 nations at the UN General Assembly today supported a groundbreaking statement confirming that international human
rights protections include sexual orientation and gender identity. It is the first time that a statement condemning rights abuses against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people has been presented in the General Assembly.¨

Human rights are incommensurable with the hierarchical structuring of religion and the absolute legitimation of ecclesiastical authority as God given.

Therefore human rights should be of the deepest concern to all faithful people: how have we built a church, any church, that is capable of acting against people because they do not fit an expected mould? How can we belong to a church which does not regard every person as of equal value before God and, therefore, of equal value in our own eyes? How can we support a church which does not actively oppose all violence against God's children?

There is something rotten in our relationship with God.

===============

Subsequent note: the Vatican signed up to the statement, the US refused to. Is this perhaps because the US might have to do something about it while the Vatican never would?

Violence and Christians

A Christian in her burned home in the Indian state of Orissa.

There are further reports of attacks on Christians:



AFP reports Iraq pours in police to protect Christians:

"Two (national police) brigades were sent to Christian areas in Mosul and churches were surrounded and put under tight security," interior ministry spokesman Abdul-Karim Khalaf told AFP.

He said the reinforcements had been deployed from midnight in the restive northern city, considered by US and Iraqi commanders as the last urban stronghold of Al-Qaeda in Iraq.

Khalaf added that two investigation teams, one security and the other criminal, had also been deployed to probe a spate of attacks on Christians in Mosul since September 28, in which at least 11 people have been killed.

An AFP correspondent said police had set up checkpoints at churches in the city's four heavily Christian areas and were patrolling the streets on foot.

Nearly 1,000 Christian families have fled their homes in the city since Friday, taking shelter on the northern and eastern fringes of Nineveh province, according to provincial governor Duraid Kashmula.

There have been some arrests (CNN).

National Public Radio reports that the Christian response in some parts of Iraq has been to establish their own militias.

Many residents are delighted to see Christians standing up to defend themselves.
Some, however, worry about the political implications of this latest sectarian
armed force in Iraq and wonder where its money is coming from.

The New York Times has: Hindu Threat to Christians: Convert or Flee

The family of Solomon Digal was summoned by neighbors to what serves as a public
square in front of the village tea shop.

They were ordered to get on their knees and bow before the portrait of a Hindu
preacher. They were told to turn over their Bibles, hymnals and the two brightly
colored calendar images of Christ that hung on their wall. Then, Mr. Digal, 45,
a Christian since childhood, was forced to watch his Hindu neighbors set the
items on fire.

“ ‘Embrace Hinduism, and your house will not be demolished,’ ” Mr. Digal recalled being told on that Wednesday afternoon in September. “ ‘Otherwise, you will be killed, or you will be thrown out of the village.’ ”

There have been attacks on Christians in at least five States over the last six weeks.

The clash of faiths has cut a wide swath of panic and destruction through these
once quiet hamlets fed by paddy fields and jackfruit trees. Here in Kandhamal,
the district that has seen the greatest violence, more than 30 people have been
killed, 3,000 homes burned and over 130 churches destroyed, including the
tin-roofed Baptist prayer hall where the Digals worshiped. Today it is a heap of
rubble on an empty field, where cows blithely graze.

And Human Rights Watch has a longer perspective, associating the rise of attacks with the BJP rule from 1998.

Attacks against Christians throughout the country have increased significantly
since the BJP began its rule at the center in March 1998. They include the
killings of priests, the raping of nuns, and the physical destruction of
Christian institutions, schools, churches, colleges, and cemeteries. Thousands
of Christians have also been forced to convert to Hinduism. The report concludes
that as with attacks against Muslims in 1992 and 1993, attacks against
Christians are part of a concerted campaign of right-wing Hindu organizations,
collectively called the sangh parivar, to promote and exploit communal clashes
to increase their political power-base. The movement is supported at the local
level by militant groups who operate with impunity.

When will it end?

I've been watching the slow dance of the culture wars over the last week or two, turning on the question of attitudes towards homosexuals.


October 12th marked the 10th anniversary of Wayne Shepard (and here), lynched in Wyoming for being gay. For some people this has not been a cold war.



Thinking Anglicans has reports from Nigeria of a direct conflict between those for whom 'Homosexuality is totally unacceptable' and the announcement of 'House of Rainbow, purportedly a church organisation piloted by a self-confessed homosexual, Reverend Rowland Jide Macaulay.' This in a country in which some people have denied the existence of homosexuality, let alone its acceptability. Also: "CHRISTIAN leaders in the South Senatorial district of Delta State have expressed shock at the infiltration into the country of the Gay Movement, made up of homosexuals and lesbians, saying it is a satanic plot" here.



