Religion in the News.

[eyeshaveit]

When Does an Embryo Become a Person?

"Embryo-based therapies include use of embryonic stem cells to grow new tissue to replace degenerated tissue, such as in neurodegenerative diseases. Embryos can come from donating parents, or they can be created by cloning the patient who is to receive the new tissue. The latter is called therapeutic cloning and it must be distinguished from reproductive cloning in which one creates a baby with her own genetic make up.

"Therapeutic cloning has the potential to treat a range of conditions, from type 1 diabetes, to degenerative conditions like Parkinson disease and various blood disorders. There are disagreements within the various religions over the use of this technology. But the major objection to anything involving human tissue comes from Christianity ? because of the belief that life begins at conception. The position was expressed in the 2015 letter of Pope Francis but also reflects views of various Eastern Orthodox and Protestant denominations:

"Concern for the protection of nature is also incompatible with the justification of abortion. How can we genuinely teach the importance of concern for other vulnerable beings, however troublesome or inconvenient they may be, if we fail to protect a human embryo? There is a tendency to justify transgressing all boundaries when experimentation is carried out on living human embryos."

"Certainly there are some liberal Protestant denominations that disagree. And there are those who believe other considerations ?finding cures for horrible diseases, for example? come into play.

"Hinduism is not fond of abortion, but India permits termination of pregnancy up to 20 weeks of gestation based on a rationale of freedom of choice similar to that underlying the approach in the United States (characterized by complete freedom of choice for the mother during the first two thirds of pregnancy, but increasing restrictions during weeks when the fetus is viable).

"Both Judaism and Islam see human ontogeny (development from gametes through personhood) as a kind of graded progression. The Babylonian Talmud considers the early products of conception (what science now calls the zygote, morula, blastocyst, and early embryonic stages) k?mayim, meaning like water until 40 days into pregnancy (tractate Yevamot 69b). At 40 days gestation, many embryos demonstrate the beginnings of brainwave activity (although obviously Talmudic period rabbis didn?t know this). At this point, there also has been a heartbeat for about 3 weeks seen easily on ultrasound ?a fact that anti-abortion Christians use frequently in efforts to dissuade potential mothers from ending their pregnancies. But, being like water, a conceptus has no legal or moral status in Talmudic thinking.

"From 40 days through the rest of pregnancy, the embryo/fetus has a status as a kind of property in Jewish law. Thus, somebody who harms a pregnant woman in a way that triggers a spontaneous abortion can be charged for damages. But it is not considered murder, nor even killing, until the next stage, which begins when the fetal head crowns through the vaginal opening. And by the way, that?s not the final stage. In terms of religious ritual surrounding mourning, Judaism does not even see a newborn as completely alive until 31 days after birth. This illustrates a view that personhood develops gradually, and in stages, with development occurring both in utero and after birth. Similarly, in Islam there is a threshold during pregnancy, which the majority of people who think about this say is 120 days (roughly 17 weeks gestation), after which a fetus is considered enough like a person such that a physician who follows Islam would not want to terminate a pregnancy. Even beyond the threshold, however, for many Muslims (as with many Christians at any point in pregnancy), the need to save a mother?s life can supersede fetal needs.

"The mothers? life notwithstanding, the graded views of ontogeny put Jewish and Islamic thinking in line with US laws drafted to conform with the watershed 1973 Supreme Court case Roe versus Wade, establishing fetal viability. Legally, that?s 26 weeks gestation, but medically it has been pushed back somewhere around 23 weeks gestation in a minority of fetuses, but this could change (especially with a new technology called the artificial placenta now on deck to enter clinical trials). The way neonatology is going, along with genetic engineering and other technologies, within decades an artificial womb (to which the artificial placenta is a stepping stone) could become reality. This could turn the tables on abortion policy by altering the paradigm of pro-life versus pro-choice, since a woman?s choice to terminate pregnancy could be satisfied without actually killing the embryo or fetus. Rather, it could simply be transferred into an external life-support environment and developed to term.

"Buddhism is the perhaps hardest to categorize when it comes to cloning and related biotechnology. Technically, Buddhism considers a blastocyst a human life, but it also considers the well-being of non-human animals equal to that of humans. Buddhists tend to vary in their opinions on abortion unrelated to their religion, and many are fervently pro-choice. Overall, Buddhism is accepting of human embryonic stem cell research. Northwestern University Medical ethics and religious studies professor, Laurie Zoloth, points out that cloning could even support Buddhist beliefs: ?Buddhism can take account the pluripotential nature of the cells, their genomic and genetic possibilities, and understands a kind of reincarnation,? she said in commentaries appearing in ABC Science Online in 2004. ?To me it?s a good example of the possibility for even deeply held religious beliefs to achieve change from their own resources, texts, and traditions.?

"Professor Yong Moon of Seoul National University in South Korea, said almost the same thing, even more bluntly: ?Cloning is a different way of thinking about the recycling of life. It?s a Buddhist way of thinking.?

"Artificial wombs, viability thresholds, and reincarnation of cell notwithstanding, therapeutic cloning and human embryonic stem cell research really involves just the blastocyst stage of development. At this stage, for all intents and purposes, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, and essentially all major religions are in agreement and in direct opposition to Christianity. Effectively, this makes the starting point for non-Christian religions essentially the same as the starting point for discussions on human embryonic stem cells in the secular world. So, there really are just two paradigms defining the territory for opinions on embryonic stem cells and things related."

David Warmflash - Genetic Literacy Project - January 9, 2017

David Warmflash is an astrobiologist, physician and science writer.

Complete article (also discusses cloning / stem cells / GMOs):

https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2017/01/09/cloning-stem-cells-gmos-religious-beliefs-shape-thinking/

[eyeshaveit]

Jehovah?s Witnesses sue for right to not stand for National Anthem

"Jehovah?s Witnesses in India are looking to overturn a recent Supreme Court ruling requiring movie theatres to play the country?s national anthem before every film, and audience members to stand for the anthem, according to the Indian Express.

"The sect?s members believe the singing of national anthems constitutes an act of unfaithfulness towards god, according to the official Jehovah?s Witnesses website. The Indian Express reports that a U.S.-based lawyer is working to help file an application seeking to overturn the apex court?s ruling.

"On Nov. 30, 2016, the Supreme Court of India ruled that audience members in movie theatres must stand for a rendition of the national anthem accompanied by images of the Indian flag, ?to show respect for the national anthem and the national flag.?

"The ruling was made after a petition by a 78-year-old citizen who said he was rebuked by moviegoers sitting behind him in a theatre 16 years ago, after he decided to stand when the national anthem was played as part of a scene in a Bollywood movie. It comes just over three months after a disabled man was allegedly harassed in a movie theatre in the Indian state of Goa because he didn?t stand up while the national anthem was being played, as reported by the Indian Express.

"The order appears to overturn a 1986 decision in which the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Jehovah?s Witnesses? freedom to not partake in anthem singing. ?Jehovah?s Witnesses are happy to have had a part in contributing to the constitutional freedoms of all citizens in India,? reads an article on the evangelical group?s website detailing the 1986 ruling"

Rahul Kalvapalle - Global News - January 9, 2017   

[eyeshaveit]

Religion: Good for the soul but Hell for humanity                               

"Some 90,000 Christians around the world were killed last year for no other reason than they were Christians.
Judging from the pushback, however, not many seemed to care. It wasn?t even a footnote in 2016?s year in review, although it worked out to one Christian dying every six minutes, as Italy?s Centre for Studies on New Religions told Vatican Radio. But, alas, there was one death here, one death there, a few more in a more concentrated settings, but nothing that jumped out to demand the world?s attention.

"Some 70% of these deaths occurred during tribal conflicts in Africa, and were therefore out of sight and out of mind as far as the western world was concerned. And dare it be said that these were also ?less-civilized? lives in the greater scheme of things, and therefore easier to let go unnoticed when bombs were going off in Paris and in Brussels, and cafes were being riddled with machine gun fire? In the end, however, the Vatican was not bombed. The Pope was not the target of jihadists.

"Last Friday marked the feast of the Epiphany in the Christian faith, a celebration of the revelation of God first appearing in the human form of Jesus Christ. One has to wonder how many lives would not have perished if Christ were never born and the religion of Christianity never existed. Any religion, for that matter. While religion may be good for souls, it?s hell for humanity.

"How many millions have died in battles fought over religion? Religion, after all, is based on an entrenched faith in something that cannot possibly be proven. It demands an illogical blind adherence in return for spiritual comfort and the promise of a better hereafter in some form of non-dimensional paradise. But it also is so easily twisted. It was a year ago that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau personally met the first of 25,000  Syrian refugees coming to Canada, Muslims fleeing fanatical Muslim terrorists, by saying to them, ?Welcome home.? If only it were so easy or all-encompassing.

"According to the Roman Catholic Bishop of Aleppo, Syria?s Christian minority was reduced from 1.5 million to 500,000 during the five years of the Syrian conflict. They were ISIS?s main target. They were infidels, the enemy Crusaders, and therefore righteous killings. We saw, thanks to the magic of YouTube, what ISIS had done to those captured, and to others who attempted to fight them off. They burned them alive, drowned them in cages, stoned them to a pulp, tossed them off buildings, and slit their throats. Where did the survivors from that demographic go? Certainly not to Canada because the Syrian Christian minority were all but left behind in the bureaucratic processing of the Syrian refugee exodus.

"What, then, if Mohammad never existed? There would be no sharia law, of course, which is the corruption of a peaceful and tolerant Islam. And no Islamic jihadism, but there would be something just as evil. Humankind tends to create its own misery. It was Jesus of Nazareth who is attributed to coining the Golden Rule to summarize the Torah. ?Do to others what you want them to do to you.?

"He should have stopped there. If that philosophy alone had been universally embraced, then the world would have had no need for any organized religion. This would have been a true epiphany, a sudden realization that we are all in this together. But it never took hold."

Mark Bonokoski - Toronto Sun - January 12, 2017

[eyeshaveit]

Defining Evangelicalism

Warren Cole Smith interviews Darrell Bock:

Smith - "The National Association of Evangelicals has a doctrinal statement that lays down eight or nine key points. In your view, What is the best definition of evangelicalism?"

Bock - "The key definition of evangelicalism comes from a British scholar named David Bebbington. He has four elements, but the most important element is a high regard for Scripture, orthodoxy, a piety that comes with it, and then a desire to share the gospel with people who don?t know Christ.

?Evangelical? goes back to the idea of a person who believes in the evangel, who believes in the declaration of the good news. In its most basic sense, that?s what it means. It?s come to mean all kinds of things today, and, as a result, the name and the term itself have become a little muddied. The core idea is someone who is a deeply committed, Bible-believing Christian who?s quite willing and desires to share Christ."

Smith - "If you read The Washington Post or The New York Times or any local paper, it will define evangelicalism almost culturally or sociologically rather than theologically. Is that tendency to identify a whole socioeconomic class as evangelical a problem for the church today?"

Bock - "To some degree it?s a problem. It?s difficult because the term ?evangelical? itself is somewhat difficult. For a lot of the media, ?evangelical? is an equal alternative to the term ?fundamentalist.? For others, it?s a simple moniker for anyone who is conservative theologically, without making distinctions about what they think about particular doctrines. It?s a term that?s used in a variety of ways and a variety of settings, sometimes sociological. Usually there is a theological dimension to it, but the understanding of what that theology is can be a little muddy.

"For some people, evangelicals may only exist in the Deep South. For others, it?s a broader term. You really have two kinds of people in the media: people who cover religion as part of a beat that they work, where they understand some of these distinctions, and other people who, when I interview with them, I?m explaining core theological terms and helping them get oriented to what it is that they are taking a look at. Some of them have very little theological background. Mostly in the media, when you hear the term ?evangelical,? you?re thinking of someone who?s very conservative theologically, someone who may or may not go to church.

"There are a lot of people who self-identify as evangelical because they think it just means theologically conservative. But actually, an evangelical is someone who has a committed faith and a sincere faith. Someone like Ed Stetzer, who looks at these statistics on a regular basis, will say that?s about between 15 and 20 percent of your population, while some people will say there are 35 to 40 percent evangelicals out there."

Smith - "The church was very divided during the presidential campaign. There was a lot of acrimony even between brothers and sisters in Christ. How should we behave now? Where should we go from here?"

Bock - "I think it?s important that the church pull together. I also think there?s a real chance the church can blow an opportunity to have gotten a reprieve on the culture war. I don?t think we need to repeat the mistakes of the older culture war. It?s really important we talk to one another about the nature of the acrimony we had. It was because of the peculiar characteristics of the candidate who led the ticket who we now have to live with as president.

"We don?t know what kind of presidency he?s actually going to bring. To me, the jury is out on whether we have done ourselves a service or not. I?m hopeful that we have. There are certain things he offers to bring that the country needs. There are certain things that also come with the package that have me deeply disturbed because the core of the gospel are themes of reconciliation, grace, the dignity of people, issues related to race. The church is multinational. It?s supposed to have a characteristic of compassion. There?s certain gospel values I struggle to see in some of the positions, in the way they?ve been taken.

