Baptists Afraid of Tongues
Friday, June 15, 2007

The conservative pendulum stopped in the Baptist convention this week.

Southern Baptists concerned about a rightward shift in the denomination claimed a significant victory Wednesday with the passage of a motion centered on Baptist identity. Some conservatives downplayed the vote's importance and called the measure confusing.

In results announced Wednesday morning, delegates at the denomination's annual meeting voted 58 percent to 42 percent to support a statement calling the Baptist Faith and Message 2000 the sufficient standard for establishing what makes a good Southern Baptist.

"I do think that what is happening is an attempt by many people, and I don't know if it's a majority, to say that the pendulum has swung far enough," Southern Baptist Convention President Frank Page told reporters Wednesday. The SBC, which has more than 16 million members across the country, has its headquarters in Nashville.

"There was a day and time when that was an extreme document to some, and now it's almost like it's being seen as more moderating, a moderating influence and that many want to go beyond it. … I do believe we've gone far enough and that the Baptist Faith and Message is enough, and I encourage entities not to go beyond that in their doctrinal parameters."

Labels: ,

Posted by B Feiler at 7:00 AM 0 comments

Florence Nightingale Meets P.T. Barnum
Tuesday, June 12, 2007

My friend Christine Rosen has a wonderful review in the WSJ about a new a book about early evangelical Aimee McPherson. A reader stopped me at BEA, the book convention, last week and raved about this book, too. Here's some of the review:

McPherson -- or "Sister Aimee," as she was known -- was the doyenne of the Angelus Temple, a spiritual palace that opened in 1923 in the Echo Park neighborhood of Los Angeles. For years she witnessed to a crowded flock, staging "illustrated sermons" complete with props and costumes. Her trademark white dress and flowing white cape lent a Florence Nightingale air to her sermons, not to mention a bit of P.T. Barnum. She frequently spoke of her devotion to Christ as that of a bride to a bridegroom. Despite having a "high-pitched, nasal, singsong voice," Mr. Sutton writes, McPherson became "the first religious celebrity of the mass media era," embracing "print, radio, and film for use in her evangelical mission..."

McPherson has been the subject of other biographies; Mr. Sutton has wisely decided not to write another, strictly speaking. Instead, he gives an account of McPherson's life within the cultural currents of her time. He argues that she had an almost preternatural ability to tap her audience's social fears -- about immigration, for instance, or the changing role of women -- and offer reassurance in the form of simple spiritual storytelling. He also portrays her, less persuasively, as a brave transgressor of gender norms.

True, 50 years before Betty Friedan published The Feminine Mystique, McPherson cast aside her apron (and rid herself of a pesky second husband) to pursue her calling. "God, she believed, wanted her to exchange domestic life for the pulpit," Mr. Sutton writes. But she also deployed traditional feminine wiles, exploiting personal details to win public approval. Broadcasting live from her nuptial boudoir just a day after marrying her third husband, for example, she treated radio listeners to the sound of their enthusiastic kisses. When the marriage failed, she churned out "sacred operas" whose lyrics read like lachrymose sympathy cards: "Do you live in a castle of broken dreams, / Where Giant despair and his dark horde teems?"

McPherson's life story tells us less about flouting gender norms than about navigating celebrity's treacherous terrain. As Mr. Sutton demonstrates, mass-circulation newspapers and magazines helped to make McPherson famous and to disseminate her message. But their appetite for sensationalism also worked against her -- not that she didn't give them help.

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 7:01 AM 0 comments

No Questions About God
Monday, June 4, 2007

0 for 5 in the Democratic Debate tonight. But hope! CNN plugged an hour about Faith and Politics on Monday night at 7 pm based on Jim Wallis' big event coming up in WDC this week.

Labels: ,

Posted by B Feiler at 7:18 AM 0 comments

The God Wars

Michael Novak reviews the new trend of anti-God books:

"The whole inner world of aware and self-questioning religious persons seems to be territory unexplored by our authors. All around them are millions who spend many moments each day (and hours each week) in communion with God. Yet of the silent and inward parts of these lives--and why these inner silences ring to those who share them so true, and seem more grounded in reality than anything else in life--our writers seem unaware. Surely, if our atheist friends were to reconsider their methods, and deepen their understanding of such terms as “experience” and “the empirical,” they might come closer to walking for a tentative while in the moccasins of so many of their more religious companions in life, who find theism more intellectually satisfying--less self-contradictory, less alienating from their own nature--than atheism."

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 7:11 AM 0 comments

Five Questions About Religion for Every Presidential Candidate
Thursday, May 24, 2007

God is in the air these days, and He's threatening to take over the presidential campaign. Mitt Romney was asked on "60 Minutes" whether he obeyed Mormon dictates against premarital sex. Rudy Giuliani was asked whether his stance on abortion makes him a bad Catholic. The entire Republican field was asked whether they were against evolution. Expect the death of Jerry Falwell to provoke more questions about the role of the Religious Right in the GOP.

While Republicans notably are on the defensive about religion, Democrats are on the offensive: Barack Obama is claiming to be part of the "Joshua Generation" leading blacks into the Promised Land. Hillary Clinton is singing spirituals. John Edwards boasts how often he prays.

But while this God primary may be a welcome break for a media bored by benchmarks and 10-point plans, candidates' personal theologies are not the point ("Madame Candidate, how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?"). The real issue is how would-be Presidents understand the religious challenges facing the world today and how those beliefs might influence their decisions in office.

With that standard in mind, here are five questions about religion that all candidates should be asked.

1. Do you believe Jews, Christians and Muslims all worship the same God? George W. Bush answered this question affirmatively in 2004 and was heaped with brimstone by the Religious Right. Today, given events in Iraq and Iran, and fears of terrorism, anti-Muslim sentiment in America seems even higher - yet any attempt to address these issues depends on our ability to work cooperatively with the Muslim world.

2. With religious issues dominant in the world today, wouldn't our children be more prepared for the 21st century if our schools taught them about religion? The 1963 Supreme Court decision that outlawed using the Bible for religious purposes in schools explicitly stated that teaching religion in a nondenominational way was allowed. Teaching children to live and work with those who disagree is a defining challenge of the new century.

3. Do you believe that Israeli settlers have a God-given right to the West Bank? American politics has seen a curious alliance between Israel-loving Jews and evangelical Christians - like Falwell - who believe Jewish residence in Israel is a precondition for the return of Jesus. Yet peace in the region depends on dismantling some settlements. Which voters are more important: Those who believe God should help determine the fate of Israel, or those who fault Washington's reluctance to push for a two-state solution?

4. Given the Bible's role over the years in defending slavery, repressing women and justifying violence, can you pledge that you will keep it out of policy decisions? American history shows that advocates on all sides of major debates cite the Bible to support their position, rendering it almost meaningless. Maybe the time has come to purge the Bible from policy debates entirely.

5. Do you believe liberty is God's gift to mankind, and that it's America's obligation to spread this blessing to the rest of the world? President Bush evoked the spread of God's freedom when going into Iraq but balked at doing the same in Darfur. President Bill Clinton intervened in Kosovo but failed to see a greater plight in Rwanda. Perhaps the most important question about God in politics today is whether Americans wish to see our struggles with religion played out on an international stage.

The Constitution says that "no religious test" shall be required as a qualification for office. But given the platitudes served up by politicians, perhaps it's time for a real exam.


This article originally appeared in the New York Daily News.

Labels: , ,

Posted by B Feiler at 8:30 AM 0 comments

Zen and the Art of Paris
Wednesday, May 23, 2007

That was quick! Paris Hilton seems to have made it through the Bible in record time (Just think: she could teach speed-reading of Leviticus in prison, not that her fellow inmates need to be in much a hurry), and today was photographed with a book of Buddhist teachings. Given how fast she made it through the Bible, and how short this book is, I suppose we can expect to see here with the Koran by nightfall. She may have to wear a bra with that one, though.

