You are here: Home > News >United Church News > Annual Meeting delegates to address war on terrorism
Annual Meeting delegates to address war on terrorism
203rd Annual Meeting
June 7-8, 2002
One Common Cloth... evangelism, mission & justice> Read the full text of the resolution.
May, 2002
After much debate and discussion, First Church in Cambridge, Congregational recently passed a resolution opposing the expansion of the war in Afghanistan and calling instead for non-violent efforts to apprehend those responsible for the attacks of September 11th.
The resolution also speaks out against the use of ethnic and racial profiling and the “indefinite detention” of suspected terrorists, and calls on the government to examine and address the root causes of terrorism, such as poverty and oppression.
Now, the church is asking Massachusetts Conference representatives at the 203rd Annual Meeting in June to pass the same resolution.
“It’s a pretty good bet that there will be some vocal opposition,” said Frank Dorman, a member of the church and a retired pastor. “But whether it passes or not, I think it’s a worthwhile thing to do, because we need to talk about what is happening and think about it and eventually we’re going to have to act.”
First Church Senior Pastor Mary Luti said she is glad the Conference delegates are now going to take up the resolution, and said she hopes the discussion is “as rich at Annual Meeting as it was for our church.”
“Clearly, other churches have had some of these discussions. This is not coming out the blue,” she said. “The church would be neglecting its responsibility as a citizen of the world, and as a community of faithful people, if we didn’t have these discussions.”
Dorman has sent the resolution by email to about 90 churches, asking them to bring it before the church body before Annual Meeting, so that delegates may know how their congregations feel about the resolution. He is also hoping some of the Associations will take up the resolution at their spring meetings.
At the Cambridge church, the social action committee brought the resolution before the Annual Meeting, but members decided to delay acting on it until they could have more discussion. Six weeks and three information sessions later, people were ready to vote, and approved it at a special meeting by a vote of 70 in favor, four opposed, and four abstaining.
Luti said some of the people who supported the resolution wrestled with it for a long time.
“Whenever we have a national situation such as the one we have now, where so many feelings and issues mix in such a painful way, its inevitable that thinking people are going to struggle with issues of war and peace,” she said.
Dorman is a veteran of the anti-war effort during the Vietnam years, and said he sees many parallels between what happened then and what is happening now.
“It feels like it to me,” he said. “There is a gradual incrementalism. We start with a few advisors, then send more troops, then they get killed and we have to avenge that with more troops.”
“We’re not supposed to go to war without the consent of Congress, but that hasn’t happened since World War II,” Dorman said. “Ever since then, we have gotten into it first, then sent the bill to Congress – and Congress has a tradition of supporting the administration in times of war.”