Report from the Capital: Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty Magazine

BJCONLINE.ORG

MARCH / APRIL 2016 VOLUME 71 NUMBER 3

Magazine of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty

Remembering Justice ANTONIN SCALIA Oklahoma Supreme Court upholds school vouchers HOLLMAN: The threat of “all or nothing” demands WALKER: We need to restore the Court to full strength A complete guide to the contraceptive mandate cases

A THREAT TO ANYONE’S RELIGIOUS LIBERTY IS A THREAT TO EVERYONE’S RELIGIOUS LIBERTY

Proxima Nova THE ST RY OF

CONCEPT B: TYPOGRAPHY

The super familyNova proxima nova straddles roxima the novagap is a typeface idea I’ve been working on in Proxima Family various forms since 1981. I originally called it Zanzibar, just between typefaces like Futura and Akzidenz Grotesk. because I liked the word. It was nothing more than rough Nova Thin The result isProxima a modern hybrid combining humanistic sketches back then, but the concept Proxima Thin Italic geometric for the lowercase was quite similar to proportions withNova a somewhat appearance.

Proxima Nova Light how it eventually turned out. The caps There areProxima a variety of width’s andcame styles this ♦ In 1991, I in was art director later.included Nova Light Italic Business Ethics magazine, where I family andProxima Concept utilizes the of following: NovaBRegular

was using Gill Sans. I liked it, but wished Proxima Nova Regular Italic zanzibar skeTch, c. 1981. for something a bit plainer and more Proxima Nova Medium modern that still had a geometric feel. Such a face did not seem Proxima Nova Medium Italic to exist. Starting my caps, old Zanzibar idea, I began working on a FeaturingProxima advanced typographic support like from small Nova Semibold new typeface to fill this void. I came up with the name Visigothic, Proximafractions, Nova Semibold figure styles, andItalic alternate will on American “gothic” faces. ⊲ sincecharacters. it was modeledThis somewhat Proxima Nova Bold Somepublication. existing faces influenced the look of Visigothic. I wanted the be the “workhorse” typeface for this general proportions and stroke contrast of Helvetica or Akzidenz Proxima Nova Bold Italic Grotesk, but with construction and details borrowed variously Proxima Nova Extrabold from Futura, Kabel, the aTF gothics (Copperplate Gothic, News Proxima Nova Extrabold Italic Gothic, Franklin Gothic, etc.) and the U.S. Federal Highway sigProxima Nova Black Proxima Nova Condensed elicit’s a strong authoritative voice but nage typeface. The result was a hybrid; a face combining modern, Proxima Nova Black Italic

proxima nova

proxima nova condensed

maintains a warm inviting presence. This typefaceproportions will primarily even-width with abe somewhat geometric appearance. ★ display I released it through FontHaus in 1994 as Proxima Sans, a famused for headlines, coverlines and other type situations.

Proxima Nova Condensed Thin ily of six fonts—Regular, Medium, and Black with matching italics.

I dropped the name Visigothic, first because of its similarity to the Proxima Nova Condensed Thin Italic name of another recently released font, Visigoth, and, second, it Proximanova Nova Condensed Light proxima soft was kind of a bad pun. I chose the name Proxima Sans because Proxima Nova Condensed Light Italic This softened version compliments the Proxima Nova it was near to other sans serifs in Proxima Nova Condensed Regular design but also because those lettypefamily andCondensed is perfect forItalic subtle contrast. This Proxima Nova Regular proxima sans, 1994. ters happened to display some of typeface willNova be Condensed used sparingly such as of the design. ● I had plans to do Proxima Medium for thesituations distinctive characteristics Proxima Nova Condensed Medium Italic more weights, small caps, a condensed version, and other ideas. bylines.

Proxima Nova Condensed Semibold But between lackluster sales, becoming a new parent, and takProxima Nova Condensed Semibold Italic ing on a new full-time job, I found I didn’t have the time or energy to continue working on it for a while. ⊲ By the early 2000s, Proxima Nova Condensed Bold Proxima Nova Condensed Bold Italic I started to get requests to expand the Proxima Sans family and Proxima Nova Condensed Extrabold Rolling Stone magazine chose it as part of its redesign in 2003.

Encouraged by all this, I went back to work on a new Proxima Sans Proxima Nova Condensed Extrabold Italic family even more ambitious than what I had originally planned. ♦ Proxima Nova Condensed Black In 2005, I re-released it as Proxima Nova, a family of 42 fonts— Proxima Nova Condensed Black Italic seven weights and three widths with matching italics. Built from

proxima nova regular

the start with the OpenType format in mind, it featured advanced typographic features like small caps, different figure styles, fractions, and alternate characters, enough to take on the most demanding typographic applications. ● Proxima Nova contained other improvements over the original. I reviewed and refined every character. I rebuilt the italics from scratch. I redid the hinting for better on-screen display. The character set grew from 245 up to 699 characters (1115 with the latest version). I kept the special characters from the original, like the arrows and other dingbats, but gave them proper Unicode values, and created proper math symbols in the positions they’d previously occupied. I scrapped and rebuilt the spacing and kerning. As in Proxima Sans, the italics have been optically adjusted to eliminate the distortion caused by simply slanting the letters—true italics, not simple obliques. ⊲ It’s now been over ten years since I first released Proxima Nova. Since then, I’ve continued to make improvements and enhancements, such as additional language support, including Vietnamese, Cyrillic and Greek, and have added a new weight—Medium—bringing the total number of fonts in the family to 48. ■ —Mark Simonson

Features

c as e -s e ns i Ti ve c h ar ac Te r s

(x-ray) → (X-RAY) T r ue sm al l cap s

True Small Caps l i ni ng & ol d s T yl e Fi g ur e s

1234567890 $¢€£¥ 1234567890 $£¢€£¥ p r o p o r Ti o nal and Tab ul ar Fi g ur e s

12345 → 12345 12345 → 12345 Fr ac T i o n s up p o r T

2/3, 1/8, 53/72... → 2/3 1/8, 53/72... o r d i nal s up p o r T

1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th... → 1st, 2nd, 3rd 4th... alT e r naTe c h ar ac Te r s

Gladly → Gladly 01 → 01 l i g aTur e s

ff fi ffi fl ffl fb fh fj ffj fk

Report from the Capital

→←↑↓⊳⊲▲▼●★♦■☐☑✓⌘

eight weights

ÐÞÝĀĈĐĘŊĠĦĬĶĽŐŞΣД... ÐÞÝĀĈĐĘŊĠĦĬĶĽŐŞ... ðþýāĉđęŋġħĭķľőşŧůσд...

Proxima Nova Extra Condensed Thin Proxima Nova Extra Condensed Thin Italic Proxima Nova Extra Condensed Light Proxima Nova Extra Condensed Light Italic Proxima Nova Extra Condensed Regular Proxima Nova Extra Condensed Regular Italic Proxima Nova Extra Condensed Medium Proxima Nova Extra Condensed Medium Italic Proxima Nova Extra Condensed Semibold Proxima Nova Extra Condensed Semibold Italic Proxima Nova Extra Condensed Bold Proxima Nova Extra Condensed Bold Italic Proxima Nova Extra Condensed Extrabold Proxima Nova Extra Condensed Extrabold Italic Proxima Nova Extra Condensed Black Proxima Nova Extra Condensed Black Italic

aaaaaaaa

M N O proxima nova condensed

© MARK SIMONSON 2016

3.002

d i ng b aTs

e xTe nd e d l ang uag e s up p o r T

e xTe nd e d c ur r e ncy s up p o r T

$¢€£¥ƒ₡₣₤₺₧₨₹ ₫₦₩₪¤

W W W. M A R K S I M O N S O N . C O M

proxima nova soft

Report from the Capital

Report from the Capital

eight weights

four weights

aaaaaaaa

aaaa

Proxima Proxima Nova Semibold Italic Proxima Nova Bold Proxima Nova Bold Italic Proxima Nova Extrabold Proxima Nova Extrabold Italic Proxima Nova Black roxima is Black a typeface Proximanova Nova Italicidea

sinc Som CONCEPT B: TYPOGRAPHY gen Gro Combining the typefaces that make up the Proxima Nova typefamily provides flexibility and ensurs a harmonius from relationship between all lines of text. The wealth of weights Got allows for ample opportunity to create dynamic heirarchy. nag I’ve Proxima Nova Family various forms since 1981. I originallyeve ca ★ because I liked the word. It was nothiI Proxima Condensed Proxima Nova Thin sketches backNova then, but the Thin concept ily o Proxima Nova Condensed Italic to I dr Proxima Nova Thin Italic for the lowercase was quiteThin similar Novaturned Condensed Light caps nam Proxima Nova Light how it Proxima eventually out. The was cameProxima later. ♦ In 1991, I was Light art director Nova Condensed Italic Proxima Nova Light Italic of Business EthicsCondensed magazine, where I Proxima Nova Regular Proxima Nova Regular was usingNova Gill Sans.

