The World Wide (Religious) Web for Monday, September 26, 2011

OUR INCREDIBLY SHRINKING PUBLIC SQUARE: “Conscience, Coercion, and Healthcare.”

…throughout American history, religious institutions have been the leading private providers of charitable, educational, and medical services to the poor, always serving those they felt were the most marginalized populations of their day—whether slaves or freed slaves, new immigrants, Native Americans, prisoners, or persons with AIDS. The quality and efficiency of their care, and the compassion with which it has been delivered, are often noted. Regularly, the populations served did not share the faith of the religious institutions who took up their cause

Given their solidarity with the dispossessed, religious leaders of every denomination have, throughout American history, also effectively led a variety of human rights’ movements, including the movements for abolition of slavery, for civil rights, for campaigns to end poverty, and for justice for immigrants, the elderly, those with disability, and the unborn. The presence of religious leaders and religious institutions in the public square—and not behind the walls of their monasteries, churches or homes—is an inescapable aspect of America’s history of progress and prosperity.

The proposed exemption disregards this history by limiting its application to employers who do little (or nothing) but preach to the convinced. This, apparently, is what the authors of the new regulations intended when they adopted the stringent definition of “religious employer,” drafted by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in connection with California’s contraception mandate. This is the very same ACLU that recently urged HHS to force all Catholic hospitals to perform abortions under the guise of necessary “emergency treatment.” Recent history demonstrates that many religious employers will exit from the marketplace rather than abandon their mission to offer faithful witness in the course of providing service. Those behind the new regulations must be willing to accept this effect, and perhaps even desire it.

This is revolutionary. Never before in American history has any administration—state or federal—been so willing to force religious institutions out of business. In fact, at our founding, and for a long time thereafter, most education, healthcare, and social services were provided by the churches, not by the government. In most cases public authorities assisted the churches by some form of financial or material aid. Even when, after the Civil War, governments began more earnestly to set up their own schools and to provide some other charitable services directly, the norm remained what it had been: a productive partnership between religious and civil providers, with no preference for any religion and with coercion of no one’s conscience, all directed to the achievement of the common good. This was surely the pattern up to and beyond World War II.

In fact, it was not until the 1960s, and then largely under the influence of Supreme Court decisions imbued with a rabid secularism, that this long partnership came in for wholesale criticism. Only then did American elites begin to think of systematically privatizing religion, of shutting up faith within the walls of family, home, and church. Only in the 1960s did significant numbers of people begin to think that everything public—that is, all that is properly in the civil sphere—should be governmental.

With these proposed regulations, the Obama administration would turn back the clock, not only to this discredited intolerance, but beyond, and toward a repudiation of our whole constitutional and political tradition. The administration would restrict the public square to the government to an extent that would be anathema to the founders, and undreamt-of by any important public figure since.

_____

“TERRIBLE JOKE” AND “RECIPE FOR SOCIAL CATASTROPHE”: “Richard Dawkins’ Atheist Academy of Unguided Truth.”

What many Catholics know, and what Richard Dawkins appears not to, is that the idea of children moving through life without serious intellectual and moral direction—in this insane world, of all places—is a terrible joke and a recipe for social catastrophe.

My wife and I are raising three Christian children. We take them to church at least twice a week. There, as at home, they are told exactly who they are, what exactly is expected of them, and why. We expect them to internalize this and come to see themselves as part of a story, a big beautiful story grounded in the reality and love of God.

We even expect them to believe it for a while. Then we expect them to question Christianity in their own ways, as they should. They may embrace it, owning it finally. They may reject it. That would sadden us. But if they do, they will at least have the singular pleasure of knowing exactly what it is they are rejecting.

You’d think Richard Dawkins—of all people—would wish the same pleasure for the graduates of his would-be academy.

_____

AMERICAN ATHEISTS SAY THE CRAZIEST THINGS: “Judaism without God? Yes, say American atheists.”

_____

ARAB WINTER? “The Anti-Liberals Strike Back.”

Middle Eastern liberals, they [Hussein Agha and Robert Malley] argue, only affected the direction of Arab history this year for the briefest of periods. The Arab revolution began on December 17, 2010, when Mohamed Bouazizi kicked off the revolt against Tunisia’s dictator Zine El Abidine Ben Ali by setting himself on fire in the town of Sidi Bouzid. The Arab revolution ended, they say, on February 12, the day after Hosni Mubarak was removed from his palace in Cairo. Men with guns and theology have been in charge of history’s direction since then.