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 4:45 PM 0 comments

Which Bible To Teach in Schools
Friday, May 18, 2007

If you're going to be an advocate of teaching the Bible in schools, as I am, you need to be very careful which curriculum you teach. I've looked at two of the leading curricula in circulation now and find the one from North Carolina to be as biased as many claim. It's really just a fundamentalist tract in disguise. The new book, while it may not be perfect, is much more balanced and interesting, as well being designed by Jews as well as Christians. The WSJ reviews:

In recent years, many prominent educators have urged U.S. public schools to teach the Bible as part of literature or culture classes, contending that students need to understand the book's influence on literature, history and current events. More schools are starting to offer such classes, in some cases with a push from their state legislatures. Georgia last year passed a law providing money to encourage high schools to offer Bible electives. This month, the Texas House of Representatives almost unanimously approved a bill, now in the state Senate, that would offer training to teachers leading classes on the Old and New Testaments.

But the spread of Bible instruction is raising questions about the separation of church and state. That is particularly true in school districts that have adopted the National Council program, one of two competing national curricula now available.

The curriculum sold by the Greensboro, N.C.-based National Council concentrates on the Bible's role as literature and as an influence on American history. Founder Elizabeth Ridenour says that nearly 400 districts have adopted the National Council curriculum since 1992.

A competing multidenominational curriculum is offered by the Bible Literacy Project, a nonprofit group that gathered a board of scholars to write a student text that discusses the Bible's books and their influence on Shakespeare, poetry, art and music. Available for the past year, the textbook has mostly received praise from scholars and critics. Charles Stetson, the project's founder, says it has been adopted by 83 school districts in 30 states.

Labels: ,

Posted by B Feiler at 7:03 AM

Falwell and Flint: K-I-S-S-I-N-G
Wednesday, May 16, 2007

OK, I thought I'd read everything interesting about Falwell, then I saw this statement from Larry Flint! To remind, Flint published a satirical ad that ran in Hustler in 1983 with the headline "Jerry Falwell Talks About His First Time," in which the magazine described a drunken Falwell having an incestuous encounter with his mother. Here's Flint's statement.

"The Reverend Jerry Falwell and I were arch enemies for fifteen years. We became involved in a lawsuit concerning First Amendment rights and Hustler magazine. Without question, this was my most important battle – the l988 Hustler Magazine, Inc., v. Jerry Falwell case, where after millions of dollars and much deliberation, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in my favor.

My mother always told me that no matter how much you dislike a person, when you meet them face to face you will find characteristics about them that you like. Jerry Falwell was a perfect example of that. I hated everything he stood for, but after meeting him in person, years after the trial, Jerry Falwell and I became good friends. He would visit me in California and we would debate together on college campuses. I always appreciated his sincerity even though I knew what he was selling and he knew what I was selling.

The most important result of our relationship was the landmark decision from the Supreme Court that made parody protected speech, and the fact that much of what we see on television and hear on the radio today is a direct result of my having won that now famous case which Falwell played such an important role in."

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 10:19 AM 1 comments

Do We Need a Person of Faith to Run the Country?

Andrew Sullivan on "Reaping the Religious Whirlwind," God and the Republican Party:

Tackling an antiMormon evangelical heckler at one event, Romney delivered this carefully rehearsed line: “We need to have a person of faith lead the country.” It sounds pleasant enough and smooths over the difficult question of what exactly the content of your faith is – but isn’t it also a form of bigotry? Doesn’t it imply that atheists have no business running for office in the United States? If it’s bigotry to oppose someone on the basis of their faith, why is it not bigotry to oppose someone because they have none?

What the Republicans are discovering is that the short-term gains of using religion as a political weapon may be outweighed by the medium-term costs. Their two best candidates have been crippled by religious controversy. The third, John McCain, despite being pro-life, has had run-ins with the religious right in the past and cannot regain lost trust with the evangelical base.

Meanwhile, independents and swing voters are turned off by some of the rhetoric. In the first nationally televised Republican debate, three candidates said they did not accept the theory of evolution. If they don’t even buy natural selection, how are they going to grapple with climate change? And then there are small stories from the heart-land that just strike many Americans as bizarre. My favourite one was a resolution proposed by Utah Republicans at a local convention a couple of weeks ago. It was a statement of opposition to illegal immigration, but it had an eye-catching title: “Resolution opposing Satan’s plan to destroy the US by stealth invasion.”

The real stealth invasion, of course, is the incursion of blatant sectarianism into secular American political discourse. Sectarian politics doesn’t work in Baghdad, and it can’t work in Washington either. When it doesn’t end all civil conversation, it diminishes the ability of good men – like Romney and Giuliani – to run for office regardless of their own religious convictions.

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 7:00 AM 0 comments

His Kids Loved Him
Tuesday, May 15, 2007

I've been reading through some of the obits about Jerry Falwell, a man I secretly always wanted to debate but never had the chance. One line jumped out of this comment on the Baptist Press:

These remain as monuments to Jerry Falwell's leadership and vision. But far more than these, I would look to his family. Dr. Jerry Falwell leaves a wife he dearly loved, Macel, and three children who were the pride of his life. The best testimony to Jerry Falwell the man is that his children love him and his two sons stand ready to continue what their father began. For a man who spent so much time in the public eye, this is truly a powerful legacy.
It's easy to dismiss this line, but the more I think about it, the rarer it seems: Billy Graham couldn't make that claim. Ronald Regan couldn't make that claim. I bet Ted Haggard won't be able to make that claim. Interesting.

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 7:21 PM 0 comments

BREAKING NEWS: Falwell "Gravely lll"

From the AP:

The Rev. Jerry Falwell was found unconscious in his office Tuesday and taken to the hospital, a Liberty University executive told a newspaper.

Ron Godwin, the executive vice president of the school, told The News & Advance of Lynchburg that Falwell was found unconscious after missing an appointment Tuesday morning. Falwell arrived at Lynchburg General Hospital around noon, the newspaper reported on its Web site.

When contacted by The Associated Press, Godwin said he couldn't talk at that time.

Update: AP reporting at 1:35 EDT that he has died.

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 12:56 PM 0 comments

"You Can't Just Be President of the Christians"

Rereading American history for the last year for my new book, I've been struck how central religion has been to American life and how important preachers have been to momentous occasions in American history. The upshot: I'm much more comfortable standing up to the liberal orthodoxy these days that preachers stay out of politics. Of course this is a reaction to the outsized influence of the Religious Right, but I don't think it's the proper one.

Thus, how surprising to read that T.D. Jakes is saying that preachers should stay out of politics:

"I think really religion in general is struggling with politics, not just African Americans. Many, many times we've allowed ourselves to be taken up under the control of this party or that party, and I think that's dangerous when you do that," he tells Michele Norris.

"I don't think that God should be assigned to a party. When the party goes bad, then the clergy are embarrassed, and I think that faith should transcend politics," he says.

Jakes says he encourages his parishioners to vote and to be aware of the issues. But to assume that African Americans are "ignorant and need the pastor to tell them how to vote is an insult to our intelligence," Jakes says. "That day is gone."

Although it is important to Jakes that a presidential candidate has some consciousness of faith, spirituality and morality, he says he is not "myopic."

"I know many people who really love the Lord, but they might not be a good president," Jakes says.

He says that to be an effective leader, "you can't just be the president of the Christians."

Labels: ,

Posted by B Feiler at 7:05 AM 0 comments

Need to Get Your Kid Into Pre-School? Get God.
Monday, May 14, 2007

What makes people find God? A family crisis, perhaps? A personal tragedy? A walk in a beautiful setting? Getting older?

In New York, it's getting your children into pre-school.

In the frenzy to land a preschool spot, some parents have found God. Area churches and synagogues that offer early-childhood programs are swelling with new families that have joined to help gain priority school admission for their kids. Brooklyn Heights’ Plymouth Church, for instance, has had “a surge of growth in young families,” reports the Reverend David Fisher. “We’re not sure if there is a direct relationship between the school and our congregation’s growth—though we strongly suspect there is.”

