Serving the Persecuted Church:
Support & Training of Underground Pastors § 
Humanitarian Aid § Advocacy for the Persecuted on Capitol Hill

The Kingdom of God Is Forcefully Advancing and Forceful Men Lay Hold Of It

Rebuttal of the Arguments Raised Concerning the Wolf/Specter Bill
by the President of ICC

The purpose of my writing this essay is to make a small attempt to rebuttal some of the weak arguments that are being raised concerning the Wolf/Specter bill (H.R. 2431) by some Christians who previously have largely been silent about the persecution of Christians. Personally, I don't think that the bill itself is the answer to the problem of persecution of Christians, neither do I think that it is going to cause additional harm to the extent that some would make it appear.

Whether or not the bill passes is of little consequence to me and my efforts to help persecuted Christians. What the debate over the bill has done, however, is raise this issue of persecution to a new level of awareness, which should have been done a long time ago by the church itself, not Congress. Shame on us! If there are any negative reactions from the bill, should it pass, it will likely be because of self- fulfilled doom and gloom prophecies. Let us not forget, the persecuted are already facing the dreaded doom that many are speculating these Christians will face; the acts of bigotry and hatred that have already been hurled against them.

For the sake of the Gospel and for the sake of those who have suffered while laboring for Christ, the current debate may in the end be a great blessing. I don't think that it is the persecuted who fear persecution most, but it is more likely those of us who live well within the comfort zone of freedom that fear what the anti-Christians might think about us. Maybe it is time to experience the promise of scripture: "All who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution" (2 Timothy 3:12). Most certainly, to "see the tears of the oppressed (Ecclesiastes 4:16)" and to "speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves (Proverbs 31:8) is a worthwhile and "godly" thing to do.

Here are some of the arguments that have been circulating about the Wolf/Specter bill and my reply to their argument:

ARGUMENT #1
"Nothing in this bill prevents "the office" (office of Religious Persecution Monitoring) from monitoring religion in the U.S."

REPLY
Good! I would hope that we should hold accountable our own government on matters of religious persecution. Is this bad? The bill is actually aimed at effectuating a change in our foreign policy in regard to those countries who persecute religious minorities. The bill is not intended to be targeted at domestic issues, but instead U.S. foreign policy. Nevertheless, if it were possible to incorporate the monitoring of religious persecution in the U.S. into this bill, this would not be something all that bad. We should hold our own government equally accountable in the event religious minorities are discriminated against, beaten, tortured or imprisoned on account of their faith in this country as well.

ARGUMENT #2
"The bill in several places singles out Christian persecution, and lists examples," says the Rev. Jay Lintner, director of the UCC agency's Capitol Hill office. "We prefer to keep our opposition to religious persecution in an interfaith context. While we are certainly outraged by and opposed to Christian persecution, and think we should work hard to end it, we oppose all religious persecution."

REPLY
Is it wrong to "single out" Christians who are persecuted. They are the most persecuted religious group in the world today. What are religious groups that are within this "interfaith context" doing at present in dealing with the issue of persecution of Christians? Are the Muslims doing anything? Are the Hindus? Who then is speaking out on behalf of Christians suffering simply for being Christian?

"We are certainly outraged" seems to be an understatement of all understatements. I would ask, how is it that you have demonstrated your "outrage" to religious persecution? Do you think that what you are doing is near enough? When Proverbs 31:8 says to "speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves," is this done only with polite platitudes? Did not the U.S. take an active role in interceding for the black Africans in South Africa suffering under apartheid? Did the U.S. not take an active role in protesting the slaughter of Jews by Nazi Germany? Did not the U.S. invest money and lives by defending Muslims in Kuwait from a brutal dictator? Should our efforts be any less for "those of the household of faith" (Galatians 6:10)?

ARGUMENT #3
"Further, by particularly citing persecution of Christians in China, North Korea, Vietnam, Laos and Cuba, the Wolf-Specter bill tends to 'continue a hard- line Cold War sanctions strategy,' Lintner says, and even to 'extend the Cold War to many Islamic countries' by naming persecution by Muslims."

REPLY
Who is responsible for the "hard-line cold war strategy?" Do we really think that not addressing the persecution of Christians will make the situation better? Come on now! You are saying we should be silent and not oppose persecution because we might exasperate the situation? Should we ignore persecution and instead reward the thugs who beat, torture and imprison Christians? If it were not for "hard-line" measures in dealing with the communist threat of the Soviet Union, where might the world be today?

ARGUMENT #4
"The Rev. Oliver Thomas, special counsel to the National Council of Churches, also argues in a Sept. 8 memo to the House committee that the U.S. government's work against religious persecution should be 'insulated from partisan political pressure' and therefore not in the White House. 'We believe that the persons best able and most qualified to monitor and report on religious persecution are at the State Department,' Thomas says.

