, , , , , , ,

Will Joe Biden's faith become a campaign issue as anti-Catholic attacks rise in America?

, , , , , , ,

The summer that has been highlighted by the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, protests and statue-toppling has placed a spotlight on everything that’s wrong with politics.

But there are more dark clouds for people in pews and at altars. As the coronavirus crisis worsens, Christians and people of all faiths must face one stark reality — the possibility that their faith will be further eroded by secular society.

The spread of the coronavirus has been a boon for some politicians. Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden has essentially run a stealth campaign from his home (and benefitted from this safe strategy in the polls), while President Donald Trump has risked one television interview after another in an effort to get his message out.

Trump is acting like a candidate on the ropes, not an incumbent. He appears to have no clear second-term agenda.

The virus, meanwhile, has also given some lawmakers the chance to act more authoritarian in the name of science, meaning churches can close but anti-racism protests can continue. While populism has suffered during quarantine lockdowns (no rallies!), more extreme forces may actually benefit in this election cycle and over the coming decade.

Totalitarianism, in any form, isn’t good for religious people. Neither is the political and cultural balkanization we are witnessing across the country. With three months to go before Americans cast their votes, the divisive nature of our politics will likely get worse.

How worse? During this time of cultural reckonings, some activists have tried to lump Catholic saints into the same category as treasonous Confederate generals. That has forced some Republicans to increasingly trumpet traditional Christian values, while Democrats get dangerously closer to Marxism.

That means that old-school religious centrists — and lawmakers prone to making compromises like former Sen. Joe Lieberman — will disappear from our national politics. These people will be forced to choose a side or remain largely absent from the U.S. political system.

Who will voters support?


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , ,

The New York Times visits Iowa heartland and hears just what its readers wanted to hear

, , , , , , , , ,

Trust me on this. If you want to visit Sioux Center, Iowa, you really need to want to go there.

Even by Midwestern standards, this town is remote. There’s a popular stereotype that many Christian liberal-arts colleges are found in lovely small towns in the middle of cornfields. That’s what we’re talking about here.

However, if you have visited this Dordt University and Sioux Center, you know that this trip is worth taking. This is especially true if you are interested in learning about the fine lines and complex divisions inside American evangelicalism and the Christian Reformed Church, in particular.

I bring this up, of course, because of a magisterial New York Times analysis that ran the other day that ran with this epic headline: “ ‘Christianity Will Have Power’ — Donald Trump made a promise to white evangelical Christians, whose support can seem mystifying to the outside observer.”

Friends, as strange as it sounds, it appears that we have found a topic on which the Times and America’s 45th president appear to be in agreement, for the most part. They share a common, simplistic view of evangelical Christianity in which everybody Just. Loves. Trump.

Before we go there, let me share part of a column that I wrote about the book “Alienated America” by journalist Timothy P. Carney. It appears that he visited the same Sioux Center that I did and what he learned there about evangelicals and the 2016 election didn’t surprise me one bit. This is long, but essential:

Research into (2016) primary voting, he noted, revealed that the "more frequently a Republican reported going to church, the less likely he was to vote for Trump." In fact, Trump was weakest among believers who went to church the most and did twice as well among those who never went to church. "Each step DOWN in church attendance brought a step UP in Trump support," noted Carney.

Reporters could have seen this principle at work early on in Sioux County, Iowa, where half of the citizens claim Dutch ancestry. According to the Association of Religion Data Archives, Sioux County has the highest percentage of evangelicals in Iowa. …

Trump didn't win a single Sioux County precinct in the Iowa caucuses.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , ,

Do these issues matter? Trump utters religious slur while Harris underlines Biden's Catholic questions

, , , , , , , , , , ,

This week’s Joe Biden and Kamala Harris nominations are an appropriate moment to look at the religious angles that writers are encountering in the 2020 campaign.

To begin, a Wall Street Journal column by Brookings Institution political scientist William A. Galston observes that in today’s United States “the level of religious polarization is the highest in the history of modern survey research.”

Which immediately brings up the Quote of the Year. It’s hard to think of any remark by a U.S. president more invidious than Donald Trump’s characterization of Democratic opponent Biden: “No religion, no anything. Hurt the Bible. Hurt God. He’s against God.”

Reporters seeking balance, and any Republicans who were embarrassed by this, could have noted that the 2020 food fight previously featured Democrats belittling the quality of Trump’s religiosity. Biden himself joined that chorus after the president’s walk from the White House to fire-damaged St. John’s Episcopal Church to hold a Bible aloft for the cameras: “I just wish he opened it once in a while instead of brandishing it. If he opened it, he could have learned something.”


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , ,

NPR affiliate dumps Jewish meteorologist who compares Seattle to Kristallnacht

, , ,

When it comes to freedom of speech, journalists are in a tough place these days.

Yes, you are free to vent your views on social media, but should you? Those of us who covered regular beats in the past were told to not air our private views about some of the major players on our Facebook and Twitter feeds.

