Bill's Faith Matters blog

The 'integralism' movement is another threat to democracy

Kind of indirectly and sporadically, I've been hearing the term "integralist" as part of the church-state separation issue gets increasing attention in this election season.

But until now I haven't had -- or taken -- the time to explore much about who the integralists might be and what they want.

So I'm grateful that the current issue of The Christian Century carries this essay that seeks to make sense of integralism and to warn readers that the name integralist reflects the reality that "they advocate for the integration of church and state."

One reason the integralist movement, if that's the right term, has been more prominent recently is "thanks in part to the affiliations of Ohio senator, vice-presidential hopeful, and Catholic convert JD Vance," writes Rebecca Bratten Weiss, who is digital editor at U.S. Catholic magazine.

She notes that at "a 2022 conference called 'Restoring the Nation,' held at Franciscan University of Steubenville in Ohio, Vance delivered the keynote address alongside prominent national conservative movement leaders and integralist thinkers Sohrab Ahmari, Adrian Vermeule, Gladden Pappin and Patrick Deneen. The conference focused on 'reversing the decline of America by recovering the forgotten wisdom of our nation’s Western and Christian foundations.'”

Our democracy clearly is threatened in various ways, but as Weiss writes, "For integralists, who sometimes identify as 'post-liberal,' democracy is a failed experiment. They would like to see our democratic republic dismantled and a new, theocratic regime installed. To this end, they happily make common cause with other conservatives, including those in the MAGA movement."

I'm reminded of conspiracy theorist Jack Posobiec who spoke earlier this year at the Conservative Political Action Conference and said this: “Welcome to the end of democracy. We are here to overthrow it completely. We didn’t get all the way there on Jan. 6, but we will endeavor to get rid of it.” He also said democracy would be replaced with "this," at which point he showed people a Christian cross he was wearing on a chain around his neck.

Weiss does note that not all integralists agree on all details for the future of the American government, but they do "support the dismantling of public education and the banning of books, reproductive and gender-affirming health care and same-sex marriage. They support legal discrimination against sexual minorities and an end to legal divorce.

"But despite their shared goals, integralism diverges from the populism of Trump’s base in a number of significant ways. Its spokespersons tend to be well-educated and aesthetically discerning, lovers of old books and fine art." And though they "may try to distance themselves from fascism," they share "many of fascism's basic characteristics. . .emphasis on tradition, rejection of modernism, fear of diversity, appeals to social frustration, a tendency toward nationalism, a cult of machismo and heteronormativity and selective populism. This doesn’t mean that integralists are fascists. But throughout history the two have made common cause."

If you want to dig a little deeper into Catholic Integralism, I suggest this article from The Conversation, written by Mathew Schmalz, professor of religious studies at the College of the Holy Cross.

Schmalz writes this: "The basic position of Catholic Integralism is that there are two areas of human life: the spiritual and the temporal, or worldly. Catholic Integralists argue that the spiritual and temporal should be integrated – with the spiritual being the dominant partner. This means that religious values, specifically Christian ones, should guide government policies."

There are, of course, lots of people who buy into that kind of integralism who aren't Catholic, but the leadership seems to be coming from that branch of Christianity.

What is clear is that integralism would undo our democratic republic in countless ways. And I think that's a really bad idea.

(The illustration above came from this site.)

* * *

POPE FRANCIS SPEAKS TRUTH TO THE POWERLESS

On the one-year anniversary of the Hamas attack on Israel this week, Pope Francis had some harsh words of judgment to share in a letter: “A year ago, the fuse of hatred was lit; it did not sputter, but exploded in a spiral of violence. Anger is growing, along with the desire for revenge, while it seems that few people care about what is most needed and what is most desired: dialogue and peace. I am with you, who have no voice, for despite all the talk of plans and strategies, there is little concern for those who suffer the devastation of war, which the powerful impose on others; yet they will be subject to the inflexible judgment of God.” The Hamas-Israel war has been a disaster for all -- first for Israel, then for the Palestinians and Gaza and now even for Lebanon. The bogus idea that somehow humanity is perfectible looks increasingly silly.

* * *

THE BOOK CORNER

Everything Could Be a Prayer: 100 Portraits of Saints and Mystics, by Kreg Yingst. This is, quite simply, a beautiful volume that can be read one page a day for more than three months and fill you with a deep appreciation for the spiritual wisdom -- and questions -- of others. (Its publication date is Oct. 15 but it can be ordered now.)

The back cover of the book describes Yingst as "an illustrator with a focus on block printing with original works created from carved blocks of wood, linoleum or other materials. . ." And his art in this book is simply stunning.

He offers one-page introductions, with an illustration, of 100 different people, ranging from such familiar modern names as Dorothy Day, George Washington Carver, Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Frederick Buechner to names as famous across history as John Wesley, Hildegard of Bingen, Thomas à Kempis and John the Baptist and to such mostly unfamous (at least to me) names as Maurice Ouellet, Guigo II and Bridgid of Kildare.

Each page is a devotional with thoughts about the person pictured in Yingst's art on the facing page. As I say, the art itself is so engaging that readers easily could spend a lot of time just admiring it and never get to the words. But that would be an error.

Maybe this is the book you've been looking for as a resource for the upcoming Christian season of Advent. Or for Lent next spring.

* * *

P.S.: As the United States struggles to preserve its democracy and its future of rule by, for and of the people, India also faces a difficult struggle to assure a good future for its millions of citizens. Markandey Katju, my friend from my boyhood, when I lived in India for two years, writes here about his perception of what needs to happen to assure that Indians don't "remain condemned to horrible poverty, unemployment, hunger, lack of healthcare etc., for themselves, as well as for their descendants.

* * *

ANOTHER P.S.: Tomorrow, Oct. 10, is the annual World Day Against the Death Penalty and the EJUSA Evangelical Network will be joining coalition partners across the country for a National Christian Prayer Call on the Death Penalty. It begins at 5:30 p.m. CDT, and you can register here to attend online.

This church finally abandoned anti-LGBTQ+ theology

When I grew up in a small Northern Illinois town in the 1950s and early '60s, children like me learned almost nothing about homosexuality except, eventually, to make fun of people we suspected were, as the derogative -- but now rescued -- term puts it, "queer."

