National Council of Churches USA
and Church World Service
General Assembly, November, 2005
Resolutions, Statements and Pastoral Messages
Resolution on the Threat to Civil and Religious
Liberties in Post-9/11 America
Resolution on Just Rebuilding of the Gulf Coast
Resolution to Reaffirm Commitment to the Voting Rights
Act
A Statement on the Disavowal of Torture
Pastoral Message on Alexandria
Pastoral Message on Constantinople
Resolution on the Threat to Civil and
Religious Liberties in Post – 9/11 America
Adopted by the General Assembly November 9, 2005
Civil and religious
liberties, while affirmed under secular constructs that were formed by
our national and world communities based on generations of human social
interaction, are grounded in the religious conviction that all human
beings reflect the divine imprint and are thus worthy of respect. These
principles protect and seek to nurture the fundamental freedoms that men
and women possess as members of an enlightened society.
The National
Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA has historically and
consistently defended these principles as integral to the well being of
US citizens, and indeed of all people. This defense has been strongest
during severe tests of our national character. This resolution, while
recognizing the myriad civil and religious liberties issues at stake
today – having to do among other things with privacy, gender, and
genetics, as well as with free exercise, establishment, and education –
is addressed primarily to the issues most related to this moment of
national crisis, a crisis characterized by post-9/11 anxiety and
responses such as the USA PATRIOT Act.
Theological
Foundation. The theological foundation for this position is in the
scriptures and tradition of the Christian faith. If it is true that all
human beings reflect the divine imprint – “Then God said, ‘Let us make
humankind in our image, according to our likeness…So God created
humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and
female he created them” (Genesis 1:26-27, NRSV) – then it is also true
that essential human dignity is the divine gift of God. Such dignity in
turn reflects humanity’s infinite worth and its endowment with rights
intended to guard against the diminishment of that worth. It is no
surprise that we consider religious liberty as basic to all other
liberties.
Ultimately, based on the relationship with God for which humankind was
created, a relationship of love and freedom, the dignity of women and
men is found in our freedom – here the Christian tradition speaks of
free will, and of the maxim that “God became a [human being] so that
[human beings] could become like God” – and thus in our response to God
and in our responsibility toward one another under God. Our response to
God, and our responsibility toward one another, therefore, is to act in
accordance with obedience to God, and to serve one another to the well
being of all.
Policies.
Particularly in times of national crisis, the National Council of
Churches USA has taken strong positions in defense of these principles
based on these theological affirmations. This is so even while
recognizing that security is preeminently in God, and not in the secular
constructs that govern our social contract with one another. A review
of these positions, taken in the past yet highly relevant in specific
content to this day, is in order:
In 1954, at a time of fear and suspicion with regard to communism, a
policy statement, entitled “Investigative Procedures in the Congress of
the United States,” was critical of the stigmatization of people and
organizations on the basis of unsupported accusations; called into
question forced testimony, under false pretexts, concerning economic and
political beliefs; sought the prevention of questionable legal
procedures intended to subvert legal processes; and expressed concern
over the exploitation of public interest and fear.
In 1955, during a
time of social unrest, a policy statement, entitled “Religious and Civil
Liberties in the United States of America,” affirmed the separation of
church and state while denying the indifference of church and state to
one another; defended the rights and liberties of cultural, racial and
religious minorities (though subjecting the exercise of these rights to
morality, public order and security); and affirmed the interdependence
and indivisibility of religious and civil liberties.
In 1957, at a time
of debate over racial desegregation, a policy statement, entitled
“Freedom of Association,” called for the protection of voluntary
associations, especially in connection with desegregation; defended the
right of peaceable association and freedom of speech; defended the right
to privacy and anonymity of membership in such associations (subject to
legal guarantees); and voiced its opposition to the suppression of
voluntary association.
In 1965, at a time
of struggle over the right to vote, a policy statement, entitled “Equal
Representation is a Right of Citizenship,” affirmed the equal right to
vote, and the equal value of all votes; called for protection of the
standard of equal representation; stated that rights cannot be taken
from people by those in power to protect their power; and confirmed that
equal representation is a fundamental right and an adjunct to full
political personhood.
In 1966, during a
time of war, a policy statement, entitled “Rights and Responsibilities
of Debate, Diversity and Dissent,” stated that freedoms and liberties
were to be protected in times of crisis, not curtailed to present a
united front; condemned the invalidation of the witness of whole groups
based on the questionable motives of a few; defended conscientious
dissent in times of military action; and questioned the appeal to
patriotism to stifle criticism.
