Reading today's Jerusalem Post, I came across a reflection on how observance of the High Holy Days has changed for American Jews over the course of centuries, and I got to thinking about how the election and the unfolding financial crisis will color this year's.

Jewish Week editor and publisher Gary Rosenblatt examines the election through the lens of the holiday:

As we move toward the final days of the presidential campaign in a nation increasingly divided between Red and Blue, between opposing visions of how America should deal with its growing problems, domestic and foreign, what, if anything, do the High Holy Days teach us?

It’s an age-old challenge for religion, to link our soul-searching to our daily concerns. But in truth the theme of these Days of Awe, like that of this political season, is all about the need for and capacity to change — in this case, the challenge to take stock of our thoughts and actions and turn inward, not to escape reality but to better ourselves in responding to the trials of everyday life.

Judaism is about the here and now. Our sages spent little time postulating on the afterlife, focusing instead on mitzvot whose overarching purpose is summed up by Hillel’s famous axiom: “What is hateful to you, do not do unto others.”

When we are commanded to emulate God and be a holy people, it does not mean to live a life removed from society but rather to engage with others in ways that make them, and us, more human, in the best sense of the word.

Newsday's Bart Jones reports that, in keeping with this spirit, Rabbi Charles A. Klein, chair of the New York Board of Rabbis will prompt his congregation to reflect on our national economic ethos:

Klein said he will tell his flock the crisis raises fundamental questions about who we are as a society and what values we are cultivating.

"What brought the crisis on?" said Klein, who is president of the New York Board of Rabbis. "If it's a result of people accepting the idea that greed is good," then that would contradict Jewish teachings.

Words for believers and nonbelievers alike to ponder.

Posted by Dan at 03:37 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

The people are not on your side. Religion News Service reported this morning that 54 percent of Americans think pastors should not be allowed to endorse candidates from the pulpit without risking their 501c3 tax exemption, 40 percent thought clergy should be allowed to do so, and the remainder weren't sure. Just as remarkably, 39 percent strongly disapproved of endorsement and 22 percent strongly approved -- remember this if and when pastors claim the mantle of popular approval during the ADF-sponsored "Pulpit Initiative" this weekend.

What gets me about ADF's claim that pastors are somehow persecuted or denied freedom of speech by IRS regulations is that it's just not true. If clergy want to explicitly make their houses of worship part of a political machine, fine. But they are not entitled to a tax exemption for that. If there were no regulations of tax-exempt organizations' political activity, political groups would have a pretty strong incentive to just set themselves up as houses of worship. I seriously cannot imagine how any religious leader would think that's a good thing.

Posted by Dan at 09:11 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (1)

Following up on last week's sudden firing of 100 Muslim workers at a JBS Swift meatpacking plant in Greeley, Colorado, 500 Muslim workers at the company's plant in Grand Island, Nebraska, have walked off the job to protest being denied time to pray at work during Ramadan.

On one level, this is a workers' rights and religious freedom issue, but the underlying problem seems to be a basic lack of respect for Muslims at this meatpacking company. Seriously, can you just let people schedule break times around prayer? Is that too much to ask?

UPDATE: The Greeley Tribune reports that proceedings for reinstatement are stalled, and that the incident has a lengthy backstory.

Posted by Dan at 09:48 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

At Progressive and Religious, FPL friend Robby Joneshosts a podcast with Rabbi David Saperstein, Director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism. Throughout, Saperstein articulately emphasizes the connection between faith and social justice:

There is hardly a classic text of Judaism that does not resound with both spiritual meaning and God’s call for us to be engaged in creating a better world, the two major themes from my own life. So you can open up almost any story in the Bible and find such themes – read any psalm, any proverb, any of the stories of the prophets – and feel this deep spiritual resonance that speaks across the centuries in the embodiment of this call that we are capable and called to create a more just and fair world for humanity.

Saperstein describes two challenges that lie ahead for religious progressives -- Keeping focus on the spiritual truths which catalyze their social views:

We have lost somewhat the deep religious grounding of the social gospel tradition in the Christian community, of the prophetic tradition in the Jewish community, that our engagement in responding to the call of our texts and our God and our religions for us to be God’s partners in creating a better world is a deeply and profoundly religious task. And working to recapture that is I think the central challenge.

...and ensuring their voices receive an equal hearing in the public square:

Why is it that the media defaults to this notion of authenticity and that somehow the religious vote, the religious voice is those who are fundamentalist in our society? This is a very difficult challenge for genuinely religious, theologically liberal believers to grapple with and has proved very difficult, particularly in the last 50 years, as media has fed this bias, for them to strongly perpetuate their vision of religion. And I think will remain in the 21st century a central challenge for progressive religion.

Click here for the full discussion with one of America's foremost religious leaders

Posted by adanielsen at 12:14 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (1)

Plans by some conservative Christians in Fresno to organize another "Christian-only" National Day of Prayer service at Fresno City Hall were thwarted when members of the Interfaith Alliance of Central California showed up holding signs saying One Nation/Many Faiths. For the first time in 16 years - in this 54 sec video, Kamal Abu-Shamsieh, director of the Islamic Cultural Center of Fresno, graciously integrates the day of prayer.

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 05:57 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

First published in 1907, Walter Rauschenbusch's Christianity and the Social Crisis became one of the most influential religious documents of the 20th century, in inspiring leaders such as Martin Luther King, Jr., Mahatma Gandhi, Reinhold Niebuhr and Desmond Tutu towards promoting social justice. On the 100th anniversary of the publication of this seminal work, Rauschenbusch's great-grandson has released an updated version that includes new commentary by leading social justice thinkers of our time.

