Politics

Plug-In: No Separation Of Church And State? New York City Mayor Sparks A Furor

Plug-In: No Separation Of Church And State? New York City Mayor Sparks A Furor

Good morning, Weekend Plug-in readers!

Among the religion news happening now, Catholics in Los Angeles are remembering slain Auxiliary Bishop David G. O’Connell. See photos by Los Angeles Times staff photographer Francine Orr from Thursday’s vigil Mass, before the funeral Mass the next day.

As always, we have a bunch of best reads and top headlines in the world of faith to highlight. Let’s jump right in.

What To Know: The Big Story

Big Apple, big controversy: “Don’t tell me about no separation of church and state. State is the body. Church is the heart. You take the heart out of the body, the body dies.”

New York City Mayor Eric Adams said that at an interfaith breakfast this week — remarks called “unhinged and dangerous” by a rabbi quoted by the New York Times’ Dana Rubinstein.

More from the New York Times:

He went on to suggest that his path to the mayoralty was divinely ordained, saying that when he implements policies, he does so in a “godlike approach.”

At another point, Mr. Adams seemed to suggest that it was a mistake for the Supreme Court to ban mandated prayer in public schools, as it did in 1962. “When we took prayers out of schools, guns came into schools,” he said.

The phrase “separation of church and state” is not in the Constitution, but the First Amendment’s statement that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” has been widely interpreted to dictate such a separation.

‘God bless Mayor Adams’: But not everyone criticized the comments.

In fact, Adams won “a new group of fans: Orthodox Jews and evangelical Christians, whose leaders lauded the liberal Democrat,” according to the Washington Times’ Mark A. Kellner.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: Zero elite press coverage of 'heresy' accusations against an American cardinal?

Podcast: Zero elite press coverage of 'heresy' accusations against an American cardinal?

The question at the heart of this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in) was not whether Springfield (Ill.) Bishop Thomas Paprocki was on target with his First Things essay that all but accused San Diego Cardinal Robert McElroy of heresy.

The question was not whether Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich of Luxembourg — a strategic leader in the Vatican’s Synod on Synodality — was right when he said the church's teaching on homosexuality are “no longer correct,” and added, “I think it is time for a fundamental revision of the doctrine."

The question was not whether Chicago Cardinal Blase Cupich was correct when he suggested, in print, that priests should absolve Catholics who come to Confession, allowing them to receive Holy Communion, even if these individuals refuse to repent of behaviors that Catholic doctrine insists are sin.

The question was not what Pope Francis meant when he told bishops in the Congo, “Always. Always forgive in the Sacrament of Reconciliation” — even if there is confusion about whether penitents are repenting of their sins or not.

No, the journalism question discussed during this podcast was this: Why are these developments — especially that stunning “Imagining a Heretical Cardinal” essay by Paprocki — receiving (as of this morning) zero coverage in the mainstream press?

By the way, it’s important that Bishop Paprocki is the chairman-elect of the Canonical Affairs and Church Governance Committee of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

It may also be relevant that, in 2017, Paprocki and McElroy clashed — in print — over the Springfield bishop’s decision not to allow Catholics to receive Holy Communion if they are openly living in same-sex marriages and, thus, rejecting centuries of Catholic doctrines on marriage and sex.

Why the lack of coverage? I have several theories.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Hurrah! Associated Press report mentions Clinton-era religious liberty principles (updated)

Hurrah! Associated Press report mentions Clinton-era religious liberty principles (updated)

Back in my Baylor University days, my favorite European history professor had a symbolic gesture he would use when discussing absurd, paradoxical moments in events such as the French Revolution.

“What a world!” he would exclaim, with a cynical laugh, while striking his forehead with the heel of his palm — his own variation on the classic “face palm” gesture.

This is the gesture I would like readers to imagine as I congratulate the Associated Press for a few important examples of basic journalism in a story with this headline: “West Virginia GOP majority House OKs religious freedom bill.”

For starters, the term “religious liberty” wasn’t framed with “scare quotes” in the headline. What a world! Might this have something to do with the First Amendment?