I likedRegular it, but wished Proxima Condensed Italic zanz Proxima Nova Regular Italic prox for something a bit plainer and more Proxima Nova Condensed Medium Proxima Nova Medium the modern that still had a geometric feel. Such Proxima Nova Condensed Medium Italic morI Proxima Nova Medium Italic to exist. Starting from my old Zanzibar idea, Nova Condensed Proxima Nova Semibold Butt newProxima typeface to fill this void.Semibold I came up with ing Proxima Nova Condensed Semiboldon Italic Proxima Nova Semibold Italic since it was modeled somewhat Americ Proxima Nova Bold Some Proxima existing Nova facesCondensed influenced Bold the look oferg Vis I sta general proportions and stroke H Proxima Nova Condensed Boldcontrast Italic of Proxima Nova Bold Italic Roll Grotesk, but withCondensed construction and details Proxima Nova Extrabold Proxima Nova Extrabold Enc from Futura, the aTF gothicsItalic (Coppe Proxima NovaKabel, Condensed Extrabold Proxima Nova Extrabold Italic fam Gothic, Franklin Gothic, etc.) and the U.S. F Proxima Nova Condensed Black Proxima Nova Black In 2 nage typeface. The result was a hybrid; a face Proxima Nova Condensed Black Italic Proxima Nova Black Italic even-width proportions with a somewhatsev ge theP ★ I released it through FontHaus in 1994 as typo Proxima Nova Condensed Thin ily of six Proxima fonts—Regular, Medium, w Nova Extra Condensed Thin and Black tion I dropped theNova name Visigothic, first because Proxima Nova Condensed Thin Italic Proxima Extra Condensed Thin Italic man name ofProxima another released Proxima Nova Condensed Light Nova Nova recently Extra Condensed Light font, Visi Proxima Soft Regular was kind of Nova a bad I chose the nameoth Pr Proxima Nova Condensed Light Italic Proxima Extrapun.

Condensed Light Italic Proxima Nova Soft Medium it was near ery to Proxima Nova Condensed Regular Proxima Nova Extra Condensed Regular for design but also Proxima Novaproxima Soft Semi-bold Proxima Nova Condensed Regular Italic Proxima Nova Extra Condensed Regular sans, 1994. to 6 ters Italic happened Proxima Nova Condensed Medium Nova Proxima Bold Novacharacteristics Extra Condensed Medium cha Proxima Soft the distinctive of the design. but Proxima Nova Condensed Medium Italic more Proxima Nova Extra Condensed Italic vers weights, small caps, aMedium condensed Proxima Nova Condensed Semibold Proxima Nova Extra Condensed But between lackluster sales,Semibold becoming sym an andh on a Nova newExtra full-time job,Semibold I foundItalic I didn’t Proxima Nova Condensed Semibold Italic ingProxima Condensed hav ergy to continue on it for ⊲ Proxima Nova Condensed Bold Proxima Nova working Extra Condensed Bolda while. sim I started to get requests to expand the Prox

CONCEPT B: COLOR

CONCEPT B: CAPITOL ICON FOR BACK COVER

Neutrals & Tonal Shades

rich black

rich black 70%

rich black 30%

rich black 5%

75/67/67/90

75/67/67/90

75/67/67/90

75/67/67/90

bjc b/g 66/47/21/01

bjc gold 39/35/100/08

Logo (CMYK Process)

bjc blue 100/92/31/26

Cover NOTE: Colors on publication cover are produced from the cover’s image.

For example: The sky in the Capitol image was sampled and complimentary (red) and shade (light blue) colors were produced.

light blue

bright red

white

(mastehead / rules)

(complimentary to sky in image)

(coverlines)

18/02/99/00

02/99/100/00

00/00/00/00

Internal Pages

bright red

rich black 12%

bjc blue

(accent color)

(large lead-in capital)

(display content)

02/99/100/00

75/67/67/90

100/92/31/26

Sampling the image colors and using the color wheel will produce harmony among the cover’s color palette. This color scheme will change depending on the image being used.

CONCEPT B: TYPOGRAPHY STYLES

Griffen calls Evangelicals to redefine perspective on religious liberty

REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL ■ MARCH / APRIL 2016

Coverlines: Proxima Nova Condensed Semibold / 16 Points (ALL CAPS for highlighted text)

Headline 1: Proxima Nova Bold / 30 Points

Mastehead Text: Proxima Nova Condensed Bold / 12 Points

This is some sample caption text set in 8pt Proxima Nova Medium. It's meant to be cleary readable without overpowering the main body text.

6

INNER SPREAD TYPOGRAPHY

Mastehead Main: Proxima Nova Condensed Extrabold / 67 Points

Lectures examine the call of Jesus to protect others and recognize the inherent dignity of all people

“Religious liberty is a fundamental social justice imperative,” Judge Wendell Griffen proclaimed, as he advocated for a deeper examination of how Scripture calls followers of Jesus to protect the oppressed and respect the dignity of all people.

In two presentations Nov. 12-13, Griffen drew lines connecting religious freedom and justice on the campus of Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, California.

Delivering the BJC’s Lectures on Social Justice and Religious Liberty, Griffen examined issues ranging from liberation theology to conscientious objections to same-sex marriage. His message centered on the ways God teaches his people to love and fight for justice for all.

Griffen is pastor of New Millennium Church in Little Rock, Arkansas, as well as Circuit Judge for the 6th Judicial District of Arkansas, 5th Division. He frequently lectures and writes about legal ethics and professionalism, religion and social justice, and public policy. He also serves as CEO and owner of Griffen Strategic Consulting.

In his first lecture, Griffen used his legal and pastoral expertise to consider whether religious freedom, equal protection and the teachings of Jesus collide or build upon each other.

Griffen reviewed recent events that create tension between the First Amendment’s religious freedom guarantee and the right to equal protection granted by the Fourteenth Amendment, such as the

COVER TYPOGRAPHY

conflicts over the contraceptive mandate in the Affordable Care Act, a Kentucky clerk’s refusal to issue marriage licenses to samesex couples, and an increase in non-discrimination laws across the country.

“Religious liberty is a fundamental social justice imperative.” judge wendell griffen

But, Griffen noted he was not there to delve into divergent legal analyses of those issues. “I am more concerned, as a follower of Jesus and a jurist, in provoking serious thought and conversation about how the constitutional values of religious liberty and equal protection are understood vis-à-vis the ‘love thy neighbor’ ethic in the gospel of Jesus,” he said.

Quoting from Luke 10:25-37, Griffen told the story of the Good Samaritan and asked the crowd questions regarding how Jesus’ admonition to “love thy neighbor” squares with respect for religious liberty and equality, including how we approach non-discrimination measures.

“Whether one is religious or not, these questions force us to decide whether

religious liberty, equality and the love ethos of Jesus function in a circle, collide or can somehow co-exist.”

Griffen pointed out that followers of Jesus often discuss political arguments surrounding hot-button issues, but they do not often ponder them in light of Jesus’ command to love our neighbors nor do they cite the teachings and conduct of Jesus.

“That is remarkable because the Gospel accounts of the life and ministry of Jesus illustrate that he often violated religious laws and practices,” Griffen said, providing several examples, including Jesus healing others on the Sabbath – which was a day forbidden to work – and touching a man with leprosy, even though touching a leper rendered someone unclean in the prevailing religious view.

Griffen said that, at minimum, one would onoring the ideal of equality and justice not only in the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of equal protection of the law; she can find authority for doing so also, and more fundamentally, in the life and ministry of Jesus,” Griffen said.

In his second presentation, Griffen took that instruction and confronted ethical and discipleship issues in the 21st century.

Mastehead Date/Vol: Proxima Nova Condensed Extrabold / 9 Points / All Caps Slogan: Proxima Nova Condensed / All Caps Black / 12 Points

Headline 1 Large: Proxima Nova Bold / 42 Points Sub-header: Proxima Nova Regular / 11 Points Lead In Cap: Proxima Nova Condensed Extrabold / 241 Points Body Text: Proxima Nova Regular / 9 points Pull Quote Text: Proxima Nova Regular / 18 Points Pull Quote Name: Proxima Nova Soft / Small Caps Bold / 9 Points Call Out Text: Proxima Nova Soft Medium / 15 Points InCopy Quote: Proxima Nova Semibold Italic / 9 Points Captions: Proxima Nova Medium / 8 Points Bylines: Proxima Nova Semibold Italic / 8 Points Footer: Proxima Nova Condensed / All Caps Semibold / 8 Points Reflections Byline: Proxima Nova Soft Regular / 11 Points

By: Cherilyn Crowe

MARCH / APRIL 2016 ■ REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL

7

CONCEPT B: PULL QUOTES / CALL-OUT BOXES / HIGHLIGHTED CONTENT

CONCEPT B: PULL QUOTES / CALL-OUT BOXES / HIGHLIGHTED CONTENT CALL OUT BOX

This publication defines various styles for brief, attention grabbing snippets pulled from the main text.

Proxima Nova Medium / 15pt Call out boxes can change color depending on which page it is appearing. They may appear “tall” or “wide” depending on what best suits the surrounding content.

PULL-QUOTES “Bright-Red” / Proxima Nova / 18pt Pull-quotes can be used within a column of text or span across multiple columns. Figure 1.

When column text is fully justified, pull quotes can also be centered on column gutters. Figure 2.

NOTE: This should only be used when text is set in full justification.

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Ratur? Explit laccusto volorem que vellabo rerrorem eosapid itaerum eos sitam erciatenimpe volo et volo conserrum doluptas volore moluptis ut asperit, niam faccab im que con et endisim iliquasim facera vel illecta des se prepuda nditati nonseque latquiam ut aborectate cullanda que illatio nsendam,

“The fact that faiths are free from government endorsement creates the conditions for religious voices to have credibility and power on public as well as private issues.” melissa rogers

quiderovid et harum voloritios ut alit aperore mporro etusa sundelibus, quiberum quiae lit que vel maximus apidus mossus everepta dolore volupta simposa quo ma voluptat rem int, ut quidundis molorporit expeles ciducitatur aliqui andignat expe nus pliciis quiamus ut liquibus sincta sinvend isitatur,

8

REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL ■ MARCH / APRIL 2016

sa cum rehentur rername pellatiorem. Utem fugit autem fuga. Ut inimporibus nus, que aut et ma nonsendae doloreh endanimin rerumqu iscipsa mendipiet eum que aliquatio id est ernam faccum, adis dollabo resent de seceria sitatem sollorit, que nobis as etur rem facium quamus denda dolupta quidisi dis accum volore estotatius vent ut lant ut quiae noneser spernam reritatiam etur, nis aut eic temquisquam quident, tendipsam idus sed qui quas ius, comnimo luptatiam que alita doloria simodion re reic tet molorem iumentionse elitior am, occus, ipsuntium ipsapid evellecus velit et et, unt ea ea eum, tem explique es utem facepero dollate pernate ndanihi libuscium, quam quos acescia doluptat eosaepere de dolorro coremelissa strum que possitis enim eumet, occatur, ommossi ullit occae pella nos am, tet laccae nam exerum unt et porro dolume eseque plaut electe non nihicae venda volor aut am aut im expe repuda sequi ut quos et ut latust aut quias elit quunt mollani hiliquas est vendae. Et ut eseceperunt.