Rev. Paul Rauschenbusch, a pastor and social justice advocate, has been touring the country and has an important perspective on the state of inequality in America and the role of faith in the 2008 Presidential campaign.

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 05:33 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

Os Guiness, author and social critic, explains the origin and raison d'etre of the Evangelical Manifesto.

The chairman of Christianity Today International, John Huffman, discusses the meanings of "evangelical."

Richard Mouw, president of Fuller Theological Seminary, critiques that recent past history of evangelicals for "perpetuating a kind of warfare mentality."

Christianity Editor, David Neff, explains that any societal engagement must be subservient to the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 06:56 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

Some friends of mine organized this panel discussion at the Graduate Theological Union. I thought - in light of Opening Day and all - that the questions might provoke some interesting discussion for folks who like to think about the variety of ways that faith works in public life.

• Do pastors really need to know anything about sports?
• What can sports teams and sports fans teach Christians about community?
• How do athletics serve a liturgical purpose?
• Are sports competing with church in US society? How so? Is that a bad thing?
• What sermon will you give on Super Bowl Sunday?
• How can sports and religion cooperate to bring about justice and improve people's lives?
• What are some ethical implications of the Olympic Games?

On that last question, in light of all the unrest in Tibet lately and China's role in the Darfur genocide, do lovers of sport and human freedom, have a role to "play" here too?

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 02:28 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (1)

A little while ago when I was rereading Barack Obama's speech, shouts and sirens drew me to my office window. Nine stories below, Capitol police pushed a cluster of maybe 100 Code Pink protesters out of the intersection of Vermont Ave. and L St.

Together, Obama's words and the sounds of protest took me back five years, when the war began.

That Sunday, I sat in a conservative white evangelical church in the impoverished Mississippi Delta -- the corner of the South that most resembles its pre-Civil Rights Movement self. As an aside during that morning's sermon, the pastor thanked the troops defending our freedom in Iraq. Many heads nodded; mine was not one. After the service I made a point of discussing it with the pastor. He was good-natured, but sincerely convicted that America's freedom was at stake. I swallowed my discomfort, mindful of and thankful for my spiritual growth under his guidance.

Unlike my church, suspicion of the motivation for war pervaded the black community in which I lived. My white churchmates seemed to think "America is good, and our government tells us the truth, and if they tell us we need to fight for our freedom, that's fine." Black neighbors and colleagues I talked to thought it was about oil and Bush was lying. Given the persistence of segregation in town, there was little interracial dialogue on the matter (as was true of anything controversial). Although we did not often share a house of worship, my black neighbors and I shared a suspicion of our government and a presumption against war.

On a Sunday soon after Shock and Awe, the sermon included a well-received, racially undertoned joke which unintentionally revealed what looked to me like a consensus of racism in the congregation. On the ride home, I told my girlfriend I had to leave the church, but at her urging I agreed to talk with the pastor before severing ties.

The following week, we visited the pastor's office and argued with him for more than an hour about race, racism and "reverse racism" in the Delta. At conversation's end we did not see eye to eye, but I sensed that he had an open heart and a desire to grow. To quote Barack Obama, "He contain[ed] within him the contradictions - the good and the bad - of the community that he has served diligently for so many years." I chose to stay in his fold.

Still, teaching in a segregated black school all week and going to a subtlely prejudiced white church on Sundays made for great discomfort. I could have left, but as William Faulkner said, "you dont love because: you love despite; not for the virtues, but despite the faults."

Church continued to nourish me, but disagreements recurred. An intentional fellowship program with a black church in town warmed my soul, but occasional expressions of prejudice burned me. Although I didn't change many minds, I firmly believed that my focus on God's call for beloved community was an important part of the body of the church.

So I read Obama's words yesterday about race, church and politics with keen empathy and great admiration. Living astride the color line (as we all do to one degree or another) brings tension, misunderstanding and bitterness alongside enlightenment, growth and community. Those of us who are intentionally attuned to the problems and possibilities that come with integrated community deal with this reality on a daily basis. Obama expressed it with a thoroughness and eloquence I can envy but not approach.

I look down on the protest-induced traffic jam downtown this evening and recall what life was like on the eve of the war, then turn my gaze uptown toward the uncongested black and brown neighborhood I call home. Between the present and the past, war and peace, uptown and downtown, the white church and the black school, I see crevices created by our original sin of racism. But in rousing speeches of unity, intentional acts of community, and the faith that we can overcome, I see bridges of love that can hold all the traffic we can push across them.

Posted by Dan at 05:37 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (5)

Book Review:
What Does a Progressive Christian Believe?--A Guide for the Searching, the Open and the Curious, by Delwin Brown

By the Rev. Anne Howard

This is the book we’ve been waiting for.

We’ve been waiting, I say, because far too often, I’ve heard someone say “I’m a Christian, but not 'that' kind of Christian.” They can say that they are not biblical literalists, they don’t believe that God is a punishing distant monarch, they know there’s more to Jesus than Mel Gibson’s movie. In short, they don’t identify with the Christianity that dominates the public conversation.

There’s a problem here: they can say what they are not, but the question remains: So what kind of Christian are you?

One new book, Del Brown’s “What Does a Progressive Christian Believe?—A guide for the Searching, the Open and the Curious,” gives us a solution to the problem with some pithy, lucid answers.

