Participants:
Series Code: LI
Program Code: LI000383A
|
00:25 Welcome to the Liberty Insider.
00:27 This is the program bringing you discussion, news, views, 00:31 on religious liberty events and developments 00:34 in the U.S. and around the world in our day and age. 00:38 My name is Lincoln Steed, editor of Liberty Magazine. 00:41 And my guest on this program is Dr. Ed Cook, 00:45 author, minister of religion, academic, 00:50 and specialist in church-state affairs. 00:52 - Your doctorate's in that area. - Correct. 00:55 Let's put things on the line now. 00:59 There's a huge development that anybody that watches the news 01:04 must have caught not long before this program. 01:07 The president of the United States, 01:09 a man hitherto unknown to be religious, 01:14 took it upon himself to very suddenly, without warning, 01:17 say that the United States is recognizing Jerusalem 01:20 as the capital of Israel, and that shortly we'll be moving 01:24 our embassy to Jerusalem. 01:27 Was that justify? What does that mean? 01:30 Certainly I can say from kind of at the outset 01:34 is that it is something that drew a lot of attention, 01:37 a lot of reactions to it both pro and con. 01:41 As far as the aspect of recognition of Jerusalem 01:44 as the capital, in essence, from a purely political perspective 01:49 it certainly is going to draw the ire of Muslims, 01:53 and at the same time maybe cater to the preferences of the Jews. 01:58 It's something that as well of course Christians, evangelicals 02:01 in particular, would be very much interested in that 02:05 if that were to develop. 02:07 Do you think the state of Israel is happy with this? 02:12 I'm not quite so sure. 02:14 That's, you know, I would actually kind of 02:16 look at that maybe as a mixed bag. 02:18 Because there is an element of very conservative Judaism 02:21 there in the state of Israel. 02:22 Then, of course, there's also the more liberal 02:24 aspect of society. 02:25 In the 1967 war they took Jerusalem. 02:28 They've never moved their capital to Jerusalem. 02:30 They know what it would do. 02:33 So Trump has moved ahead of the state of Israel itself. 02:36 They've kept the capital in Tel Aviv. 02:39 So they've not dared do this. 02:42 They might want to. 02:44 And you know, the world has known a lot of woes, 02:48 not just North Korea, in the last few decades. 02:52 But most of the woes, North Korea excepted, 02:55 have derived from the establishment of the 02:58 state of Israel and the death battle, battle to the death, 03:04 between the whole Islamic Arab world 03:08 and the western Israel, as they see it. 03:12 So I couldn't think of a more incendiary action. 03:17 It's just like throwing gasoline into the fire. 03:20 One thing, though, that I would kind of, 03:23 I guess two points I would look at. 03:24 One is that, you know, if it is a U.S. embassy, 03:28 obviously it's something that we, you know, as the country, 03:31 have the right to decide where the embassy will be located. 03:34 But as far as just by virtue of moving an embassy, 03:37 that doesn't automatically by default mean 03:40 that country's capital has now moved. 03:42 I wouldn't think. Is that correct or not? 03:44 ~ No, but usually you put an embassy in the capital. 03:49 I know that, for example, just kind of on a comparative basis, 03:52 right, there had been a time when the U.S. embassy 03:55 was located in the Vatican, the Holy See. 03:58 ~ You're ahead of me. That was my next question. 03:59 I was going to put you on the spot. 04:02 ~ The U.S. decided back in 2014 to move it from there 04:05 to a more neutral location. 04:07 It still recognizes the Vatican state, but it's not 04:10 actually located there where it had been. 04:13 And that was purely our prerogative as a country 04:16 to decide where to put the embassy. 04:18 ~ Go back further. 04:19 For many decades it was unthinkable to the U.S. 04:24 to even have an embassy or an ambassador to the Vatican. 04:29 Because we saw ourselves as a Protestant society. 04:31 This was, again, recognizing as a state 04:35 what we saw as a religion, and an uncomfortable 04:39 relationship to that religion to boot. 04:43 And I remember the story. 04:45 Richard Nixon took it upon himself to send an emissary, 04:50 not a full ambassador. 04:51 And our modern presidential icon, President Reagan, 04:57 established full diplomatic relationship. 04:59 ~ 1984. - Again it was just as 05:01 preemptive as Trump's action on Jerusalem. 05:05 And in both cases, I think they were running ahead of 05:08 popular view at this late point. 