We were even coached to not place so much as a bumpersticker on our car that advertised our leanings — on anything –- one way or another. For instance, if a reporter covering a crisis pregnancy clinic pulled up to the interview with a Planned Parenthood sticker on her rear bumper, the CPC folks would have every right to conclude they would not get professional, objective treatment.

But if the reporter was a columnist, all bets were off, as he or she was being paid to be opinionated. Which is why the latest weird outrage — National Public Radio firing a Seattle-area meteorologist because he likened the city’s recent riots to an anti-Semitic mob in 1938 Germany — makes no sense.

From the Seattle Times:

KNKX Public Radio announced … it was axing its long-running weather segment with meteorologist Cliff Mass after the University of Washington professor wrote a post on his own blog comparing some Seattle protesters to the early Nazi militia known as the Brownshirts.

Mass wrote that “Seattle has had it(s) Kristallnacht and the photos of what occurred during the past weeks are eerily similar to those of 80 years ago.”

Kristallnacht was a pogrom carried out by the Nazis in 1938 that is widely seen as a precursor to the Holocaust, a turning point in Germany when social, political and economic persecution of Jewish people turned physical.

“We abhor the comparison and find it sensationalized and misleading — it does not reflect who we are and what we stand for at KNKX,” the radio station wrote on its website.

Aren’t college professors supposed to have opinions? Note that this was on Mass’s own personal blog.

Mass, a professor of atmospheric sciences at the UW, said Friday morning that he was “stunned by the reaction. It exploded in a way I was stunned by.”

He said Friday morning, and wrote in a comment on his blog post Thursday night, that he wasn’t referring broadly to all protesters, just referring to people who destroyed property. “I compared those DOING VIOLENCE to Brownshirts,” he wrote in an email to The Seattle Times.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , ,

Wait a minute: This New York Times Story is about the state of GOP life in Tennessee?

, , , , , , , , , ,

Well, I’m not in Kansas anymore. I’m back in Tennessee, but I’m borrowing WiFi in the lobby of an auto-repair establishment (don’t ask the details) while trying to get home.

But being back in the Volunteer state did remind me that I wanted to comment on a recent New York Times piece that ran just before our state primaries. The story is about the brutal, at times, race to win the GOP nomination to chase the U.S. Senate seat that for years belonged to the courtly Lamar Alexander.

The establishment candidate, Bill Hagerty won the race, but it was tight. The Times team focused, of course, on the toxic existence of Citizen Donald Trump. The president’s endorsement of Hagerty was important, but that was only one reason that Tennessee Republicans — at least the ones I know — were so torn up in this race.

But there’s no need to discuss cultural and religious issues in a Bible Belt state like Tennessee when you can focus exclusively on You. Know. Who. Thus, this double-decker headline:

Tennessee Republicans, Once Moderate and Genteel, Turn Toxic in the Trump Era

In the Senate primary race to replace Lamar Alexander, two candidates are fighting to see who can better emulate the president. It isn’t pretty.

The thesis statement near the end adds:

What is perhaps already clear, however, is that the Republican Party that Mr. Alexander long sought to shape — a “governing party,” he once wrote, that translated “principled ideas” into “real solutions” — is not the one he will ultimately leave behind.

Both of the major candidates were conservatives, but one — Hagerty — had a blue-chip GOP establishment heritage, with ties to President George W. Bush. The other, Dr. Manny Sethi — an Indian-American, Harvard-educated surgeon at Vanderbilt University hospital — was clearly running as the outsider.

Believe it or not, Trump backed the GOP establishment guy even as Sethi attempted to appeal to voters on many of Trump’s cultural issues.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The unorthodox life of Kamala Harris: The future of interfaith American politics?

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Hang on for a wild ride.

Try to avoid whiplash.

Yes, it was another crazy week in the world of religion news and we’re going to cover the highlights in a hurry.

Starting with the obvious: Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden’s selection of U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris of California as his running mate brings plenty of faith angles.

Elana Schor, the national religion and politics writer for The Associated Press, notes that the 55-year-old Harris “attended services at both a Black Baptist church and a Hindu temple growing up — an interfaith background that reflects her historic status as the first Black woman and woman of South Asian descent on a major-party presidential ticket.”

Bob Smietana, editor-in-chief of Religion News Service, dubs Harris “the interfaith candidate,” and RNS national correspondent Yonat Shimron offers “five faith facts about Biden’s VP choice.” In a separate story, Shimron suggests that Harris “is also the future of American religion.”

But the crucial angles related to Harris and religion aren’t all positive, even if some news coverage is. Can you say “Knights of Columbus”?

Her selection prompted the National Review’s Alexandra DeSanctis to write about what DeSanctis’ article called “Kamala Harris’s Anti-Catholic Bigotry.” Even before the Harris pick, Kelsey Dallas, the Deseret News’ national religion writer, had reported last week on Biden’s “tough road ahead on religious freedom.”


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , ,

Walking with C.S. Lewis: George Sayer on his friend and former professor

, , , , ,
Walking with C.S. Lewis: George Sayer on his friend and former professor

He always took the early, slow train from Oxford, so he could say his prayers and enjoy the scenery before he arrived at the tiny station at the foot of the Malvern Hills.

