Human Rights and Religious Belief
by
Charles Graves
The United Nations Human Rights Council meets in Geneva three times a year for 4 week sessions – it was created by the General Assembly. Its sessions are chaired by its own elected officials but the administration is under the High Commissioner of Human Rights based also in Geneva.
Human rights as an important theme in United Nations activities was promoted by Mr. Eleanor Roosevelt and others in the early sessions of the General Assembly and this resulted in the creation of a Commission on Human Rights which institution preceded the Human Rights Council.
Obviously, one of the reasons for the inclusion of human rights issues in the work of the United Nations was the violation of human rights in many countries of the world at the time of the Second World War, especially of the Jews, Roma, mental patients, gays and others as well as in the colonialist powers with the results of their slave trade. Moreover, discrimination against various races and religions was widespread and needed attention. Issues such as inequalities in development or in education should be discussed as well as generalized discrimination against women through patriarchalism.
In the course of time two major Conventions were adopted: the Convention on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Member states were encouraged to subscribe to these. Other treaties and agreements on the Rights of Women, Against Racism and the Rights of Minorities were proposed and adopted by many member countries.
And so through the media the activities of the Human Rights Council are publicized and the general public becomes aware when certain rights are being violated anywhere in the world and certainly some group will make this known such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch etc. Moreover, non-governmental organizations can be accredited to attend United Nations meetings about human rights and make their contributions – introducing before the Human Rights Council sessions cases about violations of certain rights and encouraging multi-state sponsored Resolutions to treat such issues.
All major religions have participated in these discussions on human rights through various NGOs (non-governmental organizations) - for example the World Council of Churches can make interventions on various issues before the Human Rights Council as well as various Buddhist or Muslim accredited NGOs. The Vatican is considered as a member state of the United Nations and it has played an important role in human rights debates in Geneva.
But what does Christianity have to do with ‘human rights’? What is the theological basis for Christians intervening on issues of violation of the ‘rights of individuals and groups’? As is often stated in most religions, the human being is ‘created in the image of God’, That is, since the human is associated with the Creator in this special way vis à vis other creatures in nature, humans should be treated by other humans with this human particularity in mind. We should ‘love our neighbors as ourselves’ as most religions proclaim.
This is a good basis for human rights activities, since it is obvious that as we look around in our world, many people are not being treated as they should be treated, and we, in a small way, feel somehow responsible to remedy this failure among and between our fellow human beings. Also, it is part of our human nature to pity those who are treated badly – even the most callow person cannot help but share this pity sometimes.
But is there a major responsibility placed upon Christians to take the violation of human rights as a personal problem somehow imposed upon himself / herself? Christianuity teaches that God is in control of the created world and that if there are violations of human ‘rights’ God will probably punish those who violate such rights – the Psalms of David teach this regarding wicked people who oppress the poor and vulnerable. But what was Jesus’ message about human rights? Did he believe his Father – God -. would take care of such oppressive evil and that his disciples should have nothing to do with such social and political issues? What should his disciples be doing with their lives and time spent? Should they be strong against human rights violations, or should they, instead, be promoting the ‘good news’ of what Jesus stands for i.e. a ‘new birth’ and believing in his message about religion and the church? Or both of these? From my point of view both of these responsibilities of Christians are important. In fact, because the Christian has found the love of God, he or she should be all the more eager to share the ‘good news’ to those who are suffering violations of their rights. These two aspects of Christianity go together – to love God and love your neighbor. These are inseparable.
But although such a solution sounds obvious and logical, the reality of acting on behalf of human rights is not logical nor is it easy. The ‘reality’ that humans begin to face at their birth is that humans are not kind to one another, There are conflicts between them and often certain one’s ‘rights’ are certainly not respected. This happens in family life, at school or university, in careers or politics. That civil life is full of inequality becomes more and more obvious to us as we grow older and we can either avoid such reality or try to do something about it. Christians in particular, because of the special aspect of Jesus’ sufferings on the cross, have some taste, in their religion, of the idea of God’s suffering because of human ‘sin’. Christian religion is based upon the idea that there is something ‘anti-god’ in the created world and that such an entity brings suffering and that the Creator God had to do something to ‘redeem’ the situation and that He chose to bring to the world the life, teaching, healing and death of Jesus as the solution. But since Jesus is considered as God’s ‘Son’ it means that the Creator God took a ‘suffering’ stance vis a vis humanity and let his own beloved son ‘die’ in order to bring this solution.