Busaepe eaquunt apic temost es essecatquos mos de lit, si vellorro tem fugiae laborro con et quid ut pro il maio vento

maxim ea quiandi comnime tusandusape eicaepe resequi reperi conserum ipsus nobist es dit ad moluptaque nisqui consequatis autate volupta nonet hic to dusam qui dolorep ernation eossit etusam qui temporia nimus rerrora cone dictiuriam, si quas ditatur aut verio. Imincia cum explitatatur am, cus aut antem rem dolupta spicias pelest restibus exerspientio blabo. Nam, officatus moluptat molor alit, corro enit laut faccum sumquodi idit ressi accum aut explat.Xeres nonsed quodita videlese cus velita vel ea qui as sitas sundist, cus, seceatq uoditaspere con parchicia illab im dolorerum eictus et estio. Iquo consecum que molor sinis voluptae volore venimin iendam et in restiis sit, con eostrundae des inrogers tore quo ea voluptas autem aut experum quis pre pliquunt estiam aribuscition plaut magnat quae. Id ea conseDam liscius estiunt. Ad quunt verspeditio magnamus, od est dello quam, volorep erchit, im la idis eatium, con expero id utempe ea doluptatiur sit eriatem raero quam etum ratis minullupta volupta sitae volor adis as voluptatquam repudam vellab illandis sum hicimet quibusa persperitae. Nequam qui dus vid qui dolorectios dolut fuga. Et harum as doluptatios

“The fact that faiths are free from government endorsement creates the conditions for religious voices to have credibility and power on public as well as private issues.”

The confidentiality of the sacrament is considered so paramount that under church law a priest who reveals anything he hears in the confessional incurs automatic excommunication.

At a time when Islam is co-opted by terrorists and demonized by antiMuslim groups, Americans need to hear the true voice of Islam.

IN-COPY QUOTES “Bright-Red” / Proxima Nova Semibold Italic / 9pt For situations where attention to a text snippet is needed but there is a lack of space, In-copy Quotes can be used as an alternative.

Namendi rae volupta tiande voluptae quis ad molore et quame aut quas maio coriorest, tecae voles sequi ariam fugit lam quam ipsam fugitat eos unt ut rest omnist aut officab iligend ignatem arum consendi sum cuptatia incium dolest a dellanda plab iuntorunt volesti corum nullaccus, odis excearum velibusdae sandit ento coreperibus.

“[Our Baptist] beliefs do not make for lawless anarchy or the religion of Lone Rangers. … They aim for a community with moral integrity, the wholeness that flows from mutual obligation. Our religion is an adventure in freedom within boundaries of accountability.”

Tem. Beresse quiassum que pra niaero eos suntis consequaest earibus ea ius ma in porporerfera aliae. Ilit, vel endus.

Ullorem es et, od modiciatet ma quis as et am dolore dictiunt, nam re lant magnis sum non res velenis expliquam etur, sita idit, sectect

oreperis dolupta ssequo et accus nes aut apiento to tem acculpa volorit facea perem deriti cus conetur?

Alique vitatur? Ut faccae con cor asped qui te nos aute nihillat alia voluptur? Nos que dolor alit fuga. Am faccull uptaturit, idia aut earum vel inihic tecepudam laciundit re sum, incte lab inia etur rehendae. Ut quia cus apid quatus veliquiate non re corerum enimint ioriae odit re pratur?

Ibeat modias esedis aut accae plignim inimi, nissum accaessi con et unt harchiliti quos elit dolorae nonserro magnis in plabore hendae pratur, asperum nimus quis et essimaior abor sequate mporum autatet qui rero eum faccusc ietur?

Fugitianis acesedi idestrum etur as dolum, omnist officil icimus eatinctamet rem reproriti offictatat.

Puditate peribusape dolenda ntecum cor minte quament lab id mod que cum verspel escilit endisse eatiis quost es dolendaecto blab inveles sapit, sum hicium faciate es ad quiae rerchil lectibus a illuptas nimagnimin corempos a velibus et venist, ipid mos as nos es amus nis ex et quat.

MARCH / APRIL 2016 ■ REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL

9

CONCEPT B: MODULAR GRID

CONCEPT B: BASELINE GRID

This publication utilizes a modular grid system made up of 12 columns and 12 rows on each page. This system provides flexibility and ensures that content will always appear aligned and organized.

This publication utilizes a baseline grid which is an underlying structure that guides the vertical spacing of text. A baseline grid creates “vertical rhythm” as all lines of text are in alignment.

Green lines indicate the baseline grid

All lines of text rest on the baseline grid

Melissa Rogers, the executive director of the White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships, speaking in Atlanta, Georgia on June 27

White House official speaks at 2014 RLC Luncheon Melissa Rogers shares how religious freedom and church-state separation shape her work

ATLANTA – The head of the White House’s faith-based office reminded the crowd gathered at the 2014 Religious Liberty Council Luncheon to continue to speak up for religious liberty and “never forget how much your voice matters.”

Melissa Rogers, the executive director of the White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships, spoke to more than 650 people in Atlanta, Georgia, during the annual event on June 27. Rogers also received an award from the Baptist Joint Committee for her lifetime of work to protect religious liberty for all people.

After bringing greetings from President Barack Obama, Rogers recounted the American commitment to religious liberty and provided an overview of the work of her office.

“I’m pleased to report that when it comes to the freedom that allows diverse faiths to thrive, the state of our union is indeed strong,” she declared.

Rogers noted that the rich religious diversity of the United States — as well as a tradition of coming together to solve problems and better the country and the world is no accident, but an “achievement.”

Observing that the First Amendment protection of the right to freely exercise religion is easy for most people to understand, Rogers explained that the prohibition against a government establishment of religion is a bit more complicated, even though it is just as important.

“No government-established faith is free; it’s a creature of the state. State establishment of religion not only harms the faith that is not favored, it also undermines the faith that the government embraces,” Rogers said. “The fact that faiths are free from government endorsement creates the conditions for religious voices to have credibility and power on public as well as private issues.”

Together, she noted, both the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment ensure that people of every faith and of no faith are “equal as citizens before their government,” and those protections also keep religion as an “independent and authentic force.”

She told the crowd it was “our duty” to maintain that system, and explained how the American commitment to religious freedom and church-state separation shapes her work at the White House.

12

REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL ■ MARCH / APRIL 2016

MARCH / APRIL 2016 ■ REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL

13

BJC General Counsel Holly Hollman

Rogers explained that the mission of the Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships is not to promote faith, but it is to partner with community groups — both faith-based and secular — to help people who are in need.

Rogers said those non-financial partnerships are “crucial” ways to reach people who are struggling and to let them know about available government benefits and services, such as new flu shots, veterans benefits and college aid applications.

Rogers shared that another part of her job is implementing reforms to the office recommended by a diverse advisory council appointed by President Obama. Before working in her current role, Rogers served as the chair of that council. She also led a task force — which included BJC Executive Director Brent Walker — charged with drafting reform recommendations for the office.

Presently, she works to make sure those recommended changes are written into federal regulations and guidance. For example, beneficiaries of social services will receive written notice of their religious liberty protections when they receive government-funded services through a faith-based or community group. Among other statements, the notice 14

REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL ■ MARCH / APRIL 2016

BJC’s Brent Walker

“The fact that faiths are free from government endorsement creates the conditions for religious voices to have credibility and power on public as well as private issues.” melissa rogers

informs those individuals that they cannot be discriminated against because of religion, they cannot be required to participate in an explicitly religious activity, and privately

funded, explicitly religious activities must be separated from the government-funded service provided. Rogers said these important reforms are being put into place because “no one should ever be pressured along religious lines in order to receive government benefits.”

Her office also makes sure policymakers are aware of the ways in which different policies and laws can affect religion, including how changes to child care policies could affect centers run by congregations and how policies on international development could intersect with humanitarian and missionary work of faith groups.

“So, in all these things, especially because of the American commitment to the letter and the spirit of the First Amendment, it is crucial for policymakers to be mindful about the way in which policy and law impact religious activities, institutions and ideas, and it is essential for us to remember that the First Amendment creates boundaries within which the government must operate.”

Rogers noted that not everyone agrees about where these boundaries are. “That’s part of our freedom, too, of course, and that makes this task difficult, but it also underscores its importance.”

On a daily basis, people of all faiths and no faith engage the White House on a wide range of policy issues. Rogers urged the crowd to speak up on issues that matter to them, including religious liberty.

“When you take the time from your busy life to stand up and to speak out, it makes an impact. It matters. We hear you. It matters at the White House, and it matters in the world.”

Before she was appointed to her position in 2013, Rogers served as the director of the Center for Religion and Public Affairs at the Wake Forest University School of Divinity, as well as a nonresident senior fellow at The Brookings Institution. She was part of the staff of the Baptist Joint Committee from 1994-1999.

“I feel like I’m home again,” Rogers told the crowd when she first took the stage.

She briefly reflected on her professional journey during her speech, noting that her appreciation for the BJC has grown over the years. “I can safely say that there is no more respected voice on religious liberty in Washington or in the country than the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty,” she said.

After her address, Rogers received the J.M. Dawson Religious Liberty Award.

Named for the BJC’s first executive director, the award recognizes the outstanding contributions of individuals in defense of religious liberty for all.