Not that it always works. When one Manhattan mother applied to a Jewish preschool, she was urged to join the affiliated synagogue. She paid the $1,500 fee and attended the odd service, but her kid was wait-listed anyway. “Then we applied again, and he still didn’t get in,” she complains. On the other hand, a Carroll Gardens mother who volunteered at a Brooklyn church event will be sending her daughter there in the fall. “Now I am going to be more involved in the church because it could help with a kindergarten recommendation.”

Some institutions are growing wise to self-interested joiners. “I laugh when people tell me, ‘I joined Temple Emanu-El in June and I’m applying to the preschool in September,’ says Amanda Uhry, owner of Manhattan Private School Advisors. “I say, ‘Do you think Emanu-El isn’t hip to that’s going on?’” Madison Avenue Presbyterian Church Day School prefers two years of membership and participation to be eligible for an admissions advantage, while the East Side’s Christ Church United Methodist limits preschool priority to congregants who actively worship and give money.

“The Day School office sends to the church office the list of people seeking admission, and we go over it to make sure that the criteria are being met,” says Christ Church’s the Reverend Javier Viera.

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 7:01 AM 0 comments

Romney, the Garden of Eden, and Underwear
Friday, May 11, 2007

Though I was criticized for making this point on blogginheads.tv a month or so ago, TIME Magazine raises the religious issue with Romney and even addresses the location of the Garden of Eden and Mormon underwear.

"John F. Kennedy's election in 1960 was supposed to have laid the 'religious question' to rest, yet it arises again with a fury. What does the Constitution mean when it says there should be no religion test for office? It plainly means that a candidate can't be barred from running because he or she happens to be a Quaker or a Buddhist or a Pentecostal. But Mitt Romney's candidacy raises a broader issue: Is the substance of private beliefs off-limits? You can ask if a candidate believes in school vouchers and vote for someone else if you disagree with the answer. But can you ask if he believes that the Garden of Eden was located in Jackson County, Mo., as the Mormon founder taught, and vote against him on the grounds of that answer? Or, for that matter, because of the kind of underwear he wears?"

Slate editor Jacob Weisberg threw down the challenge after reviewing some of Joseph Smith's more extravagant assertions. "He was an obvious con man," Weisberg wrote. "Romney has every right to believe in con men, but I want to know if he does, and if so, I don't want him running the country." That argument, counters author and radio host Hugh Hewitt, amounts to unashamed bigotry and opens the door to any person of any faith who runs for office being called to account for the mysteries of personal belief. He has published A Mormon in the White House?, a chronicle of Romney's rise as business genius, Olympic savior, political star. But Hewitt has a religious mission as well when he cites a survey in which a majority of Evangelicals said voting for a Mormon was out of the question. If that general objection means they would not consider Romney in 2008, Hewitt warns, then prejudice is legitimized, and "it will prove a disastrous turning point for all people of faith in public life."

The Mormon question has settled in right next to the issue of whether a twice-divorced man has credibility discussing family values or whether changing one's mind on an issue like abortion is a sign of moral growth or cynical retreat. Unlike in 1960, today the argument is less about the role of religion in public life than in private. It is about what our faith says about our judgment and how our traditions shape our instincts--and about what we have the right to ask those who run for the highest office in the land.

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 10:34 AM 0 comments

Hispanics: More God In Politics
Wednesday, April 25, 2007

Another fascinating tidbit from the Pew Study: Hispanic Catholics think churches should be a place of political activism and haven't been enough. Dems who say they want to appeal more to Hispanic voters but who also say religious leaders should stay out of politics are going to have think again. Secular liberal bloggers who call for preachers to butt out of politics are going to have a bitter wake-up call.

Two-thirds of Hispanics say that their religious beliefs are an important influence on their political thinking. More than half say churches and other houses of worship should address the social and political questions of the day. By nearly a two-to-one margin, Latinos say that there has been too little expression of religious faith by political leaders rather than too much. Churchgoing Hispanics report that their clergy often address political matters, although the extent of that practice varies considerably by issue and by religious tradition.

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 3:35 PM 0 comments

Barbara Bush: Mormons Gone Wild
Monday, April 23, 2007

Barbara Bush has waded into the muddy waters of God in the '08 election. First, her husband said on CNN today that the country may be experiencing a bit of "Bush fatigue" and that's why Jeb isn't running. As to which candidate he prefers? "I have no dog in that hunt," Bush said "But three good men are leading and there are some others too. Any I can't talk bad about the Democrats. It's very, very early, but it's comfortable to be on the sidelines. " CNN picks up the story from there.

Asked if voters should be weary of Romney being a Mormon, the former president's wife, Barbara, said "not at all," noting there are "wild people" in many religions.

"I mean it was in 1897 that bigamy was outlawed in that church," she said. "You know we have a lot of Christian wild people too, and a lot of Jewish wild people and a lot of Muslim wild people. The Mormon religion takes care of it's own, they don't have people on welfare.

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 4:23 PM 0 comments

God's Top Ten
Friday, April 20, 2007

Peer inside the "vast Right Wing conspiracy": There's a smaller, easily definable leadership of the Religious Right. Kudos to the Religious News Service for identifying the most influential religious conservatives in the country:

· Broadcaster and psychologist James Dobson, whose Focus on the Family radio show attracts some 220 million listeners who tune in for his views on the merits – and failings – of various candidates.

· Michael Farris, founder and chairman of the Homeschool Legal Defense Association, who one observer said had "a network of home-schoolers that will do anything for him."

· Richard Land, the go-to political guru for the nation's 16 million Southern Baptists, who has been outspoken in declaring what is acceptable (Mormonism) and what is not (infidelity).

· Pam Olsen, president of the Florida Prayer Network, and a mother of four who set up a network of pastors and organizers in each of the state's 67 counties.

· Rod Parsley, pastor of the 14,000-member World Harvest Church in the battleground state of Ohio, who can use his network of pastors to help a candidate fine-tune his message to reach conservatives.

· Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, the most powerful Christian lobbying group in Washington whose e-mail alerts reach 200,000 people each day.

· Steve Scheffler, head of the 4,000-member Iowa Christian Alliance, the most active – and credible – religious group in the Hawkeye State.

· Tamara Scott, Iowa leader of Concerned Women for America, who has talked with nearly every GOP candidate and is willing to back a candidate who's "truly conservative," even if he's a longshot.

· Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice and national radio host, whose blessing on Mitt Romney's campaign was a huge stamp of approval for the Mormon candidate.

· Don Wildmon, chairman of the influential Arlington Group and head of the American Family Association, pontificates about politics and society on the 185 radio stations that his group owns across 36 states.

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 8:01 AM 0 comments

If Only Elvis Was A Scientologist
Thursday, April 19, 2007

John Travolta says it saved him, otherwise he would have been Elvis or Marilyn Monroe.

Actor John Travolta says he was as big a star as Elvis Presley and Marilyn Monroe but he did not end tragically like them because of his values and his faith in Scientology.

Newsweek quoted him as saying: 'I have fame on the level of a Marilyn Monroe or an Elvis Presley, but part of the reason I didn't go the way they did was because of my beliefs.'

Travolta went on to explain that his faith in Scientology made the difference between him and the icons.

'People make judgments about it (Scientology), but often they don't know what they're talking about. I would advise anyone who wants to know about it to read up on it. We (the Church of Scientology) are only getting bigger and we help people all over the world, from disaster zones to drug rehabilitation.'

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 8:01 AM 0 comments

No Church, Please, We're Hispanic

Assimilation is bad for Catholicism, apparently.

A wave of research shows that increasing percentages of Hispanics are abandoning church, suggesting to researchers that along with assimilation comes a measure of secularization.

Several studies show that Hispanics are just as likely as other Americans to identify themselves as having “no religion,” and to not affiliate with a church. Those who describe themselves as secular are, without question, a small minority among Hispanics — as they are among Americans at large. But, in contrast to many of the non-Hispanic Americans who identify themselves as secular, most of the Hispanics say they were once religious.

The Roman Catholic Church, the religious home for most Hispanics, is experiencing the greatest exodus. While many former Catholics join evangelical or Pentecostal churches, the recent research shows that many of them leave church altogether.

