Jan. 23, 2012 Abidjan, Ivory Coast

Gilbert Weeh/ANN staff

The Seventh-day Adventist Church in Nigeria is seeing a drop in church attendance and some church closures amid worsening religious conflict in the country.

An upsurge of attacks against Christian churches by the extremist group Boko Haram beginning late last year has led to ongoing sectarian violence between Muslim and Christian groups in northeast Nigeria.

Adding to the tumult, the country’s government recently eliminated energy subsidies, doubling the price of gasoline and inciting nationwide strikes and demonstrations. News reports indicate that Nigerians are living in fear of continuing unrest.

Meanwhile, Nigerian writer Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie called on religious leaders in her country to speak out against the violence, the Guardian reported last week.

“Christian leaders must continue to preach peace and togetherness so that Christians do not retaliate,” Adichie told the Guardian. “Muslim leaders must strongly and repeatedly condemn the violence against Christians and make it clear that Boko Haram does not represent Nigerian Islam,” she said.

The Adventist Church in the country has devoted recent days to fasting and prayer for the ongoing situation. Church administration in the country is encouraging membership to work in small groups and avoid large public religious gatherings. Open air evangelism efforts have been put on hold due to a curfew and the fragile security situation, church officials said.

According to a report by Northeast Nigeria Conference President Bindas Stephen Haruna, the Adventist Church there has not suffered property damage or loss of life. However, some individual members have had their property looted or burned.

“The situation in Northern Nigeria shows how a lack of religious freedom can affect the life of churches, and why we must promote and strongly defend this essential freedom before it is too late,” said John Graz, director for the Adventist world church’s Public Affairs and Religious Liberty.

Church attendance in northeast Nigeria has dropped drastically, leading to church closures in some regions where most members are traveling business people who have returned to their homes. In other churches, pastors have left their congregations for fear of being killed.

The situation has produced a wave of small group evangelism, church leaders said. As Nigerian Adventists funnel their efforts to spread the Adventist hope on a smaller scale, church officials in the country are soliciting the prayers and support of the world church family.

Amy Tarkanian, the state GOP chairwoman told The Associate Press that she has asked the Republican National Committee to weigh in on whether the religious voters should be accommodated by moving their voting to Saturday night, or moved forward to February 2.

Casino titan and Republican party supporter Sheldon Adelson has raised concerns about the scheduling of the February 4, 2012 caucus, which falls on Saturday, or the Sabbath as celebrated by orthodox Jews, Seventh-day Adventists, and members of a few other religious groups.

The proposed changes would allow religious voters who observe the seventh day as a holy day to vote on an alternate date while most Nevada Republicans would be requested to caucus from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. on February 4.

If you support religious accomodation for Nevada GOP voters who observe the Sabbath on Saturday, contact the GOP with a message of thanks and support for the decision at http://www.nvgopcaucus.com/contact

Here is a sample message:  ”Just wanted to thank you for considering accommodating members of the GOP whose religious beliefs require that they rest on Saturday.”

Dec. 14, 2011 Silver Spring, Maryland, United States

Bettina Krause/PARL/ANN

Religious liberty leaders of the Seventh-day Adventist Church this week met the Hungarian ambassador to the United States in an effort to help officials from that country better understand the potential effects of a looming deregistration of churches.

The Law of Churches, set for implementation on January 1, would deregister all but 14 religious denominations in Hungary, including the Adventist Church. It could also potentially affect the church’s theological seminary.

Hungarian Ambassador to the United States, Gyorgy Szapary, met with officials from the Adventist Church’s Public Affairs and Religious Liberty department on December 12 at the Hungarian embassy in Washington, D.C. While the law is still set for implementation, Adventist representatives later described the meeting as “cordial” and “productive.”

“We expressed our deep concerns to Ambassador Szapary about Hungary’s recently passed ‘Law on Churches’ and its impact, not just on the Adventist Church, but on many other minority religions as well,” said Dwayne Leslie, the Adventist Church’s director of legislative affairs. Leslie represented the Adventist Church at the meeting along with Ganoune Diop, the church’s representative to the United Nations.

Diop and Leslie provided the ambassador with an overview of the international denomination and the history and scope of the Adventist presence in Hungary. They also explained the potential impact on the Adventist Theological Seminary in Pécel, near Budapest, which serves 66 students.