"The church needs to have a good conversation with itself, and it also needs to have a better conversation with those who aren?t a part of the church because our goal is not to crush people in a political defeat. Our goal is actually to win them to the gospel. Ephesians 6 says that our battle is not against flesh and blood. It?s against spiritual forces. Those spiritual forces need to be challenged as we challenge people to have a change of heart so they can get the spiritual equipment needed to live the way that God desires them to live. Sometimes in our political rhetoric, I think we forget our mission. When we forget our mission, we don?t help the church, we actually work to undermine it."

Smith - "You said that you?re concerned that the church not repeat the same mistakes of the old Religious Right. What were those mistakes?"

Bock - "I think it was to see the current situation in terms of a strictly political, social, ideological battle. There are things that are attached to the arguments we make that have nothing to do with what the Bible argues that we treat with a passion almost equal to what things the Bible does teach. We?ve got to be able to distinguish those elements of civil concern, and what I might call civil religion, from Biblical religion. That means that certain issues get handled differently. Either in terms of tone, which can be very important, or in terms of substance."

Warren Cole Smith - World - January 12, 2017.

Warren Cole Smith is the Vice President of the Mission Advancement for the Colson Center for Christian Worldview.

Darrell Bock is a professor of New Testament studies at Dallas Theological Seminary.

Podcast of the entire interview - https://world.wng.org/podcast/listeningin

[eyeshaveit]

Racial Divides - Black & White

Martin Luther King, Jr. once said, ?It is appalling that the most segregated hour of Christian America is eleven o?clock on Sunday morning.? Progress is slow on racial reconciliation in this country, particularly given recent events. But why do lingering divisions exist in the Church, the very communities built on the promise of forgiveness and reconciliation? ... Barna examined the divergent ways in which black and white Christians approach discipleship, individually and collectively, revealing insights that may contribute to the realization of King?s dream of an unsegregated hour of worship.

"The term ?spiritual progress? is open to interpretation ... Black Christian leaders are more likely to describe the process of spiritual progress as ?spiritual maturation? (31%), while white Christian leaders prefer the phrase ?spiritual growth? (21%). The language of ?maturation? implies more of an internal transformation and the development of wisdom through life experience, whereas the word ?growth? tends to suggest an approach that entails reaching key milestones.

"When both groups define ?discipleship,? white believers are more likely to refer to it as a ?process of learning to follow Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord, seeking to observe all that Jesus commanded, by the power of the Holy Spirit and to his glory.? ... For black Christians, spiritual progress tends to focus more on life experience rather than achieving goals, about maturing into a Christ-like character as they weather life?s storms.

"The greater emphasis on experience is also evident when looking at motivations for spiritual growth ... black Christians are more likely to say they have been through tough times in life, and that growing spiritually will help them ... but ... black pastors are more likely than white pastors to state that ?guilt about things in the past? pose a major obstacle for their congregation?s spiritual maturation ...

"A crucial part of fellowship for black Christians is mentorship. They are more likely to currently be mentored and discipled by another Christian ... and to be discipling others themselves ... White Christians are more likely than black Christians to prefer being discipled on their own ... whereas black Christians show a greater preference for group-based discipleship ... Black Christians are also more likely to list large group study or discussion groups ... and family members ... as ?very important? in aiding spiritual development.

"Black communities tend toward communal rhythms of spiritual development while white communities prefer a more individualistic setting. It is unsurprising therefore that white Christians are more likely to view their spiritual life as ?entirely private? ... Black Christians, on the other hand, are much more likely to believe their personal spiritual life has an impact on others?whether they are relatives, friends, community or society at large. This was a strong belief of Martin Luther King ... half of black Christians (50% compared to 34%) believe it is their responsibility to tell others about their religious beliefs, further reinforcing the public / private contrast between both groups.

"Another crucial form of spiritual growth is education, or more specifically, studying the Bible. Black Christians, generally demonstrate a higher regard for and deeper devotion to Scripture. They are more likely to believe that the Bible is ?totally accurate in all of the principles it teaches? ... a belief that translates into more consistent and frequent study of the Bible ... and memorization of Scriptures ...

"Black Christians also consistently rate the personal spiritual impact of many forms of biblical study?including memorizing or meditating on Scriptures, studying the Bible in a group or on one?s own or following Bible study curriculums?at higher levels than white Christians ...

"One of the more significant contrasts between the two groups is the role played by friendship in spiritual growth. Black Christians are more likely to rate their relationships with family members, mentors, church members, Christian communities outside of church and small group members as ?valuable? to their spiritual journey. Though both groups equally deem friendships as ?valuable to their spiritual journey? ...

"Black Christians are also slightly more likely to believe that when their friends aren?t as interested in spiritual things, it poses a major obstacle to their spiritual growth ... Black church leaders are also more likely to believe that ?negative peer relationships? pose a major obstacle for people?s growth as disciples ... This outlier of friendships for black Christians is an interesting shift in narrative. Black communities clearly appear to have robust formal relational networks for spiritual development (mentorship structures, family networks or small groups), but it appears their informal relational networks, specifically friendships, is more likely to be a source of spiritual hindrance.

"Three-quarters of Americans agree that ?Christian churches play an important role in racial reconciliation? ... This is good news for the Christian church-at-large. But as leaders and pastors we must learn to celebrate these differences rather than lament them ... Bridging the racial divides when it comes to spiritual practice is a complex task. But it begins by observing current approaches and recognizing ways in which they might be, however unintentionally, tailored toward a specific audience. Sticking to monolithic, cookie cutter approaches to discipleship and spiritual development without considering how to integrate other approaches will unlikely change the status quo.

"Approaches detached from experience that are privately practiced might struggle to appeal to the black Christian experience. Likewise, approaches that rely heavily on broader social mechanisms (such as mentorship structures or large groups) for discipleship will be met with a similar reluctance for a white Christian ...

?Missionaries often know they are going to ?cross a culture,? so they take time to understand the sociology and anthropology of the new people they will engage with. Pastors working domestically don?t often engage this same practice, so generally they don?t lead their church with strong cross-cultural intelligence. As a result, too many Christians jump into conversations about racial reconciliation without a firm foundation of cultural understanding.

As leaders, we have to ask ourselves, How are we forming people? Are we forming people in consumer spirituality? Are we forming people to prefer others before themselves? Are we creating a church for the least of these or for our big givers? When we ask ourselves these questions with honesty and transparency, we allow space for the Holy Spirit to speak to us through a diverse group of brothers and sisters and hear things we wouldn?t normally hear. When we don?t ask these questions, we leave ourselves open to malformation according to our own cultural blind spots.?

David M. Bailey - Barna Group - January 12, 2017.

Complete Q&A with David M. Bailey - https://www.barna.com/qa-david-bailey/

David M. Bailey is the Executive Director of Arrabon, a ministry that equips churches to engage in the ministry of reconciliation.

[eyeshaveit]

Fake News about Religion: Pew Continues to Confuse

"Pew and the media have a history of spinning Pew polls to attack people of faith.  One study by Pew falsely implied that atheists have more religious knowledge than do religious people.  Another appeared to show that Americans are abandoning belief in God by combining people who believe in God but who aren't part of an organized religion with atheists and agnostics.  Pew calls this hodgepodge group "nones," apparently to imply that they are lacking in faith, but the reality is that only a small part of this group actually lacks a belief in God ? which a close reading of the Pew reports shows that even Pew agrees with.

"Pew raises that old canard again in claiming that Americans have gotten less religious under Obama.  The reality is that while the percentages of atheists and agnostics have stayed low, many religious people are saying they're not affiliated with a particular faith. Basically, the "nones" are an example, in large part, of people either rejecting formal church structures or people for whom religion is not a major part of their lives, not people who deny the existence of God.

"Pew apparently tries to inflate the number of truly non-religious people in America by writing:

"When it comes to the nation's religious identity, the biggest trend during Obama's presidency is the rise of those who claim no religion at all. Those who self-identify as atheists or agnostics, as well as those who say their religion is "nothing in particular," now make up nearly a quarter of the U.S. adult population, up from 16% in 2007. When it comes to the nation's religious identity, the biggest trend during Obama's presidency is the rise of those who claim no religion at all. Those who self-identify as atheists or agnostics, as well as those who say their religion is "nothing in particular," now make up nearly a quarter of the U.S. adult population, up from 16% in 2007."

"Yet Pew has to admit, without highly publicizing it, that 89% of Americans believe in God and only 3.1% say God does not exist, while a further 4% say they don't know. Essentially, by adding people not affiliated with a particular denomination and those who don't think religion is an important part of their lives to the 3.1% of Americans who reject God, Pew seems to be trying to convince us that religion in America is rapidly dying.  After all, it would be pretty earth-shaking if 25% of Americans no longer believed in God.

"Clearly, if people were really rejecting God in great numbers, one would expect to see a far greater growth in the number of atheists.  Yet atheists are a minuscule portion of the American population. This is a standard liberal tactic of using fake news to convince people they don't agree with ? conservatives and Christians, for example ? that hardly anyone is like them, and everyone is like the liberals. By attempting to make it embarrassing to admit being Christian, liberals are trying to drive religions other than their own materialistic hedonism out of the public square.

"Just as liberals try to silence the voices pointing out the racism of Democrat policies by labeling all who don't toe the liberal line racists, they use Pew's results to make it uncool to profess one's faith. Of course, that tends to distort poll results, just as the polls missed the support for Trump because people didn't want to publicly admit supporting him. While Obama did work hard to persecute religious people during his eight years in office, there is no data to support any massive change in American's traditional deep-seated religious beliefs.  People of faith are not dodos, nor are they on the verge of extinction.  After all, Pew admits that 71% of Americans are Christians ? hardly a minority.

"To be fair, Pew's most extreme claims appear in their titles, and a close reading of the actual material reveals a number of hedging comments.  But given that it's the headlines that drive the narrative in many cases, the reality is that Pew certainly appears to be distorting the implications of its polls in a manner designed to normalize the liberal narrative and ostracize those who reject the bicoastal elites' beliefs.

"Pew's spinning is probably the result of its staff being trapped in the east-coast elite liberal bubble rather than any deliberate intent to mislead, just as the Washington Post's failure to cover a pro-life march in D.C., which featured hundreds of thousands of protesters, wasn't because of deliberate bias, but because no one on the Post's editorial team is pro-life, and none of them even knew anyone who is pro-life.  Because no one in the Post's bubble knew that the massive protest was going to occur, the Post didn't even know there was anything to cover until after the march had occurred.

"Irrespective of the cause, however, the key take away is that one should never trust any conclusions that Pew puts forth on any topic.  You need to dig down into the details to see what their data really says to ensure that you aren't getting fake news."

Tom Trinko - American Thinker - January 16, 2017

[eyeshaveit]

Austria?s far-right party wants to ?ban? Islam

"The head of Austria's far-right Freedom Party called on Saturday for a total ban on ?fascistic Islam.?
Heinz Christian Strache told an audience in Salzburg that he wanted to see a ban of Muslim symbols, something like the Austrian law that bans Nazi symbols. And he warned that Islam posed an existential threat to Europe. ?Let us put an end to this policy of Islamization,? he said. ?Otherwise we Austrians, we Europeans will come to an abrupt end.?

"The Freedom Party is staunchly anti-immigrant. Stache said Saturday that ?we need zero and minus immigration.? The country has received 130,000 claims for asylum since the summer of 2015. Most are former residents of Afghanistan, Syria and Iraq.


"There are about 600,000 Muslims in Austria, and they're facing a growing chorus of detractors. Recently, an Austrian cardinal (and a top candidate for pope in previous conclaves) asked in a speech: ?Will there be an Islamic conquest of Europe? Many Muslims want that and say: Europe is at the end.? In December, a right-leaning Austrian trade union suggested that Muslims should be denied Christmas bonuses because ?they are against all Christian traditions.?

"This attitude has made it hard for young Muslims to feel accepted. One recent study of Muslim youth in Vienna found that many do not feel recognized as Austrians, which has increased the risk of radicalization. According to the survey, "85 percent of young people who are in contact with a youth worker have an immigration background,? and "27 percent of those teenagers who are Muslim show strong sympathy for jihadism, and violent and anti-Western thinking.?

"The Freedom Party's anti-Muslim message has been well-received by a nearly a majority of Austria's electorate. Its presidential candidate Norbert Hofer was defeated in a runoff vote last month, but gained 47 percent support.

"In the Netherlands, the Freedom Party is running on a platform of closing mosques and Islamic schools, banning the Koran and Muslim migrants. It also wants to prohibit women from wearing headscarves. The next election is March 2017, and the party is expected to pick up seats to become the most represented party in the Dutch parliament"

Amanda Erikson - Washington Post - January 14, 2017

[eyeshaveit]

President Trump and Religious Freedom

"Eighty-eight years ago, the famed African-American civil rights activist Martin Luther King, Jr. was born. Named for the monk who started the Reformation over four hundred years earlier, Dr. King would go on to become a Baptist minister and arguably the most important civil rights figure of the twentieth century.