“Migrating to the U.S. means you have the freedom to create your own identity,” said Keo Cavalcanti, a sociologist at James Madison University in Harrisonburg, Va., and a co-author of a recent study that found a trend toward secularization among Hispanics in Richmond. “When people get here they realize that maintaining that pro forma display of religiosity is not essential to doing well.”

A separate study of 4,000 Hispanics to be released this month by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life and the Pew Hispanic Center found that 8 percent of them said they had “no religion” — similar to the 11 percent in the general public. Of the Hispanics who claimed no religion, two-thirds said they had once been religious. Thirty-nine percent of the Hispanics who said they had no religion were former Catholics.

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 8:00 AM 0 comments

Can You Teach Religion Without Endorsing Its Claims?
Wednesday, April 18, 2007

Stanley Fish resumes his discussion of religion in schools over at the NYT:

In a March 31st Op-Ed column I critiqued Professor Stephen Prothero’s claim (quoted in Time magazine’s April 2nd issue) that the “academic study of religion … takes the biblical truth claims seriously and yet brackets them for purposes of classroom discussion.” I questioned how anyone could take something seriously by leaving it at the door or putting it on the shelf. And I said that in the absence of its truth claims – claims like salvation is through belief in Jesus Christ who rose from the dead and redeemed us by taking upon himself all our sins – a religion was nothing more than a set of stories and ritual practices bereft of any transcendent meaning of which they would be the expression. You can teach those stories and practices – just as you might teach the stories and practices of baseball (which is, I know, the religion of some people) – but you wouldn’t, I insisted, be teaching religion, only its empty shell.
He goes on to report that he was criticized, with his responders arguing that you could teach the truth claims of religion as historical and cultural facts without either believing or disbelieving in them, and teaching the exclusive truth claims of a religion as matters of fact goes against the principles of liberal democracy and liberal education.

I stipulate to the usefulness of teaching the bible as an aid to the study of literature and history. I’m just saying that when you do that you are teaching religion as a pedagogical resource, not as a distinctive discourse the truth or falsehood of which is a matter of salvation for its adherents. One can of course teach that too; one can, that is, get students to understand that at least some believers hold to their faith in a way that is absolute and exclusionary; in their view nonbelievers have not merely made a mistake – as one might be mistaken about the causes of global warming – they have condemned themselves to eternal perdition. (“I am the way.”) What one cannot do – at least under the liberal democratic dispensation – is teach that assertion of an exclusive and absolute truth as anything but someone’s opinion; and in many classes that opinion will be rehearsed with at best a sympathetic condescension (“let’s hope they grow out of it”) and at worst a condemning ridicule (“even in this day and age, there are benighted people”).

In short, what one cannot do is teach a religion as true, because as Patrick Tharp notes, to do so would be to teach a singular truth – “All religions can’t be taught as truth, only one” – and a chief tenet of liberal education (it is a religion too) is that a range of religious views should be taught in the sense of being noted and indexed in the manner of sociology or anthropology.

I have to say that I don't quite see the problem here. First, I don't believe that just because one religion claims to have truth doesn't also mean that another religion can't also have truth. Plenty of religions teach that religions can coexist with other religions. Even the first of the Ten Commandments says there should be no other god before me, not that I am the only God. I also disagree with the notion that teaching religion without endorsing its claims is teaching an empty shell. We teach Marxism, for example, without endorsing all its claims. We teach different philosophies without endorsing all their claims. We teach tyrants without endorsing all their claims. The principal argument for teaching religion in school is borne out in the importance of religion in the world today. Without teaching religion we simply are not equipping our students to understand and be able to cope with the world. And that, after all, is the main purpose of education.

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 8:03 AM 0 comments

When Doctors Preach ...

patients get better?

More than half of physicians believe that religion and spirituality have a significant influence on patients' health, according to a report in the April 9 issue of Archives of Internal Medicine, one of the JAMA/Archives journals. Physicians who are most religious are more likely to interpret the influence of religion and spirituality in positive ways.

The relationship between religion and health generates controversy in the medical world, according to background information in the article. "Consensus seems to begin and end with the idea that many (if not most) patients draw on prayer and other religious resources to navigate and overcome the spiritual challenges that arise in their experiences of illness," the authors note. "Controversy remains regarding whether, to what extent and in what ways religion and spirituality helps or harms patients' health."

Farr A. Curlin, M.D., and colleagues at the University of Chicago mailed a survey in 2003 to a random sample of 2,000 practicing U.S. physicians 65 years or younger from all specialties. The survey included questions to determine physicians' religious characteristics, general observations and interpretations of religion and spirituality and potential positive and negative influences of religion and spirituality.

The response rate was 63 percent (1,144 of 1,820) and the average age for respondents was 49. According to the study, two-thirds of U.S. physicians believe that experiencing illness often or always increases patients' awareness of religion and spirituality issues. A majority of physicians (56 percent) think that religion and spirituality has much or very much influence on health and 54 percent believe that at times a supernatural being intervenes. The majority of physicians (85 percent) believe that the influence of religion and spirituality is generally positive, but few (6 percent) feel that religion and spirituality changes medical outcomes.

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 8:01 AM 0 comments

The Greening of Church
Tuesday, April 17, 2007

From Rick Warren to the Southern Baptist Convention, unusual coalitions of religious figures are now turning their attention to the environment. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer reports on one local movement that's crossing faith boundaries.

About 50 local churches and synagogues are expected to take part in a march and rally in downtown Seattle as part of Step It Up 2007, a day of planned public events nationwide to call for action on climate change.

Earth Ministry is one of several local environmental groups coordinating activities in the Seattle area. Beres sees this as the next step for involvement by faith communities in environmental issues.

For some congregations, Step It Up is but a first step. And for those already involved in environmental matters, it's an opportunity to go from more congregation-level actions — such as choosing fair-trade coffee — to more public actions, such as rallying and calling for political change.

"It's the move to advocacy," Beres said.

Earth Ministry was founded by three Seattle-area people who saw that caring for the environment was important to some churchgoers, said the Rev. Jim Mulligan, a Presbyterian minister who's one of the founders. But the topic wasn't often mentioned in church and there weren't many resources to link theology and care for the environment.

Now, Mulligan sees faith groups focusing far more on the environment. For instance, local Christians, Jews, Muslims and those of other faiths are organizing an Interfaith Creation Festival from May 31 to June 3 at St. Mark's Episcopal Cathedral. The festival is intended to launch a year of environmental activities.

Some say this flurry of activity has come about because of all the information on global warming, the release of the Al Gore documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth" and the way Hurricane Katrina showed the effects of climate intersecting with racial and economic disparities.

"I think there's been something of another leap forward," Mulligan said.

Labels: ,

Posted by B Feiler at 8:00 AM 0 comments

Is the Bible Inerrant?
Sunday, April 15, 2007

Newsweek convened a conversation between Rick Warren and Sam Harris. Here's an excerpt that begins with Jon Meachem asking Warren if the Bible is inerrant.

WARREN: I believe it's inerrant in what it claims to be. The Bible does not claim to be a scientific book in many areas.

Do you believe Creation happened in the way Genesis describes it?
WARREN: If you're asking me do I believe in evolution, the answer is no, I don't. I believe that God, at a moment, created man. I do believe Genesis is literal, but I do also know metaphorical terms are used. Did God come down and blow in man's nose? If you believe in God, you don't have a problem accepting miracles. So if God wants to do it that way, it's fine with me.

HARRIS: I'm doing my Ph.D. in neuroscience; I'm very close to the literature on evolutionary biology. And the basic point is that evolution by natural selection is random genetic mutation over millions of years in the context of environmental pressure that selects for fitness.

WARREN: Who's doing the selecting?

HARRIS: The environment. You don't have to invoke an intelligent designer to explain the complexity we see.

WARREN: Sam makes all kinds of assertions based on his presuppositions. I'm willing to admit my presuppositions: there are clues to God. I talk to God every day. He talks to me.