Adventist Education officials have previously said the seminary is key for providing theological and counseling education in the Hungarian language and cultural context. “Although it’s small, the seminary meets the needs of the church in Hungary for pastors and theologians, as well as for life style and family life counselors,” said Mike Lekic, an associate Education director for the Adventist Church.

Following Monday’s meeting, Diop said the ambassador was gracious and receptive to the issues presented by the Adventist Church. “The meeting provided an excellent opportunity for dialogue — we stated our concerns clearly, and heard the perspective of the Hungarian government,” he said.

When the new law, voted in July, goes into effect next month, it will strip all but 14 “historic” religions of their legal status. Minority religions must then apply to the Hungarian parliament for re-registration.

Since the legislation was passed, Hungary has maintained that the move was not “anti-religion,” but rather a legislative means to root out fraudulent organizations operating behind the protection of religion.

Religious liberty advocates worldwide, however, have decried the law, calling it unnecessary state interference with religion and a setback for human rights in Hungary. More than 300 groups are set to lose their registration, including Hungary’s Methodists, Unitarians, a number of Islamic communities, and many smaller Protestant and evangelical churches.

In November, Diop and John Graz, PARL director for the Adventist world church, met in New York with Hungary’s ambassador to the United Nations to express the church’s concerns about the potential plight not just of Adventists, but of other religious groups in Hungary that will be affected by the new law.

Leslie and Diop said the Public Affairs and Religious Liberty department will continue to monitor the situation in Hungary and will provide any assistance requested by local church leaders.

EXCERPT:

Shortly before I left the work at the GC office I had an opportunity to sit down with Karel and ask him what he would say to the person who would replace him. What words of wisdom would he give. He had shared with me that he planned to retire when his current term of office had come to an end. I had no idea that this question would prove to be such an important question. Karel told me, “my understanding of the service I am trying to provide to the church is similar to the service provided by ADRA in a humanitarian area. I think that the global church needs three type of services provided by the PARL department:”

1. the church needs to be constantly reminded of the principles and importance of religious freedom;
2. the church needs to be known in the society as a community that promotes and protects religious freedom;
3. the church needs to get reliable, correct information about the legal and social situation in every country.

The PARL department has two primary functions, according to Karel, first it is to provide information about the legal and social issues of religious freedom in the given country; and second, it is to be involved in creating a positive image of the Adventist church to the community.

Read the full article here.

Here is a brief excerpt from this book:

Perhaps some are asking, “What does an economic collapse have to do with the Second Advent? Answer: The coming international economic meltdown, coupled with natural disasters, will drive governments to find scapegoats for the escalating calamities.

The religious card will be played. Something like this will be said, perhaps by the president of the United States: “We are in an enormous crisis. We need unity as never before. We need to restore our common values, our religious roots. We need fewer divisions, less hate talk. In fact, we are going to outlaw any group talking negatively about anyone else. This is a time to come together and fulfill the American dream. Remember, ’Righteousness exalted a nation.’ Let’s restore peace to our communities, at least for one day of the week. Let’s restore America to the way it used to be.”

Bingo! Sunday will be the day of choice, and the plea for tolerance and national unity will trump all negative talk about anyone’s sexual orientation, ethnic origin, or religious beliefs.

So what? someone may ask. These unprecedented conditions we have been reviewing in these pages will soon compel frightened citizens to enact strict government laws that will evaporate the basic freedoms on which this country was founded. For instance, no longer will it be permissible to argue for which day is the Sabbath or to point out who changed it-that will be considered intolerant, divisive, and subject to rapid, legal incarceration.

These unprecedented conditions we have been reviewing in these pages will soon compel frightened citizens to enact strict government laws that will evaporate the basic freedoms on which this country was founded.

…
Bottom line–such a time will come, when loyal, patriotic citizens will not be able to buy or sell. And if they continue to be divisive with their appeal to freedom, as guaranteed in the Constitution, Revelation 13 comes into play. Verse 15 predicts that the law will say they should be killed! We are not there yet, but the stage is surely being set. Really, it has never been this late before!

Does anyone still doubt the accuracy of the predictions in Revelation 13 and 18 that we have just reviewed, and Testimonies, volume 9, page 13? In this chapter, we have briefly flown over the current economic/political distress primarily in the United States. Only a fool is saying, “All is well!” But the U.S.A. comprises only part of the world’s predicaments.