In 1967, at a time
of social upheaval, a policy statement, entitled “Church-State Issues
for Social and Health Services in the U.S.A.,” affirmed equal access to
social welfare resources; distinguished between service and evangelism
as a guide for the policies of church-related social agencies; affirmed
the role of communities of faith in helping to implement social programs
and shape social policy; and outlined principles governing church and
state relations in social service.
In 1968, at a time
of war and continued social unrest, a policy statement, entitled
“Religious Obedience and Civil Disobedience,” confirmed the
responsibility of government to secure justice, peace, and freedom, and
to maintain order for these purposes; affirmed that Christians can
disobey government if its authority is misused, and peace, justice, and
freedom are denied; stated that Christians are compelled to act out of
faith, yet peaceably in the case of civil disobedience; and argued that
civil disobedience is a violation of a law deemed unjust in obedience to
one’s conscience or a higher law.
These policy
statements, when taken as a whole, are a coherent and compelling defense
of civil and religious liberties. Based as they are on Christian faith,
they offer a template against which Christians may evaluate other
challenges to civil and religious liberties that confront Americans and
American Churches.
Current Issues.
Today we are in another moment of national crisis and uncertainty.
The terrorist attacks of 9/11; the all-consuming “war on terror”; the
war in Iraq: all of these have led to anxiety, the exploitation of
fear, and the erosion in national self-confidence. It has also led this
country to the point of willingly sacrificing the very ideals that have
made it great. In no area of social interaction is the threat as large
as in the area of civil and religious liberties.
Many of these
issues are reminiscent of years past, as is evident in the above policy
descriptions; others are new and equally shocking. These threats
include: indefinite detention and the withholding of due process;
extraordinary rendition and torture; arbitrary designation of enemy
combatants; the suspicion of immigrants and those applying for immigrant
status; the invasion of privacy in terms of medical records, library
borrowing, and other personal documents; and a creeping reliance on
selective religious fundamentalism as the lens for shaping public
policy, especially at the expense of other religious communities.
In response to
pertinent security concerns, the US Government has availed itself of any
number of tools. Most prominent among these is the USA PATRIOT Act,
which has attracted much attention due to its expansion of government
power to intrude in the private lives of individuals. Passed in the
wake of the 9/11 attacks, and largely reaffirmed this year as a
continued weapon in the “war on terror,” it holds the potential for
vastly eroding civil liberties. The provisions of the act are in
seeming conflict with the Fourth Amendment prohibition against
unreasonable searches and seizures. These provisions include:
delayed-notice search warrants to secretly investigate potential
criminals; national security letters to secretly gather private and
confidential information; relaxed restrictions on wiretapping; and
extensive use of deportation and denial of immigrant applications based
on unknowing associations.
At the same time,
the law has authorized the seizure of assets of organizations, including
religious and charitable organizations, deemed to have ties with groups
labeled by the government as terrorist. As with other provisions which
are executed in secret, there is no opportunity to challenge government
declarations in advance of adverse enforcement action. The use of these
laws to stigmatize American Muslims has created hardship and mistrust in
their community, putting them in the position of having to prove
innocence without even the benefit of an appropriate public forum.
In addition, the
use of ethnic profiling as a proxy for religious profiling is especially
troubling. The use of such profiling by law enforcement is a debatable
and highly suspect practice. But it does not stop with official acts,
as the official practice of religious profiling encourages a wider
discrimination in the society at large whereby many peaceable,
law-abiding citizens are severely disadvantaged solely because of their
religious faith.
Liberty taken away
in the name of patriotism and security is a cause for concern for all
who trust in US Constitutional protections. While churches support law
enforcement to protect Americans, they are not blind to the risks we all
share when our civil and religious liberties are eroded. As persons of
faith, we should also be aware that there is no exemption from these
rules for faith-based organizations. We must therefore continue to
stand strong against this tendency and to speak out in defense of those
liberties that are fundamental to our national being.
Actions.