HARRIS: What does that actually mean?

WARREN: One of the great evidences of God is answered prayer. I have a friend, a Canadian friend, who has an immigration issue. He's an intern at this church, and so I said, "God, I need you to help me with this," as I went out for my evening walk. As I was walking I met a woman. She said, "I'm an immigration attorney; I'd be happy to take this case." Now, if that happened once in my life I'd say, "That is a coincidence." If it happened tens of thousands of times, that is not a coincidence.

There must have been times in your ministry when you've prayed for someone to be delivered from disease who is not—say, a little girl with cancer.
WARREN: Oh, absolutely.

So, parse that. God gave you an immigration attorney, but God killed a little girl.
WARREN: Well, I do believe in the goodness of God, and I do believe that he knows better than I do. God sometimes says yes, God sometimes says no and God sometimes says wait. I've had to learn the difference between no and not yet. The issue here really does come down to surrender. A lot of atheists hide behind rationalism; when you start probing, you find their reactions are quite emotional. In fact, I've never met an atheist who wasn't angry.

HARRIS: Let me be the first.

WARREN: I think your books are quite angry.

HARRIS: I would put it at impatient rather than angry. Let me respond to this notion of answered prayer, because this is a classic sampling error, to use a statistical phrase. We know that human beings have a terrible sense of probability. There are many things we believe that confirm our prejudices about the world, and we believe this only by noticing the confirmations, and not keeping track of the disconfirmations. You could prove to the satisfaction of every scientist that intercessory prayer works if you set up a simple experiment. Get a billion Christians to pray for a single amputee. Get them to pray that God regrow that missing limb. This happens to salamanders every day, presumably without prayer; this is within the capacity of God. [Warren is laughing.] I find it interesting that people of faith only tend to pray for conditions that are self-limiting.

WARREN: That's a misstatement there.

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 9:46 PM 0 comments

Look Left AND Right Before Crossing Off God
Monday, March 26, 2007

Pew has released its quadrennial study of politics, religion, and society in America. Most of the attention has focused on the political findings of the study, namely that Republican self-identification has guttered in recent years, while Democratic self-i.d. has risen. Andrew Sullivan, for instance, sees in the study a rise in social acceptance, of blacks, gays, and guns.

It's a devastating indictment of the Bush-Rove strategy for conservatism and the Republican party. They may have created the most loyally Democratic generation since the New Deal with the under 25s. But check the other findings out. Party identification is now 50 percent Dem and 35 percent GOP. The country is now divided in two over the question of whether military strength is the key to ensuring peace... Since Bush has been president, there has been a sharp decline in the number of Americans favoring "old fashioned values about family and marriage." In the last ten years, opposition to gay marriage has dropped ten points and support has risen ten points. There has also been a striking twelve point increase in support for affirmative action over the past decade - all of it among whites.
While Andrew points out that secularism is rising, particularly among the young, the real story may be the determined commitment of American to hold on to religious values. Pew asks three questions -- "Prayer is an important part of my daily life" (78% yes); "We will all be called before God at Judgment Day to answer for our sins" (79%; more than who are Christians, by the way); "I never doubt the existence of God" (83%). These numbers are stunning and would be rivaled no place else in the world other than the Middle East.

And while the God gap is growing (79% of GOPers answers these questions in the affirmative, compared with 62% of Democrats; two decades the number was equal at roughly 70%), to me the real news is how high these numbers continue to be among Democrats. "I never doubt the existence of God" is hardly the standard of religiosity where I come from. Many of the most faithful people I know spend a lot of time in the realm of doubt. But as I argue here with Bob Wright, while most pundits will conclude from this that GOP voters are still more religious-oriented , the real news is how religious-oriented the so-called secular left continues to be.

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 8:03 AM 0 comments

In the Shadow of the Twin Towers
Friday, March 23, 2007

In response to my post about St. Nicholas, 9-11, and The DaVinci Code, a friend sent these pics. Close, indeed. Eerie.

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 8:01 AM 0 comments

The DaVinci Code Meets 9-11
Monday, March 19, 2007

A goldmine for wannabe Dan Browns. The search for remains at Ground Zero have moved on to a destroyed church, where relics of three saints have been missing for decades.

Last week, two bones were recovered in the place where St. Nicholas' Greek Orthodox Church used to be, and where digging has begun for remains, said an official who knows about the search but is not authorized to speak publicly about it.

Debris from both towers collapsed onto the church and its parking lot on Sept. 11, 2001. The site was paved over to be used a staging area for reconstruction at the site, making it a likely place to find long-buried debris and remains, those involved in the initial cleanup say.

In the months after the attacks, some relics were returned to the St. Nicholas congregants, including a small bell and cross, several Bibles and even wax candles that had not melted from the heat of the attacks, said Peter Drakoulias, a church board member.

But its most precious relic is still missing: a 600-pound, 2-foot-by-2-foot safe that contains church documents and a small enamel box containing three bone fragments less than a half-inch long, said Drakoulias. The bones are believed to be those of St. Nicholas — the church's founding saint — St. Sava, and St. Katherine, he said.

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 8:03 AM 0 comments

We Teach Sex, Why Not God?
Thursday, March 15, 2007

At a time when religion is the dominant force in the world today we must teach out students to understand religion. We must. To reach a piece I wrote about this last year in the NYT, click here. Meanwhile, the folks over at Newsweek and the WashPost are having the discussion online this week. Here's what Talmudic scholar Adin Steinsaltz wrote about the matter. And check out the hostile reaction he generated! (At least they're polite, unlike many commenters on blogs, which I attribute to two reasons: 1) Commenters here have to sign their name, and 2) Steinsaltz looks so authoritative in his octogenarian beard!)

Teaching religion in public schools is not easy. For one thing, in most countries, children of many different religious backgrounds sit together in the same classroom. For another, teaching the basics about religion would seem to cross the dividing line between church and state in those countries which separate the two spheres.

Nevertheless, I believe that basic religious training does have a place in school – not in the form of indoctrination or missionizing, but to give students a way to relate to religious issues as they mature.

There are likely many subjects to which this can be compared, but one example – which may seem wildly incongruous – that operates under parallel principles is sex education.

Clearly, the aim of such classes is not to provide practical experience. Instead, sex education is based on the understanding that young people have natural urges that will somehow express themselves and that this is something that the students will encounter, in one way or another. Before such education became commonplace, children were left to acquire knowledge about the subject from garbled pieces of information they got from their friends, or from very reluctant – and not much more illuminating – explanations they got at home.

This reasoning can also apply to religious instruction. There is a need to give children at least some basic and true notions about the subject. The schools should not be proselytizing. They should not be dictating how these concepts are used practically by the students. But at least young people will have the chance to acquire basic knowledge about what they will or will not practice in their later years.

These arguments apply to elementary and high school students alike. However, because of the general inattention of smaller children to what they learn in school, it is worthwhile to provide this training to young adults as well so that they gain some knowledge, not preaching, which will enable them to make reasonable and informed decisions as adults.

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 8:03 AM 0 comments

Now We Know Why Britney Shaved Her Head
Friday, March 9, 2007

She's becoming a monk! Britney is returning to Christianity after a brief fling with Kabbalistic Judaism. Who's the winner here?

Ever since Britney Spears scribbled the word PUSH on her hand, people have been scratching their heads trying to figure out what the word stands for.

Until now, patience, understanding, smiles and honesty have been the leading contender, but www.hollywood.tv reports that PUSH is really the Christian message - 'Pray Until Something Happens'.

'It is often printed on bands and necklaces available in Christian shops,' said a source. 'These are frequently given as gifts to remind people that god is on their side through everything,' added the source.

Is the 25-year-old pop princess returning to Christianity at this difficult time in her life? It's a possibility, since she was raised in the Southern Baptist Church.
All this in the same week that Madonna pitched up at a Kabbalah Purim party in London. Do we need a new feature around here: At the Corner of Hollywood and God?