REPLY
Has anything changed? The National Council of Churches was always against taking a pro-active stand against persecution, including the time when Christians were being imprisoned and brutally treated by the Soviet regime. The key word is "insulated" and not just from the use of political pressure, but the persecuted then should be "insulated" as well from any public attention. If the government does not reflect the sentiments of its people that it represent, what should it do? And to think that the State Department will serve a pro- active role in monitoring persecuted religious groups! They have repeatedly looked out for big business and maintained the status quo, with religious freedom at the bottom of the list whenever human rights abuses are raised. Moreover, to suggest that religious persecution will be used as a "partisan political pressure" shows that somebody hasn't observed that this issue has wide support on both sides of the isle. Anyone that doesn't think that persecution against Christians or any other religious minority is wrong is likely committing political suicide.

ARGUMENT #5
"But this is a very complicated issue with deep historical roots. Chinese rulers from the time of the early emperors have viewed most social activities as being subservient to the will of the State, or at present, the Ruling Party. Now, compared to the past, religious activity has become much more accepted and out in the open.

REPLY
Christianity has "deep historical roots" that go further back into time than many realize. A carefully study of the characters of the Chinese alphabet reflect the influence Christianity had on Chinese history, indicating that Chinese "roots" can be traced back to having been influenced by Christianity before that of any other traditional religion. Nonetheless, if any government views social activities as being subservient to the will of the State, do we accept this as just and acceptable in terms of respecting human rights?

And to what extent do you mean that the church in China "has become much more accepted and "out in the open." Yes, the church is far more accepted by the people and has become more open by coming out of the four walls of church buildings. But this is not the working of a government policy that allows for religious freedom, but to the contrary. More than 80% of all Christians in China are not legally allowed to meet in buildings or private homes. They are not allowed to evangelize openly. The "strangle the baby while it is in the manger" policy is clearly evident in the actions taken by the Chinese government.

If this issue is as "complicated" as you say, shouldn't we expose the problem rather than bury it deeper by making excuses that it has "deep historical roots." It is time to dig up the roots--not allow them to continue to grow deeper and more oppressive.

ARGUMENT #5
"However, our partner churches around the world feel strongly that such a blunt instrument as the Wolf- Specter bill would actually do more harm than good in many settings, increasing persecution and undercutting the role of Christianity in those societies," says the UCC's Lintner.

REPLY
How little faith you must have in the power of Christ through His church. Yes, when Moses spoke up for the oppressed people of Israel while they were in bondage in Egypt, things got worse for awhile. Moses didn't stop speaking out, however, even as the people of Israel complained that he was making matters worse. Let's face it, the only thing that will be undercut is the business-as-usual attitude of those who value relationships with corrupt government officials over that of the welfare of the persecuted church.

It would be interesting to conduct a study as to how many Christian ministries would stand to suffer a loss in revenues if their work was hampered due to western action. The Christians in those countries don't need us just for our money, our literature and missionary enterprises. To the contrary, many Christians of the local churches in the Third World have expressed dismay at the "ownership" mentality that many western mission organizations have over the local churches.

This doesn't imply that such missionary work is not worthwhile, but instead that we have become so arrogant in our thinking that God cannot do a work without our hand being in it. Could it be that God may now want us to move in a different direction for a season, to intervene by serving as a voice for justice? Could it be that in doing so we could still carry forth the Gospel, but now to higher levels of authority, as did John the Baptist, Moses, the Apostle Paul and many others down through the history of the church.

SUMMARY
Maybe it is time for us to be "as God" in the manner of Moses: "You will be as God to Pharaoh." It is possible for the church to still be doing the work of God, both in social work and evangelism, while holding governing authorities responsible for their brutal acts. It is one thing to say that suffering persecution is what we are called to endure, but yet another matter altogether when you say to someone, "you go suffer for awhile, it will do you good," while you ignore their cries of agony.

Maybe it is time that we take a good hard look and try to imagine what God sees from His perspective: "The Lord looked and was displeased that there was no justice. He saw that there was no one, he was appalled that there was no one to intervene" (Isaiah 59:15-16). I know this, if any of my children were abducted and were being brutally treated, I would do everything within my power to help them, including using whatever political pressure that may be available to me. Should we treat with any less compassion, with any less regard those who are of the household of faith?

It is to the shame of the church if we should fail to respond to the pain "when one member suffers," having become numb to feeling their pain and having become reluctant to act in fear of retaliation from the bullies. Somehow, someone (if not all of us) will pay the price for having ignored the pain of that single, suffering member. It is a true saying, "All members suffer with it" (I Corinthians 12:26).

International Christian Concern is a human rights organization based in Washington, D.C. that serves as a watchdog and advocate for religious freedom worldwide.

Originally Posted:  October 13, 1997

Back to Conference Talks and White Papers Index
Back to ICC Home Page