Standing for the Rights of Others: Southern Baptists and a New Jersey Mosque

Photo by Frank van Leersum

The International Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention has been doing some backpeddling after rather heroically coming to the aid of a Muslim community in New Jersey which was facing unfair zoning requirements in their efforts to build a mosque.

You can read more on the story here as reported by Christianity Today.

After the IMB and the SBC's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission filed an amicus brief (along wth 16 other groups) in support of the mosque, they faced some backlash from IMB trustee Dean Haun who deemed the amicus brief an "unholy alliance" and said:

"If we defend the rights of people to construct places of false worship, are we not helping them speed down the highway to hell?"

There's so much about that statement that should send chills down your spine.

So, I read that yesterday.  And then today, I read about a friend of mine, a Chicago church planter who's church was also being unfairly treated by a city zoning board.  His case was almost identical to the situation of the mosque in that the religious group was being blocked by city officials in the name of inadequate parking.  It quickly reminded me of one of my own church plants that recently had to deal with the same thing here in Chicagoland.

Now, let's leave aside the question of whether a pastor from rural Tennessee is in the best position to comment on the kind of urban zoning pressures that those of us in big cities have to deal with.  But, beyond commenting, Haun actually resigned from the IMB board and then apparently lead his church to suspend their giving to Southern Baptist Missions.

And then it gets even more concerning.

The IMB responded to the criticism by changing their processes for filing legal briefs.  Essentially, they have taken the position of siding with Pastor Huan's Morristown, Tennessee priorities and agreeing to never do it again.

A few points to consider:

1. Denying justice and equal treatment under the law to anyone is always wrong.

Because ... it's ... denying ... justice!

The second a Christian says that it is okay to deny a Muslim equal treatment under the law, that Christian forms an unholy alliance (to use Pastor Haun's phrase) with the perpetrators of injustice.   Just read a little Bonhoffer.  German Christians who failed to prophetically stand against the unjust treatment of Jews ... Russian Christians who failed to prophetically stand against the unjust treatment of Roma or Muslim people ... American Christians who failed to prophetically stand against  the unjust treament of African slaves ... anyone remember these things?

Pastor Haun, injustice is a highway to hell too!  Ethnocentrism and Islamophobia are false religions! You and your church have positioned yourself on the side of NOT defending the rights of others -- the side of injustice.

2. If you don't speak up for the rights of others, you will have no credibility in speaking up for your own rights.

This was the rationale of the IMB when they filed the brief:

[Our] specific interest in the brief arises out of our belief that all peoples of the world have the right to religious liberty, including the freedom to embrace the gospel. This is what we believe and why we take the gospel to them, despite situations that pose great risk. A public record by IMB of supporting freedom of religion for all people in the United States—regardless of their beliefs—gives IMB workers overseas a credible foundation from which to advocate for freedom of religious exercise in countries that are hostile to Christianity, penalize those who convert, or make it difficult for a new church to own or rent property for worship. … IMB’s call on the government of these other countries to support the religious freedom of their citizens will ring hollow if, in the USA, we only support freedom of religion for Christians.

And this is absolutely correct.  It is not only the just to defend the rights of everyone to religious liberty, but it simply makes sense.  Pastor Haun may not want to venture as far as Yemen or China or Nepal where the rights of Christians to plant churches and worship freely are not always as certain as they are in Morristown, Tennessee, but perhaps he can take a Megabus to Chicago and talk to the pastor of Immanual Baptist Church about their struggle over parking ordinances.  If we fail to defend the rights of a Muslim group in New Jersey, what have we to say when the City of Chicago denies a religious use permit to a Southern Baptist Church over the exact same issue?  What right have we to expect Muslim nations to give relgious liberty to those who wish to follow Jesus if we do not ourselves champion religious liberty as a universal right.

This isn't complicated theology... it's Golden Rule stuff (Mt. 7:12).