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 7:01 AM 0 comments

Death of the American Newspaper II: The Religion Section
Thursday, March 8, 2007

I'm tempted to just cut and paste the comment from below: More evidence (if we need any) of the challenges facing the American newspaper. But here the news is somewhat different. Below, the news is the end of the book section, which heralds the end of the book. Here, Christianity Today is talking about the end of the religion section, which hardly heralds the end of religion. It heralds the rise of the Net for God. Either way, bad for the paper.

The Dallas Morning News eliminated its religion section in early January. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution folded its Faith and Values section into the Living pages. The Wichita Eagle plans to cut its religion editor position, and other newspapers are removing their religion beats.

"In a time of flat revenues, we simply could not generate the advertising to break even on the section," said Bob Mong, editor of The Dallas Morning News. "I don't think any paper in the country tried harder than we did over the years."

Mong helped develop the religion section in 1994, but sees more potential now for online reporting in blogs and newsletters. The Dallas Morning News website has seen more page hits on its religion blog than it did for its religion section online, he said.

"I like the idea of a section. I obviously believed in the section approach to give the subject more visibility," Mong said. "It had a very strong and loyal readership, but there came a time when we simply had to make some difficult choices."

The media industry posted nearly twice as many job losses in 2006 as in 2005, according to the outplacement company Challenger, Gray, and Christmas.

"Unfortunately, with a lot of the cutbacks in newspapers right now, the religion beat is seen as expendable," said Charles Overby, who heads the Freedom Forum. "Eliminating religion reporters is, at best, an economic advantage that could cause longer term problems."

Overby, a former newspaper editor and part of USA Today's management, said he has seen religion coverage improve over the past five years and hopes the trend will continue.

"The tendency of newspapers is to look at the quirky aspects of religion. The truth is many readers are just looking for mainstream coverage," Overby said. "That's not church bulletin coverage, but it is recognizing that faith is an important part in many lives."

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 7:15 AM 0 comments

God: The New Rebellion
Wednesday, March 7, 2007

My brother sent me an article from the Wall Street Journal about what it calls a "growing trend" of children who become much more religious than their parents, straining family ties. The article is not available online, but here are a few excerpts, including advice at the bottom on how to handle the situation, with some sites that offer support.

Clergy are in the difficult position of trying to guide young people toward devoutness without dishonoring their families. The reluctance of parents to accept their children's choices can be a source of frustration for some youths and their pastors. "My joke is, they liked them better when they were on drugs," says Pastor Peter La Joy, who directs the student ministry at Calvary Chapel in Tucson, Ariz.

While statistics on the number of devout young people are hard to come by, some groups that minister to the young report big gains. Young Life, an evangelical Christian ministry that focuses on children "disinterested" in religion, says more than 106,000 teens attended its programs on a weekly basis during the 2005-2006 school year, up from 66,362 12 years ago. "Mecca and Main Street," a new book by Geneive Abdo, a senior analyst at the Gallup Organization's Center for Muslim Studies, argues that a significant number of young U.S. Muslims are becoming substantially more devoted to Islam than their parents. In the Jewish community, a growing number of formerly secular young people are embracing an Orthodox lifestyle.
And this:
Tom Lin's parents, immigrants from Taiwan, sent him to Harvard University with the expectation he would become a corporate attorney. When he instead opted for a much lower-paying career in a Christian ministry, his mother threatened to kill herself, says Mr. Lin, 34, a regional director for InterVarsity, a college ministry that has 843 chapters in the U.S. Mr. Lin adds that both parents cut off all communication with him for seven years, reconnecting only after his mother was diagnosed with cancer. (She died in 2002.) Mr. Lin says his choices were "shaming" to the values held within many immigrant cultures. His parents "moved to America for material prosperity," says Mr. Lin. "When [immigrants'] children forsake the very reason they came to this country, it's particularly devastating."

Families in which the children are more religious than the parents aren't the norm. In "Soul Searching: The Religious and Spiritual Lives of American Teenagers," University of Notre Dame professor Christian Smith reports that a child's religious beliefs generally will closely reflect his parents'. And not all religious fervor among the children of secular families has a solely spiritual basis. At times, "it's a part of teenage rebellion," says Azeem Khan, the former national coordinator of Young Muslims, a group that runs summer camps and other youth-oriented religious programs.

Overall, American's religious devotion seems to have remained fairly constant over the past 10 years. In a 2006 Gallup poll, 63% of respondents said they were members of a church or synagogue, down slightly from 65% in 1996. When asked how important they considered religion in their own lives, 57% said it was very important, the same as in 1996.

Here are the sites that offer advice:

"Following Jesus Without Dishonoring Your Parents," edited by Jeanette Yep and Peter Cha

Greg Joa, a contributor to the book, says families should consider how their generational differences can affect views. "The discussion is not just about religion," he says. When choosing religion over lucrative careers, he says, children need to realize a parent's objections are borne out of concern, not judgment. Parents should consider that their kids "haven't grown up under the restrictive pressure of, 'I must achieve more, I must make more,'" he says.

"But my parents aren't saved!" Christian Teen Corner (www.wolfeborobible.com/teen20.html)

If a young person wishes his parents would become more religious, the site recommends that the child show the benefits of devotion by being obedient and respectful: "Don't give your unsaved family members any reason for not wanting to know the Jesus that has made such a change in your life!"

"How do I tell my parents and family I've become a Muslim?" by Saraji Umm Zaid
(www.iprofess.com)

The author suggests that converts and the newly observant wait six to 12 months before alerting their family to their new religious identity, giving time to become "established in Islamic practices" and to "build a support system within the Muslim community."

"Is Orthodox Judaism Driving Our Family Apart?" (www.beingjewish.com)

The site, written by a newly Orthodox woman and her husband, recommends that parents who are concerned with "losing" their children to observant religion reach out to clergy: "Speak to the one who has the most influence on him right now -- his rabbi or religious teacher. ...The rabbi will probably be a good mediator, and can advise both you and the child how to work together."

Update: I found an AP version of the same story.

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 7:05 AM 0 comments

The God Gene
Monday, March 5, 2007

In WALKING THE BIBLE, I first wrote about the idea that I felt a physical connection to the land and wondered whether this landscape was somehow in my DNA. At the time this sounded laughable to most people, but ever since the genome was decoded and suggested that we carry historical memory around within us, this idea has been gaining traction.

I was thinking about that this weekend as I was reading through the NYTimes Magazine cover story called "Darwin's God." The article looks at a new corner of evolutionary studies examining where religion comes from. While it's hard to summarize in a few paragraphs, here is an excerpt from the opening. It requires free registration to read, or running out to a newstand while the Sunday edition is still on sale.

The magic-box demonstration helped set Atran on a career studying why humans might have evolved to be religious, something few people were doing back in the ’80s. Today, the effort has gained momentum, as scientists search for an evolutionary explanation for why belief in God exists — not whether God exists, which is a matter for philosophers and theologians, but why the belief does.

This is different from the scientific assault on religion that has been garnering attention recently, in the form of best-selling books from scientific atheists who see religion as a scourge. In “The God Delusion,” published last year and still on best-seller lists, the Oxford evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins concludes that religion is nothing more than a useless, and sometimes dangerous, evolutionary accident. “Religious behavior may be a misfiring, an unfortunate byproduct of an underlying psychological propensity which in other circumstances is, or once was, useful,” Dawkins wrote. He is joined by two other best-selling authors — Sam Harris, who wrote “The End of Faith,” and Daniel Dennett, a philosopher at Tufts University who wrote “Breaking the Spell.” The three men differ in their personal styles and whether they are engaged in a battle against religiosity, but their names are often mentioned together. They have been portrayed as an unholy trinity of neo-atheists, promoting their secular world view with a fervor that seems almost evangelical.

Lost in the hullabaloo over the neo-atheists is a quieter and potentially more illuminating debate. It is taking place not between science and religion but within science itself, specifically among the scientists studying the evolution of religion. These scholars tend to agree on one point: that religious belief is an outgrowth of brain architecture that evolved during early human history. What they disagree about is why a tendency to believe evolved, whether it was because belief itself was adaptive or because it was just an evolutionary byproduct, a mere consequence of some other adaptation in the evolution of the human brain.