Let’s walk through this AP story and look for what appear to me to be ordinary examples of news coverage. However, in this day and age, basic acts of journalism should be celebrated. Here is the AP overture:

CHARLESTON, W.Va. (AP) — West Virginia’s GOP supermajority House of Delegates passed a bill Monday that would create a test for courts to apply when people challenge government regulations they believe interfere with their constitutional right to religious freedom.

The bill passed after several Democrats expressed concern that the proposal could be used as a tool to discriminate against LGBTQ people and other marginalized groups. Democratic Del. Joey Garcia also asked whether the proposed law could be used to overturn West Virginia’s vaccine requirements, which are some of the strictest in the nation.

A sign of progress? Note that the lede states that the bill created a “test for courts to apply” — not a mandate of some kind. This is a sign of things to come.

Let’s read on.

One of the legislation’s co-sponsors, Republican Del. Todd Kirby, said those questions would be up to the courts to decide — the bill only provides a judicial test for interpreting the law.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Loaded question: Is gambling evil? That's a religion-beat hook in many states

Loaded question: Is gambling evil? That's a religion-beat hook in many states

THE QUESTION:

Is gambling evil?

THE RELIGION GUY’S ANSWER:

Analysts anticipated a record high cash haul from the Super Bowl with the explosion in legalized online sports betting. The big weekend produced several interesting articles about the pros and cons, the inroads and innovations, of America’s gambling industry.

The Wall Street Journal’s Barton Swaim mulled religious aspects under the arresting headline “Would Jesus Bet on the Super Bowl?” He said that for Jews and Christians the Bible is “less than explicit” in warnings and yet its moral teachings do raise questions about gambling.

Swaim sympathizes with theologians who oppose the desire to “get something for nothing,” accompanied by the attitude that work to earn necessary income “is a mostly unhealthy activity best avoided.” But he admitted that’s also the case when we inherit assets or the value of property increases regardless of our own efforts.

For Swaim, the key moral aspect is what gambling “reveals about the gambler,” especially desire or lust for wealth. The last of the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:17) even forbids private inward thoughts of material desire or coveting, and Jesus warned in the Sermon on the Mount that “you cannot serve both God and money” (Matthew 6:24).

Yet another moral problem for Swaim is the fact that a certain portion of gamblers “will end up addicted and in financial and moral ruin.” More on that below.

Looking at Judaism, a Super weekend survey in The Forward noted that the late Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik, the prime thinker for the “modern Orthodox” movement, denounced casino attendance and that’s the view of “pretty much every other authority” on Jewish law, before and since. Even the rabbis of Judaism’s liberal Reform branch have called gambling  “non-productive and threatening to the social fabric.” A noted Jewish  therapist says even seemingly innocent small bets can be a gateway to addiction.

Among Christians, there’s a notable split between tolerant Catholics and Protestants, who’ve been mostly hostile.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

With her newsworthy 'firsts,' don't ignore religion angles in Nikki Haley v. Donald Trump

With her newsworthy 'firsts,' don't ignore religion angles in Nikki Haley v. Donald Trump

As a woman and as a child of immigrants from India, new presidential candidate Nikki Haley has scored notable career “firsts.”

But the media shouldn’t ignore that her life story is more religiously intriguing than any of the 16 Republicans on CNN’s list of other potential challengers to Donald Trump. She’s been regularly subjected to questions about conversion from her parents’ Sikh religious faith to Christianity at age 24.

Moreover, Haley right now has a link to a huge 2023 story, the global split in the United Methodist Church. Haley and family are members of Mt. Horeb church in Lexington, South Carolina’s largest UMC congregation with 5,000-plus members.

Mark your calendars: On February 26 the congregation meets to decide whether to leave the denomination after 132 years due to progressive trends in the denomination’s doctrines and discipline that conservatives believe will undermine the Bible’s authority, including on “sexual ethics.” Local coverage here: “SC’s largest United Methodist Church prepares to leave denomination.” Two-thirds approval will be needed to depart.