05:11 I don't think America cares about it. 05:15 But I can remember very clearly, 05:18 you know, this is just out for general musings, 05:21 but I can remember very clearly about 05:24 the best part of 10 years ago going to Rome 05:29 and going to a reception held at the U.S. ambassador's residence, 05:34 U.S. ambassador to the Holy See. 05:36 Now it wasn't really in the Holy See because it's not 05:39 big enough for every embassy. 05:40 Maybe it's big enough, but they don't want them there. 05:42 So it was in Rome just across the Circus, 05:47 Roman Circus, looking to Vatican City on the hill across. 05:54 And I was interested to see what it would be like. 05:57 Because I've been in a few ambassador's residences, 05:59 and they're usually a shrine to the country they represent. 06:03 I went to this, and as we entered the door of this 06:06 ambassador's residence, it was a shrine to Roman Catholicism 06:10 and to the Vatican. 06:12 Very telling. 06:14 And this was at the time of the George Bush administration. 06:17 And to this day I can't say why, but as we came 06:20 in the antechamber there was a picture of Cheney there, 06:23 no picture of George Bush. 06:25 So it was an aberrant ambassadorial presence. 06:31 And I think that's just sort of consistent with the whole thing. 06:34 It grew up like Topsy. It's a funny fit. 06:37 Because, yes, on a certain level the modern world, 06:41 I think, would have to recognize Rome. 06:44 You know, they have a diplomatic cadre that are everywhere. 06:48 So no modern state could ignore them. 06:50 That would be to their peril. 06:51 But it's sort of improper, in my view, that a church is so 06:56 politically active and involved in a power play like that. 07:00 And here we're acknowledging them as a state, and yet 07:04 it isn't really a state, so even the ambassador's 07:07 residence is sort of a religious icon. 07:10 Very problematic. 07:11 There's a couple of things that historical points out. 07:13 I'll kind of develop off of that. 07:16 When we go back and look during the Roman Empire 07:19 in the first couple of centuries of this era 07:23 when Christianity had started there, 07:25 the concern with the Roman Empire was not so much 07:29 that Christianity was just another religion or that 07:32 it was something that was there to lead its adherents 07:36 to worship Christ as Lord and Savior, 07:39 in Rome at the time they had what was called a, 07:42 Religio Licita. 07:43 Those that are lawful religions. 07:47 And any religion that was a religio licita 07:50 was just afforded the opportunity to exist 07:53 and practice its faith. 07:55 ~ Just like in our modern era, France 07:58 played with the idea of registering religions, 08:01 the acceptable religions, and a few were de-registered. 08:04 It's not that you were imprisoned, 08:06 but you didn't have permissible writs. 08:09 So you could be sort of driven out of existence. 08:12 The concern then going back with the Roman Empire 08:15 was that they recognized within several decades 08:19 that Christianity was teaching the converts 08:23 that their supreme allegiance was to be given to the 08:26 Lord Jesus Christ and not to the Roman Emperor. 08:28 So for them it became an issue of, in essence, 08:31 patriotism or fealty to the Roman Empire. 08:34 And that's why they started cracking down 08:36 and persecuting the Christians. 08:38 So there is an element of the aspect of supreme allegiance 08:41 being given to the Lord Jesus Christ that for some states, 08:45 even in the modern context, it is threatening. 08:49 Because, you know, if you have citizens that 08:51 they're loyal to your country and your government unless 08:54 there's something that violates their higher norms 08:57 and their ultimate allegiance. 08:59 You know, if one said that they could become 09:01 organized into a unified body, they might present a challenge. 09:04 So flipping that around, from the Roman Catholic perspective, 09:08 one of the reasons that the pope does claim to have 09:11 diplomatic status in going into other countries 09:14 is that if Catholics have a presence there, he says 09:16 that as the shepherd of his flock he has that prerogative. 09:20 So that's where, again, there comes into the conflict 09:22 between church and state is that, do you recognize 09:25 him as a purely spiritual religious leader 09:27 or is he coming in to make political pronouncements 09:30 against the prevailing order of that government 09:33 that might be harming its citizens? 09:34 ~ I picked up on a story recently from a dead man. 09:40 I was looking online. 09:43 I do a like of... 09:45 I do have a little in common with Trump, 09:47 with President Trump. 09:49 He spends the hours of the night watching TV 09:53 or cruising the internet. 09:54 And I watch a lot of documentaries and 09:57 historical clipping on YouTube. 10:00 And I found an interview with now deceased Chávez of... 10:09 What's the country? 