C.S. Lewis rarely tinkered with the details of these trips, since the goal was always the same -- to walk and talk with friends. He wore a rumpled tweed jacket with the obligatory leather elbow patches, baggy wool pants, walking shoes and an old hat. He had a battered rucksack and he never carried a watch.

His host was George Sayer, his former pupil at Magdalen College and a close friend for three decades. They usually walked the 10-mile Malvern ridge, with its lovely views of the distant Welsh hills, the Severn valley and the Cotswolds. But sometimes they strayed elsewhere, joined by other colleagues.

"Beauty was so important to Jack and so was good conversation," said Sayer, using the nickname Lewis preferred. "What could be better than putting the two together? One could not have found a better walking companion."

Sayer gazed out the sunny garden window in his sitting room, which served as the starting point for their travels. Then he laughed out loud.

"You should have seen Jack trying to walk with J.R.R. Tolkien! Once Jack got started a bomb could not have stopped him and the more he walked, the more energy he had for a good argument," said Sayer. "Now Tolkien was just the opposite. If he had something to say, he wanted you to stop so he could look you in the face. So on they would go, Jack charging ahead and Tolkien pulling at him, trying to get him to stop - back and forth, back and forth. What a scene!"

That was long ago. It has been nearly a quarter of a century since Sayer led Malvern College's English department and a decade since he wrote "Jack: C.S. Lewis and His Times."


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , ,

Veteran minister and Tennessee lawmaker fights for his political life -- as pro-life Democrat

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

As a teen, longtime Tennessee state Rep. John DeBerry Jr. integrated an all-White high school and witnessed civil rights icon Martin Luther King Jr.’s final speech before his 1968 assassination.

To supporters, DeBerry — a 69-year-old Black preacher from Memphis — is a man of high integrity and strong moral convictions based on his Christian faith.

But to opponents, including Planned Parenthood, the LGBTQ Victory Fund and the Tennessee Democratic Party’s executive committee, the 13-term incumbent is an out-of-touch relic. In their view, DeBerry’s conservative positions on issues such as abortion, gay rights and school choice make him unfit to remain in office.

“I tell people all the time when they talk to me: It’s not about the elephant. It’s not about the donkey. It’s about the Lamb,” said DeBerry, who has preached nearly every Sunday since 1968 and served as the minister for the Coleman Avenue Church of Christ in Memphis for the last 20 years.

The widowed father and grandfather makes no secret that he believes life begins at conception.

That, he contends, is not a Republican stand.

“It is a biblical stand,” he told The Christian Chronicle in a lengthy, wide-ranging interview. “It is a moral stand. It is an ethical stand.”

After 26 years in the Tennessee General Assembly, DeBerry faces the fight of his political life in the November general election.

That’s because the Democratic executive committee voted 41-18 in April to remove him from the party’s primary ballot. The decision — reaffirmed 40-21 the next week — came after the filing deadline to run as a Republican or independent.

At first, it seemed as if DeBerry would have no choice but to give up his seat or wage a longshot write-in campaign.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , ,

Podcast: Portland Bible (or Bibles) was just 'kindling' for fire, saith The New York Times (#SoThere)

, , , , , , , , , ,
Podcast: Portland Bible (or Bibles) was just 'kindling' for fire, saith The New York Times (#SoThere)

Let’s say that it’s a cold summer night and you need to start a fire during your #AltRight demonstration that includes quite a bit of violent behavior.

There are, of course, television cameras present.

How many Qurans would you need to burn — just as “kindling” — to create a news story worthy of coverage by what used to be called the mainstream press? You are, of course, going to burn an American flag, as well, since it is a symbol of the liberal state that is your enemy. You are flying your own banners — such as a Rebel battle flag from the War Between the States.

Do you need to burn one Quran to create headlines around the world? How about two? You are, of course, not showing hostility to Islam. You just need some kindling to start a fire. It also helps to open the cover up so that the camera catches the title page of the holy book.

This was one of the questions discussed during this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in). We were discussing that recent New York Times story that ran with this headline: “A Bible Burning, a Russian News Agency and a Story Too Good to Check Out.”

The setting for this drama, of course, is Portland. Here’s a key passage:

The story was a near-perfect fit for a central Trump campaign talking point — that with liberals and Democrats comes godless disorder — and it went viral among Republicans within hours of appearing earlier this month. The New York Post wrote about it, as did The Federalist, saying that the protesters had shown “their true colors.” Senator Ted Cruz, the Texas Republican, said of the protesters, “This is who they are.” Donald Trump Jr., the president’s son, tweeted that antifa had moved to “the book burning phase.”

The truth was far more mundane. A few protesters among the many thousands appear to have burned a single Bible — and possibly a second — for kindling to start a bigger fire. None of the other protesters seemed to notice or care.

Were the Russians tipped off about the random Bible burning? Where were the CNN cameras? Fox News pros weren’t there to join the conspiracy?

Let me be clear: I have no doubt that advocacy media on the right jumped on this story. That is what they do in this new era of biased news on both sides of America’s cultural divide. I have no doubt that Russian operatives seek to cause division.


Please respect our Commenting Policy