This doctrinal dispute may not matter in Republican primaries, but it’s easy to imagine Democrats highlighting religious affiliation and LGBTQ concerns if underdog Haley manages to win the Republican nomination for president or vice president.

Already, LGBTQNation and People For the American Way’s Right Wing Watch are on the warpath. Note the targeting of Haley’s friend Pastor John Hagee, who prayed at her campaign launch. As a candidate, she will need strong support from cultural conservatives, which will require clear stands on issues linked to parental rights, religious liberty and abortion.

Born Nimrata Nikki Randhawa and raised in Sikhism, Haley was encouraged by her parents to visit varied churches and understand the surrounding culture. She married husband Michael in both Sikh and Methodist ceremonies and soon after converted to Christianity.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Why you probably missed news about the FBI memo calling out 'radical traditionalist' Catholics

Why you probably missed news about the FBI memo calling out 'radical traditionalist' Catholics

The politicization of American society has affected a great number of institutions — from universities to major sports leagues to large corporations. Right now, there are a great many things that divide us as Americans.

The FBI has also become politicized. This is a belief that picked up momentum during Donald Trump’s presidency, but continues to exist now under the Joe Biden administration. If journalism is the place that you believe should shed a light on this painful paradox, then you’d be sadly mistaken.

Not only has the FBI possibly been politicized, but so has journalism, and we’re all poorer for it. A great example of this journalistic disconnect is an important story that “conservative” and “religious” media covered, while it was ignored by the vast majority of mainstream news outlets, including our culture’s most elite and powerful newsrooms.

The key question: Has the FBI decided that “radical” Catholics are dangerous and a threat to American public life?

On Feb. 8, a website called UncoveredDC reported on an FBI document titled “Interest of Racially or Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremists in Radical-Traditionalist Catholic Ideology Almost Certainly Presents New Mitigation Opportunities.”

UncoveredDC says on its website that it pledges “to work hard to bring you the unvarnished truth, a concept the legacy media abandoned long ago.” It is considered a right-wing news website given the people it covers and the angles it takes on stories. That doesn’t mean that what they are reporting on isn’t true, especially if it comes on the form of official government documents.

The memo, out of the FBI’s Richmond, Va. field office, zeroed in on what it called “Radical-Traditionalist Catholics.” The memo notes that FBI investigations have found that there is a “growing overlap” between white nationalists and the RTCs. The Jan. 23 memo claimed that RTCs are a small minority within Catholicism. It said that they adhere to beliefs that are “anti-Semitic, anti-immigrant, anti-LGBT” and linked to “white supremacy.”

That sounds like a big story, especially with a rosary-carrying Catholic in the White House, even if he is a Catholic who has — in word and deed — rejected some ancient doctrines of the church.

Why was this story not covered by most news outlets?


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Pope Francis and a liberal U.S. cardinal spark new firestorm on sex, sin and Eucharist

Pope Francis and a liberal U.S. cardinal spark new firestorm on sex, sin and Eucharist

When popes talk about sex, it tends to make headlines.

This was certainly true when Pope Francis told the Associated Press, "Being homosexual isn't a crime." He said the Catholic Church opposes criminalizing homosexuality and that, "We are all children of God, and God loves us as we are." The pope then noted that homosexual activity is "not a crime. Yes, but it's a sin."

The pope immediately responded to questions from Outreach.faith, a website serving LGBTQ Catholics. Francis explained: "I was simply referring to Catholic moral teaching, which says that every sexual act outside of marriage is a sin. … This is to speak of 'the matter' of sin, but we know well that Catholic morality not only takes into consideration the matter, but also evaluates freedom and intention; and this, for every kind of sin."

The timing was striking since the AP interview ran on January 25 -- one day after the Jesuit magazine America published a controversial essay by Cardinal Robert W. McElroy of San Diego, who Pope Francis selected as a cardinal last year.

"It is a demonic mystery of the human soul why so many men and women have a profound and visceral animus toward members of the L.G.B.T. communities," concluded McElroy. "The church's primary witness in the face of this bigotry must be one of embrace rather than distance or condemnation. The distinction between orientation and activity cannot be the principal focus for such a pastoral embrace because it inevitably suggests dividing the L.G.B.T. community into those who refrain from sexual activity and those who do not."

