Terra Extraneus

Unlike many of my family members, I cannot recite every word from every conversation I hear or every movie I see. Indeed, I find both skills annoying because verifying the asserted memory is often pointless or inconvenient. But, one line I remember from the movie version of the Fellowship of the Ring was when the rapidly aging hobbit Bilbo Baggins confides in his young friend and heir, Frodo Baggins, that he feels like “too little butter spread across too much bread.”

That seems to be a cause of the demise of many wonderful organizations. They lose focus to ego driven goal setting, they lose effectiveness by squandering the good will accumulated by years of toil and hardship, and in the end they continue as increasingly fainter, shallower, and quieter organizations until finally they are gone.

This seemed to happen in the 2000 elections when the mighty PAC (“political action committee”), Campaign for Working Families, founded by Gary L. Bauer, was turned over to a caretaker director while Bauer ran for the presidency. His stated goal was to inject the abortion debate into the political thought of the time, but his PAC had already been very successful raising funds, and in elections, that was enough to raise the issue.

During his campaign for the presidency, he tried to use the contributors and mailing lists of the PAC in his campaign. I remember telling one of the many staffers that telephoned me to obtain a contribution that Bauer needed to stand in line for PAC money like every other candidate. But, clever as I thought that was, the staffer did not understand what I meant. It was a short conversation. I lost all interest even before Bauer had to install a glass door on his office to ward off accusations of fraternization with one of this campaign staffers, because the PAC was no longer focused on its mission, and Bauer’s chances in the election were never credible. I have never again supported Bauer’s work.

The same thing seems to be happening to Jay Sekulow’s American Center for Law and Justice. Originally founded as a para-church ministry to act as a “Christian public interest” law firm, the organization seems to have tired of its focus on legal issues and is spreading shallowly like spilled water in all directions. One day the ACLJ is writing briefs, but the next it is circulating petitions to support Israel’s struggle to survive (which needs to be done but by somebody else with that focus), or issuing “news of the day” analyses about what is being taught by university professors (with a thin or non-existent explanation of the data used to found the conclusions reached). ACLJ’s website is becoming a cacophony of issues, many of which are not before any court, or not before any court in any case in which ACLJ appears to have entered an appearance.

Is Sekulow primping for a run for national office? That would be a shame. Continuing Legal Education authors and speakers often mention him when they are name dropping about cases involving constitutional questions relating to the Establishment Clause. But, will he forfeit that distinction and reputation and attempt to become recognized as a news commentator or even a foreign policy advisor? Is Sekulow’s ego forcing him to joust at windmills instead of slaying the dragons that hound Christians in school districts, counties and cities? Like Bauer, will he fail, or at least be set back, because he became too little spread too far?

My fear is that just as Bauer probably felt that his contribution to the national debate was growing too slowly or reaching too few people, causing him to imagine he could by the force of his personality influence a national presidential election, Sekulow may have conceded to himself that he can only take so much ground in the Establishment Clause and similar cases. From that conclusion, has he begun to cast about for new issues and new sources of support to propel himself to another “plane of existence?”

The work of the ACLJ is too valuable to abandon. Just as the impoverished must have the Legal Services Corporation (“legal aid”), Christians desperately need a similar organization on watch and on call. Most local churches simply do not have the resources, much less the expertise or will, to fight these critical trench warfare battles without the ACLJ. Bauer did not get it. His PAC was, and still could be, vital in the battle to keep the abortion debate alive so that it might reach a just conclusion. Even if Roe v. Wade was abandoned as national policy tomorrow, there would still be decades of legislative work and litigation to be done, but Bauer seemed to abandon it all in favor of his personal run for the presidency. If Sekulow makes similar poor choices, the ensuing loss of ACLJ will likely be a culture war disaster of the first magnitude resulting in the further erosion of freedoms for Christians.

No Comments

The free expression of religious speech has received another setback from a Des Moines federal court when it squelched a Prison Fellowship program in a state prison. The decision is nonsensical; inmates who had no fear about breaking criminal laws would have no difficulty refusing to participate in a Prison Fellowship program.

The other side of the coin is “ecclesiastical privilege,” the body of law that prevents government and courts from intruding into church governance. Two recent court decisions demonstrate the breadth of the “flipside” of the Establishment Clause’s present abusive application. The “other side” of the Establishment Clause might even be a fair offset to decisions like the one in Des Moines. But is it?