The luncheon also included updates from Washington, provided to the crowd

by Walker and BJC General Counsel Holly Hollman. Business conducted at the event included the election of four Religious Liberty Council representatives to the BJC Board of Directors. Charles Cates of Washington, Emily Hull McGee of Kentucky, and Jenny Smith of Alabama were elected for the first time, and Joe Kutter of Kansas was elected to his second term. As the individual donor organization of the BJC, the RLC cultivates an understanding of religious freedom among Baptists and the larger public. It is one of the 15 supporting bodies of the BJC, with 13 RLC members serving three-year terms on the BJC Board of Directors.

The Religious Liberty Council Luncheon is held each year in conjunction with the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship General Assembly. The 2015 event is scheduled to be in Dallas, Texas.

By Cherilyn Crowe

The day before the Religious Liberty Council Luncheon, Brent Walker and Holly Hollman led a workshop during the CBF General Assembly reviewing the major religious liberty cases of the current Supreme Court term. The standing-roomonly event addressed the Town of Greece v. Galloway decision, challenges to the contraceptive mandate, and the history and legal standard of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

MARCH / APRIL 2016 ■ REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL

15

Melissa Rogers, the executive director of the White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships, speaking in Atlanta, Georgia on June 27

White House official speaks at 2014 RLC Luncheon Melissa Rogers shares how religious freedom and church-state separation shape her work

ATLANTA – The head of the White House’s faith-based office reminded the crowd gathered at the 2014 Religious Liberty Council Luncheon to continue to speak up for religious liberty and “never forget how much your voice matters.”

Melissa Rogers, the executive director of the White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships, spoke to more than 650 people in Atlanta, Georgia, during the annual event on June 27. Rogers also received an award from the Baptist Joint Committee for her lifetime of work to protect religious liberty for all people.

After bringing greetings from President Barack Obama, Rogers recounted the American commitment to religious liberty and provided an overview of the work of her office.

“I’m pleased to report that when it comes to the freedom that allows diverse faiths to thrive, the state of our union is indeed strong,” she declared.

Rogers noted that the rich religious diversity of the United States — as well as a tradition of coming together to solve problems and better the country and the world is no accident, but an “achievement.”

Observing that the First Amendment protection of the right to freely exercise religion is easy for most people to understand, Rogers explained that the prohibition against a government establishment of religion is a bit more complicated, even though it is just as important.

“No government-established faith is free; it’s a creature of the state. State establishment of religion not only harms the faith that is not favored, it also undermines the faith that the government embraces,” Rogers said. “The fact that faiths are free from government endorsement creates the conditions for religious voices to have credibility and power on public as well as private issues.”

Together, she noted, both the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment ensure that people of every faith and of no faith are “equal as citizens before their government,” and those protections also keep religion as an “independent and authentic force.”

She told the crowd it was “our duty” to maintain that system, and explained how the American commitment to religious freedom and church-state separation shapes her work at the White House.

MARCH / APRIL 2016 ■ REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL

17

Rogers explained that the mission of the Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships is not to promote faith, but it is to partner with community groups — both faith-based and secular — to help people who are in need.

Rogers said those non-financial partnerships are “crucial” ways to reach people who are struggling and to let them know about available government benefits and services, such as new flu shots, veterans benefits and college aid applications.

Rogers shared that another part of her job is implementing reforms to the office recommended by a diverse advisory council appointed by President Obama. Before working in her current role, Rogers served as the chair of that council. She also led a task force — which included BJC Executive Director Brent Walker — charged with drafting reform recommendations for the office.

Presently, she works to make sure those recommended changes are written into federal regulations and guidance. For example, beneficiaries of social services will receive written notice of their religious liberty protections when they receive government-funded services through a faith-based or community group. Among other statements, the notice informs those individuals that they cannot be discriminated against because of religion, they cannot be required to participate in an explicitly religious activity, and privately funded, explicitly religious activities must be separated from the government-funded service provided. Rogers said these important reforms are being put into place because “no one should ever be pressured along religious lines in order to receive government benefits.”

Her office also makes sure policymakers are aware of the ways in which different policies and laws can affect religion, including how changes to child care policies could affect centers run by congrega-

“When you take the time from your busy life to stand up and to speak out, it makes an impact. It matters. We hear you. It matters at the White House, and it matters in the world.”

Before she was appointed to her position in 2013, Rogers served as the director of the Center for Religion and Public Affairs at the Wake Forest University School of Divinity, as well as a nonresident senior fellow at The Brookings Institution. She was part of the staff of the Baptist Joint Committee from 1994-1999.

“I feel like I’m home again,” Rogers told the crowd when she first took the stage.

She briefly reflected on her professional journey during her speech, noting that her appreciation for the BJC has grown over the years. “I can safely say that there is no more respected voice on religious liberty in Washington or in the country than the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty,” she said.

After her address, Rogers received the J.M. Dawson Religious Liberty Award.

Named for the BJC’s first executive director, the award recognizes the outstanding contributions of individuals in defense of religious liberty for all.

The luncheon also included updates from Washington, provided to the crowd by Walker and BJC General Counsel Holly Hollman. Business conducted at the event included the election of four Religious Liberty Council representatives to the BJC Board of Directors. Charles Cates of Washington, Emily Hull McGee of Kentucky, and Jenny Smith of Alabama were elected for the first time, and Joe Kutter of Kansas was elected to his second term. As the individual donor organization of the BJC, the RLC cultivates an understanding of religious freedom among Baptists and the larger public. It is one of the 15 supporting bodies of the BJC, with 13 RLC members serving three-year terms on the BJC Board of Directors.

The Religious Liberty Council Luncheon is held each year in conjunction with the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship General Assembly. The 2015 event is scheduled to be in Dallas, Texas.

“The fact that faiths are free from government endorsement creates the conditions for religious voices to have credibility and power on public as well as private issues.” melissa rogers

tions and how policies on international development could intersect with humanitarian and missionary work of faith groups.

“So, in all these things, especially because of the American commitment to the letter and the spirit of the First Amendment, it is crucial for policymakers to be mindful about the way in which policy and law impact religious activities, institutions and ideas, and it is essential for us to remember that the First Amendment creates boundaries within which the government must operate.”

Rogers noted that not everyone agrees about where these boundaries are. “That’s part of our freedom, too, of course, and that makes this task difficult, but it also underscores its importance.”

On a daily basis, people of all faiths and no faith engage the White House on a wide range of policy issues. Rogers urged the crowd to speak up on issues that matter to them, including religious liberty.

By Cherilyn Crowe

BJC General Counsel Holly Hollman

BJC’s Brent Walker

The day before the Religious Liberty Council Luncheon, Brent Walker and Holly Hollman led a workshop during the CBF General Assembly reviewing the major religious liberty cases of the current Supreme Court term.

The standing-room-only event addressed the Town of Greece v. Galloway decision, challenges to the contraceptive mandate, and the history and legal standard of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. 18

REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL ■ MARCH / APRIL 2016

MARCH / APRIL 2016 ■ REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL

19

Melissa Rogers, the executive director of the White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships, speaking in Atlanta, Georgia on June 27

White House official speaks at 2014 RLC Luncheon Melissa Rogers shares how religious freedom and churchstate separation shape her work

ATLANTA – The head of the White House’s it’s a creature of the state. State establishfaith-based office reminded the crowd ment of religion not only harms the faith that gathered at the 2014 Religious Liberty is not favored, it also undermines the faith Council Luncheon to continue to speak up for that the government embraces,” Rogers said. religious liberty and “never forget how much “The fact that faiths are free from government your voice matters.” endorsement creates the conditions for Melissa Rogers, the executive director of religious voices to have credibility and power the White House Office of Faith-based and on public as well as private issues.”

Neighborhood Partnerships, spoke to more Together, she noted, both the Establishthan 650 people in Atlanta, Georgia, during ment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause the annual event on June 27. Rogers also of the First Amendment ensure that people received an award from the Baptist Joint of every faith and of no faith are “equal as Committee for her lifetime of work to protect citizens before their government,” and those religious liberty for all people. protections also keep religion as an “indeAfter bringing greetings from President pendent and authentic force.”

Barack Obama, Rogers recounted the She told the crowd it was “our duty” to American commitment to religious liberty maintain that system, and explained how the and provided an overview of the work of her American commitment to religious freedom office. and church-state separation shapes her work “I’m pleased to report that when it comes at the White House. to the freedom that allows diverse faiths to Rogers explained that the mission of the thrive, the state of our union is indeed strong,” Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood she declared.

Partnerships is not to promote faith, but it is Rogers noted that the rich religious dito partner with community groups — both versity of the United States — as well as a tra- faith-based and secular — to help people dition of coming together to solve problems who are in need. and better the country and the world is no Rogers said those non-financial partneraccident, but an “achievement.” ships are “crucial” ways to reach people who Observing that the First Amendment are struggling and to let them know about protection of the right to freely exercise reliavailable government benefits and services, gion is easy for most people to understand, such as new flu shots, veterans benefits and Rogers explained that the prohibition against college aid applications. a government establishment of religion is a Rogers shared that another part of her bit more complicated, even though it is just job is implementing reforms to the office as important. recommended by a diverse advisory council “No government-established faith is free; appointed by President Obama. Before work-

20 REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL ■ MARCH / APRIL 2016

ing in her current role, Rogers served as the chair of that council.

She also led a task force — which included BJC Executive Director Brent Walker — charged with drafting reform recommendations for the office.

Presently, she works to make sure those recommended changes are written into federal regulations and guidance. For example, beneficiaries of social services will receive written notice of their religious liberty protections when they receive government-funded services through a faith-based or community group. Among other statements, the notice informs those individuals that they cannot be discriminated against because of religion, they cannot be required to participate in an explicitly religious activity, and privately funded, explicitly religious activities must be separated from the government-funded service provided. Rogers said these important reforms are being put into place because “no one should ever be pressured along religious lines in order to receive government benefits.”

