Five groups update church-state stance

Christian Century, Nov 20, 2002

Five U.S. religious organizations, including the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs and the American Jewish Committee, have issued a new version of a "Shared Vision" statement affirming the separation of church and state.

"As representatives of religious organizations, we reaffirm our commitment to maintaining church-state separation as the best means of assuring robust religious liberty and to creating a climate of mutual respect in a religiously diverse culture," reads "A Shared Vision: Religious Liberty in the 21st Century."

First published in 1994, the original statement was signed by six religious and civil liberties organizations and 80 individuals. The new version was updated and released October 17 to reflect legislative and judicial developments in laws regarding church-state matters in recent years. The publishers of the statement decided to draft the new document solely with religious groups, including the Interfaith Alliance Foundation, the National Council of Churches and the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism.

The new version addresses such topics as charitable choice and school vouchers. "We oppose the `charitable choice' approach to government funding of social-service programs, which would permit pervasively religious organizations to receive public funds to provide social services and which lacks other necessary church-state and antidiscrimination safeguards," the statement reads.

The statement publishers also criticized last June's U.S. Supreme Court decision permitting a Cleveland voucher program that lets parents use tax-payer-funded vouchers to send their children to religious schools. "What may be constitutional is not always wise or good public policy," the statement declares.

The document rejects portrayals of America as a "Judeo-Christian nation" or a place where religion should have a role in public discourse. It supports government neutrality toward religion, saying free religious exercise should not be restricted without a compelling reason, such as a threat to public safety.--RNS