Associated Baptist Press - 9/11/2008

Associated Baptist Press
September 11, 2008 · (08-86)

Greg Warner, Executive Editor
Robert Marus, News Editor/Washington Bureau Chief


In this issue
Poll: On torture, evangelicals not looking to Bible, doctrine
Experts: National security not ensured by torture
Legislators call faith leaders to focus on poverty issues
Opinion: The Trinity and other concrete things

Poll: On torture, evangelicals not looking to Bible, doctrine
By Robert Marus

ATLANTA (ABP)-A new survey suggests the very Americans who claim to follow the Bible most assiduously don't consult it when forming their views about torture and government policy.

The poll of 600 Southern white evangelicals was released Sept. 11 in Atlanta in connection with a national religious summit on torture. It shows not only are white evangelical Southerners more likely than the general populace to believe torture is sometimes or often justified, but also that they are far more likely-to tweak a phrase from Proverbs-to "lean on their own understanding" regarding the subject.

However, their views seemed to change when asked to consider torture policy in light of the Golden Rule. When respondents were asked if the United States should "never use methods against our enemies that we would not want used on American soldiers," more than half agreed.

While a recent Pew survey showed 48 percent of the general public believes torture sometimes or often is justified in order to obtain information from suspected terrorists, the new poll shows 57 percent of white Southern evangelicals hold that belief.

Among that demographic and despite their high levels of religious belief and practice, the survey found, "white evangelicals in the South are significantly more likely to rely on life experiences and common sense (44 percent) than Christian teachings or beliefs (28 percent) when thinking about the acceptability of torture."

Meanwhile, among the minority who pointed to the Bible and Christian doctrine as the primary influences on their view of torture, more than half-52 percent-oppose government use of such tactics.

"This is a spiritual crisis, I suggest, that should alarm all Christian leaders regardless of what we think about torture," said Tyler Wigg Stevenson, a Baptist minister and human-rights activist from Nashville, Tenn., at a press conference announcing the survey's results. "This bad news for the church is a plus for any special interest who wants to take advantage of us."

However, he added, "The good news this poll reminds us of is that, as with any issue when Christians remember that our calling is to follow Jesus, he changes everything."

The study was commissioned by Mercer University and Faith in Public Life. Its results were announced during the "Religious Faith, Torture and our National Soul" conference held on Mercer's Atlanta campus. The meeting was sponsored by the two organizations that commissioned the poll and a host of other religious groups, including the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, Evangelicals for Human Rights, the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference and the Islamic Society of North America.

David Gushee, a Mercer professor and president of Evangelicals for Human Rights (and also a columnist for Associated Baptist Press) said the poll results should tell both of the major-party presidential candidates how to lead when it comes to addressing the subject of torture.

Both GOP nominee John McCain and his Democratic rival, Barack Obama, have expressed opposition to the United States' use of torture on terrorism suspects.

"My message to [Illinois] Sen. Barack Obama ... is that you have an opportunity to make torture a moral and, in fact a religious issue-a values issue," said Gushee, who teaches Christian ethics. "This is in your interest, because you are trying to communicate to religious Americans-and especially to evangelicals."

But he warned Obama not to soft-pedal the torture issue in his campaign speeches for fear of alienating middle-of-the-road voters. "I say: Say more about the issue of torture and not less," Gushee said. "Don't run away from the issue."

For McCain, the veteran Arizona senator who endured years of torture while he was a prisoner of war in North Vietnam, Gushee had different advice. "I say to Sen. McCain: Make the tie between your personal narrative and your policy stance on human rights perfectly clear," he said.

Gushee, noting that two-thirds of those in the poll who said they were supporting McCain also support torture, added, "Tell your own voters why they are wrong on this issue, and why you are committed to the positions that you have articulated since 2002-2003 on the issue of torture."

During a question-and-answer session, Gushee said he was disappointed with McCain's actions on specific legislation earlier this year that seemed to indicate he was backtracking on his previous anti-torture stance. Gushee said one vote in particular was "grievously disappointing to all who follow ... this battle for our national soul."