3. A Kingdom worldview is not afraid of the spread of non-Christian religions.  

Are you not yet tired of Christians who bemoan the opening of a new Mosque or Hindu temple in their communities? Do you not yet understand just how ungodly is that all too common "there goes the neighborhood" response to peoples of other faiths moving into town?

How long are we Christians going to be so stupid?

A Biblical worldview knows that the Kingdom of God is coming and that the gospel of that Kingdom must be proclaimed as a testimony to all people groups before then end (Mt. 24:14). When the nations move into town, we should be throwing parties because it means new opportunities to share the love of Jesus with those who don't know him.

very tired of Christians who get all panicky when they see a Mosque or Hindu temple being built in their communities.  To me, this is dumb and reflects a worldview that does not understand the Bible.  A Biblical worldview knows that the Kingdom is coming and that the gospel  of the Kingdom will be preached as a testimony to all peoples and then the end will come (Mt. 24:14).  When I see a mosque or temple being build, I rejoice because I know it means a new opportunity to share the love of Jesus with people who don't know him.

But people like Pastor Haun seem to be afraid of Islam.  They are afraid that "false religions" will take over their country.

Such people need to be reminded that this world is not their home and that the country they should be seeking is an eternal one.  Whatever happens to the USA is pretty darn irrelevent from the perspective of the Kingdom of God. The Kingdom will come and reign forever.  No religion can ever overcome it, delay it or alter its course .  When the Muslims and the Hindus and the Buddhists and others come to town... when they come to Morristown ... that is cause to rejoice and to extend welcome.  It is a sign of the Kingdom and the coming of the new age.

Politics will not save us!

I was going to write a long post about the presidential election and my feelings about the candidates.

But, I got tired of it.

These people are both morally corrupt in their thinking and policy making.

There is no savior on the ballot.

Focus on the reign of the King. Spend your energy advancing that.

That's what I'll be doing.

Enough with the Huddled Masses Already!

The world has gone mad with it's increasingly hostile approach to migrants. We cry for walls and fences, turn back boats and ship people off to dead end camps and hidden away detention centers. We put a gag in the mouths of those who would cry out for justice and trumpet out an exclusive invitation only to the best and brightest. Meanwhile the base of the New Colossus, must be deeply dust-covered. Brush it away and read the inscription that must have been written by some strange and alien civilization:

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,

With conquering limbs astride from land to land;

Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand

A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame

Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name

Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand

Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command

The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

"Keep ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she

With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Give me your tired, your poor ... send these!

By Philocrites

As the power hungry grab for votes in this election year 2012, I feel so often that we in the United States have drifted from our calling as a nation.  I find myself increasingly uncertain if either party would embrace the words of Lady Liberty:

"Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breath free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

It seems to me that no candidate is able to see the immigrant as anything more than a potential voting bloc.  As a nation, we've lost the ability to see those coming to our shores as the strength of a nation and the hope for tomorrow.

And I wonder if the Church in the United States isn't just as guilty.  During the past week, I have seen gifts of the Holy Spirit manifest in Bhutanese-Nepalis as we made visits house to house.  I have seen the power of God bringing deliverance to bound people during the all-night Ghanaian prayer service.  I have heard the testimony of an Indian leader who is in the midst of 40 days of fasting and prayer.  I have experienced the presence of the Lord again and again in fellowship with a precious Ugandan sister here for a visit.  And, as I reflect, I am fully convinced that God's movement of peoples from everywhere to the USA represents the single greatest hope for revival and renewal and mission that my nation now sees.  

May the Lord unveil our eyes to see a fuller picture of what He is doing!

I have linked below to a NY Times article which tells the story of a refugee summer academy that is focused preparing youth for school in the United States.  This academy seems to "get" the fact that such students are more than mere object of charity.  They are hope and they are the future.