In our next chapter we will focus on the quiet, though extraordinary methods being used to globalize all aspects of our lives, no matter what country we may live in. “All the world is a stage, and all the men and women merely players,” Shakespeare said so well in “As You Like It.” Never before in earth’s history has Planet Earth become such a world theater! Yes, we all are “bit” players! For the world to be bankrupt, “when great riches came to nothing”-that is still ahead.

—

Order your copy of Red Alert: Hurtling Into Eternity by Herbert E. Douglass from the Pacific Press Publishing Association at http://pppa.com/index.php?pgName=prodBooks&sku=0816324883

During his 60 year ministry, Dr. Herbert Douglass has served as a college theology professor, Atlantic Union College president, vice-president of a publishing house, president of Weimar Institute, vice-president for philanthropy at Adventist Heritage Ministry, and most recently, as consultant for Amazing Facts Ministry.  Author of many books and articles, Dr. Douglass earned his doctorate in 1964 at the Pacific School of Religion, Berkeley, California. 

Since its organization in 1863 the Seventh-day Adventist Church has been counter cultural.  In its Christian witness to modern society it has advocated keeping the seventh-day Sabbath, vegetarianism, abstinence from tobacco and alcohol and refusal of its members to bear arms.  But the stance on the refusal to bear arms has seen a metamorphous in modern times.  Today more Seventh-day Adventist young people have voluntarily joined the military than in any previous generation of the Church’s history.  This volume is a compliation of essays that were presented at a conference called to discuss the Adventist Church’s position on concientious objection.  The presenters considered the history of the Church’s stand and the changing views.  These discussions were not limited to American context but considered other countries including South Africa and Canada.

This volume will not only be a benefit to the Adventist scholar and historian, but to those who want to gain a deeper understanding of the Adventist struggle to remain faithful to the principles of the Sermon on the Mount and relevant in the modern age.  Adventist young people who are considering the military as a career option would find this resource invaluable to understanding the history of those young people in the Church who faced the very same questions.

Barry W. Bussey, was born and raised in Newfoundland, Canada.  He holds degrees in Theology, Political Science and Law.  He is currently working on a PhD in Law at the Osgoode Hall Law School in Toronto.  Barry is a member of the Law Society of Newfoundland and the Law Society of Upper Canada.  He has appeared before various Canadian courts (including the Supreme Court of Canada), administrative boards and Parliamentary Committees on issues of religious freedom.  His legal practice deals with all areas of church life including – employment law, property, estates and civil litigation.  He is a member of the Board of the Canadian Council of Christian Charities; and International Justice Mission Canada.

Click Here to purchase this book for only $19.95.

Understanding three models of church-state relations in Europe is a key first step in addressing issues of religious freedom here.

As recently as a decade ago, religion in the West was considered to be facing extinction. Now more than ever, matters of religious freedom and human rights in secular states are at odds with a refocus on religion — this resurgence being fueled by the fact that extensive technical reasoning has been unable to explain the meaning of life.

Earlier this month, the Adventist Church sponsored a symposium in the city of Bellinzona, Ticino, bringing together elected officials, experts on church law and church-state relations, theologians and students of different Christian denominations to better understand religious liberty concerns and discuss possible solutions.

At the heart of the matter is understanding religious liberty in relation to the different models of secularism existing in Europe and Switzerland.

While Switzerland has 26 different models of church-state relations (as many as there are Cantons in Switzerland), in Europe, three models exist:

First: Countries with a large Catholic or Orthodox majority, where traditional religions are considered by the State to be capable of providing the necessary social cohesion for the country and thus recognized and favored.

This trend in Europe is that of an alliance between strongly Catholic and strongly Orthodox countries which then manifests itself in particular situations, such as Italy’s recent defense of the crucifix, with the cooperation of these countries.

Second: Countries where the majority religion is weak. In such countries, secularism, with its values of equality, liberty and fraternity, becomes the organizing principle and the State takes on the task of promoting this secularism. This usually manifests itself as imposing negatives — “no” to religious symbols in schools, for example. This is the case in France.

Three: A multicultural policy. This has developed in England. There, human rights are at the forefront in relation to religions, which must recognize and submit to human rights. Unfortunately, in some cases human rights have risked overriding the rights of the single religions.

Understand, these are not fixed models. Indeed, today’s situation in Europe — especially here in Switzerland — is one of constant oscillation between the three models, determined by the sense of decline that is being perceived in Western culture.