Our churches were of no help with this at all, though some of them were worse than that by declaring homosexuality sinful. As far as I can remember, the subject never came up in my Presbyterian congregation, even though at the time our denomination refused to ordain LGBTQ+ folks as pastors or allow pastors to do same-sex weddings.

There still are Christian churches of various denominations that teach that homosexuality is always and everywhere a sin against God. These churches are -- as I argue in this longish essay -- sincerely wrong or misguided (sometimes willfully) or just hateful.

The good news is that it is possible to change such teaching. My denomination did that -- after a decades-long battle -- almost 15 years ago. Other Mainline Protestant denominations beat us to it. Some other branches of the faith and independent churches are yet to get there, though the United Methodist Church became a fully inclusive denomination recently at the cost of a painful schism.

But a small congregation in Iowa City, Iowa, once known as Vineyard Community Church, instead of waiting for the leadership of Vineyard USA churches to change its restrictive teachings on this subject, moved slowly but carefully toward rejecting such teachings and eventually declared itself to be fully inclusive of LGBTQ+ people. Which meant it would operate outside of Vineyard membership and oversight.

This inspiring story is told in a book to be published this coming Wednesday, Sanctuary: Queering a Church in the Heartland, by Adey Wassink, Katie Imborek and Tom Wassink, the pastoral leaders of the Sanctuary congregation. (The book can be ordered now.)

It's an unusual book in some ways, especially in how the authors take turns telling the often-painful story of how they came to change their minds and hearts about this matter. There's a lot of personal anguish here along with human drama and trauma, and when they reached their decision it was not without regret about the people who would leave their congregation because of the choice to embrace LGBTQ+ people.

But sometimes doing what's right means that some people will feel betrayed, especially those who think that God is on their side.

The authors say that because of the decision to leave Vineyard and become fully inclusive, "our church came out on the other side not just alive, but bigger, healthier, happier. . .We did not implode or plunge into the abyss. We lost duplicitousness and gained sanity."

The first step in this transformation, of course, was the one that is always first -- recognizing that there's a problem and defining it.

As Adey writes, "Most in our church had inhabited homophobic cultures, which had then been sanctified by conservative evangelical theology." What was needed was for people "from the LGBTQ community (to) teach us, shape us." Such people tentatively showed up and the transformation of the church began. One of them was Katie, one of the co-authors of this book.

As Adey began to see this matter in a new way, she sought to bring along her husband, Tom, who writes this, "(T)he only reason that I took the time to understand how my Christianity had caused me to be able to exclude queer people, and to then repent of that, was because she (Adey) insisted."

As church leaders were deconstructing their anti-LGBTQ+ theology, they also were forced to challenge Vineyard's male-dominated approach to ministry. And did, though that wasn't an easy journey, either.

Adey puts all of that this way: "We only became who we are now because we, out of necessity, against our own will, and mostly unaware of what we were actually doing, had to leave our beloved thing and begin building a new thing."

Understandably, there were ups and downs to this process, but Tom eventually found a measuring stick: "When I am confused about who Jesus would currently champion, whether in a dispute or in culture writ large, I just need to identify the ones being castigated by Christianity, and there's my answer."

That hurts to hear because it's true. As the authors write about Jesus, "We came to see his person and agenda quite differently as our turn toward inclusion unfolded. He was more attuned to systems and privilege than we had previously perceived, tearing down temples of the status quo at every turn. He relentlessly centered innocent victims while marginalizing power."

Adey and Tom were blessed in this journey to have Katie along to guide them into how LGBTQ+ people understood themselves and their need for a connection to the divine -- questions that she, too, struggled with.

As Katie writes, "The option was never to stop being gay if the Bible said it was a sin; the only option then was to give up on Christianity because the whole thing must be bogus and Jesus wasn't it. I honestly don't think I ever doubted who I was or that a divine power out there was working for good in my life and loved me. I was just trying to determine if it was in fact Jesus."

One reason this story is so useful is that the authors eventually figured out how complicated the question they were trying to answer was:

"(O)ur Sanctuary Community Church story of inclusion is not that we realized we got it wrong with calling queerness sinful, and so we had to recant of that. Our story is that we constructed and propagated a system in which sinfulness was an organizing principle that we used to label people so that we could suppress them. Our repentance was not to admit that we were in error on one particular assessment, but rather that we had to demolish our nefarious system and build up a new one in which the construct and consequentiality of sinfulness had nothing in common with what we had practiced previously."

In the end, Sanctuary church leaders told congregational members that "we have come to embrace full inclusions for LGBTQ persons. . .We believe this approach reflects the heart of God for LGBTQ persons and for our faith community, and that it represents a faithful reading of scripture."

The stark lesson of this book is that when faith communities adopt beliefs and practices that turn some people into second-class citizens or worse, that denigrate them, that fail to affirm their full humanity and their status of being made in the image of God, they will inevitably injure others whom God loves without reservation. Nearly all humans and faith communities fail at that at times, but repentance and recommitment to the right path is always an option. Unless, of course, the leaders and structures of a faith community are convinced of their own infallible righteousness.

* * *

FAITH GROUPS RESPOND TO 'HELENE,' OTHER CATASTROPHES

When disaster strikes in the U.S., many citizens know that help will come from many governmental directions, including FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). What they may be less aware of is all the help that faith communities mobilize to offer. As this RNS story reports, several faith-based disaster assistance groups are at work to help victims of hurricane Helene in North Carolina and elsewhere.

Among them is the Mennonite Disaster Service. As the story notes, "relief workers from Mennonite communities around Ohio and Pennsylvania arrived outside Asheville, North Carolina, with chainsaws and earth-moving equipment to help clear the back roads as government services focus on main thoroughfares as well as search and rescue." Agencies representing other faith traditions also are pitching in. And as this Baptist Press article notes, for lots of faith groups, it's a matter of responding again and again and again.

You can find a long list of faith-based disaster assistance agencies here if you want to contribute to the vital work they are doing after Helene -- and will be doing in response to future catastrophes.

A prominent theologian changes course on LGBTQ+ issues

One of the most painful tasks we encounter in life can be admitting that we were wrong about something. Sometimes our mistaken ideas are of little consequence. Who, for instance, cares if you weren't quite right about the middle names of former President George H. W. Bush? (Herbert Walker, not Howard Winston or Hoot Wallaby.)