In a case involving a United Methodist church, a case which can be read on the Oklahoma State Courts Network (at 2006 OK CIV APP 79), the defamation claim of the youth minister was dismissed under the doctrine. In a Texas case which also involved a Methodist church, the Third Circuit Texas appellate court also dismissed the defamation claim of a youth minister.

In the Oklahoma case, the senior minister told a member of the congregation, a young person, that the reason for the youth minister’s termination was because the youth minister was “questioning his sexuality.” The allegation was shocking, and the fact that a senior minister felt free to communicate it to a “young member,” as reported in the opinion, was equally shocking.

In the Texas case, the youth minister’s dating life was subjected to scrutiny, as well as accusations that he was putting his arm around some “girls” in the church. Apparently the rumors were sufficiently troubling that two more senior ministers were considering terminating him. One of the ministers took notes of the meeting between them, and the youth minister found the notes on the photocopy machine. Such a lapse, leaving the notes on the copy machine, also seems shocking and unprofessional. Like the Oklahoma court, the Texas court dismissed the defamation claim.

Other than a sad commentary on the lack of professionalism in the salaried clergy, and other than a sad commentary on the abrupt and callous handling of youth ministers, which are typically younger, less experienced, and new to ministry, both churches and their ministers had free reign without civil law accountability. Maybe this is as it should be in churches, in order to fully effectuate the Establishment Clause. Most business people would like to have the same shield.

These published appellate opinions have shed some light on personnel problems that churches should address differently, and probably with greater professionalism as well as more compassion. Also, in both instances, there was the availability of denominational resources, some of which should be devoted to Human Resources management and training.

The “right” of the matter cannot be determined in either case merely from the appellate opinions, but what is clear is that enormous resources in legal fees were probably wasted by both sides, tithed resources, no doubt, that could have been better spent solving the problems. If someone is indeed not cut out for the ministry, the amount spent in legal fees would still have been less than severance or retraining resources for youth ministers unready or unqualified for the mission.

2 Comments

Liberty Elementary School in Keller, Texas, used a graphic of the new Liberty nickel on the cover of its yearbook this year. But to make sure they didn’t offend atheists, they deleted the words “In God We Trust” from the graphic. Then, to make sure they didn’t offend believers, they included an “In God We Trust” sticker with each book for those who wanted to add our nation’s motto back onto the coin.

Ironically, the motto was deleted from the yearbook cover because its use “might create an issue,” the superintendent said. Keller is a suburb of Fort Worth. Here’s the Star-Telegram’s report.

Here’s some interesting info from the Department of the Treasury on the “In God We Trust” motto, which has been used on U.S. coins and currency since the Civil War days. A century later, the U.S. Congress voted in 1956 to make “In God We Trust” the official national motto of the United States.

Even in “Liberty,” Texas.

1 Comment

Abdul Rahman, the Afghan man who faced a possible death sentence by beheading for converting from Islam to Christianity, has been released. Muslims, chanting “Death to Christians!” took to the streets to protest Rahman’s freedom. Rahman was turned into authorities by his own family, who are among the Afghan Muslims who seek Rahman’s execution for the crime of following Christ.

Rahman has gone into hiding, and Italy has offered him asylum. More news from the Associated Baptist Press here. The ABP reports says at least two other Afghan Christians remain in jail under circumstances similar to Rahman’s ordeal.

Two-hundred and eighty-four U.S. military have been killed in Afghanistan since the U.S.-led invasion of that country in 2001. The U.S. has 18,000 troops stationed in Afghanistan. The most recent U.S. death happened earlier today, when Taliban insurgents attacked the U.S. base there.

The Afghan constitution, which was drafted and adopted after the Taliban was ousted in 2001, declares Islam the supreme law of the land, and Islamic law calls for the execution of Muslims who abandon the religion. Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, an organization closely linked to James Dobson, criticized the Bush administration’s foreign policy for failing to make religious freedom in Afghanistan and elsewhere a top priority. Quoted in the ABP article linked above, Perkins said:

Simply dismissing the charges based upon lack of evidence does not sufficiently address the lack of religious freedom in Afghanistan. As the United States continues its work in Afghanistan and Iraq, it is vital that the Bush administration secure a clear understanding of religious freedom from these new governments. Abdul Rahman’s imprisonment has revealed a major fault in our foreign policy.