Her office also makes sure policymakers are aware of the ways in which different policies and laws can affect religion, including how changes to child care policies could affect centers run by congregations and how policies on international development could intersect with humanitarian and missionary work of faith groups.

“The fact that faiths are free from government endorsement creates the conditions for religious voices to have credibility and power on public as well as private issues.”

BJC’s Holly Hollman & Brent Walker

during her speech, noting that her appreciation for the BJC has grown over the years. “I can safely say that there is no more respected voice on religious liberty in Washington or in the country than the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty,” she said.

After her address, Rogers received the J.M. Dawson Religious Liberty Award. Named for the BJC’s first executive director, the award recognizes the outstanding contributions of individuals in defense of religious liberty for all.

The luncheon also included updates from Washington, provided to the crowd by Walker and BJC General Counsel Holly Hollman.

Business conducted at the event included the election of four Religious Liberty Council representatives to the BJC Board of Directors.

Charles Cates of Washington, Emily Hull McGee of Kentucky, and Jenny Smith of Alabama were elected for the first time, and Joe Kutter of Kansas was elected to his second term. As the individual donor organization of the BJC, the RLC cultivates an understanding of religious freedom among Baptists and the larger public. It is one of the 15 supporting bodies of the BJC, with 13 RLC members serving three-year terms on the BJC Board of Directors.

The Religious Liberty Council Luncheon is held each year in conjunction with the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship General Assembly. The 2015 event is scheduled to be in Dallas, Texas.

melissa rogers

“So, in all these things, especially because of the American commitment to the letter and the spirit of the First Amendment, it is crucial for policymakers to be mindful about the way in which policy and law impact religious activities, institutions and ideas, and it is essential for us to remember that the First Amendment creates boundaries within which the government must operate.”

Rogers noted that not everyone agrees about where these boundaries are. “That’s part of our freedom, too, of course, and that makes this task difficult, but it also underscores its importance.”

On a daily basis, people of all faiths and no faith engage the White House on a wide range of policy issues. Rogers urged the crowd to speak up on issues that matter to them, including religious liberty.

“When you take the time from your busy life to stand up and to speak out, it makes an impact. It matters. We hear you. It matters at the White House, and it matters in the world.”

Before she was appointed to her position in 2013, Rogers served as the director of the Center for Religion and Public Affairs at the Wake Forest University School of Divinity, as well as a nonresident senior fellow at The Brookings Institution. She was part of the staff of the Baptist Joint Committee from 1994-1999.

“I feel like I’m home again,” Rogers told the crowd when she first took the stage. She briefly reflected on her professional journey

By Cherilyn Crowe

The day before the Religious Liberty Council Luncheon, Brent Walker and Holly Hollman led a workshop during the CBF General Assembly reviewing the major religious liberty cases of the current Supreme Court term. The standing-room-only event addressed the Town of Greece v. Galloway decision, challenges to the contraceptive mandate, and the history and legal standard of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

MARCH / APRIL 2016 ■ REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL

21

Breakaway South Carolina Episcopalians win major court case

India withholds visas from U.S. religious freedom monitors

The Episcopal Church lost a major court battle Feb. 3 when a South Carolina judge ruled that the Diocese of South Carolina legally seceded from the denomination, and can retain control of $500 million in church property and assets.

The Charleston-based Diocese of South Carolina voted to secede in 2012 after the national church accused its bishop, the Rt. Rev. Mark Lawrence, of abandoning the church and taking his diocese with him.

The diocese said it helped form the national church in 1789, and was not legally bound to stay.

Lawrence insisted he and the 38 parishes that followed him out of the national church comprised the Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina. The 30 parishes that remained part of the national church sued, asking a judge to determine who could legally claim the name “Episcopal” and who controlled the property.

Circuit Judge Diane Goodstein ruled that the national church has “no provisions which state that a member diocese cannot voluntarily withdraw its membership.” The diocese was chartered in 1785, four years before the national church.

“With the freedom to associate goes its corollary, the freedom to disassociate,” Goodstein ruled.

Goodstein’s decision affects the fates of some of Charleston’s most iconic churches, whose towering steeples and colonial charm helped earn Charleston the nickname “the Holy City.”

The ruling follows similar decisions in Fort Worth, Texas, and Quincy, Ill., in which judges have ruled in favor of breakaway dioceses,

A U.S. religious freedom panel says it has been unable to obtain visas for members who planned to travel to India to assess conditions there.

In its 2015 annual report, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom included India on its list of Tier 2 countries — not the worst offenders but worthy of close monitoring due to religious freedom violations within their borders.

USCIRF chairman Robert P. George said in a statement that “a pluralistic, non-sectarian, and democratic state” such as India should have allowed the visit.

He noted that USCIRF has sent delegations to some of “the worst offenders of religious freedom,” such as China, Burma, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Vietnam.

In the report, the commission said that while India had tried to

even as most courts have said the property of individual breakaway parishes belongs to the denomination.

The national church allows same-sex blessings and gay bishops, but Lawrence said the decades-long battles over sexuality were just a “distraction” in the South Carolina fight.

“This has never been about exclusion,” he said in a statement.

“Our churches, our diocese, are open to all. It’s about the freedom to practice and proclaim faith in Jesus Christ as it has been handed down to us.”

The parishes that remain loyal to the national denomination, known as The Episcopal Church in South Carolina, plan to appeal Goodstein’s ruling, with its chief lawyer, Thomas S. Tisdale, calling the ruling “not unexpected.”

“We have understood from the beginning that this lawsuit was mounted after years of planning by individuals who were intent upon taking the diocese and its property out of The Episcopal Church,” spokeswoman Holly Behre said. “We have also understood that defending ourselves will be a long legal process.”

A separate suit in federal court accuses Lawrence of “false advertising” by “continuing to represent himself as bishop of the diocese.”

protect religious minorities, incidents of “religiously-motivated and communal violence reportedly have increased for three consecutive years.”

The Tier 2 designation was seen as unfair and part of what Jakob De Roover, a professor at Belgium’s Ghent University, considers an effort by USCIRF to promote a society based on American notions of religion.

“It seeks to spread Protestant-Christian values across the world but does so under the guise of promoting and protecting human rights that are ‘universally held sacred,’” he wrote on firstpost.com, an Indian website, shortly after the release of last year’s USCIRF report.

By Adelle M. Banks, Religion News Service

By Kevin Eckstrom, Religion News Service

N.J. to Archdiocese of Newark: Get out of the headstone business

Catholic ‘seal of the confessional’ upheld as religious liberty issue

NEWARK, N.J. — The Archdiocese of Newark, the largest single provider of in-ground burials in New Jersey, must give up a lucrative companion business — the marketing of headstones and private crypts — under a bill signed into law March 23 by Gov. Chris Christie.

The measure, which passed both houses of the Legislature with overwhelming bipartisan support, goes into effect in one year, allowing the archdiocese time to wind down without imperiling sales in progress at its Catholic cemeteries.

The archdiocese became the first religious group in the state to enter the headstone business two years ago, alarming dozens of small, independent companies that produce monuments and crypts.

The dealers’ trade association, the Monument Builders of New Jersey, waged an 18-month legal fight and lobbying campaign against the move, contending the practice would spread to other dioceses and then to the owners of other religious cemeteries.

The archdiocese returned fire with a lobbying effort of its own, along with a personal appeal from Archbishop John J. Myers, who exhorted Catholics to fight the law.

Once in effect, the measure will bar all religious groups from the market for headstones and family crypts. It also will bar those groups from owning funeral homes and mortuaries, though none currently do.

A Louisiana judge has ruled that a state law requiring clergy to report child abuse or other crimes learned in the confessional is unconstitutional because it infringes on religious liberty.

At issue is a long-running case involving Rebecca Mayeaux, a 22-year-old who claims that when she was 14 she told the Rev. Jeff Bayhi, a Catholic priest, during confession that a church member was abusing her. Mayeaux claims Bayhi told her to “sweep it under the rug.”

In his testimony, Bayhi told state District Judge Mike Caldwell that he had no choice but to keep Mayeaux’s allegations private because of the inviolability of the seal of the confessional. Caldwell agreed and ruled Feb. 26 in favor of Bayhi.

Confession is a Catholic sacrament in which a penitent recounts his or her sins privately to a priest, who then absolves them and usually sets up some regimen of penance, such as extra prayers. Mayeaux claims Bayhi told her to “sweep it under the rug.”

22 REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL ■ MARCH / APRIL 2016

The law does not impact large, communal mausoleums, which sometimes contain the remains of thousands of people.

John Burns Jr., the president of the trade association, said the law will do nothing less than save his industry from annihilation, contending private firms would not be able to compete on a level playing field with a tax-exempt group like the church. In time, Burns said, the archdiocese would have developed a monopoly.

“Thank God,” he said. “If Christie didn’t sign this bill, it would have been a short period of time before we were out of business.”

In the 18 months since the archdiocese began marketing headstones, Burns said, some his colleagues saw business drop off by 40 percent.

He has previously said church officials were disappointed by the measure’s approval in the Legislature. At the same time, he said, they were grateful for the year-long delay.

By Mark Mueller, The Star-Ledger (Newark, N.J.)

The confidentiality of the sacrament is considered so paramount that under church law a priest who reveals anything he hears in the confessional incurs automatic excommunication.

The confidentiality of the sacrament is considered so paramount that under church law a priest who reveals anything he hears in the confessional incurs automatic excommunication.

The Louisiana State Children’s Code includes clergy among the “mandatory reporters” of suspected or known abuse. It makes no exception for the confidentiality of confession and specifically states that “notwithstanding any claim of privileged communication, any mandatory reporter who has cause to believe that a child’s physical or mental health or welfare is endangered” must report it to authorities.