But if you've spent years as a professional theologian telling people that homosexuality is a sin -- but now you've changed your mind -- well, that's a big deal. And one reason it's a big deal is that your initial position has injured innumerable people in countless ways.

But that is what this CNN story says Richard Hays (pictured below), whom it describes as "one of the most prominent and influential New Testament scholars of the last century," is facing now. (And here is a Religion News Service story focusing on Hays' repentance.)

As the CNN story notes, almost 30 years ago, Hays "wrote what quickly became the go-to traditionalist Christian argument against same-sex marriage. Now, Hays says he’s changed his mind.

"In a seismic reversal, (Hays) is apologizing for his previous position — writing in a new book, The Widening of God’s Mercy, that he is 'deeply sorry' for the pain caused to LGBTQ individuals who have been excluded from Christian churches."

As glad as I am that Hays finally has rejected his erroneous and exclusionary reading of scripture, I can't imagine how much regret he has for fostering bigotry and dehumanization of certain people. And as for the title of the book, God hasn't widened divine mercy. It's always been wide. It's just that some people like Hays didn't understand that or chose not to.

I've met many LGBTQ+ people who have suffered because of the idea that homosexuality is a sin instead of it being simply a sexual orientation different from the orientation of a majority of people. The generative theology that insists that all people -- no matter what, including sexual orientation -- are precious children of God could have prevented all that exclusion and pain. Instead, Hays and others stuck with a theology that considered some people, in effect, outside the circle of divine love.

The CNN story to which I've linked you was written by Ryan Struyk, who identifies himself as a gay man. He writes this: "For almost three decades, Hays’ landmark analysis on homosexuality in his 1996 book, The Moral Vision of the New Testament, has been referenced in evangelical seminaries and traditionalist studies across the country. And, as a gay Christian myself, I’ve lost track of how many times I’ve read his chapter on homosexuality — or been pointed to it by pastors and church officials — in the 12 years since I came out."

As for Hays changing his mind and writing a new book about that, Struyk wrote this: "'I want to repent of what I wrote before,' Richard Hays told me in an interview alongside his son and co-author, Christopher Hays. 'Where I now stand on the question is that Scripture, read as narrative, offers a vision of a God who is dynamic and personal, and can constantly surprise us by reshaping what we thought we knew as settled matters. It was, I thought, what needed to be said in order to put myself right with God and with my brothers and sisters in the church. The whole story of the Bible, I think, regularly summons us all to the practice of repentance.'”

As Struyk also writes, "Hays says he regrets how he says some Christians used his work to marginalize and exclude LGBTQ individuals from the Christian church. 'That position has been, I would say, weaponized — I don’t think that’s too strong a word — by people on the conservative side of the evangelical churches who use it as ammunition to act in what I guess are rightly described as oppressive ways towards gay and lesbian people.'”

Yes, and those oppressive ways were encouraged by Hays and others who were unwilling for so long to abandon an idea that made persecuted and second-class citizens of many people. Any religion that does that is simply getting it wrong. It took too long for Hays to make this change, but let's give thanks that his change came in time for him to confess and try to right the wrongs his position fostered.

* * *

P.S.: HEBER SPRINGS, Ark. -- I'm on the road for a few days to visit friends, so the usual second item on the blog will be missing until I return, which will be soon.

Here's a chance to turn deadly weapons into gardens

In the parking lot right behind Central Presbyterian Church, 3501 Campbell in Kansas City, Mo., you will find a garden, pictured here. That's the congregation's pastor, the Rev. Jenny Wells, standing in front of it.

That parking lot is where, from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. on Saturday, Oct. 12, people will be able (anonymously) to turn in firearms that they want to get rid of. Then they can watch the start of a process that will turn those guns into gardens. Or, if not exactly the gardens themselves at least garden tools to help make things grow.

The "Guns to Gardens Safe Surrender" event that day is rooted in a prophecy found in the book of Isaiah (2:4) about an imagined time when people "shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks."

So, yes, this is one small effort to address the catastrophic plague of guns that are murdering our fellow citizens and wounding the heart and soul of our community. But it's also rooted in Central's approach to ministry, which Wells says has a lot to do with feeding people physically and spiritually, which is why Central has both a sanctuary and a garden.

"After the shooting at the Super Bowl parade here," she says, "I mentioned 'Guns to Gardens' (a national program) in a sermon, and had a handful of members here at Central who really grabbed onto it."

The event, naturally, has security precautions. Any weapon someone brings to turn in must be unloaded and in the trunk of the car. That will be checked at the very start of the process, "and the person surrendering the firearm will never be the one to handle it," Well says. The volunteer inspectors and the people chopping up the weapons will be the only ones handling them.

Volunteers for the event are going through extensive training and the people bringing in guns will not be asked to identify themselves: "We're not asking people for their names," Wells says. "We're not checking i.d.'s." And media are being asked not to be present for the event.

As for getting dozens or more guns off the streets, Wells says "I'd be happy with one" firearm turned in. But she hopes for many more and expects more because some of the people who have gone through volunteer training have said they intend to turn in weapons, too.

When faith communities get engaged in such civic or social programs, you almost always will find some theological justification for that engagement. In this case, as Wells notes, "Something that Central is really good at is feeding people." (And that is exactly what Jesus asked his disciple Peter to do for the Christ-followers of that time.) "So if there's any way that we can turn this tool that has been used for violence and destruction into a tool that can be used productively to make something beautiful, to feed someone, that's really ultimately the goal -- to turn violence into food and peace. The hope is that we'll have a line of cars."

Wells says that a local blacksmith will be present to take "the pieces of the guns that are dismantled that day and turn them into things like garden tools." In return, people giving up their guns will get a grocery store gift card.

"Our hope," she says, "is that some of the tools that are created from the firearms that are turned in will be put to use in our garden here and maybe offered to some of the community gardens in town."

I hope you'll share this post with others in the Kansas City area so that lots of dangerous weapons can be deconstructed into tomatoes and peppers. Thanks for helping with this good project.

* * *

WHEN MEMBERS DISAGREE WITH CORE RELIGIOUS TEACHINGS

It's true that the theology and positions on social issues within religious communities are not decided by opinion polls of members at any given moment. There are, after all, traditions and history to consider. On the other hand, it can be disruptive and even dangerous for an institutional religious structure to ignore the opinions of lay members.