"His religious beliefs and the freedom to exercise and speak out based on those beliefs were essential to his advocacy for nonviolence as means of achieving civil rights for African-Americans. As King reminded us, ?Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.? Yet without a public square that was open for religious conviction to work and speak, his efforts would not have met the success they did.

"Fast forward to today, Religious Freedom Day 2017, which is on January 16, we find that the religious freedom which enabled Dr. King to do his work is just as needed for the challenges of today. For as King also said, ?[t]here comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must take it because conscience tells him it is right.?  Today, Americans need the same freedom in the workplace, in school, in the public square, in our homes, and in our churches. Everywhere there is air, there must be the freedom of conscience, the freedom of religion, and we must exercise it.

"The importance of retaining this religious voice in the public square, and the feeling that it is under attack, significantly impacted the results of this past November?s election. Fifty-nine percent of Trump voters, according to a WPA Opinion Research survey commissioned by Family Research Council, stated that how they cast their ballots was impacted by the Republican Party platform?s positions on life and religious liberty. This represents over 37 million voters, and these issues will no doubt continue to be a priority for voters as the new administration takes office in just days.

"What specifically can President-elect Trump do to demonstrate his commitment to the issue of religious liberty which motivated so many voters to turn out and vote? To start, religious liberty in the military needs to be addressed. Over the past several years we have witnessed chaplains being disciplined for their faith, and religious speech being censored. President-elect Trump can direct that religious liberty in the military be clarified and strengthened, and that appropriate training is conducted to ensure the law is followed.

"In addition, our foreign policy, contrary to the law, has not prioritized religious freedom like it should. President-elect Trump must direct that religious freedom be properly integrated into all foreign policy of the United States at every level.  As even the United Nations has recognized, religious freedom is not just an American right, it is a human right.  Defending that human right has been an American value until recent years.

"President-elect Trump should also follow through with his pledge to issue an executive order, reinstating government-wide protections for religious liberty. But executive orders halting attacks on religious freedom are just the start, there are many more anti-religious freedom policies of the Obama administration that must be reversed.  That?s why government nondiscrimination legislation is needed to protect supporters of marriage between one man and one woman.  People of faith should not be punished by the government for living in accordance with their beliefs.

"As we start a new year, Religious Freedom Day marks an era of new opportunity for our First Freedom. Let us look with hope to these advancements and beyond to increased protections for all Americans to live out their faith in the public square."

Tony Perkins - January 16, 2017 - Fox News.

Tony Perkins is president of the Family Research Council.

[eyeshaveit]

Murky Future for Religion in America

"If we Americans bother every once in a while to take a serious look at how our society is profoundly changing from what it used to be, we're often  surprised at what we find. Take religion, for example. The long-held stereotypes of religious people in this country simply don't apply any more.

"Daniel Cox, research director at the Public Religion Research Institute, wrote this last summer on the website FiveThirtyEight.com.:

?The U.S. was once a predominantly white Christian country, but fewer than half of Americans (45 percent) identify as white Christian today.?

"One of the reasons for this change is that there are more religions in America these days. Cox explains:

"The American religious landscape is transforming rapidly. At one time, religious diversity meant: Baptist, Methodist and Episcopalian. Today, it encompasses a multiplicity of religious traditions such as Sikhism, Buddhism, Islam and Hinduism, as well as an increasing variety of non-institutional belief systems such as humanism, skepticism, atheism and subjective spirituality. Racial and ethnic shifts have also changed the face of Christianity."

"There are numerous other factors, of course, contributing to changes in thoughts about religion among Americans. . Greater mobility and the rise of social media expose us to a greater variety of attitudes toward religion. Our grandparents and great-grandparents likely knew relatively few people who didn't share their religious beliefs. Diversity was not common among folks in those old days ? at least not in most locales. A funny thing about that is that diversity seems to militate against religious fervor. Here again, Daniel Cox explains:

"Geographically, states with greater religious variety tend to exhibit lower levels of overall religiosity.2The religious diversity for each state was calculated using the Herfindahl-Hirschman index, one of the most commonly used measures of diversity. No state is more religiously uniform than Mississippi. It is a place where, as my colleague and native Mississippian Robert Jones once said: 'It's hard to swing a dead cat without hitting a Baptist.' And this is not far from the truth. Half of the state's population identifies as Baptist and 54 percent are evangelical Protestant. No other state is so singularly dominated by a single faith tradition. It's probably no coincidence that Mississippi is also one of the few states with constitutions that prohibit atheists from serving in elected office. According to Gallup's 2016 rankings  of the most and least religious states, Mississippi has the honor of being the most religious state in the country. A separate measure of religiosity computed by the Pew Research Center has Mississippi tied with Alabama as the most religious state in the U.S. See: Lipka, Michael and Benjamin Wormald. 'How religious is your state?' Pew Research Center, Washington, D.C.: Feb. 29, 2016. In contrast, Oregon ranks high in terms of religious diversity " no one religious tradition makes up more than 20 percent of the state's population " and falls near the bottom in Gallup's ranking. Only four states are less religious."

"Does all of this mean that religion is dying out in America? Probably not. But it seems to indicate that profound changes are at hand. As Daniel Cox says:

"It does not signal the end of religion, but it may make it easier for Americans to abstain from religious involvement and encourage other types of spiritual and philosophical explorations. It may also make atheists more willing to 'come out,' something that can be exceedingly difficult in very religious communities. Organized religion has never been in jeopardy of dying out due to a single traumatic event. Instead, it is a cumulative series of unanswered challenges that pose the greatest risk. Religious diversity might not represent a dramatic threat to religion, but it may represent another small hole in an already sinking ship."

Pat Cunningham - Benton Evening News - January 18, 2017

[eyeshaveit]

Colleges Offer Radical Religion Classes

"It seems that college campuses across the country treat references to God as an offense, unless of course, those references are blasphemous, heavily politicized with a Marxist skew, or simply meet the criteria of the PC police. Whether at a secular school or a divinity school, God is not safe from the unstoppable forces that are radical leftism and PC mania at institutes of higher education.

"For example, Pennsylvania?s Swarthmore College, originally founded by Quakers, is offering a religion class this semester entitled ?Is God a White Supremacist?? The school?s 2017 catalog explains that the class will explore the relationship between race and religion, with a focus on ?the interpretive practices that are foundational to the process of ?whiteness-making? and the construction of white identity.? In that course, students will learn about ?white supremacist ?Christian identity? churches,? the Nation of Islam, and ?religious theories justifying racial domination,? as well as ?the influence of religious thought both past and present on comparative global racisms and transnational whiteness,? according to the course description. Swarthmore College also offers a class called ?Queering God: Feminist and Queer Theology,? in which students are asked to explore God?s sexuality. The course description reads, ?This course examines feminist and queer writings about God, explores the tensions between feminist and queer theology, and seeks to stretch the limits of gendering ? and sexing ? the divine.?

"And yet another course offered at Swarthmore is called "Queering the Bible," which asks students to approach the Bible ?with the methods of queer and trans theoretical approaches.? For just over $60,000 a year, students at Swarthmore College get to enjoy all the delights of a radical college education, including an annual symposium named for a gay alumnus that promotes homosexuality and defying gender standards, as well as an annual ?Crunkfest? that features the ?American Masturbatory Theater Company.? Swarthmore College has surely come a long way since its original humble Quaker beginnings. Sadly, even divinity schools have succumbed to the pressures of this increasingly secularized and radical culture, albeit not to the same extremity as Swarthmore. Still, officials at the divinity schools at Vanderbilt and Duke Universities have asked professors to use gender neutral pronouns in reference to God in order to ?mitigate sexism.?

"Vanderbilt?s course catalog is asking that any references to God use ?inclusive language.? The catalog states that the school ?commits continuously and explicitly to include gender as an analyzed category and to mitigate sexism?. This includes consistent attention to the use of inclusive language, especially in relation to the Divine.? That document recommends ?exploration of fresh language for God,? and states that ?masculine titles, pronouns, and imagery for God have served as a cornerstone for the patriarchy.?

"According to the associate dean for academic affairs at its divinity school, Melissa Snarr, the guidelines are derived from a policy dating back to 1999, but are merely suggestions and not mandates. ?It is up to the individual professor?s interpretation for their classes and is suggestive rather than mandatory,? she said.
Meanwhile, Duke University's divinity school released "Guidelines for Inclusive Language\," said to be ?the beginning point for developing a more inclusive language about God,? and encourages using the words ?God? and ?Godself? in lieu of gender-specific pronouns. 

"What?s more, professors are asked to consider avoiding gender specific metaphors for God, such as ?God the father,? preferring ?God is a parent to us all.? Combining gender metaphors is another option, such as ?God is the father who welcomes his son, but she is also the woman searching for the lost coin.?

?Referring to God in gender-neutral language can sound clumsy. But this is largely due to the fact that we are in a transitional period with our use of language,? Duke?s guidelines said. ?Imagination, patience, and diligence are required in order to use language that expands and enriches our understanding of God.?

"According to CNS News, other divinity schools have contemplated ?inclusive language? for references to God. For example, Harvard?s Theological Review issued a statement observing that ?it is not always appropriate to employ inclusive language when referring to God or divine beings.?

"Notre Dame?s Theology Department asked its departmental community to ?adopt respectful and gender-inclusive language in the conduct of their work and their social life both within and outside the Notre Dame community,? but ultimately left it to the discretion of the professors.

"The thing is that the Bible leaves very little room for debate on the subject of God?s gender, a point noted by CNS News:

In both the Old and New Testaments, God is referred to as male, the ?father.? Jesus Christ frequently spoke about God the Father. A few examples: ?Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they?? ? 6:26. ?Do not let your hearts be troubled. Trust in God; trust also in me. In my Father?s house are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you.? ? John 14:1-2
Then, when asked how to pray, Jesus told the apostles, ?When you pray, say ?Father, hallowed be thy name.'"

"Similarly, the National Review?s Katherine Timpf opined that when talking about the Christian God, ?It?s just plain inaccurate to refer to Him as anything but ?Him. There is a point where an obsession over political correctness can blind people from basic of facts, and call me archaic, but I really do feel like facts are still the way to go,? she continued. ?It would be like teaching Hamlet and calling Hamlet ?she.??

"Aye, there?s the rub. Facts are often the enemy of political correctness and radicalism. Unfortunately, college campuses have embraced the latter."

Raven Clabough - The New American - January 19, 2017

[eyeshaveit]

Weird Day in America

"As a TCK (third culture kid) growing up overseas, I used to be anti-American.  A lot of TCKs are. They see their childhood home overseas as perfect, and America as full of a bunch of shallow, materialistic, boring, couch potatoes. Um, sorry about that.  I could make excuses for my teenage self, that it was all a part of finding my identity between two worlds, but really I was sometimes just an arrogant snob.

"I've grown up a lot since then.  I don't see things in black and white; I know better than to idealize any particular culture or country or ethnicity.  All have beauty; all have been ruined; all can be redeemed.  I've also realized that I am much more American than I would like to admit. And actually, living overseas as an adult has made me much more appreciative of America.  That's what I'm thinking about today, this very significant day in American history.

"I'm thinking about Zimbabwe, where the 92-year-old Mugabe is planning on running for president again--in another sham election--in a country he has held (and destroyed) in his iron fist for 36 years. 

"I am thankful I am from a country where I can have a strong degree of confidence that elections are fair and ethical, and where every citizen is allowed to vote.

"I read about Gambia today, where the president is refusing to step down in spite of losing a fair election, and violence is imminent. 

"I'm thankful I am from a country where despite the fact that the past administration and the new administration couldn't possibly be more different, that we can expect a peaceful transfer of power.  None of us are worried that Obama is going to change the Constitution so that he can retain power.  No one has given thought to a military coup taking over the country, which most recently was attempted in Burundi when the president insisted on running for a third term.

"I'm thinking about South Sudan, South Africa, Ivory Coast, Sierra Leone, Burundi, Uganda, and Ethiopia where journalists are in constant danger, and some have lost their lives. 

"I am thankful I am from a country where journalists--and ordinary people--can vocally and aggressively speak, write, and publish their opposition to the government and not fear being arrested for it. I know there might be some of you out there who are protesting, But...but...but...!  Yes.  I know.  We have big problems, and some of them are huge.  Listen--I'm comparing America to the rest of the world.  We still have a lot of work to do.  But there is a reason we have an immigration problem in America:  Everyone wants what we have.  Those of us who do have it should be incredibly grateful.