Nonetheless, the professor said, McCain's original position on torture is more in line with the candidate's overall message.

"It fits entirely with [McCain's] vision of national honor, it fits entirely with his vision of the discipline and grandeur of the U.S. military," Gushee said. "I think his whole appeal-his whole stated appeal-for his candidacy is a maverick who stands up for what is right. And I want him to be who he says he is."

-30-

Experts: National security not ensured by torture
By Ken Camp

ATLANTA (ABP) -- Retired high-ranking military officers and national security experts at a national summit on torture Sept. 11 agreed: A policy that permits torture does not make the United States or its troops safer.

Speaking on the seventh anniversary of the worst terrorist attacks in the United States' history, Steve Xenakis, retired brigadier general in the U.S. Army, disputed the assertion that "9/11 changed everything" -- including acceptable rules for the treatment of suspected terrorists in custody.

Xenakis, a medical doctor, participated in the two-day summit on "Religious Faith, Torture and our National Soul" held on Mercer University's Atlanta campus. Torture, he said, violates at least four key principles, he insisted, labeling it as:

-- Un-American. George Washington set the standard during the American Revolution by insisting on the humane treatment of prisoners during wartime.

-- Ineffective. Information obtained through extreme coercive physical and mental abuse is notoriously unreliable.

-- Unnecessary. Skilled interrogators know more effective ways to obtain reliable actionable intelligence.

-- Damaging. "The person who is tortured is damaged. But so is the torturer, the nation and the military," Xenakis concluded. Torture creates "increasing risk of retaliatory measures" that endangers military personnel on the front lines.

Fear, anger and politics all contributed to the climate that allowed the torture of detainees to become national policy, said Don Guter, retired rear admiral and a former Navy Judge Advocate General.

Coercive physical and mental abuse of prisoners occurred not just because of "a few bad apples," but because "those higher up in the chain of command" authorized it, said Guter, dean of the Duquesne University School of Law.

"There is a marked difference between something that happens in spite of administrative policy and something that happens because of it," he said.

Guter characterized that policy shift as a "shameful downfall" for a country that set the standard for the humane treatment of prisoners in World War II.

Karen Greenberg, executive director of the Center on Law and Security at the New York University School of Law, recounted the events that led to "groundbreaking" shifts in national policy, making torture an acceptable form of interrogation.

By the time the American public saw the first photos detailing the degradation of prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad, at least a dozen reports had been commissioned -- mostly by military personnel -- following persistent allegations of detainee abuse, she noted.

The senior U.S. military official in Iraq ordered a report prepared by Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba specifically regarding alleged abuse of prisoners by members of the 800th Military Police Brigade at Abu Ghraib.

"Reading the Taguba report was like being transplanted to Mars," Greenberg said.

The document detailed the ways in which prisoners were stripped, hooded and subjected to sexual humiliation. But, beyond that, she noted, more than 1,000 pages of documentation appended to the report revealed another shocking fact. It showed that the detention and, in essence, unrestrained interrogation of suspected terrorists had become official U.S. policy.

The Military Order of Nov. 13, 2001 -- an executive order issued by President Bush -- granted all authority regarding the detention, treatment and trial of non-citizens in the "war on terror" to the secretary of defense.

"America could do what it wanted with detainees," Greenberg said.

Five lawyers from the White House, Pentagon and Justice Department -- a "war council" convened by Bush and Cheney -- developed the legal rationale for circumventing the Uniform Code of Military Justice, federal courts and international treaties.

High-ranking military and national-security officials initially were excluded from those discussions, she noted. And once they learned about the change in policy, they could not believe people they knew and trusted would implement it.

"I do not think that torture makes us safer as a country," Greenburg said.

