Freedom of Worship or Freedom of Religion?

By Stanley Carlson-Thies

Provided by the Institutional Religious Freedom Alliance

Several observers, including Thomas Farr, former State Department official and author of World of Faith and Freedom (2008), and now also the official U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, in its just released 2010 annual report, have sounded the alarm. A number of top US leaders, including President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, have started substituting the term "freedom of worship” for the traditional concept "freedom of religion” in speeches on international affairs.

Why be concerned about a slight change of terminology? Freedom of religion is the robust concept. It includes the freedom not only to worship but also the right to use religious language and arguments in public life and the freedom to put faith into practice outside the walls of the church. International human rights standards speak of the freedom not only to worship, evangelize, and convert, but also the freedom to manifest religion through charitable institutions, schools, and publications.

Freedom of religion protects the practices of parachurch ministries; freedom of worship is largely a church matter. The change in terminology so far seems limited to international contexts. But that’s no reason for domestic ministries not to be concerned about changing views of religious freedom, for one of the disturbing trends in US public policy and law these days is increasingly to subject parachurch organizations to secular standards, even if churches and ministers continue to be protected by the First Amendment.

###

Stanley Carlson-Thies, founder and president of the Institutional Religious Freedom Alliance, has worked since the early 1990s on public policy affecting faith-based organizations. He was a founding member of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives in 2001.To learn more visit www.irfalliance.org