"I know that this is a weird day in America.  Some are rejoicing; some are despairing.  As for myself, I am neither.  I am bracing myself for the worst and hoping for the best.  Our president is neither Jesus nor the anti-Christ.  America, in all it's greatness, is just one more blip on the screen of history.  After all, God doesn't owe me the American Dream.  Maybe our country as we know it will last only a few more years, maybe hundreds.  For those of us who claim citizenship in heaven, that is not what's most important."

Amy Medina - Everyone Needs a Little Grace in their Lives Blog - January 20, 2017.

Amy and her husband, Gil are Christian missionaries in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, on the coast of East Africa.

[eyeshaveit]

Ohio Prisons Now Open To Pagan, Wiccan, Satanist Ministries   

"Inmates in state prisons have a new choice to practice their religious convictions: Paganism. The Appalachian Pagan Ministry, a small volunteer group based in Huntington, West Virginia, has held services at two Ohio prisons and plans to expand to three others.

"The Rev. Donna Donovan, ordained as a Druid priestess and an interfaith minister through Universal Life Church, is the leader of the group working with inmates she describes as "pan pagan," referring to religious that are "non-Abrahamaic," which excludes Christians, Jews and Muslims. Her meetings have included believers in Asatru, Odinism, Heathenism, Wicca and Satanism. "The only way to eradicate hate and intolerance is through education," Donovan said. "I don't personally care what your higher power is as long as you believe there's a higher power than yourself." Donovan's group is visiting prisons in Ohio and West Virginia. She has been to the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility near Lucasville and the Allen-Oakwood Correctional Institution in Lima. Her group will soon begin visiting prisons in Chillicothe and Lebanon.
Inmates must request visits by outside religious organizations rather than groups deciding to visit and hold services on their own.

"Jo Ellen Smith, spokeswoman for the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, has an approved list of about 50 religious groups that have permission to visit prisons, including a wide variety of Christian, Jewish and Muslim groups, plus Buddhists, Hindus, Jehovah's Witness, Mormons, Native Americans, Sabbatarians and Wiccans. The organizations must submit applications, pass background checks and undergo training about prison procedures before visiting inmates.

"State records show Baptists (4,739), Roman Catholic (3,420) and Muslims (1,563) are among the highest religions self-identified by inmates. There are also Rastafarians (755), Amish (36) and Druids (21). Donovan said there is widespread public misunderstanding about Pagans and related non-Christian groups. Inmates, too, usually don't know about the religion, she said. "I've seen huge changes in behavior by inmates," she said. "It's helping. Instead of just just sitting there and stewing, they can be taking time to better themselves." She said she meets with 30 to 40 inmates at each Ohio prison. She funds the ministry out of her own pocket and through public donations.

"These inmates, male and female alike, know the mistakes they have made in their lives. They are paying for those mistakes. Yet instead of wallowing in self-pity or continuing to blame outside sources for their current situation, they are holding themselves accountable and doing what they can to grow in body, mind and spirit to ensure they do not make those same mistakes again."

"Ohio prisons opened the door to the expansion of religious groups because of a 2005 U.S. Supreme Court, ruled which found that state could not deny religious services to prisoners. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who wrote the decision, said federal law "protects institutionalized persons who are unable freely to attend to their religious needs and are therefore dependent on the government's permission and accommodation for exercise of their religion."

Alan Johnson - Columbus Dispatch - January 21, 2017

[eyeshaveit]

Queen's Chaplain Quits over Koran Readng, 'Jesus not the Son of God', in Cathedral

"A chaplain to the Queen has resigned after publicly criticising a church that allowed a Koran reading during its service as part of an interfaith project. The Rev Gavin Ashenden, said the reading was ?a fairly serious error? and one which he had a duty to speak out about. ?There are things we should not tolerate because they are destructive,? he told BBC Radio 4?s Sunday programme.?I don?t accept the rather feeble accusation that intolerance is a bad thing.?

"During a service at St Mary's Episcopal in Glasgow earlier this month to mark the feast of the Epiphany, there was a reading of a passage from the Koran which said that Jesus was not the son of God. The cathedral in Kelvinbridge had invited local Muslim worshippers to contribute to the service, which was aimed at improving relations between Christians and Muslims in Glasgow. But police were called after members of the church received "hate-filled messages" from far-right extremists after the service. The Bishop of St Andrews, Dunkeld and Dunblane, the Most Rev David Chillingworth, said that the Scottish Episcopal Church would review the work of St Mary's. He said the church was "deeply distressed at the offence which has been caused".

"Dr Ashenden wrote a letter to The Times newspaper earlier this week, where he called on the church to apologise to Christians ?suffering dreadful persecution at the hands of Muslims? and added that the denigration of Jesus in Christian worship would be called "blasphemy" by some. He told BBC Radio 4 on
Sunday: "The problem with what happened in Glasgow was that although it was presented as a way of building bridges and a way of educating people it was done badly in the wrong way in the wrong place in the wrong context.

?It should not happen in the holy Eucharist and particularly a Eucharist whose main intention is to celebrate Christ the word made flesh come into the world. ?To have a reading from the Koran at that point was a fairly serious error for the Christian worshipping community, but to choose the reading they chose doubled the error. Of all passages you might have read likely to cause offence, that was one of the most problematic.? He said that he had to make a choice between the ?important honour? of continuing in the role of royal chaplain, and having the ability to speak out on matters he felt strongly about.

?I think it?s clear to me that accepting the role of chaplain to the Queen does not give one a platform where one can speak controversially in the public space,? he said. ?So in those circumstances I think one has to choose between whether one wants to accept an important honour or whether one chooses to continue a debate in the public space. ?I am fairly clear in my own mind that my duty to my conscience, to my order, to my understanding of Christianity and my vocation is that I am supposed to be speaking out in the public space on behalf of the Christ I serve.?

"A Buckingham Palace spokesperson said: "Dr. Gavin Ashenden has tendered his resignation from the honorary position of Chaplain to The Queen. The Royal Household has accepted the resignation with immediate effect."

Camilla Turner - The Telegraph (UK) - January 22, 2017

[eyeshaveit]

Reflecting on the Basics of his Faith

?Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. And they continued steadfastly in the apostles? doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.? Acts 2:41-42 records the initial events of the Christian faith as soon as Christ founded His church through the apostles. The Scriptures record what the basic marks of Christ?s church are, and in a world of competing ?Christian? faiths perhaps we should consider those early functions.

"Notice that baptism held a position of great importance, in fact it was the beginning of the entire Christian life. Numerous places demonstrate that baptism was an immediate occurrence when a person came to faith in response to the preaching of Christ. The Ethiopian Eunuch, upon seeing a body of water, asked what hindrance there was ? upon confession of faith he was baptized right then. (Acts 8:35-39) When the Philippian jailer learned about Jesus, he was baptized around 3 or 4 a.m. (Acts 16)  Apostolic and Christian faith does not delay or schedule baptism, but performs it at the point of convicting faith.

"What about the ?breaking of bread?? Most of Christian history recognizes this as parallel to Acts 20:7, which reads, ?And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.? Apostolic Christian faith always observed the Lord?s Supper, known as the Eucharist, Communion, or as in these verse ? the breaking of bread. Is the memorial of Jesus? death, burial, and resurrection foundational, or is it something done at leisure? The minimum observance was every first day of the week; that is the standard of a biblical church.

"The apostles? doctrine is the teaching of the apostles as given by Jesus during His earthly life, and as completed by the ministry of the Holy Spirit (John 16:12-13) for the benefit of the church. What God gave to the apostles was for the guidance and maturity of the church (Eph 2:20, 3:5). Modern humanity thinks they can choose what they want of the New Testament, both in their personal lives and as churches. However, the moment a church adds to the apostles? teachings, they cease to be the church for which Christ died, and they are no longer in agreement with God?s Will. A church can preach the words of Jesus and feel spiritual, and at the same time not agree with the teaching of the apostles and fail to be Christ?s church.

"These are basics of the faith and church for which Jesus Christ died and rose again, it is not exhaustive. These basics can be done with minimal effort and suggest outright rebellion against God when they are not. Modern American Christianity thinks it does not matter to do what Jesus and the apostles taught, but instead thinks they can give God what makes them happy. While it may be American Christianity, it is not Jesus?. As you seek to serve God this year, compare what your faith teaches and does, with what the Bible teaches us all ? and seek to please God first"

Brian Reagan - Op Ed - Palestine (TX) Herald Press - January 22, 2017

Brian Reagan is pastor in Mineral Wells, Texas

[eyeshaveit]

America?s Irreligious Profile Explained

"Americans are increasingly choosing not to identify with a religious tradition. Between 2007 and 2014, this ?none of the above? category has increased from 16 to 23 percent. Among young adults, one-third say that they have no religious affiliation. Most of the public conversation about religious disaffiliation tends to emphasize the idea that with the rise of the religious ?nones,? a categorization that goes back to the 1960s, America is becoming more secular and less religious.

"Yet a closer look at who is actually included in the category of the nones suggests a more complex picture: It is an evolving religious landscape, which currently includes a variety of people who have different relationships to religion and religious institutions. For example, in the course of interviewing many nones for our current research project on innovative religious and irreligious groups, we are finding that, for some, religion has no place in their lives; others may be marginally interested in religion but rarely if ever attend services. This group claims that religion still has some relevance in their lives. In one of my interviews with a young woman, I asked whether religion had any relevance in her life, and she said, ?A little bit, maybe five percent.?

"What explains this increase in religious nones? Based on my research, I see five reasons:

"First, traditional authority structures, including religious ones, have been flattened through access to knowledge. As a result, everyone and no one is an authority, which reduces the need for traditional authorities of any sort. One pastor I interviewed told me that during Sunday services, her parishioners regularly fact-checked her sermons on their smartphones, rather than simply accepting what she said.

Second, fewer Americans view important social institutions ? such as religious organizations, corporations and government ? as having a positive impact in society. In the mid 1970s, 68 percent of Americans said they had ?a great deal? or ?a lot? of confidence in churches and other religious organizations. By 2016, this number had dropped to 41 percent.

"Third, religion has a bad brand. From sex scandals across different religious traditions to the increasing association between evangelical Christianity and the political right, religion per se has taken a beating.

"Fourth, increasing competition for people?s attention from work, family responsibilities, social media and other activities means that religion loses out to more pressing commitments. Several people we have interviewed for our current project have told us that religion is just not that important for them, suggesting that involvement with a religious group is yet another social obligation rather than a time of reflection, conversation and renewal.

"Finally, personal choice is a bedrock feature of American culture. Individuals choose professional affiliations, diets, club memberships and myriad other associations, with religion being one more affiliation that is ?chosen? by adherents. Many young adults have been raised by parents who have encouraged them to make up their own mind about religion, resulting in their choosing ?none of the above? as they think about whether they want to affiliate or be identified with any religious tradition.

"What might be the results of this rising indifference to traditional religion in American society? In my view, there are at least two areas in which the increase in the number of religious nones may have a significant social impact in the coming years ? volunteerism and politics.
There is a long-established positive correlation between religion and volunteerism in American society. While this can be partly explained by personal religious motivations, it is also true that religious organizations have long been involved in providing important services to those in need. As religious organizations lose members, we might expect that they will be less capable of providing the volunteers needed to make available the services they have long provided.

"The relationship between religion and politics is an important issue, as we saw with the 2016 election. Despite the rapid increase in the number of Americans who claim no religious affiliation, nones remain a relatively small group within the American electorate. Looking at the religious makeup of the electorate (those who actually vote in elections), the largest group is Protestants (52 percent), followed by white evangelicals (26 percent) and then Catholics (23 percent).

"In contrast, nones make up only 15 percent of the electorate. Although the proportion of the electorate made up by nones has increased from 9 percent in 2000 to its current 15 percent, each of the other groups has remained remarkably constant since 2000. Religious nones are also less likely to be registered to vote than, for example, white evangelicals. In the near term, this probably means that the relationship between religion and politics that has shaped our political scene since the 1980s will remain unchanged. But as the ranks of the nones continue to increase, the disconnect between our political institutions and the public they are supposed to represent may prompt some dramatic electoral realignments.

"However, in my view as a scholar of American religion, this misses the diversity within the nones. Who really are the nones? A diverse group Nones are typically analyzed as a category of individuals who identify themselves religiously as atheists, agnostics and having ?no religious preference,? or as ?nothing in particular.?

Richard Flory - Religious News Service - January 24, 2017.

Richard Flory is Senior Director of Research and Evaluation at the University of Southern California.

[Teaspoon Shallow]

I hope religion does not die out completely.  Some seem to need the promise of infinite reward or the threat of eternal torture to be decent human beings. Opiates for the masses.

These sheep are not going to fleece themselves you know.

[eyeshaveit]

Senate Confirms Dangerous Christian Extremist as CIA Director

"The new head of the CIA is a dangerous Christian extremist who believes the U.S. is at war with Islam. Earlier today, the U.S. Senate confirmed Representative Mike Pompeo as the new head of the powerful Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Pompeo, a Kansas Republican and prominent member of the House Intelligence Committee, is a radical Christian extremist and a sharp critic of Islam who endorsesthe notion of a ?Holy War? between Christians and Muslims, and believes the fight against terrorism is a war between Islam and Christianity.