Young Immigrants Helped by Refugee Youth Summer Academy - NYTimes.com: "This year, more than 100 students enrolled in the six-week program, which offered an academic curriculum supplemented by creative-arts classes, field trips and other activities. They hailed from at least 13 countries, including Nepal, Burkina Faso, Iran, Iraq and Cameroon. Some had been in the country for a couple of years; others, like the Diallos, had just arrived. They spoke at least 17 native languages. Some could speak and read English fluently; others could not write their own name in any language. Some had attended school in their home countries; others had never been in a classroom."

Why Emma Sullivan Should Apologize

Not sure if you have seen the news story, but the other day an 18-year-old high school student by the name of Emma Sullivan became an overnight celebrity when she tweeted the following regarding her state's governor, Sam Brownback:

"Just made mean comments at gov brownback and told him he sucked, in person #heblowsalot"


As I write this post, Sullivan's following on Twitter has surged to more than 12,000.  Significantly more than mine, of course.  And even quite a bit more than Gov. Brownback (Kansas) himself (about 3,000).  Sullivan uploaded the tweet, it seems, while she was in the audience listening to the Governor deliver a speech.  Sullivan was a part of a program known as "Youth in Government" which is apparently designed to give students interested in government and politics hands-on learning experiences.  


As the story goes, the Governor's staff found the tweet while monitoring the web for mentions, news stories, and discussion about Brownback.  This, of course, is the first point at which critics are firing away at the governor.  Writes Ian Millhiser, "If nothing else, one would think a state governor’s office has better things to do than troll the internet looking for young dissenting voices they can intimidate." But that's just a very silly thing to say.  Trolling the internet is what a lot of us do.  It is simple enough to set Google Alerts for a name or use an app to follow specific topics on Twitter.  I do that myself and that's without a staff.  Of course elected officials engage in this, they must.  Heck, I must and I'm just a lowly missiologist.


Next, the Governor's staff contacted those responsible for organizing the Youth in Government field trip and let them know about what one of their students had posted online.  This is apparently what Governor Brownback has now publicly apologized for.   He has stated, “My staff over-reacted to this tweet, and for that I apologize. Freedom of speech is among our most treasured freedoms. I enjoyed speaking to the more than 100 students who  participated in the Youth in Government Program at the Kansas Capitol. They are our future. I also want to thank the thousands of Kansas educators who remind us daily of our liberties, as well as the values of civility and decorum.  Again, I apologize for our over-reaction.”


I suppose that was what Brownback had to do.  However, if I had been organizing such a program as "Youth in Government", I would hope that those students who participated in it would conduct themselves with much more "civility and decorum" than what Sullivan displayed.  I'm sorry, but saying that an elected official "sucks" does not exactly rise to the level of mature and thoughtful criticism.  Since, Sullivan's school principle apparently responded to the news by reprimanding her, people have been rushing to cry foul regarding the student's freedom of speech.  But freedom of speech isn't the issue at all.  Had Sullivan tweeted an actual critique of Brownback's policies, this would have never been a story.  For example, she might have said, "Gov. Brownback's defunding of education sucks." Had she done so, I have a feeling she'd still be hovering around 60 followers.


The point is that Sullivan made a comment that manifested deep ignorance and immaturity along with an inability to articulate her dissent respectfully.  And when adults do that, when we put our feet in our mouths, we apologize for it.  This isn't about freedom of speech or government censorship.  It is about mature and respectful engagement with other members of a civilized society.  We say something stupid.  It gets out.  We apologize and try not to be such an idiot in the future.  Self-censorship is a mark of humility and maturity -- an essential mark of good leadership.  Crassness may suddenly jar an audience and stir a flash-in-the-pan following, but it isn't worthy of long-term attention.  It isn't capable of dealing with the realities of the troubled world in which we live.  


Well, Sullivan apparently isn't aware of this.  When asked during a CNN interview if she would like to apologize to Gov. Brownback or perhaps have a chance to have a direct conversation with him, Sullivan replied, "I wouldn't mind maybe voicing my opinions to him. I'm not a politician myself so I can't sit down and tell him, 'This is what you need to do for this, this, this and  this, you know, different policies or what he needs to do to help our education system'.  But I wouldn't apologize for the tweet itself because, like I said, that was aimed toward my audience. That wasn't aimed towards him.  I wasn't talking directly to him. It was to my high school friends."