The cardinal linked this "pastoral" approach to another hot-button issue -- offering Holy Communion to Catholics divorced and remarried outside the church. Previously, he had claimed that the "Eucharist is being weaponized and deployed as a tool in political warfare" by bishops attempting to withhold Communion from Catholic politicians who publicly promote abortion rights.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Dangerous four-way intersection looms ahead in Christian debates about LGBTQ issues

Dangerous four-way intersection looms ahead in Christian debates about LGBTQ issues

Flying home from his February Africa pilgrimage, Pope Francis held an unprecedented three-man press conference alongside Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby, leader of the Church of England and some 85 million members in the global Anglican Communion, and the Right Rev. Iain Greenshields, this year’s titular head of the Church of Scotland (equivalent of the mainline U.S. Presbyterians).

These men personify three emerging approaches to same-sex revisionism that reporters will be observing. A fourth option,of course, is strict limitation of sex to heterosexual marriage, a doctrine articulated in the Catholic Catechism and shared by all churches until recently. For example, see this summary issued last week by the Rev. J.D. Greear, a former Southern Baptist Convention president.

In the West, many “mainline” Protestant groups have shifted to option one — full-on approval of same-sex relationships, exemplified by liturgies to celebrate church weddings. The Church of Scotland joined them last May as assembly delegates gave this change 67% support. (Dissenting clergy will not be forced to perform weddings they oppose in conscience.) This followed an earlier go-ahead in America’s largest Presbyterian denomination.

With option two, Pope Francis has not proposed any alteration in the Catholic teaching that same-sex acts are sinful, but is ambiguous about how Catholic churches should welcome and potentially bless gay people (see this earlier GetReligion post on a test case in Chicago). That and his other “dialogue” initiatives rile doctrinal traditionalists. Backed by Welby and Greenshields, Francis asserted that secular law should not criminalize people for gay acts -- a striking plea in Africa, where many nations outlaw gay activity and some impose the death penalty.

Then Archbishop Welby’s church made an historic decision for option three — half-way liberalization. This approach would continue to bar same-sex weddings, while approving church “blessing” ceremonies for such couples after their civil marriages (legal in England since 2013). After six years of formal nationwide church discussion, and more than eight hours of floor debate, the General Synod voted February 9 to “welcome” that policy, which the bishops approved in January.

The motion expressed repentance over past and present “harm that LGBTQI+ people have experienced” in church. Welby and the Archbishop of York jointly stated that their church “will publicly, unreservedly and joyfully welcome same-sex couples.” This includes sexually active same-sex couples? Debate continues on that point.

This decision by no means settles matters.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Christian nationalism? Try discussing that serious topic in crisp, punchy Twitter terms

Christian nationalism? Try discussing that serious topic in crisp, punchy Twitter terms

Every now and then, I envy Bobby Ross, Jr.

Why? He has such a knack for writing short, crisp introductions to punchy posts.

You know, posts that open with a few blunt sentences.

Then they jump to a headline and a URL, like this: “Poll: A third of Americans are Christian nationalists and most are white evangelicals.

Then Ross is off and running.

What comes next? Frequently, he embeds several relevant tweets on the topic. That’s helpful, since it shows readers who is saying what.

That’s that.

So let’s try that with a very complicated Twitter storm linked to that Religion News Service headline mentioned earlier. This report is built on the results of a survey from the Public Religion Research Institute and the Brookings Institution: “A Christian Nation? Understanding the Threat of Christian Nationalism to American Democracy and Culture.”

This story led to some fascinating discussions on Twitter — including links to information about the funding for the RNS project to expose Christian nationalism.

Try to write something short and punchy about that. Ah, but I can point to the Twitter sources.

First, here is the top of that RNS story:

(RNS) — A new survey finds that fewer than a third of Americans, or 29%, qualify as Christian nationalists, and of those, two-thirds define themselves as white evangelicals.


Please respect our Commenting Policy