_____

MATTHEW 25:40 WATCH: “Five misperceptions about poverty in America.”

“Poverty doesn’t exist in the United States.”
“There is no such thing as extreme poverty in America.”
“If you live above the federal poverty line, you’re doing just fine.”
“These so-called safety-net programs cost American taxpayers money when we need to be focused on balancing our budget.”
“Fifty percent of all Americans do not pay taxes.”

_____

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT DEBATE: “The Guilt of Troy Davis.”

The guilt of Davis does not undermine the arguments against capital punishment, but this case should lead opponents to be cautious before making the slanderous claims about an “innocent man” being put to death by the state.

_____

WHY THE YOUNG LEAVE CHURCH: “You Lost Me 2.” Scot McKnight outlines David Kinnaman’s new book, You Lost Me: Why Young Christians Are Leaving Church…And Rethinking Faith.

Overprotective. Mosaics are shaped more by creativity, cultural engagements and progressivism — re-imagine, re-create, re-think — while the church tends toward the conservative, the traditional, and the lack of change.
Shallow. Too many platitudes, too simple of proof texting, and formulaic slogans are a problem for Mosaics. A church that is thin theologically, and who can gainsay this for far too many of America’s churches?, cannot respond adequately to the deeper level of questions of many Mosaics.
Antiscience. Faith and science are incompatible for many Mosaics. Science works, as they experience daily. What does this say for faith? Not much. Science is not afraid, the church is. Thank God for someone like RJS on this site, and this is not a statement about her own beliefs and conclusions but about the posture of asking questions and probing.
Repressive. Religious rules stifle Mosaics who are so individualist and sexually-oriented. How has the church shown that it has understood sexuality, and how has the church responded? How can a church be trusted when so many of its members are divorced? Is this just about sex or is this even more about relationality?
Exclusive. Mosaics are shaped by tolerance, open-mindedness, and acceptance, and the church seems so exclusive and boundary-driven. How can the church challenge such Mosaics?
Doubtless (no doubts allowed). Many Mosaics openly claim the church does not permit and does not welcome their own doubts. It is not safe. I still think the emerging movement offered shelter for those who were told not to doubt. This doubt is both intellectual and institutional. Will the church be able to integrate their questions into a life of faith?

_____

FIRST AMENDMENT WATCH: “A Free Speech Year at the Court.”

The Supreme Court completed its 2010 term at the end of June with no blockbusters, few surprises, and an unbroken string of victories for free-speech plaintiffs. It was a year to take a deep breath before the onslaught of divisive cases next year: Same-sex marriage, the constitutional right of religious groups to choose their clergy without government interference, and enforcement of laws against illegal immigration are likely to be among them. We do not yet know whether the Court will tackle the health-care issue next year as well, but the fact that the two courts of appeals that have addressed the issue have come down on opposite sides makes it highly probable.

Despite the usual press rumblings about a “divided court,” almost half the cases—48 percent—were decided by a unanimous vote, and another 28 percent were decided with only one or two dissents. During his confirmation hearings, John Roberts declared his hope that the Court under his leadership would decide cases more narrowly, with greater consensus. This seems to be happening. For the last three years, the frequency of unanimous decisions has been steadily increasing.

_____

WWJ(B)D? “The Gospel according to Justin Bieber.”

Bieber explained his approach to Rolling Stone in February: “I feel I have an obligation to plant little seeds with my fans. I’m not going to tell them, ‘You need Jesus,’ but I will say at the end of my show, ‘God loves you.’ “

He does not take complicated theological soapbox stands. In February, he drew a lot of attention for articulating his opposition to abortion in a Rolling Stone article, but he was quick to say it was his belief and he would not force it on anyone.

The book also uses quotes from social media sites to evidence the positive influence Bieber’s faith has on his young fans. [Author Cathleen] Falsani sprinkles in quotes from Bieber’s core audience—tween and teenage girls—and plays to their hand with a glossy color photo spread featuring pictures of Bieber being Bieber.

Though she considers herself a fan in his shadow demographic (the moms at the concert who secretly dig and buy the music), as a mother herself, Falsani appreciates the positive role Bieber’s faith has played in his young career.

“I do think this faith he has is very genuine and very much his and not his mom’s or anyone else’s. It’s not a marketing tool,” she said.

Well, good for him!

_____

LET’S HOPE NOT: “Sudden death? The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom may fold under a Senate Democrat’s opposition.”

_____

HAD RICK PERRY SAID THIS… “Obama asks CBC for biblical faith in his agenda.”