What Secretary Madeleine Albright modeled for us
By / Apr 26

The announcement of the death of former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright brought to my mind many very pleasant memories of my interactions with her during both her tenure as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations (1993-1997) and her service as Secretary of State (1997-2001). 

As you would imagine, we had substantive disagreements about many important issues, foreign and domestic. However, I always appreciated her deep and abiding love for America — her adopted country. 

Madeleine Albright’s personal story

Her personal story was a compelling one, a very American one. 

Her family had to flee Czechoslovakia in 1938 one step ahead of the Nazis. As a young girl, she experienced the Battle of Britain and the London Blitz along with her family. She had to flee persecution along with her family once again when the Communists took over Czechoslovakia in 1948. She spoke eloquently about her first glimpse of the Statue of Liberty as she entered New York harbor and she and her family were granted asylum in America.

She went on to a brilliant academic career and worked her way up to serving with the National Security Council and then the U.N. and the State Department. She was the first woman to serve as secretary of state and the second foreign-born secretary of state. (Henry Kissinger was the first.) I doubt there is another country in the world where a foreign-born asylum-seeker could ascend to a position as exalted as secretary of state. 

Secretary Albright understood down to her bone marrow the unique nature of her adopted country and how critically important American participation in the world was to the flourishing of freedom and human dignity. That conviction was underscored and reinforced when she discovered, as she was being vetted for secretary of state in 1997, that she and her family were actually Jewish, not Catholic, and that more than a score of her relatives were murdered in the Holocaust, including three of her grandparents. 

This life story gave Secretary Albright an existential understanding of the stakes of the world if America does not fulfill its responsibility to be a friend and champion of freedom and human dignity. Secretary Albright believed, as do I, in “American exceptionalism,” and that it is not a doctrine of pride and privilege, but one of service and sacrifice. 

Several years ago I was asked in a public debate, “What is your biblical evidence for American exceptionalism?” I replied, 

“To whom much is given, much is required. No nation or people have ever been as blessed as the citizens of the United States. A blessing by definition is undeserved. I believe we have an obligation to be the friend of freedom and the defender of human dignity whenever we are asked and whenever we can. We can’t address all the world’s ills, but when we can make a difference, we should.”

I know Secretary Albright agreed with that belief because I asked her. 

Friends of freedom, defenders of human dignity

I believe that we, as Christians, should prayerfully consider whether or not God has called some of us to serve in diplomatic roles, serving our government and the cause of peace and freedom at the same time. After all, Jesus told us, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God” (Matt. 5:9). 

As Christians, we should be willing to go to extraordinary lengths to bring about peaceful resolutions of conflict and pursue the good of our neighbors. As just war theory asserts, all “just” war must be defensive in nature. If all countries followed just war theory, there would be no wars. 

As we look back on the past 120 years, it is clear that war has become increasingly deadly, and with the advent of nuclear weapons, war has become capable of leading to a near-extinction level catastrophe. In such a world, diplomacy and peacemaking should be an extremely high priority. We should always remember Winston Churchhill’s observation, “Meeting jaw to jaw is better than war.”

One major bonus of American diplomacy being oriented to prioritize freedom and human liberty is that it makes the world a safer and safer place. If you start with the calendar year 1800 and search history from then until now it is extremely difficult to find instances where a government elected by the people and accountable to their own people goes to war with another country where the government is elected by and accountable to their own people. In fact, I can find only one instance where that arguably occurred — the American Civil War.

I said it was “arguably true,” because the U.S. federal government was elected by white males only (rather than “the people”). And the Confederate government was similarly elected by white males only, excluding not only white women but also 100% of the 3.5 million slaves (38.8% of the total Confederate population) held in bondage in the 11 states of the Confederacy.

The best conclusion to be drawn from these facts is that to the extent we can maximize democratic self-governing countries in the world, the more rare warfare will become. As President George W. Bush so succinctly put it in his second inaugural address in 2005:

“The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world.

America’s vital interests and our deepest beliefs are now one. From the day of our founding, we have proclaimed that every man and woman on this Earth has rights, and dignity and matchless value because they bear the image of the maker of heaven and Earth.

Across the generations, we have proclaimed the imperative of self-government, because no one is fit to be a master, and no one deserves to be a slave. Advancing these ideals is the mission that created our nation. It is the honorable achievement of our fathers. Now it is the urgent requirement of our nation’s security and the calling of our time.”

President Bush then immediately added this clarification: 

“And when the soul of a nation finally speaks, the institutions that arise may reflect customs and traditions very different from our own. America will not impose our own style of government on the unwilling. Our goal instead is to help others find their own voice, attain their own freedom and make their own way.”

I believe President Bush laid out in his second inaugural address, and Secretary Albright modeled for us, what is indeed “the calling of our time.” If we embrace this calling, through diplomatic means, we will leave behind a more peaceful, free, and just world to our children and our children’s children. 

Explainer: ERLC condemns CCP at the U.N. Human Rights Council
By / Oct 20

During the current 45th session of the U.N. Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in Geneva, the ERLC advocated for the religious freedom of children in China. The ERLC joined the Jubilee Campaign and Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) in issuing a written statement to the UNHRC. The joint statement condemns the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) for its continued religious persecution of children in China.

How is China persecuting children?

Over the last decade, China has increased its persecution of religious minorities. In its efforts to “sinicize” religious belief, that is, subjugate religious belief to the demands of the Chinese Communist Party, the Chinese government is attempting to erode independent practice of religion altogether. Sadly, children in China are not immune to such persecution.

Since releasing its Regulation on Religious Affairs in 2017, China has escalated its suppression of the religious liberty of Chinese children. Following the CCP’s Regulations on Religious Affairs, Chinese government officials have prohibited minors from attending any “religious-based activities.” They have enforced this by forcing children away from religious activities and interrogating them for holding religious beliefs. Government authorities are also confiscating Bibles and religious literature.

Two years ago, the CCP closed kindergartens because they were founded and operated by churches. In 2019, Chinese authorities stormed a Catholic mass in Zhengzhou and forced out all of the children. Police monitored the church for weeks to ensure no children, including infants, attended mass. Chinese police also entered a Guangdong province house church camp last summer and arrested the preacher. The police interrogated the church members and registered the names of all children in attendance.

Last August, the Xiaodian District Civil Affairs Bureau raided the Bethany Home for Children with Disabilities and sent the children away to state-run orphanages. The Home, founded by a Catholic nun, was the only home the children have known.  

In addition to these heinous actions, the CCP continues to persecute the Uyghur people, separating Uyghur children from their families and placing them in state institutions.

What does the U.N. Human Rights Council say about religious liberty?

The CCP’s religious persecution directly violates Article 14 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which provides the international framework for freedom of religion or belief for children. Article 14 declares that, “States Parties shall respect the right of the child to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.” Additionally, China is violating the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Article 18 of the ICCPR states, “Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.”

What actions should the United Nations take?

The ERLC, the Jubilee Campaign, and ADF strongly condemn China’s persecution of children. We urge them to end all government actions that deny children the freedom to practice their religious beliefs. Specifically, China must immediately repeal the 2017 Regulations on Religious Affairs as it unjustly restricts the religious freedoms of religious minorities in China.

The U.N. Human Rights Council must speak clearly about these abuses and condemn China’s failure to comply with the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The Council has a number of tools at its disposal to address these issues and must take action. Such action will be more difficult because of China’s recent election to the U.N. Human Rights Council, but this makes Council action even more crucial, to preserve the legitimacy of the Council itself. 

ERLC intern Justin McDowell contributed to this article.