Torture Is Us

Among the ways we are being “cooked by the culture” (the title of last week’s post) is our acceptance of torture as national policy. As Christians, of course, we are against it and in various public utterances have even called on the Bush administration to publicly renounce torture. The Executive Council of the Episcopal Church in March passed a resolution condemning the use of torture and “the practice of extraordinary rendition” and called upon the US government to comply with “The United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhumane and Degrading Treatment or Punishment”; the resolution also, somewhat astonishingly, stated: "That members of the Episcopal Church, including military chaplains, commit themselves to supporting U.S. military and civilian personnel who refuse to obey orders to practice torture or engage in extraordinary rendition or who face discipline for exposing such illegal conduct."

Good for the Episcopal Church. That is an exemplary commitment to support those who might engage in civil disobedience. It's the kind of action the church should be taking. I for one would like to know what has been done to implement this policy. Perhaps Bishop George Packard, the Bishop for Military Chaplains, or the Secretary of Executive Council, The Rev. Gregory Straub, could make a public statement of the church’s position, loudly and clearly, and tell us and the other religious leaders what we are doing to support those who refuse to engage in torture.

A group known as the Evangelicals for Human Rights has issued a statement on torture that I hope leaders of the Episcopal Church and other denominations will support. You can read it on the HRE website, www.evangelicalsforhumanrights.org, and take the time to sign the statement. I think it is particularly important for non-evangelicals to sign. The truth is that some of the evangelical organizations have been more active on social justice issues than the mainline denominations (as in, for example, Darfur). The HRE website also had a list of resources that are worth looking at (including a link to a sermon by Episcopal priest Fleming Rutledge).

The statement from HRE is stronger and more grounded than the one from the Episcopal Church Executive Council. It concludes forcefully:

“The abominable acts of 9/11, along with the continuing threat of terrorist attacks, create profound security challenges. However, these challenges must be met within a moral and legal framework consistent with our values and laws, among which is a commitment to human rights that we as evangelicals share with many others. In this light, we renounce the resort to torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment of detainees, call for the extension of procedural protections and human rights to all detainees, seek clear government-wide embrace of the Geneva Conventions, including those articles banning torture and cruel treatment of prisoners, and urge the reversal of any U.S. government law, policy, or practice that violates the moral standards outlined in this declaration.”

I urge the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church, as well as others in church leadership positions, to sign this statement. And to make it known that the church is in solidarity with evangelicals on this issue. And to make public its own actions to communicate our support to those in the military who might be forced to engage in torture.

And one more thing: could Bishop Packard tell us what the nature of that support is? Is it more than moral? More than prayer? Do we offer sanctuary? Legal defense?

We are cooked by the culture when we make statements for the sake of appearances and do nothing to back them up. I wonder what the Evangelicals for Human Rights plan to do now that they have expressed their opposition to the policies of the US government on torture. (How hard is it to be opposed?)

What is to be done? Who will lead?