Dean Emeritus of Pacific School of Religion and formerly the Harvey H. Potthoff Professor of Christian Theology at Iliff School of Theology, Brown writes with clarity and conviction out of his own passion that “progressive Christians join with their liberal and conservative Christian friends in rejecting the agenda of the religious right as a poisonous departure from any credible interpretation of the gospel.” It is high time, he writes, to name this poison for what it is: “a repressive political ideology disguised in Christian trappings.”

And while he is unabashed in his sense of urgency for the articulation of “the profoundly healing voice of Christianity,” he is careful not to offer the definitive script for that voice. This is one man’s version of what he calls the “family of perspectives that vigorously rejects the religious right as a distortion of the Christian faith” and he is able to articulate his own passion with remarkable humility and grace. This is indeed a healing and generous expression of Christianity.

Beginning with a brief historical overview of two strains of Christianity that progressive Christianity is not, i.e. liberal or conservative, Brown gives us a pithy seven-point answer of what it is. It’s those seven points that are stunning, because they are the solid pillars of basic systematic theology: Bible, Christ, God, Humanity, Sin, Salvation, Church.

In this systematic, Brown offers a Christianity that “charts a different course” than liberal or conservative Christianity, a course that embraces the rich diversity of the biblical narrative and the public witness of the church.

In his seven points, he retrieves the value of the bible, affirms the presence of God entwined in all of creation, and breathes life into the creeds (imagine that!) He grounds a view of humanity in the Genesis story of co-creation and the twin commandments to love God and others as ourselves.

Love is the key to his treatment of sin, and he give us a refreshing correctives on centuries of bad preaching. Sin he rightly portrays as a failure to love “loving too much or too little any part of the interconnected web of life”; and sin’s clever strategy of deception, subtle self-deception gives rise to the structures that plague our world: racism, consumerism, militarism, etc.

But there is good news: salvation. And salvation, of course, is not located on the other side of pearly gates, but available here and now in our world where God is “working through all the processes of the creation to bring it to the fullness and health made possible by love.” And we are part of the process, as the church, “the community of those who seek to serve God’s healing work in the world.”

One succinct way to express the value of this book is to point to a phrase that prefaces several positions descriptive of progressive Christianity: “There is a Christian reason for…” What follows is just that, the explicit Christian reason for, say, respecting diversity or working for economic justice or caring for the planet or making peace valuing the common good or or being open to other faith traditions.

Brown gives us reasons by taking us into the biblical record and the early church’s rendering of that narrative to offer compelling reasons that comprise a sound theology. This is what takes this book beyond one more expression of liberal ideals or a philosophical theology that would ignore the particularity of Christianity’s biblical heritage.

All of this leads to his final chapter, “Rightly Mixing Religion with Politics.” We know too much about the wrong way to do this. With six rules for bringing religion into the public square, Brown gives us a recipe for the right way, the generous way, the humble way, recognizing that “in our differences we are, together, ordering and reordering the world.”

This book will help us with the task. Don't miss it!

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 04:16 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

The Many Faces of American Muslims with Paul Barrett, Reporter at BusinessWeek and former editor at The Wall Street Journal.

In the wake of 9/11, Muslims in America are often caught in a religious subculture torn between moderation and extremism. Not only are they confronted with the task of reconciling faith with a permissive society, but they also face challenges to overcome stereotyping. The six million Muslims in the United States see themselves as anything but monolithic with significant differences in background and ideology. In American Islam: The Struggle for the Soul of a Religion, Paul Barrett interacts with Muslims in their homes, mosques, and private gatherings to introduce a population of striking variety. As thousands of American Muslims have been investigated and interrogated since 9/11—and as Islam has come under heavy attack worldwide—a better understand.

In her Salon review, Laura Miller writes: "Author Paul Barrett deftly upends the stereotypes that Westerners harbor about Muslims -- and shows why militant Islamism is less likely to take root here than in other countries."

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 11:45 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

Today, Good Morning America interviewed Eboo Patel, Executive Director of Interfaith Youth Core, and some of the IFYC young Fellows who are working toward a multi-religious future.

Eboo helped to create the idea and organization of the Interfaith Youth Core in June 1998. He has worked as an organizer, teacher and artist on four continents. He completed his Doctorate at Oxford University in the Sociology of Religion on a Rhodes Scholarship. Eboo was named one of "thirty social visionaries under thirty changing the world" by Utne Reader in 2002.

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 04:05 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

As culture war watcher Beth mentioned last week, public observance of Christmas in Basra, Iraq, was canceled after two local Christians were killed because of their religion. That is a war.

Earlier this month Americans United for Separation of Church and State threatened to sue the city of Dallas, Ga., if they didn't remove a nativity scene from public property. That is a legal dispute about the proper use of public property.

This distinction seems lost on the good people at CBN (among many others). According to their story about Dallas, Christmas is "under attack" and "under siege" and "simply part of a larger war being waged on anything and everything Christian."

All I want for Christmas is the cessation of these toxic war metaphors. How about this: if people aren't dying, don't call it a war. The purpose of war metaphors is to cultivate a sense of fear, outrage and victimhood, and if fear, outrage and victimhood have to be cultivated with absurdly exagerrative rhetoric, those sensibilities are unwarranted.

Posted by Dan at 02:32 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (2)

Bill O'Reilly won the epic "war on Christmas," and he just can't stop bragging about it. And if you suggest that this war is a triviality or a distraction from a much greater threat to Christmas, then you just don't get it. C'mon.

That's the gist of what he told Rev. Derrick Harkins on the Radio Factor today. Rev. Harkins, senior pastor of 19th St. Baptist Church in Washington, shared a perspective shaped by his pastoral leadership (as opposed to, say, ginning up outrage for sake of ratings and bucks).