For instance, a new survey of Catholics in six Latin American countries and the United States, done by the Pew Research Center, shows a lot of them disagree with official church stances on various issues, including birth control and the possibility of women priests. In fact, on those two issues, large majorities of respondents disagreed with the official church positions.

Church positions on various issues cannot be up for grabs every two weeks, but there's a price to be paid when the members of a religious tradition begin to reject some of the tradition's important teachings. The challenge is being able to be what my own denomination describes as being "reformed and always reforming" without seeming to have no fixed theology at all.

* * *

P.S.: Speaking of deadly weapons, as I was above, I hope by now -- if your are a resident of Missouri -- that you have written to Gov. Mike Parson to express your outrage about his failure to stop the Sept. 24 execution of death-row prisoner Marcellus Williams, who throughout his incarceration has contended, for good reason, that he's innocent. If you haven't yet done so, here's what I wrote. You're free to use it as a model:

Dear Governor Parson:

Your failure to stop the execution of Marcellus Williams — and you, in the end, were the only one who could have done that — was an appalling act of misgovernance.

I am among those who believe the death penalty is wrong and immoral in all cases for many reasons. But given that Missouri still retains capital punishment as an option in some cases, you and the whole system of justice in our state must make sure that there is never a single doubt about the guilt of any prisoner subjected to it. You failed in that task this time. And I don’t understand why. Nor do I understand how, given that failure, you can sleep in peace at night.

Please know that your inaction will not be forgotten as I and others continue to oppose capital punishment and as we work to create a legal system that can be trusted to do the right thing. Your deadly decision will continue to inspire me and others to make sure this never happens again.

Sincerely,

* * *

THE BOOK CORNER

Some 10-plus years ago here on the blog, I introduced readers to an intriguing little book of fiction that told the New Testament story of when Jesus was 12 years old and, for three days in Jerusalem, his parents couldn't find him. Eventually, he was located in the Temple, where he was having deep conversations with the leaders there -- to the shock and annoyance of his parents. The author of that book, Chris Stepien, now has fictionalized (while sticking quite close to what history we know) the post-crucifixion life of Jesus' apostle John, whom Jesus, from the cross, appointed to take care of his mother Mary.

John narrates this book and, with Stepien's help, sticks tightly to traditional -- and Catholic -- theology and orthodoxy, despite some intriguing inventiveness on Stepien's part. The author is, for instance, clearly a great admirer of Mary, whom he calls "Imma Miriam" (as he calls Jesus "Yeshua"). Indeed, he has John, whom he calls "Yochanan," say this of her: "Miriam was Yeshua's first believer and his first beloved disciple."

In fact, Stepien adopts the Catholic idea of her perpetual virginity so closely that people identified in the New Testament as Jesus' brothers and sisters are called, instead, his cousins. And a year after Mary's death, when John and others come to her grave to gather her bones in a ossuary box, they discover that her remains are entirely missing, as would be required if the doctrine of Mary's "assumption" into heaven was to be believed.

It will almost certainly feel to non-Catholic readers -- and maybe even to some Catholics -- that Stepien is doing a lot of work to stick so closely to church theology and, in the process, making the story a little less human.

All of that said, what is redemptive about this book is that it tries to bring to life people in the Bible that sometimes seem half-dead or at least half-drawn in scripture. Stepien's John is an admirable man who struggles to understand the story of which he's such an important part. You and I may not have pictured him or others in the story the way Stepien does but his effort in some ways frees us to try to imagine a version of these gospel stories that is both true to the history we know and true to the cosmic meaning of the birth, life, ministry, death and resurrection of the Messiah.

And once we grasp the full humanity of the people in this story, its eternal meanings can become clearer. All of which is a good thing.

Another sex abuse failure by another religious group

A lot of what happens in the world of religion and spiritually is inspiring and hopeful. I need to remember that when -- once again -- I run across a development that breaks my heart. Such as:

The Southern Baptist Convention has chosen to put its Nashville, Tenn., headquarters up for sale. Why? As this RNS story reports, a sexual abuse scandal by clergy has been so expensive in so many ways that the denomination's executive committee has had to "spend down its reserves in what its auditors have called an unsustainable manner."

Apparently the SBC, the nation’s largest Protestant denomination, learned nothing from the widely publicized sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic Church. The SBC obviously failed to create systems that would prevent such abuse or that would deal harshly and quickly with abusers -- with the goal of redeeming the lives of both the abused and the abusers.

As the RNS story to which I've linked you reports, "The Executive Committee’s fiscal woes come as the denomination is struggling to implement reforms ordered by the SBC’s governing body two years ago, designed to help churches better prevent and respond to abuse. On Tuesday (Sept. 17), members of the Executive Committee also voted to set up a new department to deal with the issue of abuse reforms, which will take over the reform effort from volunteers."

Volunteers? How could the executive committee not have understood that this kind of scandal can destroy lives and needs to be handled by professionals in a structured and highly accountable system? There may be a role for some well-qualified volunteers in such a system, but they should never have been in charge of the reform efforts.

That they were in charge is a sign of how unserious SBC leaders were about this issue, which now is costing them not only members -- 17 straight years of decline -- but a lot of money.

All of this should be a clear warning to other faith communities that they should make sure reliable systems are in place to prevent such abuse -- especially, as in the Catholic case -- of children. Do you know how your faith community, if you have one, is dealing with such questions? If not, it's past time to find out.

The RNS story includes disturbing details that show that SBC leaders may not even now be taking all of this seriously enough:

It said that "the fate of the 'Ministry Check' website, a long-sought element of the sexual abuse reforms that was approved by the Southern Baptist annual meeting more than two years ago, remains uncertain." That website, approved in June 2022, was supposed to include the names of Southern Baptist pastors and leaders convicted of abuse, those who confessed to abuse or have a court judgment for abuse against them, as well as those who have credible allegations of abuse made against them. To date, no names have been added to the site, and SBC leaders have no current plans to update it and have taken no responsibility for it."