The search therefore progresses in the direction of merging the various models, and to search for common ground where the rights of the religions, religious liberty, human rights and rights of the majority and minorities are kept in balance.

Participants at the February 4 symposium said possible solutions should be seen in terms of:

• A greater disposition to accept individuals and groups who desire to manifest their religion or belief publicly.

• Helping to increase the acceptance of plurality concerning personal beliefs.

• Safeguard the internal autonomy of religion and belief communities, while respecting human rights to their full extent.

Knowing these issues is a starting point. Now is up to us to continue pursuing this goal of balancing religious liberty in multicultural societies.

–Corrado Cozzi is the Communication director for the Adventist Church’s Euro-Africa Division, based in Berne, Switzerland

May 5, 2010 – WASHINGTON (RNS) — More than a decade after it was first introduced, an on-again off-again bill to protect employees’ religious expression in the workplace is attracting renewed attention that could lead to action on Capitol Hill in coming weeks.
. . .

“The bill will be introduced to Congress soon in a fashion that will eliminate the concerns some folks had since its inception,” said Richard Foltin, the director of national and legislative affairs for the American Jewish Committee.

Touted in certain circles as the “WRFA god,” Foltin co-chairs an unusually broad coalition of almost 40 religious groups, from Sikhs to Seventh-Day Adventists to Southern Baptists, who support the bill’s religious freedom expansions.

If passed, the now narrowly tailored legislation would require employers to make reasonable accommodation in the three areas where the vast majority of religious accommodation claims fall: religious clothing, grooming, and scheduling of religious holidays.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE: http://www.crosswalk.com/news/religiontoday/11631159/

ReligiousLiberty.TV will continue to track developments of this legislation which is similar to the Workplace Religious Freedom Act passed in Oregon last year.

Related stories:

Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski signs the Workplace Religious Freedom Act

Breaking News:  We have received word that Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski has signed the Oregon Workplace Religious Freedom Act (SB 786). SB 786 requires employers to make credible attempts to accommodate religious holy day observance and religious dress. Prior to SB 786, employers in Oregon could make only the bare minimum …

Talking Points SB 786 – Oregon Workplace Religious Freedom Act

GENERAL Talking Points   Federal Religious Accommodation Law   Defining terms: “Undue hardship.” Title VII of the U.S. Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended in 1972, requires employers to “reasonably” accommodate the religious practices of their employees unless, by so doing, the employer would incur an “undue hardship on the conduct of the …

Workplace Discrimination Claims On the Rise (BeliefNet – RNS)

The Workplace Religious Freedom Act (WRFA) is again being proposed in the United States Congress and a similar bill is being heard at the state legislature in Oregon.    This bill is important to religious people who are currently being forced to choose between their faith and their jobs.  Thanks …

Greg Hamilton consults with Speaker Dave Hunt

BY VOTE OF 38-21 OREGON’S WORKPLACE RELIGIOUS FREEDOM ACT PASSES IN OREGON’S HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES!

Mark it down on your calendar, because this bill effort was a “historic,” if not a heroic, testament of God’s divine providence and power working through human instruments!

May 29, 2009 will long live in the memory of the leadership and support team of the Northwest Religious Liberty Association (NRLA) as Oregon Representative Dave Hunt (D-Gladstone District), the Speaker of Oregon’s House of Representatives, took apart each of the specific arguments of three of his colleagues in his closing remarks during the vigorous debate on the House floor. Opponents argued that current federal law was sufficient, and that the “minimal cost” and administrative “inconvenience” standards to define an “undue” business “hardship” were appropriate for employers to use when denying religious accommodation requests in the workplace.

 However, the 65 and 63 percent that voted in favor of the bill in Oregon’s House and Senate chambers respectively, agreed with Speaker Hunt that current law provides employers with little basis for defending the decision to accommodate or to deny accommodation. As a result, they exclaimed that employers often wave the claim of “undue hardship” like a magic wand without having to 1) define, explain, or demonstrate what that “undue hardship” is to the employee, or 2) how it really adversely affects their business in administrative terms, or in dollars and cents. Speaker Hunt, the chief sponsor of SB 786-A, further argued that some employers today continue to regularly define “undue hardship” as anything that causes a business “inconvenience,” and use it as a false legal pretext to refuse, as a matter of policy, to accommodate religious requests.