Since Bill has won the war on Christmas, perhaps he shouldn't take Harkins' wisdom as a threat. But since Harkins and other religious leaders signed an Open Letter to Christmas Culture Warriors as part of Catholics In Alliance and FPL's Christmas Campaign, O'Reilly has taken exception to it on TV and now the radio.

Now that the dreaded secularists have been defeated, maybe Bill could acknowledge that concerns about runaway commercialization and greed are not socialist nonsense. Check out the audio of Rev. Harkins suggesting that the Christmas warriors put their guns away or aim them at the culture of materialism that has so diluted the meaning of the holiday. As Harkins says, "the essence of Christmas is far weightier than whether a 19-year-old clerk at Wal-Mart says merry Christmas or happy holidays."

Posted by Katie at 03:20 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

The updated document on Catholic participation in public life was made public today by the U.S. Catholic Bishop's Conference. Anything that the bishops put out usually gets a good amount of attention, so I won't spend too much space right now pontificating (pun intended) on its significance. The quick and dirty summary: not bad.

The document (and the shorter summary) put forward a very mainstream vision of Catholic political thought and the common good. Attempts by certain conservative bishops (Burke) to steer the Conference rightward appear to have been thwarted.

Indeed, partisans on both sides of the aisle are likely to be alternatively delighted and disappointed by the statement which highlights the primacy of issues like abortion, stem cell research, poverty, immigration and torture for Catholics while affirming that Catholics should not be "single issue voters."

Many Catholics, myself included, have often struggled with how to make political sense out of Church teaching. If nothing else, this document seems to affirm that challenge and the many directions one's conscience might take in trying to solve it.

Below is an excerpt from the statement's introduction:

As a nation, we share many blessings and strengths, including a tradition of religious freedom and political participation. However, as a people, we face serious challenges that are clearly political and also profoundly moral.

We are a nation founded on “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” but the right to
life itself is not fully protected, especially for unborn children, the most vulnerable members of
the American family. We are called to be peacemakers in a nation at war. We are a country
pledged to pursue “liberty and justice for all,” but we are too often divided across lines of race,
ethnicity, and economic inequality. We are a nation of immigrants, struggling to address the
challenges of many new immigrants in our midst. We are a society built on the strength of our
families, called to defend marriage and offer moral and economic supports for family life. We
are a powerful nation in a violent world, confronting terror and trying to build a safer, more just,
more peaceful world. We are an affluent society where too many live in poverty and lack health
care and other necessities of life. We are part of a global community facing urgent threats to the
environment that must sustain us. These challenges are at the heart of public life and at the center
of the pursuit of the common good.

...In this statement, we bishops do not intend to tell Catholics for whom or against whom
to vote. Our purpose is to help Catholics form their consciences in accordance with God’s truth.
We recognize that the responsibility to make choices in political life rests with each individual in
light of a properly formed conscience, and that participation goes well beyond casting a vote in a
particular election.

Posted by Beth Dahlman at 03:08 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

At University of Virginia,

Jon Meacham, the managing editor of Newsweek discussed his latest book, American Gospel: God, the Founding Fathers, and the Making of a Nation. Meacham chronicles America's ongoing struggle between politics and religion from George Washington to Ronald Reagan.

He examines the role religion has played in many of the major events in our nation's history such as the Declaration of Independence, the Civil War and Martin Luther King, Jr.'s call for civil rights. The book looks at how our founding fathers' views on faith have shaped religion's place in American public life.

Watch or download the whole talk here.

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 01:27 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (3)

We Believe Ohio, an interfaith group of religious leaders, told Ohio media and the nation yesterday that political campaign tactics are a moral issue, that distortion, character assassination and cynical polarization are inconsistent with the teachings of their faiths. Several members spoke of the command not to bear false witness, as negative campaigns essentially do, but the message was ultimately hopeful.

"Some will say that we are looking for a miracle," said Cantor Jack Chomsky of Congregation Tifereth Israel in Columbus. "Who would work for miracles if not us? We embrace the idea that miracles happen every day."

Work for miracles, not wish for them. Leaders of We Believe Ohio will monitor campaign speech and advertising and speak out as necessary against tactics that violate the group's stated principles. As a group of faith leaders, We Believe brings a moral authority that watchdog groups lack. Hopefully the weight of their voice will encourage candidates and parties to embrace the values they espouse, run campaigns worthy of a democracy, and keep the shadow groups on a leash. We watch and wait hopefully.

Posted by Dan at 03:22 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 04:39 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

As mentioned yesterday, an interfaith coalition called We Believe Ohio is determined to keep gutter politics out of Ohio during the upcoming election cycle by summoning the moral authority of religious leaders and the will of the people to tell the campaigns what they will affirm and what they will condemn.

A hop, skip and a jump across the Ohio River, we're seeing some sleaze on election day in Kentucky. On election eve Governor Ernie Fletcher suddenly chose to put the Ten Commandments in the state capitol and fly around the state proclaiming himself the values candidate, and at the same time the state GOP and some mysterious outfit that loves Fletcher very much are making automated calls telling voters that Steve Beshear, his likely victorious opponent is a partisan of "the homosexual lobby" and "every homosexual cause." Message -- vote for God or vote for Sodom.

Fletcher is deliberately (and desperately) polarizing voters, and polarization feeds on feeds off of distrust, misunderstanding, and animosity. Simply put, it is spiritually degrading.

Posted by Dan at 12:29 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (1)

Christianity Today is launching a survey of Christians' beliefs on multiple aspects of public life. Progressives must be heard. All you have to do is register; they will email you the polls later. Please participate!