Mayeaux’s attorneys pledged to appeal.

The seal of the confessional has been challenged before, and at least one bishop has said he would violate it in favor of “the greatest good, the protection of innocent people.”

By Kimberly Winston, Religion News Service

MARCH / APRIL 2016 ■ REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL 23

A conversation with 2015 Shurden Lecturer Alan Brownstein On April 7-8, Alan Brownstein, professor emeritus at the University of California, Davis, School of Law, will deliver the 2015 Walter B. and Kay W. Shurden Lectures on Religious Liberty and Separation of Church and State at McAfee School of Theology in Atlanta and Mercer University in Macon, Georgia.

A nationally recognized constitutional law scholar who primarily focuses on church-state issues, Professor Brownstein has been published in numerous academic journals and is the co-author of dozens of op-ed articles and columns discussing a range of legal issues. His assistance is often sought by advocacy groups on matters relating to religious liberty and equality.

What led you to the study of First Amendment issues?

First Amendment values relating to freedom of speech and religious liberty and equality have always been both interesting and important to me. I remember being directed to recite the Regent’s Prayer — the prayer that was ultimately struck down as unconstitutional in Engel v. Vitale — each day in public school and thinking even then that there was something wrong with the government and my teachers telling what I should be saying when I prayed to G-d. I was in high school and college in the 1960s when the Civil Rights Movement and anti-Vietnam War protests challenged government policies.

Freedom of speech and association issues seemed to be part of daily life. My interest in constitutional law continued through my studies at law school. I consider myself very fortunate to have been given the opportunity to pursue these interests as a scholar and teacher.

You practiced law early in your career.

What do you enjoy about teaching as opposed to litigating cases?

Teaching and writing scholarship and litigating are as different as night and day.

Litigation is organized conflict within the parameters of accepted law. Writing articles as a scholar allows you to challenge existing orthodoxy and to try to develop solutions to problems without regard to a client’s interests. ... A teacher doesn’t experience the kind of immediate, real world results that an attorney does. It is really a profession of faith. We hope that what we do in the classroom makes a difference in our 24 REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL ■ MARCH / APRIL 2016

students’ education, but the impact we have isn’t clear like winning a case.

the common ground that people share and building from that foundation.

How has the church-state landscape shifted?

The church-state landscape has changed dramatically in recent years. For the most part, the current Supreme Court has taken the position that, except in extreme cases, church-state controversies should be resolved through political deliberation rather than through constitutional adjudication.

Accordingly, the Court has increasingly interpreted both the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause to mean as little as possible. I strongly disagree with the Court’s direction. Certainly, the basic distrust of government which underlies our constitutional system applies as strongly to government decisions relating to religion as it does to any other category of decisions.

Democracy is a great system of government, but that doesn’t mean we should be deciding what constitutes religious truth at the ballot box or in the halls of state legislatures or the chambers of local school boards.

What do you hope attendees will take away from the lectures?

I would hope that my lectures would help audience members understand and appreciate the several important values that come into play in church-state disputes. Taking all of the relevant values and concerns that are implicated in a church-state controversy into account may mean that we have to work harder to develop a fair and just solution to a problem. But liberty, equality and speech values are so important that we need to be careful to avoid solutions that only achieve simplicity and clarity by sacrificing values which demand our respect. I would also hope that my remarks might help people to engage in respectful discussions of difficult issues — particularly with regard to interactions with people who for one reason or another we see as “strangers” to our community.

Why are you focusing one of your lectures specifically on “respectful discourse” regarding religion and equality?

Unfortunately, I think respectful discourse is often missing in public debate in our polarized society. We focus too much on speech that rallies people who already agree with our point of view and often demonizes the opposition to accomplish this goal.

Persuasive speech that seeks to identify ways to settle disputes requires identifying

What drew you to the Shurden Lectures?

I have tremendous respect for the work of the Baptist Joint Committee, Brent Walker and Holly Hollman. Accordingly, I was predisposed to be receptive to any invitation from the BJC when Brent called me and invited me to participate in the Shurden Lectures. Also, the past speakers in this lecture series include some of the most prominent and effective advocates for religious liberty and equality in the U.S. I consider it to be a great honor and privilege to be included in such a distinguished group of speakers.

REFLECTIONS

HOLLMAN REPORT

Exercising responsible, selfless freedom

The threat of ‘all or nothing’ demands

By J. Brent Walker, BJC Executive Director

J

ames dunn used to say, from time to time, “No one is ‘free as a bird.’ Only a bird is as free as a bird.” As important as freedom is to what it means to be a Baptist and to the mission of the Baptist Joint Committee, freedom is not and cannot be absolute. It must be tempered by and held in tension with responsibility — duties we owe to each other, to the church, and even to government.

This idea of responsible freedom finds expression theologically.

The apostle Paul admonishes the church in Galatia not to use their freedom as an opportunity for self-indulgence, but to serve one another in love. He told the Galatians and tells us today the whole law can be summed up in one commandment, “you shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Galatians 5:13-14).

This truth also has implications ecclesiologically. Yes, we all come to God one at a time, personally and willingly. But our relationship with God must always be nurtured in the context of the community — with the admonishment of the family and the worshipping congregation. As Baptist journalist Bill Moyers has aptly reminded us:

“[Our Baptist] beliefs do not make for lawless anarchy or the religion of Lone Rangers. … They aim for a community with moral integrity, the wholeness that flows from mutual obligation. Our religion is an adventure in freedom within boundaries of accountability.”

This truth unfolds politically. It recognizes our responsibilities to government. Jesus clearly outlined our duties to both God and government when he said to render unto the emperor things that are the emperor’s and to God the things that are God’s (Matthew 22:21). And Paul acknowledges the legitimacy of government rule as a divinely ordained enterprise (Romans 13:1). Unlike some of our Anabaptist cousins, we Baptists have always been willing to engage culture and participate in the political process. From Thomas Helwys to Roger Williams to John Leland to Isaac Backus to Jimmy Carter, Baptists have been involved in politics — acting sometimes as prophets, sometimes as priests, sometimes as participants.

The notion of limited freedom is grounded constitutionally. Even the First Amendment — the pinnacle of our commitment to individual 26 REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL ■ MARCH / APRIL 2016

liberties — is not absolute and often requires a balancing of interests.

We do not have the free speech right to shout “fire” in the proverbial crowded theater. Our freedom of the press does not mean one can publish malicious lies in newspapers — even about public figures — without risking a libel suit. Our First Amendment right to assemble and to petition the government for redress of grievances must be peaceable and is subject to reasonable time, place and manner restrictions by government.

The First Amendment’s religion clauses are not susceptible to black and white treatment either. The Establishment Clause does not ban all government-sponsored encouragement of religion. It only requires that governmental acts have at least one secular purpose and the primary effect does not advance religion. The institutions of government and religion can cooperate in many ways, as long as it does not result in excessive entanglement between church and state.

Balancing of interests and line-drawing are part of the Establishment Clause’s calculus.

The same goes for the Free Exercise Clause. You can believe what you want and worship as you please, but you cannot exercise your religion in a way that unduly harms other people or seriously compromises the public interest. Insistence upon unfettered religious freedom, no matter what the impact on others or the sufficiency of governmental accommodation, is not only untenable but may engender a backlash that actually impedes religious freedom. (This is one of the main points of the BJC’s Zubik brief.) In short, the wall of separation between church and state is not impenetrable. Sometimes it looks more like a chain link fence.

The point cannot be over-emphasized: we must not exercise our freedom selfishly, but in a way that serves God, respects the well-being of others, honors the government and promotes the common good.

Come to think of it, James Dunn might not have been completely right. Maybe not even birds are as free as birds — the freedom to not flap their wings in flight will allow them to glide only so far before plummeting to earth.

By K. Hollyn Hollman, BJC General Counsel

I

t takes more than a sentence or two to explain the factual background of Zubik v. Burwell, the current religious liberty case pending before the U.S. Supreme Court. The case is the latest development in a long-unfolding story about the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive mandate, its application to religious entities, and the meaning of the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA). The Affordable Care Act in general, and contraceptives in particular, are important matters that warrant serious debate. It may be unfortunate, but it’s not surprising in our current climate, that this case inspires a lot of emotion and political rancor.

By filing an amicus brief in Zubik, the BJC weighed in on the issues that we believe are most essential for continuing protection of religious liberty for all. In a brief authored by Professor Douglas Laycock, we defend the sufficiency of the religious liberty exemptions at issue in the case and respond to far-reaching arguments made by three dozen petitioners — including individuals, religious charities and Christian colleges — that we believe endanger religious liberty.

As noted at the outset of the brief, the BJC and Professor Laycock have worked for more than 25 years – often together – to enact, implement and defend RFRA. That law creates a unique balancing test between substantial burdens on religion and the compelling interests of the government. While the kinds of claims being pursued under RFRA (and RFRA’s state counterparts) may have become more controversial, the standard is sound and continues to provide a measure of protection fitting for a country that prizes religious liberty as its first freedom.

While it is much more common for the BJC and Professor Laycock to be pushing against government action that does not adequately protect religious liberty, the brief in this case reminds the Court and other readers that “religious liberty can be endangered by exaggerated claims and overreaching as well as by government intransigence and judicial under enforcement.” In Zubik, religiously affiliated nonprofits use RFRA to challenge the government’s accommodation procedure designed to allow them to avoid contracting, arranging, paying, or even referring for contraception. The government has provided a careful system of exemptions that responds to religious objections about contraception without depriving thousands of employees important health care benefits. This is the win-win solution the Court pointed to in the Hobby Lobby case.

The brief argues that the exemption procedure for the petitioners (called the “accommodation”), which requires written notification of a religious objection, does not amount to a substantial burden on the exercise of religion. The organizations have been wholly exempted from providing contraception themselves, and the objection is to the government’s efforts to deliver contraception separately through secular insurers, with segregated funds and segregated communications.