 Speaker Hunt reminded his colleagues that a few unfortunate Supreme Court decisions, beginning with TWA v. Hardison, 432 U.S. 63 (1977), reduced the definition of “undue hardship” to a “de minimis” or “inconvenience” standard in favor of the employer. As a result, it significantly placed people of faith at a disadvantage in the workplace and created unnecessary unemployment hardships for them. That is why “undue hardship,” he argued, must be defined more coherently as a “significant difficulty” and “expense” and that such language, in turn, would also help relieve employers of so many discrimination claims against them.

 What This Bill Does

What this bill does is clarify the responsibility of employers to accommodate the scheduling of leave time for the observation of religious holy days, or for the wearing of religious apparel in the workplace unless it poses a “significant difficulty or expense” to their business(es). More specifically, it restores the original federal Title VII legal standard involving religious discrimination which obligated employers to demonstrate that they reasonably attempted to accommodate the sincerely held religious beliefs and practices of their employees before claiming that such beliefs and practices posed a “significant difficulty” and “expense” for their business(es). This bill, once law, will help thousands of people of faith in the workplace who many times are forced to choose between their faith and putting food on the table for their family.

The Next Step

Oregon’s Workplace Religious Freedom Act now goes to the Governor’s desk for his signature. The Northwest Religious Liberty Association, Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon, and the Oregon Jewish Federation of America, have been invited to join House Speaker Dave Hunt and Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian to join him at the signing photo-op with the Governor. This historic event should occur sometime between the middle and end of June.

According to Geoff Sugerman, the Communications Director of Speaker Hunt’s office, “I don’t anticipate that Governor Ted Kulongoski (D) would veto a bill that caters to enhancing and protecting workers’ rights while balancing the rights of employers under Title VII involving religious accommodation and discrimination claims.” Speaker Hunt’s office is fairly certain that Governor Kulongoski will sign the bill into law. But we must not take this last important step for granted. Therefore, please continue to keep this historic legislative Act in your prayers, and specifically pray that the Governor will decide to sign it without reservation.

Divine Providence and An Organizational Note

A few professional observations may be worthwhile.

From Left - Trevor Sleeman (Legislative Aide to Speaker Hunt), David Miller, Shani Balverio, Tara Gonzales, Greg Hamilton, Speaker Dave Hunt, Rhonda Bolton, Michael Peabody, and Douglas Clayville

It has been a tremendous blessing to be a first hand witness to Representative Dave Hunt’s commitment to religious freedom, and particularly in championing religious freedom in the workplace. Speaker Hunt, whose meteoric rise to power and influence as a practicing Baptist in a notoriously liberal state, demonstrated to all discerning observers that he had truly been “called for such a time as this” (see the Scriptural allusion to Esther 4:14).

Indeed, the passage of this bill in both the Oregon Senate (April 9) and House represents nearly eleven years of painstaking lobbying efforts; first with attempts to pass an Oregon Religious Freedom Act affecting the area of constitutional law involving free exercise of religion at the state level (1999-2005), and second with Oregon’s Workplace Religious Freedom Act addressing federal Title VII workplace discrimination law standards and applications at the state level (2007-2009). We failed in the first effort, but succeeded in the second. In a diplomatic sense, battle worn and weary, with anxiety attacks and knots in our stomachs, is one way to describe our experience on Friday, May 29. Sweet resignation and satisfaction, like after successfully climbing to the top of a huge mountain peak, is another that comes to mind.

A number of lessons were learned along the way involving a lot of awkward moments as well as planned, spontaneous and satisfyingly hard earned successes. Learning to be adaptable to political realities and various language compromises, while keeping the overall intent and effectiveness of the bill intact, were the key lessons learned throughout this experience.

On an organizational note, having worked closely with Representative Hunt since 2003 when he was a freshman in the Oregon House of Representatives, and with a bipartisan group of influential Senators since 1999 who directed us to him – including Senator Jason Atkinson (R-Medford District), an aspiring candidate for Governor in 2010 – speaks to what it takes to get a historic bill like this passed.

Building positive working relationships with legislators through an immense amount of meaningful “face time” is the most significant factor. Other terms to describe successful lobbying practices is “on the ground presence” and “real player,” which represents the enormous amount of time, sacrifice, and labor that it takes. In this sense, the entire government relations team of the Northwest Religious Liberty Association (NRLA) has been “called for such a time as this” in the states of Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon and Washington. While we always have improvements to make, our team of Capitol Pastors, attorneys, and administrative advisors, do excellent work and serves as a mighty testament as to why more excellent government relations programs like ours need to be developed in a truly serious and professional way in every state.