Let Your Voice Be Heard

Are you willing to share your opinions about current events, issues, and trends, and how your views are impacted by your faith?

NationalChristianPoll.com is an online research community of Christians sharing their opinions, ideas, reactions, and needs. Help us provide a reliable, unbiased perspective, so that the collective Christian voice can be heard by the media, pastors, church leaders, resource providers, and others.

It's Easy

Joining is a simple 3-step process. Our surveys are designed to be as easy as possible and are delivered via e-mail so you can take them at your convenience.

Earn Rewards

Every survey you complete earns you Thanks2Upoints redeemable for various rewards from our catalogs.

If you are currently a resident of the United States, Join now and become a part of the NationalChristianPoll.com Community.

Posted by Dan at 12:12 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (1)

By their deeds shall we know our public servants. That applies not just to how they govern, but to how they run their campaigns. When it comes to electoral politics, the conventional wisdom seems to be that there's no middle ground between cynicism and naivete, but an interfaith coalition called We Believe Ohio seeks to prove otherwise with a prophetic call for honest, informative, positive political campaigns in the state.

Columbus Dispatch editor Joe Hallett wrote a column yesterday about a discussion he had with We Believe's Rev. Tim Ahrens which perfectly captures the pessimism that year after year of negative campaigning produces:

Each campaign season, a well-meaning group comes up with a clean-campaign pledge that candidates use to their own advantage or ignore as they unleash hired guns to manipulate voters' hopes and dreams, frustrations and fears with half-minute television messages.

I called Ahrens the next day and confessed my skepticism, along with my intention to use him as fodder for this column. He understood and, good preacher that he is, said his group would forge ahead against the odds, putting its faith in the underlying goodness of Ohio voters and their elected representatives.

"What we're looking for is an avalanche of people saying, 'We need to do this.' This affects our kids. Some of the worst TV our kids see is at election time, with these horrible political advertisements about their leaders."

So many candidates today hawk their Christian credentials while ceding their integrity to paid consultants whose bottom line is winning, no matter what it takes.

"At what point do we give away all the integrity of our lives in order to get something else?" Ahrens said. "When you bear false witness against your neighbor, it says more about you than your neighbor. We really have to deal with the effect these campaigns are having on us as a society."

We Believe is holding press conferences in Cleveland and Columbus on Thursday to declare Ohio a political Sleaze Free Zone. A petition endorsing this declaration is quickly amassing hundreds of signatures as it begins to circulate through churches, synagogues and mosques across the state, and it will be presented to the state political parties, campaigns, and the board of elections. If it gives candidates the courage to keep their campaigns out of the gutter, it'll be a resounding success, but an interfaith demand for an end to the sleaze and an embrace of the positive is an important witness regardless of whether it is heeded.

Posted by Dan at 02:15 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (1)

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 10:44 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

You think you know evangelicals? Reading David Kirkpatrick or Jeff Sharlet leaving you hungry for more analysis of the role of faith in American politics?

It's Friday, you've worked hard this week, stop and watch this Bloggingheads.tv debate between Amy Sullivan, TIME's leading journalist of the religious left and Rod Dreher, Beliefnet's Crunchy Con.

A new evangelical promiscuity in politics (14:46) Does the GOP pay the base back? (09:50) Christian conservatives' chaste Obama flirtation (06:23) Why Romney can't pull a JFK (07:38) A conservative retreat from politics? (05:39) The conservative war on (commercialized) Christmas (04:01)

Click here for some Rendering Unto the GOP

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 12:31 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (3)

Yesterday's Pew election poll pitted Giuliani versus Clinton in the general election, and the data reflects what the news has been saying ever since last November: the Republican advantage among Christians is evaporating. (The poll didn't have breakdowns of Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, or Hindus). Comparing the '04 presidential exit polls and Pew's latest survey, Clinton has gained 9 points among weekly churchgoers, and nips at Giuliani's heels 48-52. The gap amongst white evangelicals is still a yawning 33-67, but that's an 11-point improvement from the last election. Clinton gained ground amongst every religious category except mainline protestants, from whom she lost one percentage point.

Posted by Dan at 05:13 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

Let's probe a real All Hallows Eve fissure in the popular "crackup" narrative developing on the religious right. Noting the effect of the Giuiliani campaign on this "death," "reconfiguration," or "reformation," of social conservatives, the American Spectator's W. James Antle III prognosticates in The Politico, on the effect a Giuliani win in November would have on the role of abortion in his own party. He writes:

For starters, the media will portray a Giuliani win as a victory for the right to choose [between pro and anti] and the final defeat of the religious right. The GOP is filled with politicians who oppose abortion only because it is the path of least resistance. President Giuliani would alleviate the pressure. Republicans who aspire to the presidency have always been well-advised to become anti-abortion. A Giuliani defeat of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney would advertise that such conversions are no longer required.

If this plays out, Giuliani could be creating a kind of reverse litmus test for future GOP candidates. Antle argues:

It will also reveal whether those who speak on behalf of “values voters” know what they are talking about. Giuliani has previously donated money to Planned Parenthood, praised Margaret Sanger and advocated taxpayer-funded abortion. He remains in support of abortion rights and in favor of domestic partnerships.

It's important to stop here and point out that Pat Robertson is supporting Guiliani, but not conservative Catholics. Now whatever one thinks about the sincerity of Robertson, this raises the deeper question about how this will play out with the Catholic/evangelical social alliance of the past elections. Antle mentions Brownback dropping out, but he fails to note that the majority of Brownback's votes and money came from conservative Catholics. This gets at a deeper problem both in the reporting on the religious right and the "crackup" narrative.