Information gained through interrogation is less reliable than data obtained by the established intelligence community, she said, pointing to the experience of Arizona Sen. John McCain as a prisoner of war in Vietnam. For the first 3 1/2 years of his captivity, McCain was regularly subjected to torture -- and regularly gave false information to his captors.

Greenburg also noted McCain, the Republican presidential nominee, has said his love for country, family and faith grew much deeper as a result of his brutal treatment by those who interrogated him.

She asked if the United States wants to support a policy that makes suspected terrorists more committed to their nations, tribes and religions.

The conference is being co-sponsored by Mercer and several religious groups and institutions, including Morehouse College, the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, Evangelicals for Human Rights, the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference and the Islamic Society of North America.

-30-


Legislators call faith leaders to focus on poverty issues
By Vicki Brown

WASHINGTON (ABP) -- "Poverty has been forgotten, and it has been ignored for too long," declared Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) Sept. 9.

DeLauro and Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) were featured speakers in a teleconference with reporters to kick off a nationwide interfaith week of activities to draw attention to poverty and hunger in the United States this election cycle.

More than 21 Jewish, Christian and Muslim advocacy groups, including the Jewish Council for Public Affairs and Catholic Charities USA, organized the effort. It was designed to encourage people of faith to mobilize their communities to ask local, state and national candidates what they will do during their first 100 days in office to address poverty.

Churches and religious groups have responded to the plight of the millions of Americans living in poverty, DeLauro said. Government has a "moral responsibility," she added, to do the same.

From discussions she has with constituents, DeLauro said, she's noticed an increase in financial stress. A growing number of people, she noted, "are working two jobs just to eke out a living. Larger numbers are going to food kitchens and rising every day.... People are losing that confidence ... of being able to take care of their families," she said.

DeLauro called on government to be the "safety net" for struggling families. "Families today don't really believe their children's lives will be better," she said.

The congresswoman called for an increase in the federal minimum wage, for expansion of the federal child-tax credit for the working poor and a federal stimulus package for energy assistance and food stamps.

Churches and religious groups have the moral authority in their communities to press political leaders for these causes, she said.

Lewis -- a Baptist and a veteran of the civil-rights struggles of the 1950s and '60s -- emphasized that, as government faces fiscal woes -- particularly at the local level -- people in poverty get overlooked.

"In the Civil Rights Movement, we used to say that we must pray, but we must also move our feet.... Who will offer aid to the poor, the hungry and the sick in this crisis? We must not be silent. We must pray, but we must also move our feet," he said.

People of faith have the responsibility to put the faith they proclaim into action on poverty issues, Lewis said. "We have to step in and place the problems of the poor at the feet of government, private industry and charitable organizations. The poor have no lobbyists. They have no PACs [political-action committees] or high-priced lawyers to do their work. It is up to us. We must demand solutions to these problems," he said.

"A great nation is judged by how it treats the least of its citizens. And people of faith are measured by their ability to show compassion."

The Bush administration has failed to paint an accurate picture of the plight of the lower and middle classes, alleged Jared Bernstein, director of the living-standards program at the Economic Policy Institute. He has also been the author of the annual "The State of Working America" report since 1992.

Although federal leaders continue to assert that the country's "economic fundamentals are sound," Bernstein claimed, they have failed to say that the middle and lower classes already face recession.

He pointed out that the country has lost more than 600,000 jobs this year and that the unemployment rate stood at 6.1 percent in August.

The under-employment rate stands at 10.7 percent, which represents 6 million part-time workers who would rather have full-time jobs, he added. "People need ample hours at living wages," Bernstein said.

Wealth and opportunities have become concentrated in the hands of the upper classes, he noted. While government leaders like to believe that periods of economic expansion benefit all individuals, that hasn't been the case in every period of economic growth since the late 1970s.

In the late 1990s, poverty rates diminished largely because the job market began offering more positions for low-wage workers and at higher wages, Bernstein explained. But in 2000, "inequality soared," he said.