Whereas:
the terrorist
attacks of 9/11 have caused great fear in US society;
the resulting
government-declared “war on terror” has exacerbated this fear;
the war in Iraq has
increasingly eroded national confidence in the implementation of this
“war on terror,” a development compounded by the exposure by Hurricane
Katrina of the fault-lines in Homeland Security capabilities;
the “war on terror”
has allowed the US to neglect, limit, and even betray its treasure of
civil and religious liberties, as evidenced by recent legislative and
policy assaults on such liberties, especially the USA PATRIOT Act, in
the name of security;
as Christians we
are concerned that the freedom we have as human beings is
not well served by current policies;
as women and men of
faith we believe our increasingly diverse society is best served by
expanding, rather than narrowing, the opportunities of people of all
faiths to access the public square, and thereby to expand mutual
interaction and respect; and,
as an organization
composed of Christian communions that have together over the years
defended civil and religious liberties, based on Christian faith;
Therefore, be it
resolved that the National Council of Churches USA:
urges its member
communions to be ever-vigilant in protecting and defending civil and
religious liberties – including those not specifically tied to this
current moment of national crisis but nonetheless important to our
national life – through any and all moral and legal means available;
commits itself to
the monitoring of current and potential civil and religious liberties
abuses in and by the US, and to taking action that would address these
abuses; and,
pledges to educate
members of its constituent communions, with this resolution and
background materials on previous policy statements, on the importance of
upholding civil and religious liberties, even and most critically in
times of national distress.
Return to top.
Resolution on Just
Rebuilding of the Gulf Coast
Adopted by the General Assembly
November 2005
Whereas the Governing
Board of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA has
committed itself to a Special Commission for the Just Rebuilding of the
Gulf Coast, and
Whereas Church World
Service has played and continues to play a pivotal role in addressing
human need—short term and long term in the region, and
Whereas the
complexity of race and class as instrumental issues in the Gulf Coast
demand our best, most coherent and most effective response,
Therefore, be it
resolved that the General Assembly endorses and affirms both the
establishment of the Special Commission and the relief efforts of Church
World Service carried out in the name of member communions; and urges
the Special Commission to strive for the greatest degree of coherence
and comprehensive effort in our rebuilding of the Gulf Coast communities
and in addressing the human inequities which exacerbated a natural
disaster into a wholesale calamity.
Return to top.
Resolution to Reaffirm Commitment to Voting Rights Act
Adopted by the General Assembly November 9, 2005
The General Assembly of the National
Council of Churches of Christ in the USA adopted a Human Rights Policy
Statement on December 6, 1961, setting forth general principles related
to the inherent worth, rights and responsibilities of all persons. In
the section entitled “Political and Civic Rights” the statement
recognizes:
“The right to full participation of
the person in political and civic life, including the opportunity: to
vote by secret ballot…”
This policy statement predated the
enactment of voting rights legislation adopted in 1965. The General
Board of the National Council of Churches adopted a new human rights
policy statement on November 17, 1995. The statement acknowledges
extensive changes in our society since the adoption of a human rights
policy in 1963.
Theological
Foundation
The 1995 statement shared
theological and biblical understandings based on our Christian
tradition. “Human rights are not simply granted by human authorities.
Human rights are inherent for humankind, fashioned in the image of God”.
Human rights involve the relationships of individual, groups and social
structures. The Christian faith affirms the belief in these rights and
in the corresponding responsibility of men and women to exercise their
rights.
Policies
The 1995 policy statement reads in
part:
“Racial and ethnic communities
continue to be victimized by racism, xenophobia and ethnocentrism. These
conditions are exacerbated by voluntary and forced migration, human
enslavement, political realignments and the shifting of geographical
boundaries. The Church must stand with these communities as they assert
their right to full acceptance and citizenship, guarantees of and
protection of human rights on an equal basis with other persons in the
society, and recognition of their unique worth.”
We believe that the right to vote is
a basic human right, therefore as the Voting Rights Act comes up for
reauthorization in 2007, the National Council of Churches must be on
record in strong support of this legislation. The right to vote is
perhaps the single most important right in a democratic society. Recent
history verifies that voting discrimination against minority populations
continues and therefore that federal oversight of state and local voting
functions remains an imperative in jurisdictions with patterns of voting
discrimination.
Background
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was
enacted 40 years ago. Congress hails the VRA as the nation’s most
effective civil rights legislation. The VRA was amended in 1970, 1975,
and 1982. The VRA was adopted at a time when African Americans were
substantially disfranchised in many Southern states. It has now also
removed barriers to voting for Asians, Latino Americans and Native
Americans and for persons with disabilities.
The Act employed measures to restore
the right to vote that intruded in matters previously reserved to the
individual states. Section 4 ended the use of literacy requirements for
voting in six Southern states (Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi,
South Carolina, and Virginia) and in many counties of North Carolina,
where voter registration or turnout in the 1964 presidential election
was less than 50 percent of the voting-age population.