There is no denying this aspect of Christian belief.
But what kind of ‘suffering’ on the part of Christians should a proper response be? As Christian martyrs walking all over God’s creation and suffering for others? This was the case for the early Christian martyrs who had been forced to renounce their Christian beliefs. But this is not the case for most Christians today who can go to churches and proclaim their faith freely. But if we can proclaim our faith freely this leaves us in a position to do human rights activities on behalf of others who are not se free as we are. So, within such perspective, Christians have a responsibility to help move God’s creation towards an end whereby ‘justice’ may succeed in the world, i.e, by supporting the human rights of those who are not receiving justice.
The ‘justification’ of Christians by Christ’s redeeming sacrifice and love for us implies that Christians are on the side of ‘justification’ everywhere in creation. The idea of Christianity was that if Jesus brought ‘redemption’ to the world by dying for all the sins of humanity and then showing that he had defeated such abnormality by ‘rising again,’ this means that Christians who live within this ’redemption’ must continue it and let it be activated everywhere that it can be activated. We are not redeemed and justified by God’s love in order only to be ‘saved’, but we are redeemed to be ‘saved’ and also to help the earth ’to be saved’. This does not necessarily mean simply to ‘become a missionary’ but also to become active in saving the world from its human rights violations and inequalities. Because such inequalities are a scourge in the world – the world should not have such features but it does have them. If Christians eyes are opened to their own foibles and shortcomings and yet they believe God loves them in spite of these failings, then are not Christians supposed to ‘love their neighbor’ and make certain that the neighbor can also be happy? Christians, then, should participate in any activity which improves human fate. It is an obvious command of their master, Jesus.
There is another item of theological perspective on this issue. It concerns eschatology - the science of discussion about ‘the end of the world’. In Christian belief, at the ‘end of time’ a general justification of the purpose of history shall take place. Christians believe that all the good aspects will be justified and the bad aspects banished. Apokatastasis enters into this concept, i.e. that every thing ‘in the end’ will be justified as good.
But history, of course, has not yet ended, and it is an obvious responsibility of those who believe in Christian eschatology to participate in the justification of the world which will be realized at the end of time. If this is God’s program for the world and its history, it is also part of the Christian’s program – those who believe in, and try to follow, God. It means that human rights activities are a part of the justification of history which is God’s purpose for such history. Christians, then, are meant to be actors in this divine justification process and human rights activities certainly are part of an overall process of bringing justice into history.
And there is probably no responsible theologian today who would argue that because God ‘justifies everything at the end of time’ that Christians are dispensed from doing everything possible towards the realization of such an end-time justice. Like participation in the combat against disease or lack of education or the right to development, Christians can be called to combat injustice in this world and, as explained previously, there is no lack of NGO or governmental activities which promote human rights to which a Christian could participate thus enlarging ‘justice’ in the world.
But how to find one’s special place in human rights activities is another question. Much depends upon each of our concepts of ‘humanism’. Most all of us have this innately or by experience. What do we believe about humanity and ‘where it is going’? Within one’s individual humanistic perspective we can find, geopolitically and in accord with scientific and United Nations principles and guidelines, where we ‘fit in’ and what we can do efficiently on behalf of justice. But developing our own ‘humanistic’ point of view is essential for this process, otherwise we can become inefficient - only reproducing what others can do better than we can. Since the days of the Renaissance (15th-17th centuries) ad the Enlightenment (18th century) Christians have become humanistic thinkers, a trait which aids the church in its mission. It helps Christians to be relevant in universal society and which tendency, thankfully, God seems to appreciate.
But now we must ask – what about the other religions? Do they also have a similar impetus to do good for humanity? I have had several experiences with persons of other faiths which have demonstrated that human rights issues can be important for them also. The Dalai Lama is one example. His presence at the World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna in 1993 was a symbol of that, Moreover, at the World Conference Against Racism and Religious Intolerance in Durban, South Africa in 2001 members of all major religions were present and many seminars were held on all aspects of racism, discrimination and intolerance, with thousands attending. At the Human Rights Council sessions in Geneva, there are a certain number of religiously-oriented NGOs and the Vatican attending. I have participated in many NGO or NGO-government small meetings on various human rights topics showing that an interfaith approach to human rights issues is not only possible but even quite productive. We did much interfaith work in issues concerning Iraq or South Asia as well as Africa.