Sometimes I wonder whether the Creator regrets that humans have a reproductive system that requires (almost always) sexual contact driven by sexual desire. That desire and that contact can be beautiful, loving and generative, but when it is none of those things it can be deeply injurious and ugly. Too bad the SBC and some other faith communities have failed to make sure that sexual acts by clergy don't turn into the latter.

* * *

ANOTHER STRIKE AGAINST 'PROJECT 2025'

"Project 2025," a blueprint from the Heritage Foundation and its friends for the next Trump presidency, has received lots of attention -- and much criticism -- for its radical ideas that would, in many ways, threaten American democracy. One aspect, however, hasn't received much focus -- the ways in which it could undermine religious liberty. This RNS opinion column puts the issue this way: The report is "loaded with radical policies aimed at dismantling individual freedoms while gutting the federal government’s ability to operate. One of the gravest dangers isn’t spelled out, but can be discerned by reading between the lines: A dream to turn the United States into a religious monolith, where far-right interpretations of the Bible dictate every aspect of our lives."

The author of the piece is Wa’el Alzayat, CEO of Emgage Action, also says this: "The document tries to be subtle, speaking in terms of 'religious liberties,' but its religious supremacist vision is apparent. Some of the groups involved in its creation have supported policies that intentionally discriminate against and persecute religious minorities, and the rights of religious minorities are barely mentioned."

Even Donald Trump has recognized how repulsive and dangerous to his campaign some of the Project 2025 ideas are and has tried to distance himself from it, but it's clear that many of his friends and supporters are behind it. In any case, the last thing the U.S. needs is another threat to religious liberty.

Pope Francis is catching flak for this but he's right

Well, Pope Francis has done it again. He has spoken a generous truth that is getting him in trouble with those who have a much narrower view of things than he does.

On his recent trip to Asia, he said this while in Singapore, a place whose citizens pledge allegiance to a wide variety of faith traditions: “If you start to fight, ‘my religion is more important than yours, mine is true and yours isn’t’, where will that lead us? There’s only one God, and each of us has a language to arrive at God. Some are Sheik, Muslim, Hindu, Christian, and they are different paths [to God].”

And after the pontiff returned to the Vatican, he spoke a few days ago to an interreligious youth conference and said this: “Unity is not uniformity, and the diversity of our cultural and religious identities is a gift from God.”

What? There's not just one really true, failsafe, God-approved narrow road to the divine, making all others the broad road to perdition?

I can take you to some Christian churches (and to some branches of other faith traditions) where you can hear that no-shades-of-gray theology. It's based on false certitude, a point I tried to make in my book, The Value of Doubt: Why Unanswered Questions, Not Unquestioned Answers, Build Faith.

The argument I make in the book is not that truth doesn't exist. But in Christianity, truth is not fully contained in any doctrine or dogma. That means the complete truth can't be found in a set of words. Rather, in Christianity, truth is a person, Christ Jesus. And just to be clear, my argument is not that all propositions are of equal value. That's immoral relativism and leads to nothing but trouble.

The reality of our lives is that when it comes to the eternal questions -- ideas about the divine, about whether there's a heaven or a hell, about what we can know about such matters with certainty -- we are left to make our best guesses. But they are, in the end, guesses. From the inside, they often feel like irrefutable truth. And sometimes they can be so persuasive and generative that we stake our lives on them. But it should give us pause that not everyone sees things as we do on these subjects.

I have a friend who is a Catholic priest and Trappist monk. He says that when it comes to his commitment to his faith, he is simply making a "wager." He says he has wagered on the story of Christ because he wants it to be true and because he believes it really is true. But it's not a story or a proposition that lends itself to 21st Century scientific certainty. And such "certainty" itself often isn't very certain.

Partly that's because there is a monstrous gap in what we know and what, maybe, some day we might know. For instance, a majority of the Earth's surface remains unexplored, as does a vast majority of the 13.7-billion-year-old (give or take a few weeks) cosmos. And most of physical reality, including everything on our own planet, is hidden from view in the subatomic world that underlies what to us appears to be solid reality. In fact, the desk on which my computer sits is full of emptiness at its subatomic level. Some days I'm surprised it doesn't just collapse.

The stories that religion tells come to most of us through translations into whatever language we speak. The Bibles most often read by Americans, for instance, are translated into English from the original Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic. But the original manuscripts are almost all missing, though our collection of earlier and earlier manuscripts is much better today than it was 100 years ago. So if you read the Bible as literal history, you're not taking the Bible seriously. It is not written as literal history, even though it contains some historically verifiable accounts.

None of this is to say that all faith traditions are alike or of equal value or that any of them can scientifically prove you will or won't acquire an afterlife. As much as anything, religious stories are art. They are meant to give you visions of what a flourishing life might look like and how to live such a life. Because humanity was involved in how those religions got started, grew and changed, we have no guarantee that God, who, was motivated by love to create the cosmos (which I can't prove), agrees that this or that religion is the one God would pick if God were human and given a choice.

None of that creative uncertainty will matter to a lot of people who prefer to believe they have uncovered the only true religion and who are appalled that many other humans don't agree with them.

But Pope Francis is right to ask such people: "Where will that lead us?" The answer is pretty obvious. It will lead us to where we are today: People of faith often disrespecting other human beings because they haven't wagered on the same faith story that they have themselves have wagered on.

And that is no path either to peace or to insight. Oh, and by the way, no: The pope in this instance was not speaking infallibly.

* * *

IN THE WAKE OF LIES, PEOPLE OF FAITH RESPOND

After all the recent turmoil in Springfield, Ohio, because of lies Republicans have told about Haitian immigrants there stealing and eating pets, congregations there have banded together in various ways to help. As this article from an agency of the Presbyterian Church (USA) reports, "'We didn’t know what was coming, but God did,' said the Rev. Jody Noble, pastor of Covenant Presbyterian Church in Springfield, who has taken on, among other important tasks over the past few days, organizing and offering a press conference featuring her colleagues in ministry."

Help is arriving from around the country, too. Which, of course, is exactly what people of faith should be doing in such a situation. Also: I was glad to see that among those offering help was the Rev. Margaret Towner, the first female ordained (in 1956) as a pastor in this (my) denomination. I've written several times about Marg (as she likes to be called) over the years and find her an uplifting spirit and a self-effacing pioneer for women in ministry. There are links in the story to which I've linked you in case you want to help, too.