Under the terms of Section 5 of the
Act, no voting changes were legally enforceable in these jurisdictions
until approved either by a three-judge court in the District of Columbia
or by the Attorney General of the United States. Other sections
authorized the Attorney General to appoint federal voting examiners who
could be sent into covered jurisdictions to ensure that legally
qualified persons were free to register for federal, state, and local
elections, or to assign federal observers to oversee the conduct of
elections.
Although the voting protections of
the Fifteenth Amendment and Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act are
permanent, the special provisions of Section 5 remains in effect only
through 2007. Section 5 makes it mandatory for election practices that
change boundaries or impose new procedures in certain states to be
subjected to administrative review by the United States Attorney
General, or ruled on by the United States District Court for the
District of Columbia before implementation. The NCC believes it will be
a travesty of justice to allow these special provisions to expire.
Prior to the Civil War, African
Americans were almost totally disenfranchised throughout the states.
The
Fifteenth Amendment to the
Constitution, adopted in 1870, gave all men, regardless of race, color,
or previous condition of servitude the right to vote. The
Nineteenth Amendment ratified
in 1920, provided women the right to vote.
Even after the enactment of the 15th
amendment, many southern states continued to use various methods to
prevent people of color from voting, including literacy tests, poll
taxes, the disenfranchisement of former inmates, intimidation, threats,
and even violence. Until 1965, federal laws did not challenge the
authority of states and localities to establish and administer their own
voting requirements.
The
Voting Rights Act of 1965 was
designed to address these issues. It prohibits discrimination based on
race or language minority status. The VRA enables millions of minorities
to register and vote despite some states’ efforts to limit the exercise
of their right. These key “special provisions” of the VRA have a
remedial purpose and are set to expire on August 6, 2007.
Section 2 of the Act, which bars the
use of voting practices or procedures that discriminate against members
of such protected classes, has been used successfully to attack
restrictive voter registration requirements and the location of polling
places at sites inaccessible to minority voters.
Section 5 of the Act requires federal “pre-clearance” before covered
jurisdictions (i.e., specified jurisdictions with a history of practices
that restrict minority voting rights) may make changes in existing
voting practices or procedures. The Act also provides the Department of
Justice with the authority to appoint federal observers and examiners to
monitor elections to ensure that they are conducted fairly. Initial
enforcement efforts targeted, among other things, literacy tests, poll
taxes, and discriminatory registration practices.
In 1975, the Voting Rights Act was amended to address the voting rights
of language minorities. ." Sections 4 and 203 of the Act apply in
jurisdictions with significant numbers of voters with limited or no
English proficiency and require such jurisdictions to provide voting
materials and assistance in relevant languages in addition to English.
These provisions now apply to non- southern states as well because of
the increasing diversity in our society.
The VRA was amended in 1982. The
amendments make clear that it is unnecessary to prove that certain
registration and voting practices have been established with
discriminatory intent. Instead, section 2 is violated if a court
concludes that a voting practice has the effect of limiting the
electoral influence of minorities, even if not motivated by bias. A
second 1982 amendment allows for people who are blind, disabled, or
illiterate to be assisted in voting by almost anyone of their choice.
Many Americans are not aware of the
history of the VRA and therefore may assume there is no longer a need to
have the protection afforded by the special provisions of the Act.
Despite the progress that has been made since the enactment of the VRA
of 1965, voter inequities, disparities, and obstacles still remain for
many voters and serve to demonstrate the ongoing need for the VRA and
its special provisions. Gerrymandering, improper redistricting,
disenfranchising former inmates, inaccessible voting booths and flawed
voting procedures are issues that must continued to be addressed to
ensure the protection of the right to vote for all Americans.
Therefore, be it resolved that the
Governing Board of the NCC recommends to the General Assembly the
following actions:
·
Begin work on the VRA in 2005 to
highlight its importance prior to election season.
·
Call upon member communions and
ecumenical partners to work both individually and collaboratively to
insure an awareness of the need for the Voting Rights Act and its
special provisions to be extended permanently.
Maintain involvement in voter
registration and get-out-the vote efforts.
·
Allocate appropriate funding to
assist the Justice and Advocacy Commission to gather and disseminate
appropriate educational materials on the issue of the voting rights act,
and empower the commission to work for the creation and adoption
of legislation to make all the qualities of the Voting Rights Act
permanent.
·
Make reauthorization of the Voting
Rights Act a council-wide priority for 2006-7.
·
Change the dates of future General
Assemblies to avoid conflict with Election Day.