Which is the better biological explanation for a belief in God — evolutionary adaptation or neurological accident? Is there something about the cognitive functioning of humans that makes us receptive to belief in a supernatural deity? And if scientists are able to explain God, what then? Is explaining religion the same thing as explaining it away? Are the nonbelievers right, and is religion at its core an empty undertaking, a misdirection, a vestigial artifact of a primitive mind? Or are the believers right, and does the fact that we have the mental capacities for discerning God suggest that it was God who put them there?

In short, are we hard-wired to believe in God? And if we are, how and why did that happen?

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 7:05 AM 1 comments

Tehrangeles: Or Why Eddie Murphy Is Studying Farsi

A few years ago, before taking my wife on a second honeymoon in Iran, I learned that a large number of Iranian Jews had moved to Beverly Hills after the Islamic Revolution in 1979. I made a number of telephone friends in this community who later introduced me around the Jewish community in Iran. Thirty-five thousand Jews still live in Iran, the largest number in the Middle East outside of Israel(All of this is described in comic detail in WHERE GOD WAS BORN, including what happened when I created something of a scandal by introducing my wife in synagogue in Tehran in front of 800 people. No one had ever seen a man introduce his wife in public.)

The Jewish Community in Beverly Hills was so prominent, I was told, that one nickname for L.A. was Tehrangeles. Well, now we know how prominent -- and how large! And how some of their neighbors think about it. A friend tipped me off to the fact that a firestorm erupted recently when the City of Beverly Hills sent out its local election ballot and it was translated into Farsi, the official language of Iran. Farsi! In Beverly Hills. What would Eddie do now!? (The headline in the LAT: "For some, Beverly Hills ballot went to Farsi.")

For the first time, Beverly Hills had translated its entire absentee and sample ballots into Persian. The ballots for the March 6 municipal election, in which two City Council seats are up for grabs, went out this month, and the response was swift.

More than 300 residents phoned the city to complain. City Clerk Byron Pope fielded about 100 of them personally.

"I believe the cover is what shocked the community," said Pope, who had instructed the city's election materials supplier to print the entire ballot, cover to cover, in English and Persian, also known as Farsi. "I believe it was the Farsi script, with the war going on and all," he said.

The translation is the latest measure of the growing Persian influence in Beverly Hills, where Persians now make up about a fifth of the city's 35,000 residents.

The influx, which began in the late 1970s as wealthy Iranians clustered in Beverly Hills after the fall of the shah, has made a mark on many facets of the city, from architecture to the schools.

But it has — as in the case of the ballots — caused friction. Some long-time residents have complained about newcomers tearing down historic homes in favor of what they consider monolithic white "Persian palaces."

At the same time, Persians have flexed their political muscle by holding voter registration drives, electing the first Persian to the City Council in 2003 and making the Persian new year a holiday for students.

Three of the six candidates running for City Council next month were born in Iran, and Councilman Jimmy Delshad will serve as Beverly Hills' first Persian mayor if he wins reelection.

Labels: ,

Posted by B Feiler at 7:03 AM 0 comments

"In Mohammad We Trust"
Friday, February 16, 2007

That's what Virgil Goode said on the House floor would be printed on our money if Americans didn't support the president's policy in Iraq. As many have pointed out, Muslims don't worship Mohammad. They worship the same God as Jews and Christians.

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 7:00 AM 0 comments

Bill Gates Helps Fund Arab School in NYC
Wednesday, February 14, 2007

All over the news today: the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has helped fund a new school in NYC dedicated to Arab language and culture. What a great idea. In the past we interred Americans associated with the culture of our adversaries and banned their languages. Now we study them -- both those that are against us, and the many more who are with us. More, more!

The New York City school system will open its first public school dedicated to teaching the Arabic language and culture in September, with half of its classes eventually taught in Arabic, officials said yesterday.

The school, the Khalil Gibran International Academy, is one of 40 new schools that the Department of Education is opening for the 2007-8 school year. It will serve grades 6 to 12 and will be in Brooklyn, although a specific location has not been determined.

Debbie Almontaser, a 15-year veteran of the school system who is the driving force behind the school and will be its principal, said that ideally, the school would serve an equal mix of students with backgrounds in Arabic language and culture and those without such backgrounds.

“We are wholeheartedly looking to attract as many diverse students as possible, because we really want to give them the opportunity to expand their horizons and be global citizens,” said Ms. Almontaser, who emigrated from Yemen when she was 3 and is fluent in Arabic.

“I see students who are excited about engaging in international careers, international affairs, wanting to come to our school. And I also see Arab-American students who would want the opportunity to learn Arabic, to read it and write it and have a better understanding of where their ancestors have come from.”

Labels: ,

Posted by B Feiler at 7:00 AM 0 comments

How to Bury a Muslim in Maryland
Thursday, February 8, 2007

I received a fascinating email this week from the Maryland state rep, Sandy Rosenberg, who represents the district in Baltimore where my mother grew up, and where my cousins still live. At issue: What to do when Maryland state law made Muslim-style burial illegal. His story of a Jew helping Muslims in his district bury their loved-ones legally is inspired, if only because it's the type of story we never hear in the media. This is America's true gift to the world, using a political legacy of pluralism to promote freedom of religion -- all religions:

At a candidates' night this past summer, a constituent asked us our position on a bill providing for burials consistent with Islamic belief. None of us was aware of the legislation. (I later learned that it had died in a Senate committee and thus never came before the House of Delegates.)

I met with Abdul-Hamiyd Muhammad afterwards and promised to work with him after the election. We were then joined by Saqib Ali, a newly elected delegate and the first member of the Muslim faith to serve in the General Assembly.

The crux of the issue: Muslims wash the body in a certain manner and may not embalm. State law requires that an apprentice assist in the embalming of at least 20 dead human bodies before obtaining a mortician's license. The challenge of solving a problem like this and forging a unique coalition to do so especially motivates me.

This afternoon we were joined by several other Muslims and reached agreement on the changes we needed to make to the bill draft. Over the years, I've worked on several bills to protect the exercise of religious belief.

This time, however, the sponsor line will read: Rosenberg and Ali.

Labels: ,

Posted by B Feiler at 10:51 AM 0 comments

Harvard Students Discuss Religion More Than Sex

94% discuss religion. And 71% attend religious services. Or so says a new report from Harvard, released as an attempt to quiet the furor over the fact that the school dropped the religion requirement that had been proposed last year.

Harvard University announced Wednesday its biggest curriculum overhaul in three decades, putting new emphasis on sensitive religious and cultural issues, the sciences and overcoming U.S. "parochialism."

The curriculum at the oldest U.S. university has been criticized as focusing too narrowly on academic topics instead of real-life issues, or for being antagonistic to organized religion. Revisions have been in the works for three years.

One of the eight new required subject areas -- "societies of the world" -- aims to help students overcome U.S. "parochialism" by "acquainting them with the values, customs and institutions that differ from their own," said a 34-page Harvard report on the changes.

An earlier proposal would have made Harvard unique among its elite Ivy League peers by requiring undergraduates to study religion as a distinct subject, but that was dropped in December.

The changes to the general-education requirements, imposed on students outside their major, still address religious beliefs and practices. Study of those issues, however, would be folded into a broader subject of "culture and belief." ...

Founded to train Puritan ministers 371 years ago, Harvard has been criticized by some conservatives in recent decades as a liberal bastion unfriendly toward religion.

A task force of six professors and two students which drafted the new curriculum said religion should be addressed, but only as one of several cultural influences.

"Harvard is a secular institution but religion is an important part of our students' lives," it said. It noted that 94 percent of Harvard's incoming students report that they discuss religion "frequently" or "occasionally," and 71 percent say that they attend religious services.

The report doesn't actually record the percentage that discuss sex, but can it possibly be more than 94%? Isn't anybody shy there?! I predict that more Harvard students discuss religion than sex, and I predict that this is a topic of some amusement in New Haven...