Unless Guiliani starts genuflecting in some churches and on the old social issues, and sans a Brownback endorsement, the cracks may widen between evangelicals who emphasize fighting "terrorism" and antiabortion Catholics who feel betrayed for supporting an unjust war.

On this day that Martin Luther nailed his 95 thesis to the Wittenberg door, it will be interesting to see how some of the major conservative Catholic leaders -- who have carried Protestant culture war water -- will react. Will they feel tricked by a Guiliani-comfortable party, or will they treat everyone to a real "crackup" narrative, aka, a schism?

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 02:38 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (2)

CBS interviews Wallis and Richard Land on the issues that evangelical Christians care about.

The segment features a new CBS poll which found that the top issues white Evangelicals want to hear candidates discuss are Healthcare (23%) and Iraq (20%); abortion and gay marriage didn't even crack the top 4 issues. Poverty topped the list (at 33%) when Evangelicals were asked, "Which issue should Evangelical Christians get involved in?"

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 03:28 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (1)

A clip from the Third Way press conference on new directions in the evangelical community.

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 01:36 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

type="application/x-shockwave-flash"
src="http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docId=-4683336317265074189&hl=en"
flashvars="">

This hour-long video includes leaders with backgrounds in the National Association of Evangelicals and People for the American Way. With the release of the Third Way report pointing out increasing common ground on issues from abortion to GLBT rights to the role of religion in political discourse. The paper, titled Come Let Us Reason Together: A Fresh Look at Shared Cultural Values between Evangelicals and Progressives, offers what its authors and supporters are calling “the beginning of the end of the culture wars.”

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 11:41 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

Featuring a few pithy religion experts and some revealing video of political faith-influenced language, SoulTV explores the question: should a politician be expected to keep his or her religious beliefs separate from public service?

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 07:10 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

Crossposted at The Beatitudes Blog.

“IRS DROPS THE CASE” proclaims the homepage of All Saints Church, announcing that the Pasadena, California church is free of an IRS investigation into a 2004 election-eve sermon – but not exactly cleared of wrongdoing. In short, the IRS has said that the church’s tax-exempt status is no longer endangered, but that sermon was still an illegal intervention in the 2004 election.*

All Saints, continuing its courageous stand for freedom of the pulpit, is not content to let bygones be bygones. The church is demanding that the Treasury Department investigate several legal and procedural errors that might indicate intervention—politically-motivated intervention (imagine that!) – by the Department of Justice.

In a press release posted on the church’s website the Church’s rector, the Rev. J. Edwin Bacon, Jr. said:

“While we are pleased that the IRS examination is finally over, the IRS has failed to explain its conclusion regarding the single sermon at issue. Synagogues, mosques, and churches across America have no more guidance about the IRS rules now than when we started this process over two long years ago. The impact of this letter leaves a chilling effect cast over the freedom of America’s pulpits to preach core moral values.”

It’s that chilling effect that worries me and should be worrying us all. Just last week, I used the word “Democrats” in a blog, and a colleague advised that I take it out, lest my words be construed as intervention into the 2008 elections.

We are looking over our shoulders because of the All Saints case. We are unclear about what constitutes illegal politicking, and it’s my experience that most folks in the pews (or the pulpits) think that any mention of politics in church constitutes “a violation of church and state.”

Whether or not the IRS gets clear in its explanation of the All Saints investigation, and the difference between issue advocacy and partisan electioneering, we who speak for justice and peace need to be loud and clear: it’s OK, and more than that, morally imperative, for Christian preachers to speak out for peace, and against war, to speak up for justice, and against the powers of domination. If we need to find the right (and yes, legal) words to back us up, all we need do is quote Mary and her radical Magnificat, or Jesus and his revolutionary Beatitudes, and let those who have ears hear.

The IRS might want to keep the waters murky enough to chill us to the bone, but we need to be crystal clear about our responsibility to the truth and our right to proclaim it.

As one of our colleagues (Maher Hathout of the Islamic Center of Southern California) said, in a quote picked up by today’s Los Angeles Times: “We need to work together to prevent intimidation.”

*If you don’t remember this whole saga, this sorry business started with a letter from the IRS that arrived at the church in June 2005, stating that the church’s tax-exempt status was in jeopardy because of a guest sermon preached shortly before election day 2004 by retired All Saints Rector George F. Regas. (BTW, as an “alum” of All Saints I am proud to say that Dr. Regas is one of my heroes and one of our nation’s greatest social justice preachers! In that sermon, Dr Regas imagined Jesus in a debate with both Bush and Kerry. He of course did not endorse either candidate, saying that “good people of profound faith will be for either George Bush or John Kerry for reasons deeply rooted in their faith.” But he criticized the war in Iraq. The IRS declared that this sermon was political intervention into the election.

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 08:58 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

In the current New York Review of Books, Ian Buruma examines arch neocon Norm Podhoretz's toughness problem. Describing a short history of the Jewish wing of neoconservatism, Buruma goes back to a 1963 Podhoretz essay: "My Nego Problem--and Ours" in which Podhoretz complains about not being tough enough physically to stand up to the school yard bullies of his youth. For Podhoretz, the power to change life for the better is a physical more than intellectual thing -- even ethnic -- rooted in the history of Jewish resistance and loss and the 9/11 threat that evil was again trying to take away our change.

Cutting through this scaredy cant, Buruma concludes:

The key to Podhoretz's politics seems to me to lie right there: the longing for power, for toughness, for the Shtarker who doesn't give a damn about anyone or anything, and hatred of the contemptible, cowardly liberals with their pandering ways and their double standards. Since Podhoretz, himself a bookish man, can never be a Shtarker, his government must fill that role, and not give a damn about anyone or anything.