Different religions, of course. have their preferential topics as far as criticizing certain institutions for violation of human rights is concerned but interfaith consultation about these seem beneficial to throw light on such topics. In geo-politics no country will deny today that religions can play a role in solving some local, national or international violations issues. And the United Nations, especially since a large conference on this issue in 2000, expects religious bodies to participate as fully as possible in United Nations priority issues.
What are some of the main human rights topics today, in particular for religiously-oriented individuals and NGOs? One of the major problems is individuals using ‘social media’ to promote falsehood which brings de-humanization. Religions supposedly are against falsehood among humans and they are on the side of truth-telling as a social necessity. There is also the need to help people become normal who have become ‘brainwashed’ following falsehoods promoted by unscrupulous manipulators.
Another priority field is combatting racism in the public social domaine , in the media or in politics.
Still another priority is the campaign against human slavery either sexual or work-related. Together with this goes also campaigns against the use of harmful drugs.
And, if one has the possibility to do so, to combat the misuse of public and natural resources to gain wealth or power while destroying the environment and the animal kingdom.
Besides these special topics, certain states show anti-human rights oppression which should be publicly called out when civil or political rights, or social, economic or cultural rights are violated in their populations.
And, strangely enough, for all these human rights concerns there already exist organizations whose expertise has given them opportunities to take action within the United Nations context or individual countries to combat such concerns. The number of NGOs seeking ‘consultative status’ with the United Nations every year numbers over 2000 entities. There are certainly enough of them to satisfy every person who needs an affiliation in order to enter the United Nations or other international forum to promote human rights interests.
In summary, human rights activity is in line with the way the world ‘goes around’. The world has its own history moving towards the justification of the Creator’s plan for humanity and all the creation. Each of us has a small part to play according to our personalities or resources. Because at ‘the end’ all history will have to ‘make sense’ according to the Christian belief. We believe there is an ultimate aim for the world’s history and each of us has a role to play in that ‘grand game’. Opportunities for service to humanity do not lack and each individual can find his/her special space to act.
The Church, if it is open to the world, will assist its members to find the special gifts within each member which can be used for the world’s justification. In fact,
such is the aim of religion: people working together with the great Creator for a common purpose.
Human rights as an important theme in United Nations activities was promoted by Mr. Eleanor Roosevelt and others in the early sessions of the General Assembly and this resulted in the creation of a Commission on Human Rights which institution preceded the Human Rights Council.
Obviously, one of the reasons for the inclusion of human rights issues in the work of the United Nations was the violation of human rights in many countries of the world at the time of the Second World War, especially of the Jews, Roma, mental patients, gays and others as well as in the colonialist powers with the results of their slave trade. Moreover, discrimination against various races and religions was widespread and needed attention. Issues such as inequalities in development or in education should be discussed as well as generalized discrimination against women through patriarchalism.
In the course of time two major Conventions were adopted: the Convention on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Member states were encouraged to subscribe to these. Other treaties and agreements on the Rights of Women, Against Racism and the Rights of Minorities were proposed and adopted by many member countries.
And so through the media the activities of the Human Rights Council are publicized and the general public becomes aware when certain rights are being violated anywhere in the world and certainly some group will make this known such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch etc. Moreover, non-governmental organizations can be accredited to attend United Nations meetings about human rights and make their contributions – introducing before the Human Rights Council sessions cases about violations of certain rights and encouraging multi-state sponsored Resolutions to treat such issues.
All major religions have participated in these discussions on human rights through various NGOs (non-governmental organizations) - for example the World Council of Churches can make interventions on various issues before the Human Rights Council as well as various Buddhist or Muslim accredited NGOs. The Vatican is considered as a member state of the United Nations and it has played an important role in human rights debates in Geneva.
But what does Christianity have to do with ‘human rights’? What is the theological basis for Christians intervening on issues of violation of the ‘rights of individuals and groups’? As is often stated in most religions, the human being is ‘created in the image of God’, That is, since the human is associated with the Creator in this special way vis à vis other creatures in nature, humans should be treated by other humans with this human particularity in mind. We should ‘love our neighbors as ourselves’ as most religions proclaim.
This is a good basis for human rights activities, since it is obvious that as we look around in our world, many people are not being treated as they should be treated, and we, in a small way, feel somehow responsible to remedy this failure among and between our fellow human beings. Also, it is part of our human nature to pity those who are treated badly – even the most callow person cannot help but share this pity sometimes.