The federal poverty rate stood at 11.3 percent in 2000, and rose to 12.5 percent by 2007, during a period of economic expansion. "If the economy is expanding and poverty is rising, where is the economy going?" he asked.

The top 1 percent of wage earners holds a 23 percent share of income, Bernstein noted. That percentage hasn't been that high since 1928 -- the year before the stock market crash that triggered the Great Depression.

Safeguards are in place to prevent another Great Depression, Bernstein added. "But the extent of economic inequality ... is as great now as then."

-30-

Opinion: The Trinity and other concrete things
By Beth Newman

(ABP) -- Being a teacher of theology has given me a rather distorted sense of priorities. I suppose that whatever one's line of work is, though, it will cause some such skewing. My husband once worked in a shop that made industrial valves, and he will occasionally trespass on the property of others to see whether his handiwork is part of their gas or water line. So I realize that there are some questions that are major for me that are minor for you. But you ought to care.

Take, for example, the doctrine of the Trinity. I've been asking around lately among family and friends about what they've been paying the most attention to lately. The answers are personal (children, health, finances, etc.) or relate to that part of the public life dominating the headlines at any given moment: the political conventions, the most recent hurricane, the biggest ballgame (Go Deacs!).

No one says, "the Trinity."

It's easy to understand why. The concept of a "Three-in-One" God outrages common sense. Any analogy seems strained at best. The one I remember from Sunday school involved trisecting and reassembling an orange.

Some scholars have argued that the doctrine is more the result of the invasive influence of Greek philosophy than scriptural evidence. Others see it as the outworking of patriarchal assumptions corrupting Jesus' simple message of love and justice.

For the ordinary believer (whoever he or she is) the biggest obstacle is that simple observation that the doctrine of the Trinity seems disconnected from the daily living of our lives in a way that "Jesus loves me, this I know, for the Bible tells me so" does not.

The fact is, however, that without the Trinity there is no way for any of us to know that Jesus loves us. Furthermore, generations of Christians have understood the Trinity as naming the most concrete reality of our existence.

Scripture describes key moments in Jesus' life in Trinitarian terms. Jesus comes up from the baptismal waters and the Spirit descends upon him. God says, "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well-pleased." Jesus ascends a mountain with Peter, James and John. He is transfigured before them, his clothes becoming "dazzling white, such as no one on earth could bleach them" (Mark 9:3). Elijah and Moses (the prophet and the law) appear and from a cloud God says, "This is my beloved Son; listen to him!"

We could read these as events simply happening a long time ago, or as invented elaborations by the Gospel writers. If we did, the Trinity would indeed remain irrelevant to our time and place. But if we read Scripture as a word spoken to us, then we can see that God's Triune engagement with the world is still going on.

What difference, then, does the Trinity make in our daily lives of work, school, children and so forth?

We can begin by saying that in and through Christ, we are God's adopted children. As the early church emphasized: "what Christ is by nature (the Son of God), we are by adoption." That is, we share communion through the Spirit with the Father and the Son. God is not a distant God, disconnected from our daily lives, but one who has fully adopted us through Christ. Our biological families may have deeply wounded us or even abandoned us; our adoption by the Triune God heals these wounds.

Another early church theologian (Gregory of Nazianzus) states, "What has not been assumed, cannot be healed." This means that Jesus became fully human in order to heal humanity from the inside. As we're battered about in our daily lives -- by worries, feelings of worthlessness, anxiety, egoism and other sins -- we can trust that God gives us (through confession, forgiveness, prayers, worship and so forth) the healing grace we need to live faithfully.

Finally, in contrast to all that divides and ruptures human relationships today, communion with the Triune God in the Spirit is a uniting force. Pentecost is God's gift to the church today, an ongoing reality in which the Spirit can create paths toward reconciliation in surprising ways.

In the final analysis, the Trinity is a description of God apart from which life as a Christian makes no sense.

-30-

-- Beth Newman is professor of theology and ethics at Baptist Theological Seminary at Richmond. bnewman@btsr.edu