However, beyond this bulvon way -- an undergrad mix of Nietzsche and Rand -- there now emerges a new mighty Jewish alternative for engaging the contemporary problems of the world. The current Nation reports:

A new wave of Jewish activists, from synagogues and other groups, seeks to challenge (and learn from) the rise of the religious right. They want to renew the Jewish ethic of tikkun olam--healing the world from social and economic injustice. Until the late 1990s, few Jewish congregations were involved in the burgeoning multi-issue grassroots organizing coalitions. By 2000 twenty synagogues had joined one of these local interfaith activist groups. Today nearly 100 synagogues are involved, and the number is growing steadily. The foundation Jewish Funds for Justice (JFSJ) has helped catalyze this movement.

This JFSJ video features rabbis and lay leaders from synagogues around the country sharing their inspiring stories and reflections on getting involved in this model of social justice work.

Of course JSpot is happy about the coverage, but they note that ". . .more than the numbers is the cultural shift this will have on synagogues - agitating them to be more relational (where congregants know one another’s stories) and less transactional (I pay dues, you provide me with services) - as well as learning how to operate in the public arena in interfaith partnership."

This tough, but dividend-reaping work of religious community organizing -- forming relationships, re-pairing the world -- is what will actually save us from the inhumanity of the brutal school and the battlefield.

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 07:29 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life released a new poll about the presidential candidates' favorability ratings and popular perceptions of their faith. Pew's summary leads off by saying that

So far religion is not proving to be a clear-cut positive in the 2008 presidential campaign. The candidates viewed by voters as the least religious among the leading contenders are the current frontrunners for the Democratic and Republican nominations - Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani, respectively. On the other hand, the candidate seen as far and away the most religious - Mitt Romney - is handicapped by this perception because of voter concerns about Mormonism.

The report's introduction doesn't seem to match its results. Being perceived as religious clearly is a net positive for each candidate, including Romney. While there's no disputing that Clinton and Giuliani are frontrunners in election polls and in "Godless numbers," correlation doesn't even suggest causation here. In fact, there's a much clearer correlation between their popularity and perceptions that they are religious. Buried far beneath the study's introduction is this:

Overall views of the presidential candidates are linked with views of their religiosity; those who perceive a candidate as being very religious tend to express the most favorable overall views of each candidate, followed by those who perceive the candidate as being somewhat religious. Those who view candidates as being not too or not at all religious, on the other hand, are much less likely to express favorable views.

A multitude of impressions, values and beliefs contribute to people's candidate preference. That perceptions of religiosity vs irreligiosity do not perfectly mirror the results of the latest election polls is not an argument against the clear importance of religion to voters. If anything, Clinton and Giuliani succeed in spite of their "godless numbers." For them and for all candidates studied, a religious image is an unmistakable asset.

Posted by Dan at 05:04 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (2)

Continue reading "Faith questions loom large in CNN/Youtube debate" »

Posted by Dan at 10:48 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (1)

This last Easter weekend over 220 bloggers participated in a project to Blog Against Theocracy.

Created by Blue Gal, Les Enragés, Mock, Paper, Scissors, Neural Gourmet, and Talk to Action, it is in support of - but not sponsored - the First Freedom First folks who make great videos on the First Amendment. It was a pretty simple idea, that each blog participating would write at least one post during the Easter weekend discussing how separation of church and state protects all Americans, religious and not.

The project is an interesting example of coordinated activity in the blogosphere. Blogging is becoming more widely accepted as a source of news and analysis, but the use of blogging for coordinated political advocacy is less well charted territory. Hopefully this campaign, which united bloggers of various belief systems and faiths, is only the beginning of coordinated action on a range of issues. It would be extremely encouraging if this or a similar group could move to playing defense against religious oppression to other pro-active campaigns.

Throughout the weekend, the BAT folks recorded several hundred posts in support of the separation of church and state. The Neoskeptic writes about Jefferson's role in shaping religion and American politics (appropriate that he's a UVA alum). Over at Street Prophets, wiscmass writes about the fruits of theocracy. Here's all Street Prophet diaries tagged "Blog Against Theocracy."

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 10:31 AM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

A former three-term Republican U.S. senator from Missouri and an ordained Episcopal priest, Danforth brings exceptional insight to the debate about the political use of religion and the separation of church and state.

He worries that Republican courting of the Christian Right is distorting notions of public and private morality. He laments that when Republicans voted to have federal courts overrule the state court in the Terri Schiavo case, violating long-held principles, it allowed the Christian Right to take over the party.

Danforth urges more liberal and moderate Christians to challenge the presumptiveness of the Christian Right to speak for all Christians.

Click on the side bar to listen to the conversation. From State of Belief radio.

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 04:27 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (0)

"The IRS Works in Mysterious Ways" opines the Los Angeles Times on the federal investigation into the subtext of a sermon preached at the Pasadena, CA, All Saints Episcopal Church.

The sermon, "What If Jesus Debated Senator Kerry and President Bush", was delivered by the Rev. George F. Regas two days before the '04 election. Now the IRS has annouced that it will investigate to see if the church violated its tax status.

But the issue is more complicated. In fact, recently US Representative Adam Schiff wrote a letter to the IRS and the Secretary of the Treasury in which he expresses serious concern over the fact that the IRS said that they would drop the case if All Saints admits that it did wrong. That part of the case is espeically chilling for those familiar with the logic of 17th century convictions and the House Un-American Activities Committee.