No Comments

Le Moyne College is a Roman Catholic institution of higher learning governed by the Jesuits and in its mission statement, claims to be called to “promote a more just society.” Even as a non-Catholic, I have always been intrigued by the Jesuits and not a little awed by their history and accomplishments. That makes the present controversy impossible to fathom.

CNSNews.com reported that LeMoyne College dismissed a graduate student from the graduate school of education because he wrote a paper favoring corporal punishment, spanking, as part of a program of discipline in an “ideal learning environment.” Litigation followed and a New York state court held that LeMoyne College violated its own handbook by failing to allow the student to appeal from the adverse decision. LeMoyne College has decided to appeal, according to the news report. By the way, the paper earned an “A-“ and the student’s grade point average was above 3.7, so the dismissal could not be cloaked as academic failure.

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (“FIRE”) has posted the results of their work in the matter to their website, which included the decision of the NY court in favor of the student and ordering the school to follow its own handbook. The opinion is only three pages long and does not mention the separation of church and state or distinguish LeMoyne College as a private religious institution, but merely ruled on generic contract principles. FIRE’s letters and the college’s original dismissal letter are also posted.

This is my first chance to review FIRE’s work and it was impressive in this case to this point. For many years I have followed the work of Jay Sekulow, Esq. and even his opponents publicly recognize the quality of his work. FIRE may be playing a niche role with similar competence.

The private church run school was clearly wrong. But, are we happy to see a successful intervention by a secular court, even on secular contract grounds? However, without seeing the briefing filed by the college, it is impossible to know whether the school claimed its decision was based on religious views.

Equally troubling is that UCLA, clearly a leading educational institution in this nation supported by taxpayer funds, plans legal action against an alumnus that founded an organization targeting “political radicalism on campus,” according to CNSNews.com, and presses its views through a website that identified “radical professors” and then rated them according to their views and efforts to convert their students to those views. UCLA’s cease and desist letter was based on trade mark violations. The website dropped all trade marks and disclaimed official affiliation with UCLA, but a UCLA spokesperson indicated legal action was still being designed to silence the website. The lesson to be learned here is that even in California, where First Amendment freedoms have historically been cherished, there is a certain amount of hypocrisy about academic freedom. The professors have it, the students are the unwilling victims, and even a graduate of the school must not speak of it.

In both of these instances, the institutions of higher learning have become so afraid of the written word, even an unpublished term paper, that they have felt compelled to lash out and destroy the authors. Or worse, are these institutions so flush with cash that arrogance has replaced intellectual honesty? Oklahoma institutions of higher learning would never consider such ridiculous actions, and I suspect it is because they are too busy making ends meet to waste time or energy, or highly paid personnel and legal fees, on such. Insofar as the public record yet demonstrates, there has been no accusation of defamation or violence against the authors to be silenced.

On both coasts, it appears, academic freedom and intellectual debate of some persons, but not those in some privileged class such as the professors, can be attacked consistent with the mission statement of these institutions. This is sad and frightening if it is a representative trend.

No Comments

The First Amendment, U.S. Constitution

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Religious Freedom a Focus of Terra Extraneus
Terra Extraneus’ mission statement is: “To navigate the intersection of news, morality, law and faith.” One of the most crucial arenas in which law and faith are intersecting in modern America is religious freedom. The authors of Terra Extraneus do not oppose the separation of church and state when properly applied. As a matter of fact, it was to protect our religious freedoms that our founding fathers authored the Establishment Clause. The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from establishing official state religion, and it also prohibits the government from restricting the free exercise of religion in our free society. In those ways, the Constitution “separates” the “state” (government) from the “church” (religious expression), and that is a good thing for all who wish to remain free.

However, the constitutional separation of church and state is being turned on its ear in modern times, used to accomplish the very thing it was meant to prevent. Christians and other religious practitioners in the U.S. are being prevented from the free exercise of their faith on supposed “separation of church and state” grounds.

Teachers, students, members of the armed forces, government employees, and average citizens in public places are being hindered from expressing their faith in the very name of the constitutional provision that was designed to protect our freedom.

Terra Extraneus will keep a spotlight on religious freedom: reporting relevant current events, providing commentary, answering questions, and supporting the work of individuals and groups who are doing good work to protect our religious freedom.