"Speaking at a church group in Wichita, Kansas, in 2014, Pompeo claimed that Christianity was the ?only solution? to combat terrorism, arguing that the greatest ?threat to America? is caused by ?people who deeply believe that Islam is the way.? Pompeo told the church-goers:

"This threat to America is from people who deeply believe that Islam is the way and the light and the only answer. These folks believe that it is religiously driven for them to wipe Christians from the face of the earth ... They abhor Christians, and will continue to press against us until we make sure that we pray and stand and fight and make sure that we know that Jesus Christ our savior is truly the only solution for our world."

"In addition, at an event hosted by a Virginia-based think tank last year, Pompeo again invoked the notion of a Holy War, describing the wars in which the U.S. is involved in as being ?between the Christian West and the Islamic East.? Cosmopolitan reports that Pompeo?s past comments concerning Muslims have drawn sharp criticism. For example, in the months after the Boston Marathon bombing in 2013, Pompeo took to the House floor to call on Muslim leaders to denounce acts of terrorism committed in the name of Islam, declaring:

"It?s been just under two months since the attacks in Boston, and in those intervening weeks, the silence of Muslim leaders has been deafening."

"Pompeo went on to suggest that failing to condemn the terrorist attacks made Muslim leaders ?potentially complicit? in those attacks. In another anti-Muslim incident earlier this year, Pompeo, using veiled threats and intimidation tactics, forced a mosque located in Kansas to cancel an appearance by a prominent Muslim leader, in part because the speaker was scheduled to appear on the Christian holy day of Good Friday. Writing for Slate, Michelle Goldberg notes:

"Amid the fire hose of lunacy that is the Trump transition, however, Pompeo?s extremism has been overlooked. It?s worth pausing to appreciate the fact that America?s CIA will shortly be run by a man who appears to view American foreign policy as a vehicle for holy war."

"The Washington Post reports Pompeo ?is known as one of the more fanatical purveyors of conspiracy theories.? For example, previously Pompeo suggestedPresident Obama might have an ?affinity for? radical Islam. Bottom line: Pompeo is a dangerous Christian extremist. His Holy War mentality is alarming, and completely inappropriate for the Director of the CIA."

Michael Stone - Editorial - Global Research Canada - January 27, 2017

[eyeshaveit]

Religion & Abortion

"What does the [pro-life] movement, seeking to save millions of babies from the dismemberment of the suction machine, or the acidy incineration of saline injection, make most people think of? "It's a religious thing." "It's Catholics and evangelicals, plus a few Hasidic Jews and Muslims."

"Abortion, the blood-drenched safety valve of the sixties' sexual revolution, is the great moral shame of our time. We have had world wars, and systematic genocides based on religion, ethnicity and class. But it is a chillingly different brand of evil to kill a child within the womb ? the most innocent and defenseless among us ? in the private comfort of a doctor's office and under the protection of law within a free country.

"Not all that many decades ago it was self-evident to the vast majority of Americans ? the agnostic, the lukewarm, elected officials in both parties ? that abortion was an unspeakable crime. The abortion lobby's bete noire wasn't the rosary but the stethoscope; abortion's most dedicated opposing force was once the American Medical Association. The AMA in 1859 unanimously condemned "the procuring of abortion, at every period of gestation, except as necessary for preserving the life of either mother or child ? and requests the zealous cooperation of the various state medical societies in pressing this subject upon the legislatures of the respective states." Nine decades later the AMA signed on to the World Medical Association's Declaration of Geneva, pledging to "maintain the utmost respect for human life, from the time of conception ? A doctor must always bear in mind the importance of preserving human life from the time of conception until death." Before the sixties, papal encyclicals weren't what you turned to for arguments against abortion; the Hippocratic Oath was.

"If Trump does what he promised, Roe may well be overturned within the next decade. After that happens the issue of abortion will dominate state politics for years, and right now the public is not nearly receptive enough to the powerful moral case against abortion. People simply don't see it as the objective evil it is. They see it largely as a faith issue, and that doesn't help win over the secular. For one thing, they see moral schizophrenia in the Catholic Church: hundreds of parishes have built shrines to the unborn, yet the Church has granted full funerals (contrary to canon law) and no public chastisement to the likes of Sen. Ted Kennedy and Supreme Court Justice William Brennan.

"In Kennedy's case, Cardinal Sean O'Malley said, "We will not change hearts by turning away from people in their time of need and when they are experiencing grief and loss." The Church did turn away from murderous mobster John Gotti's family in their grief, however, forbidding a Requiem Mass, and very rightly so. If people are to be convinced, they have to witness consistency in the Church's treatment of Catholics who take innocent human life. Although he eventually became a Catholic, the former abortionist Dr. Bernard Nathanson had his mind, as well as his heart, changed by science, not faith; the new technology of ultrasound allowed him to view abortion as it was happening. For many years, as an unashamed atheist, he was one of the most prominent and effective activists against abortion in America. His films "The Silent Scream" and "Eclipse of Reason" fought abortion by showing abortions.

"One of the most eloquent polemicists in the movement against abortion today is Kristine Kruszelnicki, the atheist president of Pro-Life Humanists. Too many pro-life politicians make an exception for rape, but listen to the courageous Kruszelnicki: "While the rape victim did not choose and is unfairly put into this position, her basic obligation to her dependent human offspring is no less real than that of the sailor with an unwanted stowaway." She quotes her fellow atheist Peter Singer, the notorious Princeton "bio-ethicist," who declares that a society accepting abortion must logically accept infanticide. But Kruszelnicki also warns pro-lifers that she and other non-religious activists against abortion are routinely rebuffed by pro-life organizations ? even when offering their skills as non-paid volunteers.

"These Dr. Nathansons of tomorrow should be brought to prominence in the pro-life movement. The most effective argumentation against abortion, even when the arguer has been religious, has always been when down-to-earth facts are served up straight. Pope Pius XI, for instance, wrote, "It is of no use to appeal to the right of taking away life for here it is a question of the innocent, whereas that right has regard only to the guilty; nor is there here question of defense by bloodshed against an unjust aggressor (for who would call an innocent child an unjust aggressor?)"

"When Congress made the public aware of partial-birth abortion, and more recently when the Center for Medical Progress published videos exposing Planned Parenthood's trafficking in aborted babies' body parts, this was exactly the kind of fact-based activism that changes minds and hearts ? fighting abortion by showing abortion to the people. It's powerful enough to turn atheists into pro-lifers. So let us pray to end abortion, and let a lot more of the non-faithful be the hand of God."

Thomas McArdle - Washington Examiner - January 26, 2017.

Thomas McArdle is a former Senior Writer for Investor's Business Daily, and White House speechwriter for President George W. Bush.

[eyeshaveit]

Jehovah's Witnesses charity drops attempts to block abuse inquiry

"The UK?s main Jehovah?s Witnesses charity has dropped efforts to block an investigation into how it handled allegations of sexual abuse, including of children, after a legal fight lasting more than two years.
The Charity Commission launched an inquiry into safeguarding at the religion?s main UK charity in May 2014 after receiving allegations that survivors of rape and sexual abuse, including people abused as children, were forced to face their attackers in ?judicial committees?. The Jehovah?s Witnesses, however, resisted the investigation into the Watch Tower Bible Tract Society of Great Britain (WTBTS), which oversees the UK?s 1,500 congregations and is believed to play a key role in deciding how claims of abuse are handled.

"The WTBTS, which had a turnover of more than ?80m [$100,392.000] last year, launched a series of legal challenges to the inquiry. These included an attempt to challenge in the supreme court the commission's decision to start an investigation. The charity also fought in the lower courts against production orders that would oblige it to give the commission access to records showing how it handled the allegations.

"The commission announced last week that, more than two and a half years after the investigation was launched, the WTBTS had shared some of the documents it had been seeking and the commission had since cancelled the production order. The charity had also dropped the last of its legal cases against the inquiry, the supreme court having refused to hear that particular case in July. Although charities do sometimes challenge the commission?s decisions in court, the extent and length of the Jehovah?s Witnesses litigation were unprecedented in recent times, a commission spokesman told the Guardian last year.

"A spokesman for the WTBTS said: ?In light of the progress of the inquiry and the information obtained by the commission from Watch Tower and other sources, the commission has agreed to revoke the production order. Watch Tower has therefore agreed to withdraw its application for judicial review of the production order and a consent order has been filed with the high court to conclude the proceedings.

?Watch Tower will now work with the commission to explore the issues that are the subject of the statutory inquiry and to address the commission?s regulatory concerns.? The commission is conducting a separate investigation into the Manchester New Moston congregation, where three adult survivors of child sex abuse were allegedly brought face-to-face with their abuser shortly after he was released from prison after being jailed for attacking them.

"He was later ?disfellowshipped?, or expelled, from the church. But two women in separate cases told the Guardian last year that although the church can disfellowship people from the tight-knit congregations for minor offences, such as gambling, their abusers had been allowed to remain in the church. One, who was raped as an adult, said she had been urged by senior congregation members, known as elders, to face her rapist at a private hearing, leaving her ?completely traumatised? and leading to the breakup of her marriage.

"A spokesman for the Jehovah?s Witnesses said last year: ?We are in no position to, and neither would we wish to, force any victim of abuse to confront their attacker.?

"Thomas Beale, of AO Advocates, who last year won a civil case that found the Jehovah?s Witnesses had failed to protect a woman from sexual abuse that began when she was four, said the commission?s decision to drop its production order could allow the charity to withhold further information.

?Of course we welcome the ongoing statutory inquiry into Jehovah?s Witnesses? safeguarding policies and look forward to reviewing its findings,? he said. ?However, given our experience with Jehovah?s Witnesses in litigation, we struggle to see how a thorough and robust investigation can occur now that the Charity Commission has decided to revoke its production order. We think the chance of full disclosure now by the Jehovah?s Witnesses is very small.?

Alice Ross - The (UK) Guardian - January 23, 2017.

[eyeshaveit]

Priest (sued by Atheist) must prove Jesus Christ is a historically real person

"In one of the most ominous legal cases in an era of ominous litigation, an Italian judge today heard arguments on whether or not a parish priest in that nation should stand trial for claiming Jesus of Nazareth actually existed. Viterbo, Italy, north of Rome, is the venue where Rev. Enrico Righi is being sued by his childhood friend, atheist Luigi Cascioli, for allegedly deceiving people into thinking Jesus was an actual historical figure.

?This complaint does not wish to contest the freedom of Christians to profess their faith, sanctioned by [article] 19 of the Italian Constitution,? says Cascioli, ?but wishes to denounce the abuse that the Catholic Church commits by availing itself of its prestige in order to inculcate ? as if being real and historical ? facts that are really just inventions.?

"Attorneys for Righi and Cascioli presented their arguments before Judge Gaetano Mautone in Viterbo in a short, closed hearing. ?The point is not to establish whether Jesus existed or not, but if there is a question of possible fraud,? said Cascioli?s attorney, Mauro Fonzo, to reporters, according to the Associated Press.

"Although Cascioli and his attorney know their case has little chance of success in the home of the Roman Catholic Church, their strategy is to go through the necessary legal steps that will enable them, ultimately, to bring their anti-Jesus case before the European Court of Human Rights. There, says Fonzo, he will accuse the church of ?religious racism,? said the report.

"Cascioli, the author of The Fable of Christ, claims his childhood friend violated local laws against deception when he stated in a 2002 parish gazette ?that the historic figure of Jesus was the son of Joseph and Mary (two totally imaginary characters and therefore historically non existing [claims Cascioli]); of having the same Jesus been born in the village of Bethlehem and of having grown up in Nazareth.?

"Specifically, Cascioli says Righi has broken two Italian laws: the ?abuse of popular belief? ? which amounts to intentionally deceiving someone ? and ?impersonation? ? meaning one gains by giving a false name to someone. On his website, Cascioli alleges the person known as Jesus is ?for the most part based on the figure of John of Gamala, son of Judas, downright descendant of the Asmoneian stock.?

"Rev. Righi says the existence of Jesus is ?unmistakable? due to a wealth of both pagan and Christian evidence pointing to his reality. ?Cascioli maintains that Christ never existed. If he doesn?t see the sun at midday, he can?t denounce me just because I do. He should denounce all believers!? Righi told the London Times recently.

"Among his examples are the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, thought by scholars to be the most important non-Christian source on the issue. One of his passages of Jewish Antiquities, a work completed in A.D. 93, mentions the execution in A.D. 62 of ?the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ, James by name.? In a provocative analysis of the case in South Africa?s Mail & Guardian newspaper, columnist Colin Bower says Cascioli?s legal challenge may be daunting:

"He has thought out his grounds with wit and insight. He happily concedes that theological argument is rightfully the preserve of theologians ? and that theologians can believe whatever they want to. His case is based on history, not theological reasoning. The theology of the Roman Catholic Church ? indeed all Christian theology ? is based on a particular historical understanding. Cascioli examines Christian history minutely, and reaches the conclusion: ?It never happened like that, your history is false.? He will be helped by precedent set in litigation successfully brought against scholars who deny the existence of the Holocaust. ?"