In Kenya Revd Michael Kimindu has found himself excluded from his clergy chapter meeting because of his support for those in same-sex relationships. Michael is the Co-ordinator for Other Sheep Ministries East Africa.

GAFCON met in Uganda. The headline 'Anti-gay bishops meet' was an accurate description.


Across the pond in Califormia a referendum seems to be moving towards rescinding the State's authoriasation of same-sex marriages. Geoff Farrow, a Roman Catholic Priest, has been suspended by his bishop for publicly supporting same-sex marriage. He has made a statement to the effect that, although others will stay silent, his conscience would not allow him to do so. In some quarters he has been hailed as a hero. He is not alone, but he was the first.

On the other hand the Connecticut Supreme Court has ruled, albeit by a 4:3 majority, that the ban on same-sex marriage in that state is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court in California has come to the same conclusion.



In Norway the bishops debated and decided they would not permit same-sex unions in church, nor bless (heterosexual) civil marriages.

In Iraq "October 2, 2008 - A key figure in the clandestine Baghdad network of theassociation Iraqi lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender/transsexual(LGBT) was assassinated by an anti-gay Islamist death squad" here. Death threats had followed an article and photo in an Australian magazine. Read the whole article.

The Vatican refuses gay people and divorcees as ambassadors in its court. I guess it does not want to be tainted.

Back in the States the Diocese of Pittsburgh has split down the middle. The majority will follow Bob Schofield into some sort of affiliation with the Southern Cone; a minority (at least 20 parishes) will remain with TEC. It'll be a while before its clear what will happen about Trinity Cathedral. The expectation is that a new diocese will be created in North America round which conservatives will circle their wagons. This has no doubt been spurred a little nearer by the inhibition of 52 clergy in the Diocese of San Joaquin following its defection from TEC. Perhaps it'll be ready by Christmas.

A fascinating and sad account of how the Diocese of San Joaquin came to leave TEC and attempts at and failure of reconciliation is here.

In England the issue was the role of women. John Broadhurst, Bishop of Fulham, said (as reported in the Daily Telegraph) that the decision not to protect Forward in Faith from women bishops was 'sin' and that 'Synod is "unfit for purpose" because it does not consider God first and added to applause: "The sooner it is trimmed, culled, sorted or even destroyed, the better."' (Ironic really. It took 150 years for the CofE to patriate from Parliament the power to make spiritual decisions in the government of the church. And as soon as it exercises that power people walk off in a huff.) And Bob Duncan pops up to court conservatives. Does he want English conservatives to be a parish in the new American Province?

At the same time Reform is speculating out loud about the possibility of aligning itself with bishops outwith the UK. Not forgetting the chaplain to the Stock Exchange. You wonder about the company he keeps.

================

This post has been just two weeks in the making. I guess you could do a similar review of more or less any fortnight over the last few years.

What I noted first was the violence of words (the Bishop of Fulham, Peter Mullen) and fact (Matthew Shepard, Iraq). I believe there is a direct line (association, not cause) between language which demeans and dehumanises people and willingness (tacit permission) to use violence agains them. The victims of this culture war are those who are made less, who suffer in their lives and careers, who suffered abuse and beatings and death for their sexuality.

There is also a repeated use of minority status, not least the claim for those who suffer violence that they are martyrs, as weapons in the war. Conservatives claim to be victimised by liberals which somehow creates a moral equivalence to those who suffer violence. Each side no doubt diminishes the other, I am prone to do so myself, but I risk the assertion that no-one has yet been murdered or beaten up for being a heterosuxual conservative.

There is something inherent in religion which simultaneously creates the possibility of hope, peace, reconciliation, mutual regard and respect across difference, denies the possibility. (See Violence in God's Name, Oliver McTernan, DLT, 2003) I believe that the dominant word of religion is violence against the other - often in order to prove (give effect to) the truth of one's own claim by the denial of another. At the same time the model is inverted: the truth of one's own claim is proven (tested) by noble suffering. The model is in Foxes' Book of Martyrs: Bishop Farrar, for example, was burnt at the stake by Bloody Mary,

it is said that one Richard Jones, a knight's son, coming to Dr. Farrar a little
before his death, seemed to lament the painfulness of the death he had to
suffer; to whom the bishop answered that if he saw him once stir in the pains of
his burning, he might then give no credit to his doctrine; and as he said, so
did he maintain his promise, patiently standing without emotion, until one
Richard Gravell with a staff struck him down.