A special “thank you” to the entire team who helped us with our efforts is in order. They include 1) Attorney Michael Peabody, who testified with yours truly in a convincing and eloquent manner at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing; 2) Attorney Steve Green, Law Professor at Willamette College of Law, who was simply brilliant; 3) Oregon Labor Commissioner, Brad Avakian, a powerful advocate in our corner, along with Speaker of the House, Dave Hunt, who testified together with me at the same table at the House Judiciary Committee hearing; 4) David Miller, a faithful Seventh-day Adventist truck driver who testified at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing; 5) Shani Balverio, a faithful Seventh-day Adventist food service specialist, who also testified at the same hearing; 6) Douglas Clayville, our Capitol Pastor or Representative, who made numerous and much appreciated scheduled “team visits” to legislators with me; and 7) Rhonda Bolton, NRLA’s much appreciated Administrative Assistant, whose coordination and editing services were invaluable when it came to issues of timeliness, coherence, and professional copy appearance of all lobbying materials and official documents.

The Future

With the Oregon Workplace Religious Freedom Act now in place, over the next couple of legislative sessions the Northwest Religious Liberty Association (NRLA) plans to initiate similar legislative bill proposals in each of the other Northwest states. If the United States Congress enacts federal legislation mirroring Oregon’s example, then such a state-by-state effort may be unnecessary.

What the Oregon bill accomplishes is a narrowly tailored model for the federal government to follow in its efforts to see similar protections put forward for people of faith, including religious minorities. If adopted at the federal level, it would promise to help all people of faith and employers in each state of the country.

Last year, when I was in Washington, D.C., making scheduled visits with lawmakers, it was indicated to me by the chief legislative advisor in US Senator Orin Hatch’s (R-Utah) office that both he and Senator John Kerry (D-Massachusetts) were watching closely (and debating over) the legislative effort in Oregon as a model to follow. This is because the Oregon model narrowly addresses religious accommodations involving 1) holy days and 2) the wearing of hazard-free religious apparel or clothing, and not the big “kitchen sink” approach that has often included other specific religious exemptions treating accommodation requests with distinctively moral concerns in the workplace (i.e., the dispensing of the Plan-B pill by Pharmacists and other health care concerns). Political realities, as such, however, caused the Northwest Religious Liberty Association (NRLA) to take a different path, believing that such moral concerns, while important, should be raised in separate bill proposals so as not to year-after-year continually disable, defer, and defeat the narrow but equally worthy need to satisfy the larger purpose of Workplace Religious Freedom Act efforts, both at the state and federal levels, which is to specifically address holy day accommodation requests in the workplace which drives the vast majority of religious discrimination claims.

Some will argue to the contrary, but Oregon’s Workplace Religious Freedom Act is not an unconstitutional “affirmative action” bill for religious minorities and thus a governmental establishment of religion, even though religious minorities are incidentally benefited. [See Estate of Thornton v. Caldor, Inc. (472 U.S. 703) 1985.] The clear intent of the bill is that it will be equally representative of accommodation requests that emanate from all people of faith in two specific areas – holy day and religious apparel accommodation requests. While it may exclude other religious or morally related accommodation requests, particularly in health care related areas, it does not exclude anyone of faith in regard to holy day and religious apparel accommodation requests. While it may incidentally benefit religious minorities in the workplace, the language of the bill is inclusive and directly benefits all people of faith, as well as employers in terms of lowering the number of litigation claims against them, as has been demonstrated in New York since 2006.

Once the Oregon Workplace Religious Freedom Act becomes law, it is bound to face some tough legal challenges in the courts, state and possibly federal. But that is to be expected. Our efforts in providing a more coherent standard for religious accommodation requests on the one hand, and “undue business” standards for employers on the other, was a proactive one and an intelligent step forward.

Thank You!

In conclusion, THANKS SO MUCH FOR YOUR UPLIFTING PRAYERS AND SUPPORT! We could not have done it without you and without God’s guiding hand! Thanks again!

The Northwest Religious Liberty Association, organized in 1906, and reorganized in 1991, serves the states of Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington through its team of government relations representatives and attorneys. The Northwest Religious Liberty Association partners with the North American and International Religious Liberty Associations to defend religious freedom here and abroad.  Visit the Northwest Religious Liberty Association online at http://www.nrla.com

1. Derek H. Davis, J.D., Ph.D. is Dean of the College of Humanities and Dean of the Graduate School as well as director of the Center for Religious Liberty at the University of Mary Hardin-Baker in Belton, Texas.