Ahh yes, the myth of a personal Twitter feed rehashed.  Perhaps Sullivan should be made aware of the Twitter feature that allows one to lock his/her tweets.  It is a kind of cancer of the new wireless society that we live in that people feel that they can post whatever they want online for all the world to see and if anyone ever calls them on it simply duck behind a line like, "Hey that was between me and my friends."  People, look, it doesn't work that way.  Public posts are open for public critique.  If you can't handle it, don't post it.


Bottom line, Emma Sullivan should apologize because her tweet was disrespectful and actually mocks the complicated reality of the times we live in.  With her tweet, she has effectively become the unofficial representative of Kansas's "Youth in Government" program.  In which, I would guess that there may be at least a few other students, who would rather their political insights and opinions not be reduced crass comments about whether given political figures either suck or blow.

Let me end with a couple questions:

1. What will Emma Sullivan's following on Twitter peak at?  Where will it be by January 1st?

2. Has anyone actually investigated whether or not Sullivan's tweet was true?  She claims that she told Gov. Brownback that he sucked "in person".  Did she?  I haven't found any story addressing that.

Does the U.S. have "Sinister Motivations" for Resettling Bhutanese Refugees?

I've come across an article posted on Revolution in South Asia entitled "Bhutanese Refugees in the U.S.: Pawns of Imperial Interests".  The author is known only as "redpines".  The site is dedicated to the promotion of communist/Maoist movements throughout South Asia and, in this article, seeks to slander U.S. efforts to resettle refugees as having sinister motivations.  I find the article to be a deceptive piece of communist propaganda designed to discourage 3rd country resettlement and recruit more people to the Maoist cause in South Asia.  At the end of the day, this sort of talk is pretty harmful to people who remain in the camps.  They shouldn't be deceived into thinking that life in the U.S. or Canada or wherever will be easy all the time.  But it is also wrong to spread and prop-up falsehoods like the ones in this article.  Those remaining in the camps are being fed a steady stream of lies:  "America will make you into slaves", "black people will shoot you",  "everyone gets divorced in America", and more.  The resulting fear cripples far too many, leaving them stagnating in camps without hope or a future.  Below, I offer a repudiation of the article referenced above.  I have notified the author of my post and invited a response.  Let's see what happens.

Here is the article with my comments:


While in Nepal, I heard a lot of discussion about the situation of Bhutanese refugees who had been resettled in the US [Right away, the author seeks to establish his/herself as an expert having been to Nepal and having spoken to people.  Redpines derives his/her information from having spoken to presumably Maoist-leaning people who remain in the camps (or worse, Maoists from out of the camps who just like to talk about the refugee situation) about those who opted for 3rd country resettlement.  Redpines doesn't at all acknowlege that those remaining in the camps might have an ax to grind which renders them a bit biased.  The fact of the matter is that there is a minority element among the refugees who, in seeking to promote their cause of repatriation to Bhutan, threaten those who desire to resettle to another country with violence and death. This party is prone to speak ill about 3rd country resettlement and desires to spread as much negative PR as possible about living in the United States. If Redpines wants accurate information about refugees that have settled in the US, he/she should speak directly to them]. People were outraged at the fact that the US would only accept these refugees on the condition that they repay their airfare and other costs. [Redpines is being deceptive here.  First, the issuing of travel loans is the standard procedure for refugees entering the U.S. and not a special requirement for the Bhutanese. Second, it is a loan to cover travel expenses.  What are the "other costs" Redpines is referring to?  Thirdly, the interest-free loan is provided by the International Office of Migration to make it easier for refugees to leave the camps for their new home.  The loan is issued by the International Office of Migration which pays for the immediate expenses of travel to the United States (i.e. airline tickets). The U.S. State Department is involved as a donor, furnishing the capital to make the program possible.  IOM also provides travel loans to refugees resettling in Australia.  It is considered a means of assisting with resettlement.  In the case of Canada, refugees are issued interest-bearing loans for travel and an initial medical examination.  Redpines simply doesn't know the facts.] In an economy where real unemployment is more than 20% in some places, it is not clear how this resettlement plan is different from a state of indentured servitude. It is a grotesque example of the way the US immerses the world’s people in debt and subjugation–even within its borders . [This is just untrue.  Bhutanese refugees are not being immersed in debt by the United States.  The loan they are issued (which they voluntarily sign before leaving Nepal) is interest-free and issued by the International Office of Migration, not the United States government.  The loan begins to be repaid only after about 3 months following resettlement and may be adjusted/deferred during periods of financial hardship.  The term of the loan is usually 46 months.  I have worked with many, many families and have found that it does not result in too great a financial hardship.  On the contrary, it actually serves to allow the families to begin to establish credit soon after arriving in the U.S.  Under ordinary circumstances, we find that the Bhutanese refugees do not end up drowning in debt.  The U.S. government provides (directly and indirectly through grants to resettlement agencies) thousands of dollars worth of free medical care, food, cash, rental assistance, job training and placement, English classes, education, and more.  To be sure, the current economic situation has resulted in some layoffs and difficulties.  But it is difficult to conceive of how such a situation benefits the U.S.  or is in anyway parallel to indentured servitude. How is becoming a recipient of unemployment benefits during a layoff the same thing as indentured servitude?]

There may be sinister political reasons for the US deal to accept Bhutanese refugees. This embassy cable from 2007, exposed by Wikileaks, shows the US government’s concern over Maoist organizing in the Bhutanese refugee camps, as well as the potential for communists to gain power in Bhutan itself:

“…each confirmed that the Maoists could pose a significant threat. Rutland alleged that the BCP openly threatened to use the refugees in the Nepali camps to overthrow the monarchy and the new government.”

[Let's be clear.  Redpines is suggesting that the United States stepped up to offer resettlement opportunities to 60,000 Bhutanese in order to quench the Maoist-leaning elements present there.  The US did this because they were afraid that Maoists would take over the camps and, then somehow gain power in Bhutan.  Let's forget for a moment the fact that the Bhutanese refugees have no access to Bhutan and no real prospects of repatriation in the near future -- thus rendering some kind of refugee-led Maoist takeover of that country impossible.  The question remains, why would the United States, which remained essentially uninvolved during the Maoist revolution in Nepal that eventually led to the overthrow of the monarchy there, be concerned about a Maoist takeover of a few refugee camps in an already Maoist-led nation?  This doesn't make any sense to me.  And even if the US was trying to remove the supposedly Maoist-leaning refugees from the camps, why would they want to resettle such people within the borders of the United States?  Wouldn't that simply increase any perceived threat?  And, what is Norway's motivation?  Denmark's? These and other countries are also resettling refugees from Bhutan.  Is it an international conspiracy?]

Revolution in South Asia also reported in 2008 that two Maoist groups did emerge within the refugee camps. Whether or not there is a direct connection between the resettlement scheme and the potential for strong communist organizations in Bhutan, it seems impossible to believe that the US is involved in this situation for altruistic reasons [Impossible for whom?  For a communist propagandist who is incapable of objectively considering all the facts or interpreting them in a rational way?  Perhaps.  The fact remains that the United States is the international leader in the resettlement of refugees from all over the world.  Would Redpines have us believe that in every situation the US has some sinister scheme in mind? Or is it just in this case?]. 

GOP Debate Highlights on Video

Did you catch the GOP debate tonight? Haven't really started thinking about this yet.  Where are you at on all of it?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/highlights-from-the-gop-debate-in-orlando/2011/09/22/gIQA4SGJpK_video.html

Live Stream of Election Coverage

Fox News


ABC News