But is there a major responsibility placed upon Christians to take the violation of human rights as a personal problem somehow imposed upon himself / herself? Christianuity teaches that God is in control of the created world and that if there are violations of human ‘rights’ God will probably punish those who violate such rights – the Psalms of David teach this regarding wicked people who oppress the poor and vulnerable. But what was Jesus’ message about human rights? Did he believe his Father – God -. would take care of such oppressive evil and that his disciples should have nothing to do with such social and political issues? What should his disciples be doing with their lives and time spent? Should they be strong against human rights violations, or should they, instead, be promoting the ‘good news’ of what Jesus stands for i.e. a ‘new birth’ and believing in his message about religion and the church? Or both of these? From my point of view both of these responsibilities of Christians are important. In fact, because the Christian has found the love of God, he or she should be all the more eager to share the ‘good news’ to those who are suffering violations of their rights. These two aspects of Christianity go together – to love God and love your neighbor. These are inseparable.
But although such a solution sounds obvious and logical, the reality of acting on behalf of human rights is not logical nor is it easy. The ‘reality’ that humans begin to face at their birth is that humans are not kind to one another, There are conflicts between them and often certain one’s ‘rights’ are certainly not respected. This happens in family life, at school or university, in careers or politics. That civil life is full of inequality becomes more and more obvious to us as we grow older and we can either avoid such reality or try to do something about it. Christians in particular, because of the special aspect of Jesus’ sufferings on the cross, have some taste, in their religion, of the idea of God’s suffering because of human ‘sin’. Christian religion is based upon the idea that there is something ‘anti-god’ in the created world and that such an entity brings suffering and that the Creator God had to do something to ‘redeem’ the situation and that He chose to bring to the world the life, teaching, healing and death of Jesus as the solution. But since Jesus is considered as God’s ‘Son’ it means that the Creator God took a ‘suffering’ stance vis a vis humanity and let his own beloved son ‘die’ in order to bring this solution.
There is no denying this aspect of Christian belief.
But what kind of ‘suffering’ on the part of Christians should a proper response be? As Christian martyrs walking all over God’s creation and suffering for others? This was the case for the early Christian martyrs who had been forced to renounce their Christian beliefs. But this is not the case for most Christians today who can go to churches and proclaim their faith freely. But if we can proclaim our faith freely this leaves us in a position to do human rights activities on behalf of others who are not se free as we are. So, within such perspective, Christians have a responsibility to help move God’s creation towards an end whereby ‘justice’ may succeed in the world, i.e, by supporting the human rights of those who are not receiving justice.
The ‘justification’ of Christians by Christ’s redeeming sacrifice and love for us implies that Christians are on the side of ‘justification’ everywhere in creation. The idea of Christianity was that if Jesus brought ‘redemption’ to the world by dying for all the sins of humanity and then showing that he had defeated such abnormality by ‘rising again,’ this means that Christians who live within this ’redemption’ must continue it and let it be activated everywhere that it can be activated. We are not redeemed and justified by God’s love in order only to be ‘saved’, but we are redeemed to be ‘saved’ and also to help the earth ’to be saved’. This does not necessarily mean simply to ‘become a missionary’ but also to become active in saving the world from its human rights violations and inequalities. Because such inequalities are a scourge in the world – the world should not have such features but it does have them. If Christians eyes are opened to their own foibles and shortcomings and yet they believe God loves them in spite of these failings, then are not Christians supposed to ‘love their neighbor’ and make certain that the neighbor can also be happy? Christians, then, should participate in any activity which improves human fate. It is an obvious command of their master, Jesus.
There is another item of theological perspective on this issue. It concerns eschatology - the science of discussion about ‘the end of the world’. In Christian belief, at the ‘end of time’ a general justification of the purpose of history shall take place. Christians believe that all the good aspects will be justified and the bad aspects banished. Apokatastasis enters into this concept, i.e. that every thing ‘in the end’ will be justified as good.
But history, of course, has not yet ended, and it is an obvious responsibility of those who believe in Christian eschatology to participate in the justification of the world which will be realized at the end of time. If this is God’s program for the world and its history, it is also part of the Christian’s program – those who believe in, and try to follow, God. It means that human rights activities are a part of the justification of history which is God’s purpose for such history. Christians, then, are meant to be actors in this divine justification process and human rights activities certainly are part of an overall process of bringing justice into history.