On October 15 the Russian Ministry of Justice took steps to begin liquidating 56 non-Russian Orthodox religious organizations.  The groups face dissolution, Russian news sources reported, because they failed to file required annual reports on their activities. Those targeted include a range of non-Russian Orthodox organizations and churches but hardest hit were various Christian groups, both Protestant and Catholic.  Baptist groups were prominent on the list, but Methodist, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Seventh-day Adventist and Pentecostal groups were also included. Well known humanitarian groups such as World Vision and Youth with a Mission were also named, as was the Russian branch of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association.   Non-Christian organizations were also named, including Muslim and Buddhist associations.

According to the Slavic Legal Center in Moscow, many of the organizations believe they are in full compliance with filing requirements and are surprised to be included in the list.  They are unsure if the posting is a scare tactic or if the Ministry of Justice indeed intends to pursue liquidations on a massive scale. Anatoly Pchelintsev, an attorney for the Slavic Center for Law and Justice, remarked that “such actions fly in the face of official Russian state policy on the freedom of worship and creed.” Pchelintsev believes the responsible officials are unaware of the complicated international ramifications of their actions and cites the possibility of “chaos and destabilization in church-state relations.”  He added that in the case of most of the affected organizations, the threatened punishment goes too far.  “In Russia there already are more than a dozen cases in which courts rendered decisions in favor of religious organizations since the punishment for their failure to submit information did not formally fit the crime committed.”  Moreover, he added, “liquidation for failure to submit information is equivalent to sentencing a jaywalker to the death penalty. After all, liquidation means that the organization’s life is put to an end.”  In addition, said Pchelintsev, “such actions are inconsistent with the policy of the Russian government, which guarantees freedom of conscience and religious confessions for each person. The widespread liquidation of religious associations for petty violations will lead to the crudest infringement of human rights in our country and to the self-isolation of the government.”

Pastor Vitaly Vlasenko, Director for External Church Relations of the Russian Union of Christians-Baptists, had a less dramatic reaction.  He warned against undue alarm, suggesting that the action by the Ministry of Justice is a mere “wake-up call.”  He reported that thousands of religious organizations were registered during the 1990s, and that because a number of them are now defunct, the Ministry is probably only attempting to clear out organizations that no longer function.  In some cases, he noted, registered and actual activities no longer match. For example, he said, in one instance, “a Baptist organization registered in Moscow is active only in Siberia.”

However, according to Joseph K. Grieboski, president of Washington DC’s Institute for Religion and Democracy, “the move to liquidate several organizations can be seen only as a move to limit and control their activity further.   Despite recent European Court of Human Rights cases against such activities and registration standards, the Russian Government continues its ongoing tightening of religious activity and continues to threaten free exercise of faith in Russia.”

It is too early to know precisely why the Ministry is threatening dissolution of so many religious groups.  Russians are accustomed to a degree of arbitrariness and intimidation as pertains to non-Orthodox religions, but are such threats really necessary?  Could not the organizations have been contacted separately and asked to supply needed information for compliance rather than discovering from outside sources that they suffer possible dissolution?    According to Pchelintsev, a majority of the organizations named in the list are seriously frightened, if not already in panic mode.

The Ministry of Justice’s action only bolsters the claim by many within Russia that the government is not serious about religious freedom but consistently works in tandem with the Russian Orthodox Church to pester, persecute and eliminate if possible other religions.  By most estimates, more than eighty percent of Russians today identify themselves as Orthodox. There is a saying in Russia: “To be Russian is to be Orthodox.”  Nevertheless, the restructuring of Russia that began in the late 1980’s was supposed to be about creating a democracy where freedom was ensured for all citizens, and all religions were to have equal standing before the law. 

But the Russian Orthodox Church was always a vocal critic of this new policy of religious freedom, and prevailed upon the Duma to pass a highly restrictive new law in 1997 that slowed Russia’s experiment with unlimited religious freedom.  This law, which comprehensively regulates church-state relations in Russia, specially acknowledges the unique contributions to Russia’s culture and statehood of several of the nation’s oldest religions––Russian Orthodoxy in particular–but it also discriminates against the Federation’s less traditional religions by requiring special registration procedures and by limiting the scope of the activities in which they can lawfully engage. 