"What grips the imagination is not so much the historical argument itself as the unprecedented courtroom drama that will unfold this week as Righi presents his case. He, and his long-dead witnesses, will be subject to cross questioning and to character and credibility audit. Under these circumstances he will have to think long and hard about who he calls. The Gospel writers ought to be a major concern. Imagine the kind of cross questioning that would take place in a ?normal? court proceeding: ?Is their existence attested by any non-Christian source?? Well, no. ?Can you prove that they existed?? Well, no. ?Do their accounts conflict?? Yes. ?In material considerations?? Yes. ?Is there evidence that their work was tampered with or edited by later writers??

"Yes. ?Do they provide any corroborating evidence of the miracles they report?? No. ?Are they eye witnesses to the events they describe?? No.
Clearly, if the issue before the court was a case against a person whose fate might be jail or the hangman, any self-respecting judge would have to disqualify the evidence of such unreliable witnesses.

"Cascioli declares he is not intent on having the matter be decided by a court of law, saying, ?I wrote to [Righi] an open letter, stating that I would withdraw the lawsuit if he were capable of supplying proof, just one proof, of the historical existence of Jesus.?

World Net Daily - January 27, 2017

[eyeshaveit]

The Historic Connection Between Eugenics and Abortion

"The ?eugenics? movement, which sought to protect and improve hereditary racial stock, was phenomenally popular in early 20th century America, and it has an important connection to today?s pro-abortion movement. Thomas C. Leonard explains eugenics in his 2016 book Illiberal Reformers: Race, Eugenics, and American Economics in the Progressive Era: 

?Eugenics? derives from the Greek for ?well born? and describes the movement to improve human heredity by the social control of human breeding. The concept was ancient. Plato?s Republic asked why we breed cattle but not humans. The term was minted in 1883 by Francis Galton, a celebrated Victorian Era polymath and cousin of Charles Darwin. Galton advanced the three governing premises of any eugenic program. First, differences in human intelligence, character, and temperament were due to differences in heredity. Second, human heredity could be improved, and with reasonable dispatch. Human heredity, Galton said, was ?almost as plastic as clay, under the control of the breeder?s will.?

And third, the improvement of humankind, like any kind of breeding, could not be left to happenstance. It required scientific investigation and regulation of marriage, reproduction, immigration, and labor. In other words, eugenics proposed to replace random natural selection with purposeful social selection. As Galton encapsulated it, ?what nature does blindly, slowly and ruthlessly, man may do providently, quickly and kindly.?

"Eugenics was popular across a wide range of political and religious persuasions, including a disheartening number of advocates out of a traditional Christian background. The eugenics movement itself took on a religious tone as its popularizers tried to convince the American people at large of the threat of racial degeneracy. Leonard notes that

Evangelizers spread the eugenics gospel far beyond the eugenics institutes and laboratories. Eugenic thinking reached deep into American popular culture, traveling through women?s magazines, the religious press, movies, and comic strips. The idea of safeguarding American hereditary, with its concomitant fear of degeneracy from within and inundation from abroad, influenced ordinary Americans far removed from the eugenics movement?s professionals and publicists.

"Some Darwinian thinkers, including Charles Darwin himself, advocated more births by more people, believing that it would boost the beneficial effects of natural selection. But many believed that eugenics required the restriction of births by inferior people. This restriction could happen by sterilization (involuntary, in some cases) and birth control methods, which some like Margaret Sanger believed might include abortion in extreme cases. Most eugenicists publicly opposed abortion, however. Even Sanger regarded abortion for population control as ?dangerous and vicious.? Leonard says that

Eugenics also counted many supporters on the left, from Fabian socialists like George Bernard Shaw and Sidney and Beatrice Webb to birth control advocate Margaret Sanger, who convinced skeptical eugenicists that birth control could be a valuable tool of eugenics. This was no small feat of persuasion. Many eugenicists feared unregulated birth control was dysgenic in its effects, because, as progressive sociologist Charles Horton Cooley warned, the ?intelligent classes? used it, and the inferior classes did not. If the state delivered birth control to the inferior classes, Cooley noted, then contraception could indeed work eugenically.

"Sanger noted elsewhere that ?Those least fit to carry on the race are increasing most rapidly. The most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the overfertility of the mentally and physically defective.? Sanger went on to found the American Birth Control League (1921), which became the Planned Parenthood Federation of America in 1946.

"American Christians largely accepted the validity of contraception, for whatever purposes, over the past five decades. A few groups, including conservative Catholics, still see contraception as an immoral interference with God?s providential plans for life.

"The big difference between the eugenics movement and today?s pro-abortion industry is that the latter now sees abortion-on-demand as the cornerstone of ?birth control.? Eugenicists largely focused on preventing conception in undesirable cases. Abortionists today still affirm pre-conception birth control, of course. But they also champion the post-conception termination of an unborn child?s life as an legally inviolable option in the repertoire of birth control methods."

Thomas S. Kidd - The Gospel Coalition - January 27, 2017.

Illiberal Reformers - Table of Contents:

Acknowledgments vii
Prologue ix
Part I The Progressive Ascendancy
1 Redeeming American Economic Life 3
2 Turning Illiberal 17
3 Becoming Experts 27
4 Efficiency in Business and Public Administration 55
Part II The Progressive Paradox
5 Valuing Labor: What Should Labor Get? 77
6 Darwinism in Economic Reform 89
7 Eugenics and Race in Economic Reform 109
8 Excluding the Unemployable 129
9 Excluding Immigrants and the Unproductive 141
10 Excluding Women 169
Epilogue 187
Notes 193
Index 233

[eyeshaveit]

Bible Quotes 'The Last Trump' Before Jesus Christ's Return

"Is Donald Trump specifically named in the New Testament prophecies about the end times? Some are speculating that the new U.S. president is "the last trump" that is mentioned in the Bible and that his geopolitical moves are heralding the end times. But one biblical expert says not so fast.

"Dr. Samuel Lamerson, professor of New Testament and president of Florida's Knox Theological Seminary, told The Christian Post that such analysis is "ridiculous." "First of all, it only works in the English language. The New Testament was written in Greek. Second of all, it only works in the King James Version and some other older translations. Many other translations will have 'trumpet' instead of 'trump,'" Lamerson explained.

"1 Thessalonians 4:16 reads: "For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first."

"I Corinthians 15:52 states: "Behold, I show you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed."

"[Historian] David Montaigne noted that it is possible to look into such verses and explore what they might be saying about God's plans concerning Trump. "I am not suggesting that Donald Trump absolutely *IS* the last trump ? but since the LAST TRUMP is one of the most clear and final signs in end times prophecy, can we overlook the possibility that a presidential candidate named Trump is being used as a sign by God?" he posed.

"Rejecting the argument, Lamerson told CP that he doubts that any New Testament scholar with legitimate credentials would give weight to such reading of prophecy. "It's a textbook example of how not to read the text," Lamerson stressed. "It's what we would call an exegetical fallacy. "These ideas that somehow the current president is named in the New Testament is the sort of thing that I teach my students to avoid at all costs." Lamerson pointed out that this kind of discussion took place from Barack Obama's presidency all the way back to Abraham Lincoln.

"I think that often people forget that the book of Revelation was written 2,000 years ago," he said. The notion that what the Scripture says applies to the shape of the political world today "is to totally misunderstand what exactly is going on there," he added. Other end times prophets have focused on the wider impact of Trump's presidency so far, such as his criticism of the European Union, particularly when it comes to allowing millions of refugees to enter its territory.

"Author and commentator Erika Grey, who analyzes Israel, the U.S., Russia, and other major players in geopolitics today and their role in biblical prophecy, has linked Trump's opposition to the EU to factors that could bring about the end times. While previous U.S. administrations all embraced the EU, Trump has taken the opposite stance, Grey noted, and aligned himself with Britain's Nigel Farage of the UKIP party, who successfully oversaw Brexit, or Britain voting to leave the EU. "In end time Bible Prophecy we know that the EU is going to become the greatest most powerful world empire to have ever existed and it is going to be an economic powerhouse," she wrote on her website.

"Despite BREXIT and Donald Trump in Bible Prophecy the EU is still going to move forward despite taking these bumps. With Donald Trump as president there is a new sheriff in town and the era of EU, US relations has come to an end, but with the new president will come a geopolitical shift and the EU will continue to move forward even to the surprise of some EU officials."

"People have long been making predictions about U.S. presidents playing a part in end times prophecy, Lamerson noted, and they have all turned out to be wrong. "I suppose sooner or later, just by pure luck, somebody is going to be right," the Knox Theological Seminary president commented. "But it will not be because they have carefully understood the text. One of the things about biblical prophecy is that often, it needs to be fulfilled before we can really understand it. It's intentionally vague. And often the fulfillment is much better than what we could have ever expected."

Stoyan  Zainov - Christian Post UK - January 30, 2017.

[eyeshaveit]

Health Is The New Religion

"Can you describe health and fitness as a religion? The answer is Yes! Britta Pelters at Halmstad University, along with her research colleague Barbro Wijma from Link?ping University, concludes that today's health community meets all the criteria for being a religion. Something, which means greater risks for those who do not fit in to the healthy template

"The idea of the research project was sparked when Britta Pelters, who is a Senior Lecturer in Health Education, began to reflect on the amount of images, headlines and texts in the media about health and which also contain religious metaphors. Examples of wordings that aroused her interest were "that The Autumn 5:2 Diet* is not about a hymn but about a diet hardly needs to be written" and "in the quest for the perfect body a two-day self-starvation is the new salvation". The next step for Ms. Pelters was therefore to ask the question "is health a religion?".

"We referred to Vanderpool's sociology of religion, which includes a comprehensive list of ten religious characteristics, which we applied to the hallmarks of the institutionalised health religion in Western societies. During the study, we found that today's approach to health fits all ten features," says Britta Pelters.

The divine health

"In a religion there must be something sacred that is extraordinary and existentially meaningful. The World Health Organization (WHO) defines health as "a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being". This definition portrays the perfect health image and can be seen as a divine principle. Through health, people have control of something, or at least they think they do. Thus, health provides the need for reassurance in the same way a divine force does," says Ms. Pelters.

"At the same time, the feeling of control can go too far which leads to disappointment, and sometimes shame over one's own body, for example during disease. "Many are upset if they suffer from illness since they feel that they have fulfilled all their obligations to obtain a healthy body ? they have been training, eating right and sleeping well et cetera. It is not unusual that people think that their body has betrayed them."

Health priesthood

"There are also representatives of the ideal that can be interpreted as a form of priesthood. Examples include health bloggers and health scientist who love to share ? or preach ? about health tips, such as special diets and training methods. It may not always be that people want to be perceived as a 'health priest,' but the role can easily be given to you," says Ms. Pelters.

"Another characteristic religious factor is a comprehensive worldview. Ms. Pelters argues that in the western "health society", our genes are what connect everything that is health-related. "The idea that genes with their built-in opportunities and risks make it possible for people to find their place, purpose and destiny in our health promotion and disease prevention community. The implicit promise ? good health leads to a good life ? has become morally loaded and carries a sense of duty."

Increased risks

"To show that you have perfect health is also a way to introduce yourself to the world as a capable and valuable person. Ms. Pelters believes that health religion mainly prevails in the middle class. That's because this group is often dependent on presenting itself as high performance people. Making a health trip can therefore also mean making a class trip. "But when health also becomes a class issue, it involves a risk for those who do not fit into the healthy template. In a 'health religion society,' their personalities can be judged by their weight," Pelters says.

Symbols and rituals

"In the health religion, gyms are important iconic locations symbolising the mentioned values, expectations and obligations. The gyms can be seen as "fitness temples" and serve as places for worshipping the body by training. Rituals are also something that characterises a religion.

"The gym is filled with rituals, with everything from training schedules to be followed in detail to someone who always buys a certain kind of energy drink before their workout," says Ms. Pelters, who hopes that awareness of this religious view can both play down the health topic and provide new approaches for health scientist that work in different organisations.

The Vanderpool comprehensive list of religious characteristics:

The sacred
A comprehensive world view
Moral values
A protective screen
Salvation/liberation
Symbols
Rituals
Certain moods and emotions
A conviction that the content of one's religion is uniquely realistic and true
Community

Phys(dot)Org News - Janjuary 31, 2017

*"The 5:2 diet, or fast diet, is a fad diet which stipulates calorie restriction for two days a week and unconstrained eating the other five days." - Wikipedia.

