The question has an almost obvious answer: Yes, a book can, given enough circulation and acceptance, harm religious freedom. Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf, the literary “work” of a frustrated artist and World War I veteran, remains a perverse inspiration to those who cherish hatred. Its publication prepared the way for the National Socialists in Germany, leading to 12 years of terror in Europe and the death of millions.
On a far smaller scale, and with a decidedly different purpose, another book has, in recent years, gained an audience—and fueled controversy. Its authors, two Americans, advocate a rather limited view of religious freedom, with sections of the book’s introduction talking about “the value of intolerance” and “responsible religious freedom”.
The book, first published in 1999 and reprinted three times since by evangelical Christian publishers Harvest House, of Eugene, Oregon, is called Encyclopedia of Cults and New Religions. The authors, John Ankerberg and John Weldon, claim a joint total of nearly 100 books in print, in English and Spanish, on a wide range of religious topics, but dealing principally with the subject of religions that they believe “oppose” Christianity in some basic fashion. Mr. Ankerberg1 is a popular television host: at his Internet Web site, www.ankerberg.com, he claims his television “program can be seen each week by a potential viewing audience in excess of 99 million people” in North America.
Mr. Weldon is a former associate of the late Walter R. Martin, who was a noted religion researcher and founder of the Christian Research Institute. He has been closely associated with Mr. Ankerberg for many years, and has been featured several times on the Ankerberg television programs.
Books written by Messers. Ankerberg and Weldon get a wide airing—they are prominently featured in Christian bookstores, are discussed on various evangelical radio and television programs, and are the subject of “gift offers” from various Christian ministries. As one might expect, Mr. Ankerberg promotes these books in his own venues, such as his Web site.
Among the books authored by the duo, the Encyclopedia of Cults and New Religions has drawn particular attention. Unlike many of the estimated 80,000 new books published annually in the United States, ECNR, as it will be called here, has gone into at least four printings. And, unlike most of the books birthed from American presses each year, it has drawn a major libel lawsuit, one which seeks $136 million in damages.2
Mr. Ankerberg in particular holds himself forth as a defender of evangelicalism. He claims ordination as a Baptist minister, and that he was once a church pastor. Many of his weekly television programs attempted a Phil Donahue-like discussion of so-called alternatives to Christianity, with Mr. Ankerberg often debating people who represented different new religions and philosophies, such as José Silva of Silva Mind Control and televangelist Garner Ted Armstrong, who died in September of 2003.
But in ECNR Mr. Ankerberg and Mr. Weldon posit a view of religious pluralism that to many Christians—and particularly evangelicals—could have some unintended consequences. The introductory chapter of ECNR suggests that so-called cults represent “a worldwide problem,” as well as a particular threat to the United States. Citing the American Family Foundation (whose 2002 conference on dealing with cults included guest observers from the People’s Republic of China), Ankerberg and Weldon reflect on the threat of cults in Europe as leading to problems in America.
“We pay for what we tolerate, whether it be crime, drug use, murderers or not disciplining our kids,” the authors write.3 “The worse the thing tolerated, the higher the price imposed.”4
Then, to justify their call to intolerance further, the authors generalize that these religions are characterized by everything from murder to rape, prostitution and child molestation.5
The authors declare, “Tolerance is not always a virtue,”6 citing a syndicated column by George F. Will on the death penalty to buttress their claim.
Declaring that “cults themselves have become tolerated, even praised by many,”7 the two writers ascribe a “virtue” to their stance: “The reasons for our ‘intolerance’ of cults and new religions—why we are critical of them— are more soundly based than our critics are willing to concede.”8
The scenario then proposed by Ankerberg and Weldon is fraught, I believe, with serious consequences for believers of all faiths. The authors state they support “freedom of religion” but only when it is “responsible.”9
“Christian leaders should call for and institute a national discussion over how we protect legitimate religious freedoms and simultaneously protect ourselves from ‘freedom of religion,’” is their breathtaking proposal.10
In other words, because so-called cults and new religions have lured people away from what Ankerberg and Weldon consider to be a better way, the authority of the church—and perhaps even the state—must be brought to bear. Remember that
these authors begin their argument citing the work of European and French “anti-sect” leaders as justification for their own efforts. (Ironically, the United States Supreme Court is now citing foreign judicial decisions in its rulings, despite the assertion by Associate Justice Antonin Scalia that such overseas opinions have little or no bearing on American law.11)
The authors, it seem, particularly hold to a notion that since America is a nation with philosophical and political roots in a Judeo-Christian tradition, that tradition must be appealed to as the basis of American religious freedom.