And there is probably no responsible theologian today who would argue that because God ‘justifies everything at the end of time’ that Christians are dispensed from doing everything possible towards the realization of such an end-time justice. Like participation in the combat against disease or lack of education or the right to development, Christians can be called to combat injustice in this world and, as explained previously, there is no lack of NGO or governmental activities which promote human rights to which a Christian could participate thus enlarging ‘justice’ in the world.
But how to find one’s special place in human rights activities is another question. Much depends upon each of our concepts of ‘humanism’. Most all of us have this innately or by experience. What do we believe about humanity and ‘where it is going’? Within one’s individual humanistic perspective we can find, geopolitically and in accord with scientific and United Nations principles and guidelines, where we ‘fit in’ and what we can do efficiently on behalf of justice. But developing our own ‘humanistic’ point of view is essential for this process, otherwise we can become inefficient - only reproducing what others can do better than we can. Since the days of the Renaissance (15th-17th centuries) ad the Enlightenment (18th century) Christians have become humanistic thinkers, a trait which aids the church in its mission. It helps Christians to be relevant in universal society and which tendency, thankfully, God seems to appreciate.
But now we must ask – what about the other religions? Do they also have a similar impetus to do good for humanity? I have had several experiences with persons of other faiths which have demonstrated that human rights issues can be important for them also. The Dalai Lama is one example. His presence at the World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna in 1993 was a symbol of that, Moreover, at the World Conference Against Racism and Religious Intolerance in Durban, South Africa in 2001 members of all major religions were present and many seminars were held on all aspects of racism, discrimination and intolerance, with thousands attending. At the Human Rights Council sessions in Geneva, there are a certain number of religiously-oriented NGOs and the Vatican attending. I have participated in many NGO or NGO-government small meetings on various human rights topics showing that an interfaith approach to human rights issues is not only possible but even quite productive. We did much interfaith work in issues concerning Iraq or South Asia as well as Africa.
Different religions, of course. have their preferential topics as far as criticizing certain institutions for violation of human rights is concerned but interfaith consultation about these seem beneficial to throw light on such topics. In geo-politics no country will deny today that religions can play a role in solving some local, national or international violations issues. And the United Nations, especially since a large conference on this issue in 2000, expects religious bodies to participate as fully as possible in United Nations priority issues.
What are some of the main human rights topics today, in particular for religiously-oriented individuals and NGOs? One of the major problems is individuals using ‘social media’ to promote falsehood which brings de-humanization. Religions supposedly are against falsehood among humans and they are on the side of truth-telling as a social necessity. There is also the need to help people become normal who have become ‘brainwashed’ following falsehoods promoted by unscrupulous manipulators.
Another priority field is combatting racism in the public social domaine , in the media or in politics.
Still another priority is the campaign against human slavery either sexual or work-related. Together with this goes also campaigns against the use of harmful drugs.
And, if one has the possibility to do so, to combat the misuse of public and natural resources to gain wealth or power while destroying the environment and the animal kingdom.
Besides these special topics, certain states show anti-human rights oppression which should be publicly called out when civil or political rights, or social, economic or cultural rights are violated in their populations.
And, strangely enough, for all these human rights concerns there already exist organizations whose expertise has given them opportunities to take action within the United Nations context or individual countries to combat such concerns. The number of NGOs seeking ‘consultative status’ with the United Nations every year numbers over 2000 entities. There are certainly enough of them to satisfy every person who needs an affiliation in order to enter the United Nations or other international forum to promote human rights interests.
In summary, human rights activity is in line with the way the world ‘goes around’. The world has its own history moving towards the justification of the Creator’s plan for humanity and all the creation. Each of us has a small part to play according to our personalities or resources. Because at ‘the end’ all history will have to ‘make sense’ according to the Christian belief. We believe there is an ultimate aim for the world’s history and each of us has a role to play in that ‘grand game’. Opportunities for service to humanity do not lack and each individual can find his/her special space to act.
The Church, if it is open to the world, will assist its members to find the special gifts within each member which can be used for the world’s justification. In fact,
such is the aim of religion: people working together with the great Creator for a common purpose.
Photograph: ‘rock painting’ in Australia photographed by Graeme Churchard, Bristol (UK)