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 7:47 AM 0 comments

When Sorry Isn't Enough
Tuesday, February 6, 2007

First came word a few weeks ago that Isaiah Washington, one of the stars of "Grey's Anatomy" who was caught using a slur against a gay cast mate, went into rehab for his offense. Now comes word that Gavin Newsom, the mayor of S.F. (who impressed Mrs. Feiler Faster at Davos the last few years), has also entered rehab. His problem: He was caught having an affair with his closest aide's wife, who happens to have alcohol and drug problems herself.

Since when is rehab the new standard of apology? Or is it, as I suspect, just a chance to duck the papparazzi. On second thought, maybe this is the answer to many of our societal problems: If everyone who uses an insulting phrase goes into rehab imagine how much less crowded the world would be. And if, on top of that, everyone who has an affair goes into rehab with them, even better! Our teacher-pupil ration will soar (think of all the kids who toss around insults), everyone can get a seat on the subway (or at Babbo), and global warming will disappear because the number of cars on the road will plummet. Rehabtopia!

Update: It works!

Labels: ,

Posted by B Feiler at 9:58 AM 0 comments

Does the NFL Own the "Hail Mary," Too?
Friday, February 2, 2007

The NFL has clearly benefited from all the coverage about the faith of Tony Dungy and Lovie Smith. But now it's taken its control of the Super Bowl brand to absurd lengths. The league has sent a cease and desist letter to a church in Indianapolis saying it can't host a Super Bowl party at the church on Sunday night. Come on! Their argument: The church is profiting from the game and exceeding the size screen that anyone can project the game on: 55 inches.

Upon hearing the news, Bill Shoulta, pastor of Melbourne Heights Baptist Church in Louisville, had no initial plans to stop a planned Super Bowl program at his church, which is to include a talk by University of Louisville backup quarterback Hunter Cantwell but not an actual showing of the game itself.

In fact, he looked at the situation humorously.

"How absurd!" he said of the NFL's stance. "... Maybe churches should get a copyright on the NFL's use of such terms as 'Sunday,' 'Saints' and 'Hail Mary Pass.' Every time a player points heavenward, goes down on one knee, or shows the sign of the cross after a touchdown, maybe the cheerleaders should pass the offering plate.

"Let's charge the NFL for hyping the personal faith of the respective head coaches for the Bears and Colts. Perhaps we should be reimbursed for the loss of income that churches sustain from members who attend Super Bowl activities."

Wait. So it's okay for Sports Bars to promote Super Bowl parties but not churches? Who's a little full of themselves now.

Labels: ,

Posted by B Feiler at 4:50 PM 0 comments

America's Religion
Thursday, February 1, 2007

One more Super Bowl story.

Borrowing from the traditional photo of both opposing coaches posing with the Super Bowl trophy, Tony Dungy of the Indianapolis Colts and Lovie Smith of the Chicago Bears are giving it a new twist for their shared faith in Jesus Christ.

Dungy and Smith, both good friends and fellow Christians, will appear in a full-page ad saying that while they may attain the height of their profession with a Super Bowl victory, their faith in Jesus Christ is still more important.

The advertisement was the idea of Campus Crusade for Christ, which is paying for the ad to run in USA Today and a variety of national newspapers, according to ministry officials.

Before Tuesday’s Media Day in Miami, both men posed for the ad, which will include a phone number and an Internet address associated with Campus Crusade aimed toward leading people to faith in Christ.

“It’s a great thrill to be here with my friend Lovie Smith because we have so much in common on the field and off,” Dungy said.

Labels: ,

Posted by B Feiler at 7:49 AM 0 comments

No Sneezing on Delta: No "God Bless You"
Friday, January 26, 2007

My daughters are 21-months and they can say, "God Bless You." Now I must be careful not to sneeze on Delta, apparently. An overzealous editor snipped all the reference to "God" in "God Bless You" in the film "The Queen:"

The word God was removed seven times in all after an inexperienced employee of a California company that edits movies for in-flight entertainment was told to take out all profanities - including any blasphemy.

By mistake a bleep was inserted each time a character said God, instead of just when used as part of a profanity, according to Jeff Klein, president of Jaguar Distribution, which distributed the movie to Air New Zealand, Delta and other carriers this month.

"A reference to God is not taboo in any culture that I know of," Mr Klein said. "We excise foul language, excessive violence and nudity."

Labels: ,

Posted by B Feiler at 3:22 PM 0 comments

Battle of the Scarf Comes to America
Thursday, January 25, 2007

Looks like the battle of the scarf, waged from Turkey to Britain, may now be hitting the Homeland. A woman in Michigan (it of large Muslim population) was refused a hearing in court unless she removed her headscarf. Now she's won a reprieve.

A Muslim woman who lost her small-claims case after she refused to remove her veil in court has been granted a new hearing.

Ginnnah Muhammad, 42, of Detroit, plans to wear a niqab – a scarf and veil that covers her head and face, leaving only the eyes visible – at her Feb. 21 hearing.

Muhammad wants to contest a rental car company's $2,750 charge to repair a vehicle that she said had been broken into by thieves. “I'm hoping that the judge ... listens to my case and judges the case on its merits, not on how I look,” Muhammad said.

In October, District Judge Paul Paruk told her he needed to see her face to determine her truthfulness and gave her a choice: take off the veil while testifying or have the case dismissed. She kept it on.

Labels: ,

Posted by B Feiler at 7:57 AM 0 comments

God Is Not Next
Thursday, January 11, 2007

Pew has just done it's new survey of "Generation Next," defined as Americans who grew up in the shadow of 9-11, or 18-25 year olds. Among the headlines, two-thirds feel their generation in unique (natch) and a majority say their main goal is "getting rich." (Thirty-six percent have tattoos, down from 40% for 26-40 year olds.)

Even given that vast majorities think binge drinking, casual sex, and illegal drug use are rampant in their generation, the news on God is striking.

1) 20% of Nexters say they have no religious affiliation, twice the number (11%) who said the same in the late 1980's. 11% of those over 25 fall into the same category, consistent with other surveys I've seen.

2) Protestants are suffering the most. 44% define themselves as Protestants, down 15% since the late 1980's. 25% define themselves as Catholic, down 14%. Jews remain constant at 2% of the population.

3) 63% believe in evolution over creationism, more than 20 percentage points higher than those older than 61.

Is Generation Next the next-to-last for the notion of America as the most religious nation in the world?

Labels:

Posted by B Feiler at 10:02 PM 0 comments

Candidly, Women Don't Read Torah
Monday, January 8, 2007

Twenty-five years ago this month the Reform Jewish community ordained its first woman rabbi -- Sally Priesand. On her retirement, she spoke with NPR. She also released the rejection letter she received from the Hebrew Union College:

Dear Miss Priesand,

We are pleased to learn of your interest in our college. Since you state in your letter that your interests lean specifically to the rabbinate, we would have to inform you candidly that we do not know what opportunities exist for women in the active rabbinate, since we have, as yet, not ordained any women.

Sincerely yours, Joseph Karasick, rabbi, assistant to the provost, Hebrew Union College - Jewish Institute of Religion

Labels: ,

Posted by B Feiler at 4:47 PM 0 comments

Are the Stem Cells Wars Over?

This provocative headline from TIME about a new study showing that stem cells are beginning to prove worth the hype -- without the concerns of some religious communities. One of my predictions for this year is that both houses of Congress will overrule a Bush veto on stem cells:

It's always dangerous to use the word "breakthrough," especially in an area of science haunted by contentious politics and the risk of false hope. But a new report in the latest issue of Nature biotechnology makes it hard to resist. Researchers at Wake Forest University and Harvard have just announced that they've derived stem cells and used them to grow an amazing variety of cells, including liver, bone, fat, blood vessel, muscle and nerve cells. And they did it without even touching an embryo.

Labels: ,

Posted by B Feiler at 4:22 PM 0 comments

Previous Posts

Archives


Search Feiler Faster







All Material Copyright © 2006 Not for use without permission


about books discussions resources events blog contact home link