While deference should be given to religious understandings, the brief explains that absolute deference produces its own problems and “would produce absurd results that would discredit the cause of religious liberty.” The Zubik petitioners’ arguments illustrate the point. Their claims have moved fluidly as they articulated the exercise of religion burdened by the government. They first objected to providing contraceptive coverage, then to the accommodation form, then to providing contact information for their insurance company, and finally to maintaining contractual relationships with insurance companies that provide the employee benefits. While petitioners may have sincerely held beliefs against performing such acts, the brief explains that “substantial to the believer is not inevitably the same as substantial in law.”

Additionally, the BJC’s brief defends the practice of legislative and administrative exemptions, which are typical means of ensuring religious liberty while protecting other important government interests. The government must be able to draw reasonable lines when it creates religious exemptions, which exist in local, state and federal law. “If legislatures and administrative agencies cannot enact a narrow religious exemption without it being turned into a much broader religious exemption, many of them will not enact any religious exemptions at all, and many existing religious exemptions will be repealed,” according to the brief.

Despite what petitioners argue, legislative and administrative exemptions designed to protect religious liberty without harming other important interests should be encouraged, not threatened with “all or nothing” demands. In short, the religious organizations have been relieved of paying for or appearing to approve of objectionable services. Their RFRA claims, however, cannot extend to the government’s regulation of secular insurers.

MARCH / APRIL 2016 ■ REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL

27

Baptist Joint Committee welcomes spring interns

Walker signs open letter against anti-Muslim rhetoric

The Baptist Joint Committee is pleased to have two spring semester interns working alongside our staff in Washington, D.C.

bjc executive director brent walker was one of 50 leaders who signed a letter asserting that anti-Muslim rhetoric is a threat to the foundations of American democracy and to the religious freedom of all Americans.The letter ran as an advertisement in the Washington Post on Dec. 21, and it calls elected officials and the American public to stand for freedom.

“Our religious principles teach us to love and respect each other, and our civic responsibility demands that we take a public stand against this gross injustice happening before our eyes today,” the letter states. “As persons of faith and as Americans, we deeply value our own freedom of religion in this country and the religious freedom of others.”

Other signatories include Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, author Brian McLaren, Rev. Jim Wallis of Sojourners, Rev. Dr. Roy Medley of American Baptist Churches USA, Bishop Warren Brown Jr. of the United Methodist Church, Imam Mohamed Magid of the ADAMS Center, Rabbi Jack Moline of Interfaith Alliance, Rev. Gradye Parsons of the Presbyterian Church USA, Ambassador John Loeb Jr., Deborah Lauter of the Anti-Defamation League, and Rabbi Jonah Pesner of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism.

The effort was a collaboration between The Shoulder to Shoulder Campaign and the Aspen Institute’s Justice and Society Program.

joben david, who was born and raised in India, is a 2015 graduate of George W. Truett Theological Seminary in Waco, Texas, where he earned a Master of Arts in Christian Ministry. In 2011, he earned a Bachelor of Arts, majoring in philosophy, from Baylor University. David has experience working for the Walt Disney Company in Florida and the International Justice Mission in India. After his internship, David plans to work in the nonprofit sector and pursue a law degree. claudia shoemaker, a native of Charlotte, North Carolina, graduated in 2015 from Appalachian State University. She received her Bachelor of Science degree, majoring in political science with a minor in history.

She is the daughter of Jim and Amy Shoemaker, and a member at Providence Baptist Church in Charlotte. Following her internship, Shoemaker plans to work in political communications.

2016 Shurden Lectures set for April in Minnesota

BJC Staff Reports

Deadlines approaching for BJC Fellows, essay contest Two of the Baptist Joint Committee’s most popular programs have quickly approaching deadlines.

BJC FELLOWS PROGRAM Young professionals interested in deepening their historical, legal and theological understanding of religious liberty have until Feb. 16 to apply for the BJC Fellows Program. Created in 2015, the program brings 10 people together from diverse backgrounds, teaching and equipping them for advocacy. The cornerstone of the program is the BJC Fellows Seminar, which will be held July 27–31 in Colonial Williamsburg. The program covers most travel and lodging for the seminar.

Popular educator molly marshall will speak at Bethel University in St. Paul, Minnesota, on April 4–5 to deliver the 2016 Walter B. and Kay W. Shurden Lectures on Religious Liberty and Separation of Church and State.

The president of Central Baptist Theological Seminary in Shawnee, Kansas, Marshall has spent more than 30 years involved with theological education and has vast ministerial experience.

Walter and Kay Shurden established the lectures with a gift to the BJC more than a decade ago. The annual event travels to campuses to reach students and inspire a commitment to religious liberty. For details and a new video featuring the Shurdens discussing the genesis of the lectures, visit BJConline.org/ShurdenLectures.

28 REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL ■ MARCH / APRIL 2016

Go to our website BJConline.org/Fellows for application details, links to pages and videos featuring members of the 2015 class.

RELIGIOUS LIBERTY ESSAY SCHOLARSHIP CONTEST High school juniors and seniors have until March 4 to submit their essays for this year’s scholarship contest. The topic centers on conflicts that arise when elected or appointed government officials have religious objections to job duties.

For the complete topic, rules and entry form, visit BJConline.org/contest.

Honorary and Memorial Gifts to the Baptist Joint Committee

In honor of Alyssa Aldape

By Adam Wright

In honor of Don & Carol VonCannon

By Dr. & Mrs. Thomas M. Ginn

In memory of Harley D. Hunt

By Mr. & Mrs. David G. Hunt

In honor of Babs Baugh

By Jackie & Kim Moore

In honor of Brent Walker & Holly Hollman

By Barry & Amanda Howard Michael Lieberman

In memory of James B. Johnson

By Elaine & James B. Johnson, II

In honor of Renee Bennett

By Nikki L. Schofield In honor of Marjorie & Joe Brake

By Richard & Wendy Brake In honor of Tom & Ann Caulkins

By Rachel Revelle In honor of Marilyn Dunn

By Thomas Mullen In honor of Don & Syd Janney

By James & Elizabeth Harris Lamkin In honor of Bryce & Madison McClendon

By Michelle McClendon In honor of June McEwen

By Jim & Lavone Frost Clark and Pattie Gross In honor of Lynette & Jim Ranton

By Ray Guy In honor of Walter & Kay Shurden

By Mr. & Mrs. Wallace Daniel In honor of Jenny L. Smith

By Ronald Williams In honor of Jim Strange

By Randall Ashcraft In honor of Buzz Thomas

By Skip Newman In honor of Andrew Tonks

By Ron & Charlotte Tonks In honor of Bill Pitts & Jim Vardaman

By Edward Menger & Megan Ullman In honor of Ray Vickery

By Stephen E. Gooch

In honor of Brent & Nancy Walker

By Ross & Lea Ann Brummett In honor of Brent Walker

By Jim & Debbie Baucom Heather Entrekin Donald E. & Jo Ann Horton Stephen & Constance Marlowe Paula Jean Settle G.J. & Kay Tarazi Victor Tupitza Daniel & Melissa Whitehead In memory of John Binder

By Jean Stromberg Brent & Nancy Walker In memory of William R. Brown

By Darla Dee Turlington

In memory of Quentin & Mary Alene Lockwood

By Quentin Lockwood, Jr. In memory of Rev. & Mrs. Lewis C. McKinney

By Margie & Carroll Wheedleton In memory of Ira Peak, Jr.

By David R. Currie In memory of J.T. & Sara Rutherford

By Ann Rutherford In memory of Marylee Sturgis

By William Benton Downer In memory of Foy & Mary Louise Valentine

By Stephen E. Gooch

In memory of Steve Case

By Pam & Keith Durso Paul & Tambi Swiney Brent & Nancy Walker In memory of James Dunn

By Richard Bidwell Robert & Joyce Byrd Mark A. Chancey Marilyn & Oswin Chrisman Larry & Kim Coleman David R. Currie Andrew Daugherty Stephen Dunn Ircel Harrison Stephen Hemphill Kenneth & Anne Howe Matthew K. Johnson William J. Jones Marv & Joanna Knox Alisa Monfalcone Clay & Ann Price Mark Ray Paul & Susan Richardson Melissa Rogers Tom & Mary Lois Sanders Ryan Walker

You can honor someone with a gift to the Baptist Joint Committee at any time.

Just send a note with your check, or give at BJConline.org/ donate and check the box to designate your gift in honor or memory of someone.

Contact Taryn Deaton at tdeaton@BJConline.org with any questions.

Protecting pastors without condemning neighbors

By BJC Associate General Counsel Jennifer Hawks

30 REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL ■ MARCH / APRIL 2016

understanding of fairness in the civil arena.

The first statute to address this issue was Connecticut’s legislative recognition of same-sex marriage in 2009. It provided that “No member of the clergy authorized to join persons in marriage ... shall be required to solemnize any marriage ...” and “[n]o church or qualified church-controlled organization ... shall be required to participate in a ceremony solemnizing a marriage ... .” In fact, every state that legislatively opened up civil marriage to same-sex couples included some form of explicit recognition that pastors can refuse to perform any ceremony as an expression of their free exercise of religion.

Post-Obergefell, several states that had previously banned same-sex marriage are now looking to pass stand-alone “pastor protection acts.” Some of these independent proposals follow what other states had previously done and provide explicit reassurances to houses of worship and clergy that they are not required to solemnize any particular marriage.

Some states, though, have pushed the boundaries, fueling further conflict. For example, the first version of Texas’ “pastor protection act” provided that religious organizations and certain individuals and entities associated with them could refuse to participate in the “solemnization, formation, or celebration of any marriage, or treat any marriage as valid for any reason.” Controversy erupted over this final phrase. The potential reach of permitting any religious organization the ability to deny the validity of any marriage for any purpose went far beyond ensuring that pastors or churches would not be required to solemnize a marriage they found theologically objectionable.