[eyeshaveit]

Political Punditry in a Polarized World

"That?s what it feels like. Whether you voted for Trump or loathe him with every last bit of plasma in every drop of blood in your body, it seems like the promise of ?moving past this contentious election season,? is not going to materialize. No doubt, your Twitter feed and your Facebook page are as full as ever with political punditry?much of it well intentioned, only some of it well considered. What are we to do as Christians when there is so much we might want to say, and yet, we?d like to say it in a way that makes a difference instead of just making noise?

"Perhaps a look at the negative will point us in a positive direction. Let?s briefly consider seven ways to do political punditry wrong in a polarized world.

1. Always defend your side, no matter what. I have no problem with people who don?t feel the need to comment on every twist and turn of American politics (in fact, may your tribe increase!). But if you are in the habit of making your opinions known, and you never find yourself out of step with your party or your preferred President, then you likely aren?t looking closely enough at the issues?theirs and yours.
We have to be honest with ourselves and ask some hard questions: Is my passion to see the kingdom come and the church grow or is it mainly to see my side win elections? Do I think revival and spiritual renewal come mainly through political victories? Am I blinded by disgust for the bad guys (whether that?s Fox News, MSNBC, The New York Times, National Review, Hollywood, flyover country, or whatever) that I?ll defend to the death whatever they seem to be against?

2. Be quick to demonize opponents on the other side. We don?t have disagreements anymore; we only have devils. This means that nominee we oppose or that Senator standing in the way of our position is not simply mistaken (according to our principles) but some toxic combination of ignorant, conniving, and fiendish?a mortal threat to everything that is decent in this world.

3. Make no distinction between prudence and principle. Christians are not very good at this one. Let?s assume for a moment that most people reading this blog think abortion is wrong, racism is wrong, terrorism is wrong, hating Muslims is wrong, and being cold-hearted toward immigrants and refugees is wrong. Those are principles. The vast majority of conservative Christians will at least pay lip service to all of these things; most actually believe them with sincere earnestness. But what does this mean in terms of policies, executive orders, and legislation? Here there may be honest disagreement?not about what is good and true and beautiful for Christians to do and think, but about what is the best way forward, in light of these convictions, in a constitutional republic of 330 million people.

4. Never acknowledge real world trade-offs. In our virtual worlds, there are always clear-cut decisions with obvious goods and obvious evils. Hence, every political issue is a matter of absolute right and absolute wrong. In the real world?and especially in the real world of governing?there are always trade-offs. We have to judge between competing goods, which means we usually have to give something to gain something. It would go a long way toward a more civilized discourse?and we may actually convince a few people on the other side?if we acknowledged that our views are usually not without some difficulties, even if we consider our ?losses? superior to the ?losses? we would endure with a different policy or opinion.

5. Only speak and write in the highest rhetorical gear. At some point in the future, you may need the Hitler analogy. Don?t waste it on arcane procedures regarding cloture in the Senate. Not all errors are created equal. Break out the diabolical thesaurus only when the time is right.

6. Don?t bother reading up on complex issues. Most of the problems plaguing our country or our world will not be solved by 90 seconds of reflection. We don?t all have to be experts. Sometimes the knee jerk reaction comes from a place of seasoned wisdom and moral formation. But if there were an easy solution to every problem it would have been tried by now?not because we are all saints striving to love one another, but because we love to be first or would enjoy being famous. Go ahead and read a few articles before posting. Check out the actual statement or text of legislation. And when in doubt, let?s all feel free not to say anything at all (!) about a complicated issue that we?ve been thinking about in between Dude Perfect videos.

7. Go public with your thoughts when you are most hurt and most angry. Be slow to speak, quick to listen, and slow to get angry. That?s still in the Bible (James 1:19), and it still counts, even in the internet age. Waiting is often the better part of wisdom."

Kevin DeYoung - The Gospel Coalition - January 31, 2017.

Kevin DeYoung is Senior Pastor at the University Reformed Church (PCA) in Lansing Michigan.

[eyeshaveit]

Judge Gorsuch Thinks Your Boss?s Religious Beliefs Should Dictate Your Health Insurance Coverage

"One of the most popular components of the Affordable Care Act is the requirement that health insurance companies cover birth control without a co-pay.  Over 55 million women have benefitted from the coverage.  Nevertheless, over the last several years there has been an onslaught of court challenges to the birth control benefit by employers with religious objections to including the coverage in their employees? health plans.

Judge Neil Gorsuch, President Trump?s pick for the Supreme Court, has played a key role in these cases.  In each one he sided with the employers who claimed a right to use their religious beliefs to block their employees? contraception coverage.  In doing so, he showed little regard for the women affected by imposition of their bosses? religious beliefs, and failed to acknowledge how important contraception coverage is to women?s health and equality.

"Round one in the battle against the birth control benefit was brought by arts-and-crafts giant Hobby Lobby, and other for-profit companies, which had a religious objection to providing contraception coverage in their employees? health plan.  Before Hobby Lobby?s case reached the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby.  In that decision, Judge Gorsuch wrote a separate opinion to underscore that the family that owns Hobby Lobby would be complicit in sin if it allowed their employees? health insurance company to cover contraception.  Judge Gorsuch?s failure to give weight to the harms inflicted on women by these asserted religious exemptions is troubling.

"Although the Supreme Court narrowly sided with Hobby Lobby, even the five justices who ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby considered the impact on women employees.  The court noted that the government already had a system in place for religiously affiliated non-profit organizations that allowed those employers to opt-out of paying for contraception coverage by filling out a simple form, and instead the health insurance company would pay for the contraception coverage.  This opt-out system, the court reasoned, could just be extended to religiously affiliated for-profit companies, and the impact on the employees would be ?precisely zero.?

Round two in the battle against the birth control benefit was brought by a nursing home called Little Sisters of the Poor Home for the Aged, and other religiously affiliated non-profit organizations.  Those employers objected to the opt-out system itself, arguing that filling out the form to opt out of providing contraception violated their religious beliefs.  Eight of the nine courts of appeals to consider these challenges, including the Tenth Circuit, held that filling out a form did not substantially burden the employers? religious beliefs.  But Judge Gorsuch joined an opinion arguing that the Tenth Circuit should reconsider the decision in the Little Sisters of the Poor case siding, once again, with the employer.


"When the Litter Sisters case, and others, reached the Supreme Court, under the name Zubik v. Burwell, the court did not decide the legal question but instead sent the cases back down to the lower courts to see if there was a way to appease the employers while still ensuring that women received contraception coverage.  Again, the Supreme Court recognized the impact on female employees. Judge Gorsuch?s disregard for the effect on women in these cases is troubling.  If an employer blocks its employees? access to contraception coverage, that employer is discriminating based on sex.  Women already pay more for health care than men, and the contraception coverage requirement was designed to reduce that disparity.  Equally important, contraception is crucial for women?s equal participation in society.  Being able to decide whether and when to have children has a direct effect on women?s ability to make their own paths in terms of their schooling, their careers, and their families.

There is no question that religious liberty is a fundamental value, and one that we fight for here at the ACLU every day. But religious freedom shouldn?t give employers the right to discriminate against their female employees. So when the Senate considers whether to confirm Judge Gorsuch to the highest court in the land, senators should ask him whether he believes women have the right to decide when to have children, and whether he believes that women should be treated equally in society.

Brigitte Amiri - ACLU - ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project - February 2, 2017.

[eyeshaveit]

Tucker Carlson on being an Episcopalian

"How would you define yourself theologically?
Oh, I?m a Christian.

"What does that mean?
It means that I think this isn?t all there is. That there?s a God. That He sent Jesus to earth. I think He passes judgment on behavior. Some things are wrong not just because we find them distasteful, but because God is against them. I think there is order in the universe?things happen for a reason. I think we won?t know that reason until we die. I think there are always going to be some unresolved problems in this life, and real limits on wisdom and human decision-making. Basically, I think our world is truly imperfect, and always will be. I think I have a more realistic sense of what is possible in this world because of my faith in God.

"You grew up an Episcopalian?
I was baptized an Episcopalian. I grew up in California in basically a very secular family. In 10th grade, I went to boarding school in New England and started dating the daughter of the headmaster, who was an Episcopal priest. She was a very strong Christian, and still is. And I married her. She convinced me to take a look at the possibility of there being something beyond me, and I?m glad she did.

"What did that outlook lead to?
I became convinced of God?s existence. We still go to the Episcopal Church for all kinds of complicated reasons, but I truly despise the Episcopal Church in a lot of ways. They?re for gay marriage because it?s trendy. It?s another way to express how hip they are. They don?t care at all what God thinks of it, because they actually don?t believe in God. And then the fact that they sanction abortion. Are you joking? A church is for abortion? What?

"You said you and your family go to an Episcopal church for all kinds of complicated reasons. Could you un-complicate that for us?
Part of it?s inertia. Part is we really like the people. Part is that?s the world I grew up in. I love the liturgy. I can recite it without looking at it. Dumb stuff like that. Am I going to defend that? No. It?s totally indefensible. I?m a shallow guy! That?s why I still go to the Episcopal Church. But I like it! I just don?t want to think too hard about my money going to these pompous, blowhard, pagan creeps who run the church!

"And what do your kids think about those pompous folks?
When the chaplain is some twice-divorced, recovering alcoholic, 50-year-old woman who talks about Hinduism exclusively, my kids are like, ?You?re a loser.? And they?re right! So it?s sad.

Q&A with Tucker Carlson by Marvin Olasky in World Magazine.

[eyeshaveit]

Does Contemporary Japan Need Religion? 

"Gods, Buddha ? where are they?? asks Aera magazine.

"At the Cafe de Monku, is one answer. It?s a good name for an establishment set up by monks for the airing of monku (complaints). Its very existence (in Hanamaki) is suggestive of a populist turn traditional religion has taken over the past few years. It didn?t begin on March 11, 2011, but the cataclysms of that day ? the earthquake, tsunami and nuclear meltdown ? certainly gave it impetus. Do monks and priests, intermediaries between humanity and god, demean themselves and their office by taking daily life seriously? In settled times, maybe; in catastrophic times, maybe not. And so a woman in her 70s, for example, seeks and receives priestly consolation at the caf? for her broken-down washing machine ? not that it?s her only problem: She is one of 10,000-odd people in Hanamaki still stuck in temporary housing nearly six years after one of the most shattering days of modern times.

"Among Aera magazine's articles is one titled, ?Do today?s Japanese need religion?? Its author is the eminent novelist Hiroyuki Itsuki, who wrote in his 1998 nonfiction book Tariki: ?The troubles of daily life often attack in an uninterrupted flurry, one after another. ? Anxiety and restlessness, self-hate and unfocused anger, apathy and resignation, mark our days.? We see at a glance that his is not a buoyant outlook. Tariki means ?the strength of another.? His point is that our own merely human strength (jiriki) is inadequate, given what we have to cope with.

"Yes, he was saying then, we do need religion; and now, 19 years later, he?s still saying it, expressing his thought in the luminous image of moonlight seeping through clouds to light an otherwise pitch-black mountain path skirting an abyss, a fatal fall a single misstep away. The path is life; the moonlight, religion.

"Tariki has roots 1,000 years deep. Ancient priests roamed the land preaching, for the first time, to the common people, asking only one thing of them: not learning and arcane ritual but simple faith, to which Amida, the ?Buddha of boundless light,? would joyfully respond with salvation ? eternal life in the jeweled ?Western Paradise.? It?s a touching and naive vision, which faded in the pitiless glare of modern ?realism.? The Meiji Restoration of 1868 raised the state to religious status. Fighting and dying for the state became a religious practice, a form of prayer ? which the gods answered, in due course, with the carnage of World War II.

"When it ended at last, the Japanese, speaking generally, had had their fill of religion. Let materialism reign. Materialism was life; religion was death. Not to everyone, of course. To this day, top government leaders defy national and international public opinion to visit Yasukuni Shrine, the wartime heart and soul of divine militarism.

"That aside, postwar life was materialist, and it was good. At least it felt good. Its current twilight, says Aera, moves many to nostalgia. At its height, it was simple and (deceptively, perhaps) full. You worked hard at school, passed rote-learning tests, got into a respected university, made useful connections, joined a respected corporation and prospered. The corporation demanded a lot in return ? unquestioning, unwavering devotion ? but most people gave it willingly.

"Then things went wrong. The economic bubble burst in the early 1990s. A ?religion? called Aum Shinrikyo went on a terrorist rampage in 1995; two years later, the Great Hanshin Earthquake devastated Kobe; in 2011, the Great East Japan Earthquake devastated Tohoku. You didn?t need to see the hand of God in all this to wonder whether forces other than economics, crackpot theology and geology weren?t at work. Religion ... can feed ... on unanswered, unanswerable questions.

"Is Japan on the cusp of a religious revival? If so, says Aera, there?s nothing feverishly revivalist about it; it?s more a quiet, humble reopening of old questions once deemed settled by science, mathematics, economics. Keep in mind, notes professor Yoshinori Hiroi of Kyoto University, notes that there are many more Shinto shrines in Japan (80,000) than convenience stores (50,000). Hiroi observes among his students a growing interest in ?matters related to life and death? ? what they are, how they should be confronted, what is meant by ?the good life? and ?a good death.? The theme recurs lately, he says, in graduate theses. They are religious questions, to the extent that they are not economic ones.