Beyond all that, the Rev. Elizabeth A. Eaton, presiding bishop of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, just issued this statement about the Springfield, Ohio, situation. "Our church," she wrote, "teaches that immigrants are children of God, made in God's image and worthy of respect and lives of dignity. God calls us to witness boldly to this truth when people tell dehumanizing lies that perpetuate racist tropes and support white supremacist narratives." 

* * *

P.S.: In 2020, Mick Larson, a Kansas City documentary maker, produced a series called "What Would Jesus Do on Election Day?" You still can find that intriguing series here. In it, he interviewed and filmed quite a few folks, including me, who, he thought, would some kind of light to shed on his question.

More recently, Larson has produced a seven-part podcast series based in large part on the documentary series. You can find that here. But each part of the podcast series comes with an introduction and, with each main part, offers considerably more detail than the original documentary. The podcast is based on follow-up interviews with those of us who were filmed as part of the original.

As Larson told me, "The seven-episode documentary series was updated for the 2024 election. A podcast series was produced for the 2024 election. The podcast has a director's cut series featuring professors, authors, journalists and theologians who contributed to the documentary series. Those contributors break down each episode, expanding and analyzing the comments."

There's a lot of material here. But Larson's original question still is well worth some thought as we approach the soon-to-arrive 2024 presidential election (advance voting began in several states this weekend). The part that faith plays -- or can play -- in political matters is always a worthy subject, and I'm glad Larson has offered this new podcast series, in which some of us who are interviewed disagree -- civilly -- with others of us.

Must we rely only on rare heroes to help desperate immigrants?

The anti-immigrant rhetoric we're hearing in this presidential election time is nothing new in American history. It is, however, mystifyingly paradoxical coming from citizens who make up a nation of immigrants (excepting, of course, for Indigenous residents who, just 100 years ago this year, finally were made legal citizens of the U.S.).

Daniel Greene (pictured here), who teaches history at Northwestern University and who is what's called a "Subject Matter Expert" at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C., was in Kansas City last week to speak about all of this and more at the Harry S. Truman Presidential Library and Museum in Independence. His appearance was sponsored by the Midwest Center for Holocaust Education (on the board of which I serve).

Greene first focused on 1930s America, which was struggling through the Great Depression just as Adolf Hitler was seizing and abusing power in Germany.

It was a fraught time everywhere and when careers and lives hang in the balance, sometimes people of faith abandon what the great world religions have tried to teach them. In this case, the idea -- rooted in Judaism and re-emphasized in Christianity -- of protecting the weak, the homeless, the immigrant, the hungry, often got shelved. (Islam, by the way, teaches that all human beings are immigrants.)

The result of that abandonment of principle was a strong wave of anti-immigration sentiment just when Germany's and all of Europe's Jews were facing an existential threat from Hitler's Nazis.

Greene said that he often gets asked this question from people who don't have a good grasp of history: "Why didn't the Jews just leave?" Well, early in the period, some Jews did just that, finding at least temporary refuge in some western European countries, in what later would become the new state of Israel and in several North and South American countries, including the United States.

But, Greene said, "the question should not have been 'Why didn't the Jews leave Nazi Germany?'" Instead, "we want them to ask, 'Why did the United States make it so difficult for immigrants to enter?'"

One answer, he said, was that public opinion polling in the '30s made it clear that a large majority of Americans opposed allowing more immigrants to enter the U.S. And given the Depression and the accompanying high rate of unemployment, that opposition makes at least economic sense even if it violates religious teachings. Elected officials knew that if they adopted a strong pro-immigrant stance, they'd likely be voted out of office.

But the problem is that once you begin to see certain people as undesirable, that attitude can quickly escalate to raw racism, to hatred of "those people," to the kind of bizarre language of bitterness that, as a child, I'd occasionally hear from my maternal grandfather, himself an immigrant from Sweden. He simply had no room for people he called "the Slavs," including a family who lived across from my grandparents' home on East 12th Street in Streator, Ill. My mother was not allowed to play with the children of that family.

I had to ask my older sisters and my parents what that was all about, but I never got a full or satisfying answer, though they found Grandpa's anti-Slav views distasteful and made that clear to me.

So today we again find anti-immigrant rhetoric spewed about by some people seeking political office, including former President Donald Trump. I'm not going to repeat his pet-eating lies and other hateful nonsense here. But if you want an analysis of his thoughts about that, here's one source.

Greene, however, said he did not want to leave the impression that Americans in the 1930s and their government did nothing but evil things when it came to immigration or that somehow America was as bad or worse than the Nazis. He then told several stories of heroic Americans who went way out of their way to save a few Jewish people from Europe. They were thrilling, inspiring stories of heroic citizens who, like so many of their neighbors, could have done nothing -- or worse. (They reminded me of the people Rabbi Jacques Cukierkorn and I wrote about in our 2009 book, They Were Just People: Stories of Rescue in Poland During the Holocaust.)

The world is in a different place almost 100 years later. And yet immigration and the existence of refugees remain difficult matters to resolve in generative ways. Our elected officials for years and years have failed to create fair and equitable immigration policies, and if there is no major reshuffling of power in Washington in the next election, that is likely to continue.

But my question is why so many current American citizens -- many of them people of faith -- seem so willing to ignore or reverse what their religions historically have taught them about how to treat immigrants, the homeless, the stateless, the people who are fleeing for their lives.

I'll wait for your answers.

* * *

AFTER 20 YEARS, CHINA FINALLY FREES A PASTOR

If you needed more evidence of how horrifically the government of China treats people of faith, you need only to read this Associated Press story about an American pastor who was just finally released after 20 years in prison there for helping a church that was not authorized by Chinese officials. The Chinese communist government is among the world's worst offenders when it comes to suppressing religious liberty. Our government should be doing everything it can to call China on this and to make sure the world knows of China's continuing efforts to obliterate freedom.

* * *

P.S.: Speaking of the Holocaust, as I was above, in early 2021, I wrote here about a new book co-authored by D.Z. Stone and by a former German teacher who helped his students uncover a brutal Nazi-era story in their town. The news now is that Germany has awarded the teacher, Dieter Vaupel, the "Merit on Ribbon of the Order of Merit of the Federal Republic" of Germany for his work in that regard. You can read about that award here. Vaupel was a true patriot willing to tell a bitter story about his own country, and Germany has done the right thing by honoring that work.