Many religious organizations have already been liquidated under this law; frequently it has been used as a tool for officials throughout Russia to remove unwanted religious groups.  In the spirit of this sanctioned discrimination, it remains difficult for many religious organizations to buy or even rent property to be used for worship purposes, meet for worship services, conduct schools, disseminate religious literature, or proselytize.  “The Russian Orthodox Church is already halfway towards becoming a state church,” the business daily Kommersant wrote recently.  Another kind of disquiet was expressed by Anatoly Krasikov, an expert in socio-religious studies at the Russian Academy of Sciences, who warned, “if Orthodoxy becomes a new ideology, we’ll be right back to a totalitarian state.”  

 ”if Orthodoxy becomes a new ideology, we’ll be right back to a totalitarian state.”  

The Ministry of Justice’s action against 56 religious organizations might be a genuine but harmless attempt to bring the organizations into compliance with law.   But many inside Russia doubt whether there is not something more troublesome at play here.   It might well be Russia’s latest attempt to elevate Russian Orthodoxy to a position made prominent by reducing and eliminating the competition.  Russia must confront the task of how best to treat religion and religious institutions within an emerging democratic order.   Given Russia’s history, the Russian Orthodox Church might expect to have a dominant cultural role long into the future, but it is the Russian people, in democratic course, who must ultimately deny the church a preferred legal position. Their decision is key to the advance, or decline, of freedom in the new Russia.

Derek H. Davis, J.D., Ph.D. is Dean of the College of Humanities and Dean of the Graduate School as well as director of the Center for Religious Liberty at the University of Mary Hardin-Baker in Belton, Texas.

The mission of The University of Mary Hardin-Baylor Center for Religious Liberty is to advance religious liberty for all persons, in all parts of the world, without regard to their religious, ethnic, gender, racial or national background. Religious liberty is a basic human right that must be nourished and protected by all human societies; it is the cornerstone of modern societies’ efforts to build a more peaceful world. The Center advances this mission by publishing relevant literature, hosting and sponsoring lectureships and conferences, sharing its expertise with media and other public information outlets, and partnering with other persons and groups who share the goal of advancing religious liberty.  The web site for the Center can be found at www.umhb.edu/academics/crl

Photography by Ryan J. Bell.

India: Aftermath of violence leaves scars on Orissa

Seventh-day Adventist Church leaders in India have reported at least 27 Adventists dead from anti-Christian brutality that developed in the eastern India region of Orissa in late August. Church leaders said there are still violent outbreaks in the area despite India’s Central Reserve Police forces patrolling the state.

Choudampalli John, president of the Adventist Church in east India, reported that he was not allowed to enter the areas where extremist violence occurred. John also said some Adventists are still hiding in the jungles because they fear retribution from other refugees at government-run aid camps.

Other church leaders commented on the severity of the situation.

Paka Jesurathnam, Adventist church leader for Orissa, reported thousands of houses and three dozen Adventist churches were likely destroyed and looted.

“To evaluate the actual loss of lives, property, people … dwelling places and worship centers is impossible right now,” said Jesurathnam. “To hear … personal stories [makes] our nerves ache and blood dry.”

“To hear … personal stories [makes] our nerves ache and blood dry.”

The Prime Minister of India has condemned the violence, calling it a “national disgrace,” according to published reports.

Possibly as many as 50,000 Christians from the Kandhamal region of Orissa are scattered throughout the seven government-run refugee camps and the surrounding jungle, Ecumenical News International reported.

Hindu extremists are blamed for beheading an Adventist pastor in August. Samuel Naik, pastor of the Phulwani Adventist Church, and his mother were killed during anti-Christian violence sweeping the region of India. Church leaders reported that Naik’s wife, who was previously reported to have committed suicide, is still alive.

The outbreak came after unidentified attackers killed a Hindu religious leader and four other individuals. Hindus are blaming Christians for the deaths, while the Indian government cited Maoist rebels.

Source: Adventist News Network – http://news.adventist.org/data/2008/1222720930/index.html.en

For more information:

Source(s): these links will take you to other sites, in a new window.

• 2008 Annual Report on International Religious Freedom (US Department of State)
• Remarks: Secretary Condoleezza Rice (US Department of State)
• Remarks: John V. Hanford III, Ambassador at Large for International Religious Freedom (US Department of State)