If you have news or comments about religious freedom under fire, if you have a question about your religious freedoms, or if you would like us to highlight the work you are doing, please contact us.

No Comments

CNSNews.com reports that the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire implemented a policy prohibiting Resident Advisors from leading or teaching Bible studies in their dormitory rooms. Resident Advisors are students living in campus dormitories provided with free housing in exchange for services as advisors to other student residents. The University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire adopted the policy, CNSNew.com reports, based on the concern that student residents would feel unwelcome or pressured if Resident Advisors led Bible studies or hosted them in their rooms. Needless to say, one of the Resident Advisors has filed a federal law suit.

Typically, federal courts have enforced private rights of religious expression even on government-owned premises, as long as the religious expression was neither issued by government actors nor sponsored by government actors. Will the court view a college dormitory Resident Advisor as a government actor while acting in his own quarters? Common sense would prohibit such a view.

Our First Amendment rights are sacred. The citizens of Wisconsin should react accordingly.

The University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire apparently does not fear the voters or the legislature. Hopefully, the voters and legislature will be inspired to place additional budgetary limits on the university. For example, eliminating the position known as the “associate director of housing and resident life” (the university official who prohibited private residential Bible studies led or hosted by Resident Advisors) would be a first good move.

No Comments

The Exclusion of Purely Ecclesiastical Disputes

While Christians are often concerned, or even angered, because Christian views and activities are stifled in public places, bodies and schools, there is a compensating balance. Each will have to decide whether it is enough to balance that which is lost in “separation of church and state.” Generally, my view is that it is for the best, because properly tithing churches and Christians can solve the impact of stifled religious expression in public places by simply privatizing their locations and funding.

In exchange, purely ecclesiastical disputes are not within the jurisdiction of the courts. The exact line between purely ecclesiastical disputes and disputes invoking the military power of the state, i.e., disputes over property and money, is often hard to find.

The Mississippi Boulevard Christian Church of Memphis, Tenn., fell into the black hole of bitter rancor when part of the membership sought to prevent a new employment contract between the church and its senior minister. Other disputes included concerns over contributions to a para-church organization, as well as bonuses to the senior minister. During the trial court proceedings, the members bringing the lawsuit were excommunicated.

The Court of Appeals of Tennessee dismissed the case and held that the issues involved were purely ecclesiastical disputes, disputes over which the court had no jurisdiction. That will be the result in most courts whenever internal church issues are presented. External issues, such as title to property and bank account ownership, would likely remain the province of judicial decision-making. As a result, Christians have no choice but to obey Paul’s admonition to settle their own disputes without involving worldly courts. 1 Corinthians 6:1-8. Thus, the separation of church and state may not be all bad.

No Comments

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, on November 30, 2005, enjoined the Indiana Legislature from opening its sessions with sectarian prayer. Following the United States Supreme Court decision regarding the Nebraska legislature, the Marsh case, the Indiana federal court ordered the Indiana Legislature to conduct its opening prayer tradition like this:

“In this case, for the reasons set forth above, plaintiffs are entitled to a permanent injunction against the Speaker in his official capacity barring him from permitting sectarian prayer as part of the official proceedings of the Indiana House of Representatives. If the Speaker chooses to continue any form of legislative prayer, he shall advise persons offering such a prayer (a) that it must be nonsectarian and must not be used to proselytize or advance any one faith or belief or to disparage any other faith or belief, and (b) that they should refrain from using Christ’s name or title or any other denominational appeal.”

Gene Veith, writing for World Magazine, brought this decision, to my attention at least, in the December 17th issue of World Magazine, in his review of the decision, when he noted that the decision eliminated religious diversity by banning sectarian prayer, but allowed non-sectarian prayer, i.e., uni-prayer [my word not his, but probably not a new term since the invention of the uni-sex concept]. Mr. Veith also noted that Christian prayer is incapable of encompassing meaningful uni-prayer.

The legislative session prayer cases are more worrisome to me than the public school prayer or public school curriculum cases. To avoid that problem, Christians simply have to learn how to tithe and start their own schools. Our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters have been doing so for generations and while not perfect, have set an example for nearly everyone else. But, legislatures cannot be privatized. The Indiana federal court has taken us one more step away from non-sectarian government toward a form of uni-religion and uni-prayer that will one day become the standard of the politically correct.

No Comments