Fortunately, this controversial provision was eventually deleted from the bill, allowing it to be enacted with little fanfare and no calls for boycotts.

When carefully crafted, “pastor protection acts” non-controversially provide explicit reassurances that clergy and houses of worship can make theological decisions when it comes to wedding participation. This clarification can strengthen the public’s understanding of important boundaries between church and state.

If, however, the slogan of “pastor protection” is used as cover to exempt a wide range of entities from various interactions with the LGBT community, pastors and their supporters should ask if the legislation’s goal is to protect pastors or condemn their LGBT neighbors.

At Morocco summit, Muslim leaders stand up for religious freedom

By Charles C. Haynes, Director of the Religious Freedom Center of the Newseum Institute

A

t an historic gathering in Marrakesh, Morocco on Jan. 27, more than 300 Muslim leaders – including many of the world’s most eminent Islamic scholars and clerics – declared that the religious freedom of minority faiths must be protected in Muslim-majority nations.

The Marrakesh Declaration comes at a time of unprecedented persecution of Christians and other minority groups by extremists acting in the name of Islam in the Middle East, Africa and South Asia.

Pushing back against false and dangerous narratives about Islam, the Muslim leaders called on the entire Muslim world to reaffirm the principles of the Charter of Medina, a constitutional contract between the Prophet Muhammad and the people of Medina, “which guaranteed the religious liberty of all, regardless of faith” 1,400 years ago.

To counter extremism and promote freedom, the declaration calls for a “broad movement for the just treatment of religious minorities in Muslim countries and to raise awareness as to their rights.”

Morocco, the host country for the conference, is often cited as an example of an Islamic state that protects the rights of Christians, Jews and other religious minorities. Some of the other Muslim-majority nations, however, are badly in need of the reforms called for in the declaration: Citizenship that is “inclusive of diverse groups” and initiatives, including education, that promote understanding across religions.

By sending a message to government leaders who ignore the true teachings of Islam as well as to terrorist groups that pervert the meaning of the faith, the Marrakesh Declaration stakes out an authentically Muslim position in support of religious freedom.

“Enough bloodshed,” said Shaykh Abdallah bin Bayyah, a key organizer of the conference and president of the Forum for Promoting Peace in Muslim Societies. “There is a sickness right now in the world but we have treatments for it within Islam.”

In other words, Islam is not the cause of extremism; Islam offers an answer to it. Now the challenge facing Muslim scholars

and religious leaders will be to translate the declaration into societal reforms and peace efforts that effectively counter extremist movements, especially among the young.

The Marrakesh Declaration has received scant media attention in the United States. Positive news about Islam – including the many earlier statements and actions of Islamic leaders to fight extremism – rarely makes headlines.

But Americans should take heed of the message coming out of Morocco.

At a time when Islam is co-opted by terrorists and demonized by anti-Muslim groups, Americans need to hear the true voice of Islam. To understand why this matters, consider that hate crimes against Muslim-Americans and mosques across the U.S. have tripled since the terrorist attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, California, last fall, according to a study conducted by researchers at California State University.

Ignorance and fear of Islam breed anger, hate and violence. In recent months, a young girl wearing a hijab was attacked by classmates, a Muslim cab driver was shot by a passenger who was angry about ISIS, a Muslim woman at a car wash was threatened by a man at knifepoint – and the list goes on.

Just as the KKK and White Supremacist groups – which claim to be based on ”Christian principles” – are not labeled “Christian extremists” by most Americans, so ISIS and other terrorist groups who act in the name of Islam should not be given the label “Islamic.”

If we can tell the difference between authentic Christianity and perverted versions of the Gospel, so we should learn to tell the difference when it comes to Islam. Our ability to work with one another, defeat our common enemy, and uphold religious freedom hangs in the balance.

RELIGIOUS LIBERTY VOICES

T

here has been a lot of fear-mongering since last summer’s U.S. Supreme Court decision recognizing same-sex marriage as a constitutional right. One frequent rumor has been that LGBT advocates want to force pastors and churches to violate their theological positions and require them to participate in same-sex wedding ceremonies. That sort of conjecture is used to justify various legislation, including “pastor protection acts.” The truth is, pastors and churches have always enjoyed wide discretion, subject only to their own convictions and denomination polity, to participate (or not) in any wedding ceremony. Nothing about Obergefell v. Hodges changes this.

All this rhetoric about pastors and churches needing legal protection gives the impression that they will suddenly be turning down weddings for the first time and opening themselves up to lawsuits. Ask any pastor about weddings he or she has been asked to officiate. Odds are they have said no to at least one couple. It is not uncommon to hear of refusals for a number of reasons, such as church policy, a previous divorce, or a lack of maturity, compatibility or connection to the church.

Occasionally, pastors or churches refuse engaged couples for reasons that in other contexts would be illegal. In the summer of 2012, a predominantly white Mississippi Baptist church’s refusal to allow an African-American couple to get married in the church because of the couple’s race briefly captured national attention. While the refusal was denounced by church members as well as Baptist and non-Baptist Mississippians, no civil or criminal penalties followed.

If a racial refusal more than 50 years after the civil rights movement doesn’t trigger intervention by government authorities, it is hard to imagine what would. Frankly, the state has little interest in a church’s decision to solemnize (or not) any marriage. Nothing in the current legal landscape indicates that pastors or houses of worship will someday be required to officiate or host any wedding, much less one that doesn’t conform to their religious doctrine.

To allay the fear that Obergefell somehow changed this, several states have passed or are considering legislation often referred to as “pastor protection acts.”

While not legally necessary, “pastor protection acts” are not controversial when they pursue their most obvious objective: to reassure pastors and churches that they are not required to solemnize any and all marriages on demand. Such legislation, however, becomes controversial when expanded beyond the church in ways that conflict with the public’s

MARCH / APRIL 2016 ■ REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL

31

Why We Give I grew up in Baptist churches that stressed religious liberty.

While I’ve known of the Baptist Joint Committee for as long as I can remember, I really connected when my husband and I moved to Washington, D.C., and Monty became assistant pastor of the National Baptist Memorial Church, which was built as a memorial to religious liberty.

Emanuel Carlson, then the executive director of the BJC, was a member of the church and became a good friend. We learned so much from him and from our church’s annual “Religious Liberty Week,” inviting great guest speakers for nightly services on the subject.

The BJC is unique to me because I know of no other organization that does such a good job. Not only do they advocate for our First Amendment rights, but they constantly teach groups and individuals, using Jesus’ teachings and biblical principles as the basis for their work.

The staff of BJC is, without exception, worthy of admiration on many levels. It is

32 REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL ■ MARCH / APRIL 2016

made up of people who are extremely knowledgeable in both law and religion, who know well our Baptist history and heritage, and who are personable, interesting, caring individuals. During our 10 years in D.C., we got to know James Dunn and were so impressed with his courage and commitment. Brent Walker continues the great tradition of having the “best and brightest” and representatives of the faith lead the BJC. I chose to include the BJC in my estate plans because, when we later became “scholars in residence” at the BJC, Monty and I were deeply impressed by the quality of the work we saw being done and the Christ-like manner in which all the staff dealt with tough situations or people. Monty has passed away, but I know he would feel as I do — that one of the best possible uses of our resources is doing what we can to continue the fine work of the BJC. I want others to understand the urgency of protecting, explaining and expanding religious liberty for all. There is so much con-

fusion about what it means to have religious liberty, and many haven’t a clue about the true meaning of it or of our Baptist history in this regard. All of us need to work together so the next generation will have religious liberty and understand its vital importance.

By Diane Jordan Brentwood, Tennessee

If you have included the BJC in your estate plans or would like information about naming us as beneficiary of a will or retirement plan, visit BJConline.org/planned-giving and fill out the simple form.

You may also contact development director Taryn Deaton at 202-544-4226 or by email at LegacyCircle@BJConline.org.

200 Maryland Ave., N.E. Washington, D.C. 20002-5797 Phone: (202) 544-4226 Fax: (202) 544-2094 Email: bjc@BJConline.org Website: www.BJConline.org BJConline.org/blog

@BJContheHill

Facebook.com/ReligiousLiberty

The Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty defends religious liberty for all people and protects the institutional separation of church and state in the historic Baptist tradition. Based in Washington, D.C., we work through education, litigation and legislation, often combining our efforts with a wide range of groups to provide education about and advocacy for religious liberty.

APPLY FOR OUR

INTERNSHIP PROGRAM!

SUPPORTING BODIES BJC of the

Alliance of Baptists American Baptist Churches USA Baptist General Association of Virginia Baptist General Convention of Missouri Baptist General Convention of Texas Converge Worldwide (BGC) Cooperative Baptist Fellowship Cooperative Baptist Fellowship of North Carolina National Baptist Convention of America National Baptist Convention USA Inc. National Missionary Baptist Convention North American Baptists Inc. Progressive National Baptist Convention Inc. Religious Liberty Council Seventh Day Baptist General Conference

REPORT FROM THE CAPITAL J. Brent Walker executive director Cherilyn Crowe editor Jordan Edwards associate editor

FALL DEADLINE JUNE 30

Interested in working alongside the Baptist Joint Committee in Washington, D.C.? Open to all students as well as those who have completed a degree program. Applications for the fall semester are due by the end of the day. Learn more at…

BJConline.org/internships

Untinvel in exero conseque eosa doloreic tem ipsum la si corum que sed quas ex et fugit optatia eptate con re sim aliquossed utendellore, solo quamus, voluptur?

Report From The Capitol (ISSN-0346-0661) is published 10 times each year by the Baptist Joint Committee.

For subscription information, please contact the Baptist Joint Committee.