Policy Base:
Human Rights: The Fulfillment of
Life in the Social Order, November 17, 1995
Equal Representation Is a Right of
Citizenship adopted by the General Board, June 3, 1965
Human Rights adopted by the General
Assembly, December 6, 1963
Resolution:
The Right to Vote, February 23, 1961
Return to top.
A Statement on the Disavowal of Torture
Based
upon our longstanding policies defending human rights and our
affirmation of human dignity as revealed in scripture, the General
Assembly of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA
and Church World Service meeting in Baltimore, MD, November 8 – 11,
2005, commends the United States Senate for its recent passage of the
“Anti-Torture Provisions” which came as amendments to the Defense
Appropriations Act of 2006. As that bill now comes before the House of
Representatives for action (H. R. 2863), we are deeply disturbed that
leaders within our nation’s government oppose legislation which publicly
disavows our nation’s use of torture anytime, anywhere, under any
circumstances.
Within the core of our religious tradition are Jesus’ call to love our
enemies, his blessing of those who work for peace, and his instruction
that we are to do unto others as we would have them do unto us (Mt.
7:12)--a teaching found in other faith traditions as well. Both United
States and international law reflect this biblical mandate, a social
ethic commonly known as the Golden Rule, by upholding as core principles
the right of due process and the humane treatment of all prisoners, even
in times of war. As delegates to the General Assembly of the National
Council of Churches USA and Church World Service, we find any and all
use of torture unacceptable and contrary to U.S. and international legal
norms. We find it particularly abhorrent that our nation’s lawmakers
would fail to approve the pending legislation disavowing the use of
torture by any entity on behalf of the United States government.
Torture, regardless of circumstance, humiliates and debases torturer and
tortured alike. Torture turns its face against the biblical truth that
all humans are created in the image of God (Gen. 1:26, 27). It denies
the preciousness of human life and the dignity of every human being by
reducing its victims to the status of despised objects, no matter how
noble the cause for which it is employed.
We
believe that any reluctance of this nation to publicly disavow torture
under any circumstance not only erodes the peace of the world but even
the possibility of peace, since it destroys the trust required for
diplomacy and other non-violent means to seek peace. Thus, we call upon
members of the U. S. House of Representatives to follow the lead of the
Senate by approving the legislation before it banning the use of torture
by any entity of our government. Furthermore, we urge the President of
the U. S. and all members of his administration to support this
legislation by affirming America’s long-standing commitment to refrain
from the use of torture.
Return to top.
Pastoral Message on Alexandria
Adopted by the General Assembly
November 10, 2005
We the delegates to
the General Assembly of the National Council of the Churches of Christ
in the USA and Church World Service, meeting in Baltimore, Maryland,
November 8-10, 2005, have heard with great concern of the horrific and
violent acts against the Coptic Orthodox and Protestant Christians in
Alexandria, Egypt, on October 21-22, 2005. In solidarity with one of our
member communions, the Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America, we
join our Egyptian sisters and brothers in Christ in fervent prayer for
peace, justice and equal rights in their native and beloved country,
Egypt.
We also commend
President Hosni Mubarak for his condemnation of the violence, his
acknowledgement of deepening tensions between Egypt’s Muslims and
Christians, and his exhortation to Muslim scholars to teach tolerance
and shun extremism. In this same spirit, we commend Sheikh Mohammed
Sayed El-Tantawi, Rector of Al Azhar University, for his encouragement
of tolerance and peaceful coexistence among Muslims and Christians in
Egypt in the wake of these recent events.
We join with His
Holiness Pope Shenouda III in his call for prayer and are comforted with
him in the Book of Psalms, which states, “Wait on the Lord. Be of good
courage and He shall strengthen your heart. Wait I say on the Lord” (Ps
27:14). Especially as we near the Advent season, we pray for
Christians and all people in the region where Christ was born and
sojourned, was crucified and resurrected.
Return to top.
Pastoral Message on Constantinople
Adopted by the General Assembly November 10, 2005
The National Council
of the Churches of Christ in the USA meeting in its General Assembly in
Baltimore, Maryland, USA, expresses its sadness and dismay at the recent
attacks and demonstrations by extremist elements in Turkey against the
Ecumenical Patriarchate and the person of His All Holiness, Bartholomew,
Archbishop of Constantinople, New Rome and Ecumenical Patriarch.
We appreciate the
timely response of the police in Istanbul in containing these elements
of fanaticism and extremism.
We pray for the
continued well being of Patriarch Bartholomew and stand in solidarity
with the Ecumenical Patriarchate.
Return to top.
Contact NCC News: Philip E. Jenks,
212-870-2252; Leslie Tune,
202-544-2351
|