“In other words,” they state, “the First Amendment only works as long as the nation accepts Christian principles. If it does not, then it gets what it gets—all kinds of religious evils protected by the very amendment by which God intended to bless the nation.”12
The constitutional exegesis employed by Mr. Ankerberg and Mr. Weldon in this statement may well dwarf that of the numerous religious crackpots who’ve hung obscure theories on even-more obscure passages in Scripture over the years. While many Americans believe that God had a hand in the birth and growth of the United States, few would, I believe, suggest that the First Amendment was designed solely to protect Christians!
This hypothesis is fraught with consequences and calamities. Which flavor of Christianity was God seeking to protect with the First Amendment? Where is the declaration that non-Christian religions were to be unprotected? Was, for example, George Washington’s famous letter to the Touro Synagogue just a hoax, or a bid for votes?
Those who have made even a cursory study of the history of religious freedom in the United States would likely conclude that freedom of religion being guaranteed to all is why this country has, by and large, been a bastion of both free expression and the rights of the minority. Suggesting that leaders of any one faith should promote the legal exclusion of so-called minority religions could well lead to a slippery slope in which no one’s expression is safe.
Indeed, as Edwin S. Gaustad, an emeritus professor of history at the University of California at Riverside, wrote in a 1995 article: “As Thomas Jefferson observed in 1816, even if we have laws that provide for religious liberty, they lose much of their effectiveness if ‘we are yet under the inquisition of public opinion.’ When efforts are made to marshal public opinion against any religious group, but especially against one that is unfamiliar and politically powerless, then ‘free exercise’ becomes a mockery. If in that effort to arouse public passion, statements are made which are malicious, inflammatory and even libelous, then the chilling effect upon religious liberty is compounded.”13
Clearly there are valid concerns about the actions and practices of some groups. But if someone commits a crime—whether it’s fraud, theft by deception, or even causing physical harm to another person—there are plenty of current laws governing such actions. Where some would argue that “cult crime” legislation is the way to go, the prosecution, in Japan, of the Aum Shinrikyo sect’s leader and his followers over the 1994 sarin gas attack, shows otherwise. People were tried for—and convicted of—a variety of crimes, including murder, without “special” legislation needed.
The concerns expressed by both John Ankerberg and John Weldon in their Encyclopedia of Cults and New Religions may be troubling to parents, pastors, and educators. But the antidote would seem to lie in better education and guidance for children and adults, not the provision of liberty for some and its denial to others.
Mr. Ankerberg’s spiritual forefather, the Baptist Roger Williams, knew what it was like to face—and flee—persecution for his beliefs. Would we really want to return to that kind of society?
|
________________________
Mark Kellner is a freelance author in Rockville, Maryland. He writes a weekly column in the Washington Times and is the author of "God on teh Internet."
________________________
1 Both Mr. Ankerberg and Mr. Weldon claim to hold doctorate degrees, although many of their book-cover biographies omit the names of the schools where such degrees were earned.
2 Living Stream Ministry, the local churches, and 96 local church congregations filed that lawsuit after attempts to negotiate and mediate differences with Harvest House and the two authors failed. (See Mark A. Kellner, “Local Church Fights for Evangelical ID Card,” Christianity Today, February 2003.) The points of contention in that action are not the concern of this article. For information about their lawsuit, the Local Church has set up an Internet Web site, www.localchurch-vs-harvesthouse.com.
3 John Ankerberg and John Weldon, Encyclopedia of Cults and New Religions (Eugene, Oreg: Harvest House Publishers, 1999), p.xix.
4 Ibid.
5 Ibid., p. xxv.
6 Ibid; p. xix.
7 Ibid.
8 Ibid.
9 Ibid., p. xxvii.
10 Ibid.
11 See Joan Biskupic, “Supreme Court Citing More Foreign Cases,” USA Today, July 8, 2003, 9A; online at http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/ 20030708/530392928s.htm.
12 Ankerberg/Weldon, p. xxix.
13 Edwin S. Gaustad, “The Testimony of Edwin S. Gaustad, Ph.D.,” published in The Experts Speak (Anaheim, Calif.: Living Stream Ministry, 1995); online at http://www.contendingforthefaith.com/summary/experts/gaustad.html.
|
TOP LEVEL
Past Issues
Printer-friendly page
Send this page to a friend