10:11 Venezuela. President Chávez. 10:14 And some of our viewers may remember that in the 10:16 build up to the Iraq war there was an aborted coup 10:20 to overthrow him. 10:21 The CIA were implicated in it. 10:23 And I think the intention was to put a more friendly regime 10:27 in place so that we could guarantee oil supply 10:29 as we headed off to the Middle East. 10:31 Well it failed. 10:32 And he was our vocal enemy from then on. 10:37 He never did anything bad. 10:38 In fact, he heaped some coals on our head during a tough time. 10:43 Gave away free gasoline in New York state, I remember, 10:45 to sort of show us off. 10:47 But in any case, he's dead now. 10:48 But I saw this interview with him, and he explained 10:51 how the coup took place. 10:53 He said he was sitting in his office 10:56 when the military came in to arrest him, 10:59 and they said, "You have been deposed. 11:01 This is a new government now. You're under arrest. 11:02 Come on back to headquarters with us." 11:04 And he said they turned on the television 11:07 and he saw the edicts from his successors, 11:09 they were already governing and had control of the 11:13 television and radio stations, and they were passing 11:15 new edicts and laws and announcing 11:17 this was the end of his regime. 11:19 So he was taken back to headquarters 11:22 where he got to talking with the soldiers. 11:24 And he says, "I'm one of you." 11:25 Because I think he was a paratrooper. 11:26 You know, "I'm one of you. Why are you doing this stuff?" 11:28 And he talked them around. 11:29 So in the end they brought him back to the palace, 11:32 re-instated him in his office, seated him there, 11:34 and he resumed governing. 11:36 Meanwhile, the television is broadcasting all the new stuff. 11:39 Things are carrying on as though it was a full coup. 11:42 And he said, while he's sitting in his office 11:45 a Roman Catholic cardinal came in the side door 11:48 with a prepared paper of resignation. 11:50 And he put it in front of him and he said, 11:52 "You must sign this immediately." 11:54 He says, "Your life is in peril if you don't sign it." 11:57 In other words, threatening him. 11:59 And Chávez said, "You are the one that's at threat." 12:01 He says, "I'm back in power again." 12:03 He says, "You should leave immediately." 12:05 He said he scurried out the side door. 12:07 And then I read on the news, I checked and read on the news, 12:09 I forget the cardinals name, but he was suddenly 12:11 withdrawn to Rome. 12:12 Got caught with his and in the cookie jar. 12:14 He was playing in the middle of power politics in the country. 12:18 And you know, you could say Chávez should have gone, 12:22 he was bad, and all the rest, but it's very telling that 12:24 here a church was one of the principle players 12:27 in a military coup to overthrow a guy. 12:30 And he's actually delivering the resignation letter 12:33 and asking him to sign it. 12:35 Well that's something that I haven't had a 12:37 chance to see that video. 12:39 I can look it up. 12:41 But just generally speaking, I would say, yeah, there are times 12:44 when religious entities have been involved in civil function. 12:47 ~ Oh many times, not just the Roman Catholic Church. 12:50 But I mean, let me throw out one example. 12:51 Many Protestants even today. 12:53 I mean, the evangelical group here have got their finger, 12:56 not finger, their hand in the cookie jar 12:59 of anti-gay hatred in Africa. 13:01 They've gone over there and fired them up, and 13:04 who knows what they told them. 13:05 But the minute they leave, they pass laws with 13:07 death penalties for gays, and so on. 13:08 I'm not pro-gay, but I'm pro-life. 13:11 This is human life. 13:12 I don't think religionists have the right to use civil power 13:15 to execute people they don't like, like that. 13:17 So it's not just Catholics. 13:19 Another quick example of that, though, dating back to 2500 BC 13:23 in Sumerian society where the Babylonian empire 13:27 had its origins, there were individuals 13:29 that were known as the En and the Lugal. 13:32 The En was the cultic priest, the Lugal was the civic leader. 13:37 ~ I've heard those terms. Yeah. 13:38 And there was a time period back around the 13:41 middle of the first dynasty period that those two 13:45 roles actually blended into one 13:48 so that the individual assumed both a civic function 13:50 as well as a cultic role. 13:52 And then a couple of centuries after that 13:54 there was ensuing debate regarding that particular role 13:58 and the people that were taxed by it, and so forth. 14:00 ~ Very interesting history. 14:01 So stay with us and you'll find out a lot more 14:03 if you'll stay with this discussion. 14:05 We'll be back after a short break. |
Revised 2018-04-05