Or, in Ted Hughes' version ‘If I flinch from the pain of the burning, believe not the doctrine that I have preached.'

Violence - dehumanisation - control of the other - the claim to know truth and to the right to apply it over all other claims - and proof of truth by martyrdom - form a religiously validated complex of ideas played out today over the issue of sexuality.

When it ends, will it just be replaced by another issue, and more people suffer?

Caught in the cross-fire

From Asianews.it

Anglican bishop calls attention to civilians caught in crossfire between army and Tamil Tigers
by Melani Manel Perera

The population is caught in a crossfire between the two belligerents, the army and Tamil Tiger rebels. The prelate calls for the establishment of “humanitarian corridors” to deliver aid; he also wants to see an “inter-religious group” set up to confront the emergency situation.

Colombo (AsiaNews) – In a statement Anglican Bishop Duleep de Chickera said that people in Vanni, an area in the Tamil Tiger-controlled north, are concerned about the situation of constant tension and are afraid that dangers might increase should there be an escalation in violence between the army and rebels fighting for the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). In the same statement he expressed his “solidarity and closeness” to a civilian population under severe distress by a “war that seems to have no end.”

“Unarmed and trapped in this war zone, large numbers of civilians, including children, are caught in an intense cross-fire,” he said. “Thousands are already displaced and can flee only to places of temporary safety,” he added.

The “situation faced by these civilians is even more desperate since they cannot act independently. They are under conflicting pressure from both sides for support [. . .] and fear reprisals if they do not. Their dilemma adds to their suffering. Their voice is silenced with the sound of guns, manipulation and propaganda.”

For him it is necessary that a “collective conscience intervene on behalf of these vulnerable, helpless and harassed Sri Lankans.”

Since both the Sri Lanka government and the LTTE claim they are involved in this war for the liberation of these same civilians it is imperative they jointly invite and assist international organisations to bring aid to the population.

“My Roman Catholic colleague the Bishop of Jaffna, the Rt Rev Thomas Savundaranayagam, has already made this suggestion and it needs to be reiterated. If for some reason these agencies are unable to intervene, then an inter-religious group of leaders must be invited to do so,” Bishop de Chickera said.

Lastly the prelate thanked the government for guaranteeing the delivery of food, infant powered milk, medicines and other essential items to the area.

Since 1983 the conflict between the army and LTTE rebels has caused the death of 65,000 people.

Kenya: soul searching

Sirata Orobi Anglican Church in Kenya


The 59th General Assembly of the National Council of Churches of Kenya (NCCK), the umbrella organisation for Protestant and evangelical churches met last week at Kabarak University in Nakuru.

Some present confessed their roles in the violence following the 2007 election. Sectarian allegiances had divided church hierarchies.

This included blessing warriors to engage in violence and inviting politicians to their churches where they used the pulpit to disseminate hate messages that incited people against members of various communities.

They issued a statement:

"We own up to taking partisan positions on national issues, elevating our ethnic identities above our Christian identity, direct involvement in party politics and participating in post-election violence which were made more ominous by the deteriorating national values, sinful political strategies and failure to faithfully stand for biblical values and principles."

"We ask God to forgive us and to renew and empower our witness to His grace."

Now they were beginning to rebuild the image of the church and restore confidence amongst the faithful as the country embarks on the road to national reconciliation. By bringing together pastors from all regions and different ethnic communities the conference was seeking to rebuild ties between different groups.

Former Presidet Moi, addressing the conference, said religion was still the best mechanism to addressing hatred and violence adding that these efforts should be intensified among the communities that worst affected by the violence.

All here

==============

It is too easy to condemn from a distance - and wholly innapropriate. I don't think that faith or Christian adherence gives any protection against participation in politically inspired and driven communal violence. The same would be true in the UK if conditions were right.

Christians, on the whole, have the same range of views and allegiances as the rest of the population and are as easily swayed as anyone else.

I am also sure that, during the violence, there were examples of heroism and self-sacrifice by Christians (and by others) and this is also an important part of the story.

But it is not enough to see these stories as Christian and the violence as alien to the Christian character. That is self-deception.

This is why I sometimes focus on areas of conflict and violence: because both are part of our faith journeys, because faith is tested most severely in the middle of violence, and because I wish to look honestly into the fire to try to understand how faith is embodied in practice - on the maxim: faith is as faith does.

A mob torched a Kenyan church, burning about 30 villagers cowering inside alive, as the death toll from ethnic riots triggered by President Mwai Kibaki's disputed re-election looked set to pass 200.

ABC News January 2 2008.