Many in the blogopshere - on the left and right - wonder: is the IRS being even-handed?

Conservative Riddleblog announces:

"While I don't agree with this church on virtually anything--it is far-left both theologically and politically speaking--good on them for standing up to the IRS and for refusing to turn over documents, sermons, newsletters, etc, as demanded! . . . God will deal with this church's rejection of orthodox theology and the gospel in his own time and way. But what they preach is none of Uncle Sam's business."

Irenic Thoughts says,"The sermon was critical of both candidates for their views on war and poverty yet the IRS noted the statements against the President as politicking on behalf of John Kerry.

Below a commentor wrote:

. . ."I remember the reputation of the old Episcopal Church as one with old families with old money sipping single malt Scotch and bridge clubs. There was even a joke about using the wrong fork at dinner and going you know where since it was a sin to to be an Episcopalian and not know proper etiquette. Now I look at the church and I'm proud. TEC has really become a church that wants to build the Kingdom of God right here, right now. We stand up and say war is wrong, social injustice is a sin, discrimination is clearly against the teachings of the Gospel, Etc...I'd be proud to be a member of All Saints."

Socially conservative Thoughts and News writes: I and most Evangelical Christians would not agree with them doctrinally on many issues. . .such as acceptance of homosexual lifestyles. . . but the [ IRS investigation of All Saints] affects both equally, as well as those who attend synagogues, mosques and other religious worship centers."

On the question of equality, the Los Angeles Daily News notes, "In Los Angeles alone, 39 churches, synagogues and Buddhist temples were identified by political candidates as contributing more than $15,000 to their election campaigns since 1998, according to city Ethics Commission records. . While the federal tax agency has taken on All Saints, some say it may be overlooking others' political donations as well as whether churches are using federal funds solely for intended social programs. . .the Rev. Ed Bacon of All Saints notes his church has never violated federal law by contributing to a political candidate."

Here's the rector's sermon: The IRS Goes to Church. And here's a recent Los Angeles Times article and a NPR story on the situation.

Julie writing on her blog, Truth, Justice and the American Way points out: "The summons even requests utility bills to establish costs associated with hosting Regas' speech . . .from the very beginning of our constitutional republic, America's pastors and ministers have courageously engaged the culture. We must not allow the IRS, or any other government agency, to now trample this heritage.

Over at Street Prophets, Pastor Dan writes:

"Apparently, they're trying to shake loose evidence that All Saints has been supporting partisan candidates. The request for utility bills matches a similar demand for 'overhead expenses,' which the church takes to be a reference to staff salaries. That seems like nitpicking to me, especially since Regas didn't endorse or oppose any candidates in his sermon. But I don't know the first thing about the IRS' calculus."

Always helpful, the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life provides a Guide on Internal Revenue Code Restrictions on the Political Activity of Religious Organizations.

In light of All Saints, Talk to Action explores the problems surrounding the IRS and church policking.

ReligioNews blog notes: "Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said, 'The church must be reminded that it is not the master or the servant of the state, but rather the conscience of the state.' It would be mighty hard to be the conscience of the country if clergy could not speak about the country's rights and wrongs."

Smells like Snapper writes: "When I heard the most recent report on NPR this morning, I had to scramble to find my blood pressure medication before I blew a cardiovascular gasket. . .All Saints' is one of my favorite haunts. I really love the place--who wouldn't love a rector from Mississippi making it big in LA?"

Hollywood pastor Ryan Bell posts photos from the Sep 22, press conference in which the church leaders announced that they would resist the IRS and go to court.

And finally, a former member of All Saints, the Rev. Anne Howard writes in the Beatitudes Society newsletter:

"I first learned about courageous preaching as a member of Regas’ church back in the 1970s. It was his preaching that caused me to leave my job as a newspaper reporter and come to work at All Saints as the Director of the Interfaith Center to Reverse the Arms Race. It was his preaching that helped me connect that anti-nuclear work with faith, and eventually led me to seminary. And it is the legacy of his preaching that has stayed with me through my years as a parish priest, prodding me to speak the truth when I might otherwise stay silent. . . ."

Posted by Alex Carpenter at 06:40 PM | Link | del.icio.us | Digg | Comments (1)

Dear Amy and David,

Don't worry about the optimism, Amy. We all need plenty of it! Actually, I'm fairly optimistic as well, I guess I just look for boulders on the highway too much.

I realize that I need to clarify something. I don't think that Casey was able to demand equal time because of his pro-life credentials. That is pure political strategy and simply using the law as it was intended. I still think, however, that his reception by the group has more to do with his pro-life stance than anything else. They may respect him for standing up to his party on abortion and to conservatives on gay marriage, but that's because he manages to stand up to different people on the two issues. If he was also pro-choice, then he'd have left a much different feeling in their bellies when he walked away. He still could have demanded, and probably received, fair and equal time. The result would have been different, though. In fact, I doubt he'd have decided it was worth his time.

The most precious resource in any campaign is time. The PPN has maybe three or four issues about which they want to hear a candidate speak. If he's against them on all four, there's no chance he'll convince a voter to vote for him. From a campaign perspective, that's a waste of time. That's why Democrats have, for so long, eschewed many religious groups. It isn't going to help them and they might say something that really gets the religious people lathered up. It's better to let a sleeping dog lie.

In Casey's case, his pro-life position allows him to make the speech something besides a waste of time. There may be a few voters there that actually vote for him. Regardless, their attacks on him, as Amy points out, are going to be blunted. So while it isn't his pro-life credentials that get him the time