Subscribe to Christianity Today
Subscribe to Christianity Today
Donate to Christianity Today
February 9, 2010
Free Newsletters:
RSS Feeds | Audio | Twitter

Home > 2007 > March (Web-only)Christianity Today, March (Web-only), 2007  |   |  
NAE Endorses Statement Against Torture
Declaration calls for churches and individuals to act on "non-negotiable" issue.



ADVERTISEMENT

Torture is not an option, says the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE), which endorsed a statement against the practice of torture this week.

The newly-formed Evangelicals for Human Rights, comprised of 17 activists and scholars, spent more than six months drafting the 18-page document, "An Evangelical Declaration Against Torture: Protecting Human Rights in an Age of Terror." The document is intended to be both a moral and theological statement.

"From a Christian perspective, every human life is sacred. As evangelical Christians, recognition of this transcendent moral dignity is non-negotiable in every area of life, including our assessment of public policies," the statement begins.

The NAE endorsed the document at their annual March 11 meeting, with one dissenting vote.

"Everyone bears an obligation to act in ways that recognize human rights," the statement says. "Churches must teach their members to think biblically about morally difficult and emotionally intense public issues such as this one. Our own government must honor its constitutional and moral responsibilities to respect and protect human rights."

Drafters said the statement was motivated by recent accounts of torture, such as the numerous 2004 accounts of abuse and torture of prisoners held in the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

"There are some who have misconstrued this as criticism of the United States, but that is clearly not the intent or the character of the document," NAE interim president Leith Anderson told CT. "The most frequent question I have been asked is, 'Why did we not do this sooner?'"

NAE vice president for governmental affairs Richard Cizik said he has seen an overseas perception that even evangelical Christian Americans are willing to engage terror by any means necessary.

"We support the war against terror, but not by any means necessary," Cizik said. "If you don't think torture is a topic worthy of a statement, just watch 24." The enormously popular counterterrorism drama depicts American military officials using torture, even though it is illegal.

Although it has not received the same amount of attention, the document is similar to the Evangelical Climate Initiative statement signed by many evangelical leaders in February 2006, said Cizik. "The idea is not to just draft a statement and put it on the shelf."

"An Evangelical Declaration Against Torture" criticizes provisions of the Military Commissions Act that do not hold intelligence officials to the same standards as the military. It also commends the Pentagon's recently revised Army Field Manual for clearly banning torture.

"This is not evangelicals versus the government," said Union University professor David Gushee, one of the statement's drafters. "We're saying the Pentagon has it about right. Let's have all branches play by those rules."

Gushee says the document is not a political statement but something which can be used as a study tool. "We sort of want to be a clearinghouse for evangelical reflection on this," he said. "Our dream would be an evangelical consensus, and we are working diligently to build that."

Institute on Religion and Democracy vice president Jerald Walz criticized the endorsement by saying that those who helped draft the document and those who originally signed it were largely from the evangelical left. "It doesn't build broad support for the document," he said. "It makes the document look like a political document used to criticize the administration or the U.S."

Walz also sees "An Evangelical Declaration Against Torture" as being incomplete, because it only addresses the United States policy on torture. "They need to include countries that are actively torturing. There's no moral equivalence between the United States and a regime like North Korea," he said. "To remain silent on that is a travesty."

share this pageshare this page



E-mail this pageWrite CTPrint this articlePost a comment





  


Subscribe to Christianity Today and get 3 free trial issues. No credit card required.

Please allow 4-6 weeks for delivery. Offer valid in U.S. only.

If you decide you want to keep Christianity Today coming, honor your invoice for just $19.95 and receive nine more issues, a full year in all. If not, simply write "cancel" across the invoice and return it. The three trial issues are yours to keep, regardless.


Click here for international orders2-for-1 Gifts!

[Reader Reviews]
Average User Rating: 

Displaying 1 - 3 of 7 comments.See all comments
Denny   Posted: March 21, 2007 9:02 PM
As Bob Coger and others have mentioned, unless "torture" is defined, this document is meaningless. On its face, it seems the NAE thinks playing loud music and other techniques are the same as sawing a person's head off. Unfortunately the signers of the statement will think they actually did something significant and congratulate themselves for taking a "brave stand" when it is really pointless.

Rob Baker   Posted: March 20, 2007 12:02 AM
Praise the Lord! There is so little genuine Christianity left in the US. Many professing Christians seem as bloodthirsty as heathens. I was awed & encouraged that the NAE had the conviction to state that sin is always sin. Anytime a nation acts as though the end justifies the means then the door is open to terrible evils.

Thomas Q   Posted: March 19, 2007 6:23 AM
As a twenty-year Arny veteran of two wars and a Christian minister, I too do not condone torture in any way, however I agree with Jerald Walz, there cannot be a separtate standard for America and another for others. As people of faith, we need to take a stand and condemn torture by all who would use it. To issue a reolution condemning toture by Americans and then to be silent about the practice of others, to an even greater degree, such as beheadings, etc. sends a wrong message to the world. Why cannot the NAE resolve to be for human rights for and by everyone?

The allotted time for commenting has ended.

[Browse More Christianity Today]

Search






















Search by Name
Or use Advanced Search to search by program, region, cost, affiliation, enrollment, more!

Search by:





Books & Culture
Christianity Today
Church Law & Tax Report
Church Finance Today
Leadership Journal
Men of Integrity
Outcomes
Kyria.com
Your Church
ChristianityTodayLibrary.com
PreachingToday.com