Work on 'reparations' needs more voices of faith

Say the word "reparations," and many white people will picture handing cash to Black people as a way to make up for slavery.

There's a bit of truth in that idea, but it's so woefully inadequate that it prevents a lot of people from exploring the idea of acknowledging the destructive, bleak decisions and policies in our nation's past, then seeing the still-continuing results of all that and finally deciding to do something that can create a better, more just future for everyone.

There are many reasons why faith communities should be helping to lead the campaign for reparations. The most important one is that some of what happened in our nation's history -- from cultural and physical genocide against Indigenous people to enslavement of Black people to the later discriminatory laws and practices that kept most of them in poverty (or prison or both) -- violated a core principle found in all the great world religions: The idea that each person is of inestimable value because each person bears the image of the divine.

But in many places where communities are considering options for reparations, the work is being led not so much by people of faith who are acting as representatives of their religions but by politically appointed folks who see their work as a secular civic duty. In some cases, including in Kansas City, they are doing good work toward finding some kind of solution that can garner enough political support to be implemented. And I wish them success. You can follow the work of the Kansas City Reparations Coalition here and the Mayor's Commission on Reparations here.

But in much of this work, the voices representing institutional religion seem either mostly silent or unable to get much of a public hearing and response for their ideas.

So I was glad to see the current issue of an independent magazine, The Presbyterian Outlook, which covers my denomination (and for which I used to write a monthly column), the Presbyterian Church (USA). It has devoted nearly all the space in this issue to answering the question posed on the cover: "Reparations: How do we right the wrongs of history?"

In one of the articles in that issue, the Rev. Jermaine Ross-Allam, director of the denomination's Center for the Repair of Historic Harms, writes this: "When the Christian descendants of those peoples who committed European colonialism's originating harms finally show up in public -- locally and nationally -- to acknowledge that reparations and reparatory justice are right, necessary and possible, the church can then mobilize other community members. . ."

And William Yoo, who teaches at Columbia Theological Seminary, writes this: "My hope is anchored in my conviction that we must see our church as it is: the work of saints and sinners who did both good and evil, all in the name of God. The sinful history of racial prejudice within our Presbyterian heritage is simultaneously a sobering reminder of human fallibility and a call to enact justice by repairing relations with Black Presbyterians today."

Each faith community has its own history that is part of a larger national story about slavery and its aftermath, a story with both heroes and villains. Which means each one must take the time to understand what happened, publicly acknowledge what went wrong and take actions that can begin to repair what was broken -- often broken on purpose.

Many white Americans, like me, were born into a system that dehumanized other people and, in that process, we benefited in various ways. My job, and the job of others in that category, is to acknowledge that history and to start the work needed to repair the world.

If you are part of a faith community, ask yourself whether that community is responding to this issue in generative ways? If not, maybe you can be part of the solution.

* * *

CAN WE CHARGE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE WITH MORAL CRIMES?

Who is morally responsible for actions taken or induced by artificial intelligence? Ah, excellent question. And this RNS article wrestles with that increasingly important question. The authors of the piece write: "According to many modern philosophers, rational agents can be morally responsible for their actions, even if their actions were completely predetermined – whether by neuroscience or by code. But most agree that the moral agent must have certain capabilities that self-driving taxis almost certainly lack, such as the ability to shape its own values. AI systems fall in an uncomfortable middle ground between moral agents and nonmoral tools." It's one more reason that theologians and others who guide our religious lives should be paying more attention to artificial intelligence and both its advantages and its moral vulnerabilities.

The failure behind 9/11 continues to produce a broken world

If Karleton Douglas Beye Fyfe -- a name almost big enough to hold his 6-5 frame and winsome personality -- had died in, say, a car wreck or of cancer at age 31, it would have been a personal disaster for my extended family. (The first photo here shows his name at the 9/11 Memorial in New York City.)

But my nephew KDBF, as we called him, died 23 years ago today as a passenger on the first plane that the 9/11 terrorists slammed into the World Trade Center. So his death instantly became something much larger -- a symbol of radical violence rooted in religiously based vengeance for what the leaders of the perpetrators were convinced were American national sins that could be absolved in no other way.

The nearly 3,000 people who were murdered on 9/11 were, in effect, given the death penalty to pay for what the terrorists' leaders believed were our American government's and our culture's violations of their rigid theological standards.

It was far from the first time that misguided religion had led to bloodshed. Nor did such faith-based horrors end with 9/11, either.

But what they all had in common was the radical failure of some people of faith to understand and act on the key concept at the root of almost every generative religious tradition -- the inestimable value of every human being, a concept that springs from the conviction that each person bears the image of God.

That concept may have been articulated before Judaism enshrined it in its sacred scriptures -- words eventually adopted as part of the Christian Bible and studied by Muslims because Islam requires them to understand the Bible so they can better understand the stories in the Qur'an that are rooted in the Bible. But the book of Genesis is where most people find it today.

As Rabbi Irving Greenberg writes in his new book, The Triumph of Life, "Humans, like all life, are planted in the ground of the Divine. Just as plants rooted in alkaline soil evolve to become more alkaline and more absorptive of the nutrients in the ground, life itself absorbs the distinctive Godly energy and evolves to become more and more like its ground, the Divine. . .That is why the bible describes the human being, the most developed form of life thus far, as being in 'the image of God.' This means that human life, however finite and limited, nevertheless possesses capacities so striking and powerful that they bring to mind the operations of the unlimited capabilities of the Creator." (I recently reviewed Greenberg's book here.)

(The small photo here shows a stone marker where KDBF was buried in North Carolina.)

The failure to understand that foundational concept about the preciousness of each human being helps to explain why the 9/11 terrorists murdered Karleton and so many others. And why already this year some 100-plus people in Kansas City have been fatal victims of gun violence. It's why so many of our social systems treat people of different racial and economic backgrounds in prejudicious ways. And it's why the concept of white supremacy has had such staying power.

Had he lived, Karleton (pictured here a few months before his death), would be 54 now. His extended family, including me, continue to miss him like crazy -- his quick humor, his touching sensitivities, his loving, giving nature, his capacious brain.