"Hollowness is a vacuum we must fill. ?Everything you can imagine is real,? said Pablo Picasso. Everything? Are there no illusions to lead us astray? There are, he might reply ? but they are real. He couldn?t have known ?virtual reality? as we know it, but intuitively he may have known a form of it. As with virtual reality, so with dementia, writes Hiroi in Aera. A technological revolution spawned and expands the former; a demographic revolution ? the developed world?s rapid aging, Japan?s in particular ? breeds the latter. Both, says Hiroi, blur reality and sharpen illusion, merging the two into one, creating a space where, if anime characters are real and the visions of dementia patients with a corroded sense of personal identity scarcely less so, so can gods be ? gods as our remote ancestors knew them, or gods as only 21st-century mankind can (but doesn?t yet) know them.

"Some futurists foresee human immortality ? in the flesh or as bits and bytes on software now in embryo. Be that as it may, its time is not yet. Itsuki, no futurist in that sense and looking much less far ahead, sees something that we can all see if we look: a ?big death? coming, a great dying off as postwar baby boomers, now entering their 70s, reach the end of their life spans. Children, fewer in number than ever but no less impressionable, will see it, and be jolted into questions, like, ?Where do we go when we die?? They won?t get answers because there are none ? but, says Itsuki, ?something may well sprout in their consciousness.? What? The next vision of (the) god(s)?"   

Michael Hoffman - The Japan Times - February 4, 2017.

[eyeshaveit]

The Black Puritan

"Lemuel Haynes offers a remarkable example of African American ministerial modeling. Born at West Hartford, Connecticut, in 1753, of a white mother and a black father, Haynes lived his entire eighty years in Congregationalist New England. He completed his indenture in time to serve in the Continental Army during the Revolutionary War. Privately tutored, Haynes became the first African American to be ordained by any religious denomination. Upon ordination, Haynes then served white congregations for more than thirty years.

Middlebury College awarded him the master?s degree in 1804, another first for an African American. Among other accomplishments, he achieved notoriety for a sermon entitled Universal Salvation that defended orthodox Christianity against the threat of Universalism. For this work, he happily accepted the title ?the Black Puritan,? indicating his depth of gospel-centered, Reformation theology.

"Haynes personal epitaph (written by himself) tells much about how he lived his life and where he placed his focus. ?Here lies the dust of a poor hell-deserving sinner, who ventured into eternity trusting wholly on the merits of Christ for salvation. In the full belief of the great doctrines he preached while on earth, he invites his children and all who read this, to trust their eternal interest on the same foundation? The Rev. Lemuel Haynes pointed not to himself, but to Christ. He understood that, ?It?s all about Him!? His trust was solely in Christ and his focus was solely on the gospel of Christ?s grace.

"At age sixty-five, Haynes left his Rutland, Vermont, parish due to political friction that essentially forced him to choose to resign. His farewell sermon of 1818 emphasized, among other topics, his devotion to the work of gospel ministry and to the people of his congregation. Alluding to the words of the Apostle Paul, Haynes notes that: ?He that provided the motto of our discourse could say on his farewell, I have coveted no man?s silver or gold, or apparel. Yea, ye yourselves know, that these hands have ministered unto my necessity.?

"It was important to Haynes with his white parishioners that they recognized his Christ-like, gospel-focused diligence. Few could legitimately question his work ethic given that he had preached 5,500 sermons, officiated at over 400 funerals, and solemnized more than 100 marriages.

"It was also vital to Rev. Haynes that they understood his gospel-centered motivations. ?The flower of my life has been devoted to your service:?while I lament a thousand imperfections which have attended my ministry; yet I am not deceived, it has been my hearty desire to do something for the salvation of your souls.?

"Haynes acknowledged and wanted his people to realize that the ultimate Judge of his motivations was Christ. ?I must give an account concerning the motives which influenced me to come among you, and how I have conducted during my thirty years residence in this place: the doctrines I have inculcated: whether I have designedly kept back any thing that might be profitable to you, or have, through fear of man, or any other criminal cause, shunned to declare the whole counsel of God. Also, as to the manner of my preaching, whether I have delivered my discourses in a cold, formal manner, and of my external deportment.?

Bob Kelleman - RPM Ministries - February 6, 2017.

[eyeshaveit]

Ask the Rabbi

Q: "In the 20th century, human beings murdered by most estimates about 150 million other humans, and that?s just the death count. The religions of the planet have had thousands of years to create a moral order that people could follow, and produce that elusive ?peace on earth, good will to men.? Can you honestly imagine 150 million corpses of little children, young people in the prime of life, grandparents, mothers and fathers and deny that religions have failed miserably? Religious leaders like you bear an enormous burden of responsibility for the slaughters past, present and future. Perhaps it?s time for people like you to look in the mirror and ask yourself if you are doing more harm than good. If the answer is the former, than isn?t it time to sell people on the idea of leaving their religions behind and becoming humanists, and by doing so, lowering one more barrier between people that leads to mass graves? ? M from Lebanon, Pa.

A: "So, before I defend myself for every mass slaughter of the past, present and future here on planet earth; before I remind you that Hitler and Stalin and Mao were all anti-religious and that Ghandi, King, and Mother Teresa were not only religious but professionally religious, let me ask you if you have ever visited a soup kitchen either as a hungry person or as a volunteer to serve others who are hungry? My guess is that if you had made such a visit at any time in your life, and if you looked around, you would have immediately realized that the place housing the soup kitchen was a church or a mosque or a synagogue or a Sikh Temple. You also would have realized that most all the volunteers serving the soup and cleaning up afterwards were religious people from other churches or houses of worship where what you believe to be genocidal religion is taught.

"At some point, your preconceived anti-religious prejudices must shatter before the towering fact that most of the places producing mass healing in our world are the same places you have labeled as places producing mass slaughter. I sometimes think that the last acceptable prejudice in our world is the prejudice against people of faith. It is true that religion can be perverted and used to kill, but by any measure this is the exception and not the rule. The places where Protestants and Catholics, Jews and Muslims, Muslims and Christians live together in peace, has a far greater scope and a far longer history than places where religions are at war. Without the belief that we are all made in the image of God there is simply nothing that makes us the same. Faith alone rises above nationalism and tribalism (see Isaiah 40). Religion is not the source of the world?s limitations, but the source of the world?s fulfillment and redemption.

"Perhaps these stories will help you to see a different side of faith.

"Early one morning Father Tom Hartman and I visited the Franciscan Friars of Holy Name Province on 31st street near Madison Square Garden in New York City. We were there to help these holy men at the St. Francis Breadline that has served food and water and love to homeless people every morning outside on their front steps at 6:30 a.m. They have done this seven days a week, 12 months a year, in any weather, without a break for a single day for over 80 years! After service we were sitting on the steps of the church when a homeless woman sat down next to us. It was close to Thanksgiving and I asked her what she was thankful for. She was smiling and said, ?I am thankful that today I was given a bottle of water that did not come from the trash and that nobody drank from before me.?

"The Mary Brennan Inn on Long Island began in a church and now is run by the saintly Jean Kelly along with a host of mainly religious volunteers. One day a little girl named Maria, who was living in a car with her mother and brother, came to the Inn for their only food of the day. Even so, Maria passed up the chicken and the green beans, the rice and the salad and stood staring and crying in front of a cake decorated with the words ?Happy Birthday.? Emil at the Black Forest Bakery in Lindenhurst had donated the birthday cake because the person who ordered it never showed up. The servers asked Maria why she was crying and Maria said, ?How did you know that today was my birthday??

"The woman who lives on the street but that day got her very own water, and the little girl who lives in a car but that day got her very own birthday cake both received their gifts from religious people.

"May God soften your heart."

Rabbi Marc Gellman - GodSquadQuestions (Tribune Services) - The News & Observer (Raleigh NC) - February 6, 2017.

[eyeshaveit]

Saint Joan is the perfect religious play for our ignorant era

"The chief appeal of Saint Joan, which I saw last night at the Donmar, is that it is a brilliant vehicle for a young actress. Gemma Arterton is great, if a little too mature and attractive to convey teenage innocence. Otherwise, I don?t quite see the point of George Bernard Shaw?s play, and wonder why it is regularly revived in our time. Does it have anything intelligent to say about religion? It romanticises a medieval mystic who took up arms ? which has rather little to do with contemporary Christianity. At one point it suggests that her stubborn individualism is the source of Protestantism, but this is muddled in various ways. It generally implies that she embodies true faith, which is at odds with the worldly authorities, but this is incoherent, as true Christian faith is not militaristic.

"I think it partly appeals to secular people because it collapses the difference between Christianity and Islam. She is basically a jihadi. At one point this is underlined: one character likens her to Muhammed. So the average liberal is confirmed in their view that all religions are the same; they may have attractive, charismatic, romantic aspects (they may be romantic as well as wrong), but dangerous violence is their essence. This is a message that flatters rather than challenges the playgoer."

Theo Hobson - The Spectator - February 7, 2017.

Among the Comments:

"Christianity is not militaristic like Islam is, in the sense that its sacred writings nowhere encourage or condone spreading the faith by the sword or by conquest. It is committed to religious freedom (even if that point was somewhat lost between the Edict of Thessalonica and the Reformation).
But it does subscribe to just war theory, and to the legitimate power of secular authorities to uphold justice and the moral law. As the 1646 Westminster Confession explained: 'God, the supreme Lord and King of all the world, has ordained civil magistrates, to be, under Him, over the people, for His own glory, and the public good: and, to this end, has armed them with the power of the sword, for the defence and encouragement of them that are good, and for the punishment of evil doers?
"It is lawful for Christians to accept and execute the office of a magistrate, when called thereunto: in the managing whereof, as they ought especially to maintain piety, justice, and peace, according to the wholesome laws of each commonwealth; so, for that end, they may lawfully, now under the New Testament, wage war, upon just and necessary occasion.' Since Joan was part of defending France against English aggression, the comparison with jihadis is entirely misplaced, and from a Christian point of view there is no need to dismiss her actions as unduly militaristic. Liberals don't seem to like this, but defence of the homeland is a morally legitimate concern." - Will Jones

"If any comparisons with jihad were at all appropriate, they would concern the puritanically-minded English Catholics of the time, but it is common to mistake the crass nationalist jingoism surrounding St Joan since the 19th century for her actual sainthood, gained in martyrdom and suffering, not warfare nor aggression." - JabbaPapa

"Utterly convincing. The Old Testament reverberates with Jehovah's instructions to the Israelites to biff Canaanites, Amakelites &c, but perhaps these were 'just wars' although the victims might not have agreed. Joan was defending the claims of Charles VI to the French throne against those of Henry VI of England and her strength was her claim that God and variousa saints endorsed her. Like the jihadis, she claimed that God was on her side, and definitely not that of the English. Cardinal Beaufort would have said the contrary.
'Frenchmen' for each side and the canny managed to back both !
There were no 'liberals; in France in the 1420s." - Lawrence James

"You have never heard of the soldiers of Christ then? Strange that?" - Ottovbvs

"And have you ever heard Bob Dylan's line ( perhaps his best ) 'You don't count the dead when God's on your side' ?" - Lawrence James

"The late Christopher Hitchens wrote: "The brilliant Schiller was wrong in his Joan of Arc when he said against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. It is actually by means of the gods that we make our stupidity and gullibility into something ineffable."
"Shakespeare, who included her in a play only a century after she had lived and depicted her as anti woman was possibly nearer the truth because there would still be handed down word of mouth anecdotes in existence. Joan of Arc, a religious person who heard voices, is not a historical figure I can engage with and after reading Marina Warner's depiction I thought that her character had been wrung bone dry of any further interpretation." - Justinae

"Here's an idea, how about staging the best ever play about religion, it's called Fanaticism by Voltaire and in our vibrant, multicultural, free society there would be a massive audience for it. Oh, I see. No can do, well you can still read "Britain's Great Immigration Disaster" by G. Cooke for details, but maybe not for much longer." - David Kane

"I think the best dramatic production ever to have been centred on this misunderstood, maligned, and martyred Saint is Jacques Rivette's extraordinary diptych Jeanne la Pucelle - Les Batailles and Jeanne la Pucelle - Les Prisons" - JabbaPapa

"There is no essential difference between Christianity and Islam despite Hobson's effort to invent one. They're both religions involving a suspension of reality and belief in the supernatural. They're also similar in having deep internecine schisms (Shia v Sunni is no different than Catholic v Protestants and both have been quite willing to countenance violence against the other). In fact after nationalism religion has been the main source of divisiveness and war in human history. I'm a fan of GBS but Joan is not one of his better efforts. Like Man and Superman the arguments become tedious whereas they don't in say Major Barbara." - Ottovbvs