But as I think about such things today, I am painfully aware that the primary reason he's not still alive today is that some people either were never taught or they never understood or they just willfully violated the idea that each human being is of infinite value because each one bears the image of the creator.

Our continuing failure to live as if that's true is why the world remains in desperate need of what Jewish people call tikkun olam, or a commitment to repair of the world. Let's be about that task today in memory not just of Karleton but of all people who have ever fallen victim to this failure.

(My book about 9/11 and the trauma it put my family and the world through -- and what we can do about that now -- can be found here.)

* * *

A NEW NATIONAL CATHOLIC REPORTER EDITOR

There's some good, Kansas City-related news about The National Catholic Reporter, the independent newspaper based here in KC. As this RNS story reports, James V. Grimaldi, a member of the Grimaldi family reared here in KC, has been named NCR's executive editor. Grimaldi comes to NCR from The Wall Street Journal and brings a wealth of experience and a history of great reporting (he's been part of reporting teams that have won three Pulitzer Prizes). His brother Mike and I worked together for a time at The Kansas City Star, and I've also known his brother Tom. Mike's wife, Carol, is a leader in my Presbyterian congregation. James Grimaldi will work from NCR's offices in Washington, D.C. The paper is in many ways the progressive voice of the Catholic Church in the U.S. and has been a leader in covering such stories as the abuse scandal involving priests and the bishops who covered for them. I used to write a regular column for NCR, though now I just do occasional book reviews for the publication.

* * *

P.S.: A little KC-area seminary news: Central Seminary (also known as Central Baptist Theological Seminary) will move this December from its current location at 6601 Monticello Road in Shawnee to a new, smaller location at 8620 W. 110th St. in Overland Park. Central is an American Baptist (not Southern) seminary. The Southern Baptist seminary in our area is Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Kansas City, North. More details about the Central move can be found here.

Loving a forest can teach people of faith how to love congregations

Forests -- not unlike religious congregations -- are profoundly complicated beings. And both often need help to remain healthy.

Which is why I want to introduce you to a lovely and engaging new book, How to Love a Forest: The Bittersweet Work of Tending a Changing World, by Ethan Tapper. (The book's publication date is next Tuesday, but it can be ordered now.)

The author did not write this to help people in congregations think about how to keep their faith communities healthy. That idea might have been pretty far from his mind, I'm guessing.

But so much of what he writes -- quite elegantly, I might add -- corresponds to the questions of the health of congregations, so I'm going to draw from the insights of this Vermont forester and suggest how and where they might apply to faith communities.

Of course, you may read this book as simply a well-written look at one man's commitment to stopping the degradation of a forest that he now owns and to return it to health in a balanced, diverse way -- an individual commitment that may have broad and positive ecological applications. And that may inspire you to do what you can to promote ecological sense and justice. That would be a wonderful use of this book.

But because the interests of this blog tend toward matters of faith, I will draw from it some lessons that congregational leaders might think about applying to rescue declining faith communities.

After finally getting his college degree, Tapper, who earlier in life had lost sight in one eye in an accident, began work as a forester in Vermont. Part of his job was "helping private land-owners understand how to care for their forests."

He eventually bought some land in northwest Vermont and "began to truly understand how forest management could be restorative and regenerative, how it could enrich forests, how it could help forests rediscover their true capacity for life. I began to truly understand how the cutting of a tree could be an expression of compassion and humility, an act of healing, an act of love."

And so it can be with congregational management. Sometimes in religious communities what goes wrong and leads toward their diminishment are things that have been allowed to grow without pruning, to invade areas of ministry the way non-native plants invade a forest to its detriment. The leaders of houses of worship must find ways to grow effective worship services, healthy programs and various approaches to ministry by knowing what to change and when, what to fertilize and what to let die.

And if that's true for programming and worship approaches, it's also true of leadership. There is a time for long-time leaders to hand things over to younger members, even if the elders are worried that the "kids" are immature and won't know what they're doing. Change isn't always life-giving, for sure, but lack of change almost never is.

Here's one way Tapper puts that idea as it relates to forest management: "(F)orests are socioecological systems (and). . .our lives are forever stitched into the green flesh of the biosphere, that the separation of the human world from the wild world is an illusion. We cannot care for ecosystems without recognizing that we will always rely on them and we will always tax them, that human life will always be precious and worth nourishing and will always come at a cost."

What's important, he writes (and here what he says applies directly to both forests and congregations), is "a vision of relationship and responsibility, freedom and power, resilience and humility, legacy, beauty and change. . .In a world that is both human and wild, both wounded and vibrant, both suppressed and emergent, this is a vision both for how we manage forests and take care of ecosystems and how we manage ourselves, how we take care of each other."

Tapper draws an interesting distinction between forests and orchards that he began to notice once he "learned to reimagine the forest as something messy and imperfect, complex and undefinable, dynamic and expansive over space and time." Congregations that become well-ordered, no-surprise orchards can survive for a time, but in the end they will lack the dynamism and the resources to grow and thrive like a healthy forest because they fear the very changes that will save them.

When Tapper purchased his Vermont forest, what he found was "a monoculture of diseased beech saplings." It took courage and foresight for him to begin pruning (and, in some cases, eliminating) things and replanting or at least opening up space for nature to take its course. If that reminds you of some religious congregations, then the leadership of them needs to learn the hard lessons for life-giving pruning and restoration.

There is much more to this sweet and disturbing new book, but if congregations are to learn anything from its lessons that were meant for forests, one of those lessons is to make changes with humility, recognizing that time may prove those decisions to have been mistaken. But the bigger mistake will have been not to try.

* * *

WHY ARE THERE SO MANY EXORCISM FILMS NOW?

Filmmakers are producing more and more films about exorcism, and Joseph Holmes, the author of this Religion Unplugged piece about this trend, thinks it has to do with the shifting place of religion in American culture. As he writes, "People who can speak the language of both faith and film will be in high demand as the people most capable of speaking to one of the only audiences will have a unified meta narrative. And because that unified meta-narrative is specifically religious, the stories being told will likely be more overtly religious as well." The internet and social media have fractured the culture in countless ways, and finding an audience for any sort of entertainment, sport or idea is increasingly difficult. Maybe the culture needs an exorcism, too.