TruthBook Religious News Blog

To coincide with 200th anniversary of abolition of U.S. and U.K. slave trade

NEW YORK, Jan. 8 /Christian Newswire/ --

The John Templeton Foundation recently awarded a major grant to fund a new documentary film, The Better Hour, to make William Wilberforce a household name again, as he was 200 years ago. The TWC Films documentary, The Better Hour: William Wilberforce, A Man of Character Who Changed The World is targeted for fall 2007 television broadcast in the U.S. and U.K., and will focus on the character of British Parliamentarian William Wilberforce—who worked heroically for 20 years for the abolition of the Trans Atlantic slave trade.

The Better Hour documentary, co-sponsored by the Wilberforce Project, will provide a more in-depth resource for the growing interest among church and anti-slavery groups, anticipated to increase upon the February 23, 2007 release of Bristol Bay Productions’ major motion picture Amazing Grace, starring Iaon Gruffud as Wilberforce and Albert Finney as John Newton.

William Wilberforce was well known, even in America, in the early 1800s, after having led the 20 year effort, against all economic odds, that ended the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade, effective May, 1807 in England and January, 1808 in the United States. (British Royal Assent was given on March 25, 1807; U.S. legislation was signed by Thomas Jefferson on March 2, 1807.)

The British Parliamentarian, William Wilberforce, was directly responsible not only for the legislation abolishing the British Slave Trade 200 years ago, but heavily influenced the same legislation in the U.S. In addition, Wilberforce was responsible for the beginning of the modern human rights movement, the women’s suffrage movement, the first child labor laws, prison reform, a more human penal code, and the founding of 69 philanthropic societies in late 18th century England.

“William Wilberforce’s political career is a case study that merits attention," said Chuck Stetson, chairman of The Wilberforce Project. "While Wilberforce's name is virtually unknown in the modern United States, with approximately a 3 percent recognition factor in the U.S. and 10 percent in the U.K., Wilberforce was once acknowledged by Abraham Lincoln in 1858 as a person that 'every school boy' knew," explained Stetson. The emancipation leader Frederick Douglass saluted the energy of Wilberforce “that finally thawed the British heart into sympathy for the slave, and moved the strong arm of government in mercy to put an end to this bondage. Let no American, especially no colored American, withhold generous recognition of this stupendous achievement—a triumph of right over wrong, of good over evil, and a victory for the whole human race.” In 1833 when Wilberforce died, the Free Blacks in America were urged by their leaders to wear black arm bands for 30 days as a sign of mourning, said Stetson. In 1856, the first historically black university in America in Dayton, Ohio was named Wilberforce University.

The John Templeton Foundation grant also included funding for a national essay contest for youth, to launch in September 2007, with awards made by spring of 2008.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Man’s spiritual journey holds lessons for all

By Lawn Griffiths, Tribune Columnist
January 27, 2007

When I talk to groups about religion writing and the most compelling or memorable things I have covered, I always mention Robert Drews, whose story I hold in envy.

Drews was an 87-year-old widower who had just completed a faith odyssey — going to 100 different churches on 100 consecutive Sundays. When he shared his story, he was going to start on his next 100 houses of worship, beginning with his first visit to a Catholic church.

His eclectic worship marathon was the ultimate “comparative religion” exercise for a man who belonged to no particular faith but was openminded about belief. Avuncular and playful, Drews told me that it wasn’t some quest for the “holy grail” or final truth. It wasn’t even an original effort to get closer to God. The biggest reward, he said, was hearing so many different sermons and homilies. It was purely an adventure. Some would say it took courage — a stranger darkening the doors of unfamiliar churches eager to add him to their rolls.

Drews’ experience causes us to ask ourselves whether most of us have boxed ourselves in by simply embracing the religions and faith traditions largely given to us through family or marriage. Would a search like Drews’ give us more authenticity to what we ultimately settled for? Or do all religions basically get the job done in giving us moral bearings and treating each other better than we might otherwise?

Drews picked churches at random, but he kept track of those he visited and amassed a large pile of worship bulletins along the way. Typically, he arrived 15 minutes before the service and took a seat in a second-row pew on the lefthand side of the church so his right ear, his good one, could pick up the words of the pastor, whose hand he always shook afterward. After each service, he wrote a critique in a spiral notebook.

I asked Drews whether all that diverse doctrine and dogma turned his mind into theological mush — the “swirl of teachings, liturgies, rituals, styles of worship, sermons and worship music” — just left him unsure of what to believe.

Naw, he said. The undertaking proved what many faiths don’t want people to know: There’s nothing all that important that separates authentic faiths. Most of them embrace immutable verities that they think they discovered first and have best refined.

Actually, it was part of Drews’ habit to “do things that other people don’t do”: visiting every Mesa city park and every area museum, playing golf at every course, bowling at every alley in the Valley. Some irony, then, that he embarked on such a serious and disciplined exploration of faith.

Drews didn’t live too many months after that story was published, and his son called to tell me of his death and how the article had somehow affirmed his father, that his weekly drill actually had given great purpose to his octogenarian years.

Recently a reader, Carrie Davis, wrote me in the spirit of Robert Drews. She said she had read 11 Bible translations and thoroughly enjoys keeping the doors open on religious truth. She reminded me how liberating it is to not get too serious and too convinced of the absolute rightness of a certain belief system or theology. She says that “truth is all around us,” and we can educate ourselves from what the ancient minds and teachers offered and what comes new to us each day.

“Everything I do in my life is based on trust and belief,” Davis said. “Teach what you learn. Knowledge is wisdom, and wisdom is empowering.” One’s spirit keeps one free, she said. “Our soul takes us home,” while belief itself is something others cannot touch. She said she embraces Spiritualism, a “natural way of believing,” which “raises eyebrows,” conjuring everything from “tree hugger” to “witch” to “hippie.” But she said no one should be told his or her religion is wrong unless it leads to hurting others or breaking the law. She believes in teaching children so they can choose their own spiritual paths.

So, is wandering the canyons of faith worthwhile? Are perennial seekers wasting the soles of their shoes and doing little for their wayfaring souls?

I encounter plenty of folks who have shopped around, grown here, felt unfed there, been burned, saw faith in action in several places and seen epic tedium in the grind of religious life. But years of bold search have deepened their spirituality and made them less apt to accept some airtight orthodoxy, to question authority and wonder aloud. They may seem aloof and standoffish as you tout your good news.

Aloof like Robert Drews, who kept on roving in what truly was a faith journey.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

The 'Spiritual State of The Union?'

Landmark Gallup Survey Shows Major Shifts

WASHINGTON, Jan. 29 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- D.C. & Princeton, N.J.

The Gallup Organization and the Spiritual Enterprise Institute [
http://www.SpiritualEnterprise.org ], today released the results of a
national survey on the state of religious and spiritual attitudes and
practices in America.

George Gallup III said, "This is the first comprehensive survey of its
kind since 1999, and a new 13-statement "Spiritual Commitment Index" was
developed to link to trend measurements from a smaller 2002 Gallup survey."
He also said, "We see rapid shifts in American attitudes -- as well as
confirmation of the critical underpinning of religious and spiritual
beliefs as they relate to current problems, the economy, volunteerism, and
giving.

Top Line Findings:

* Agree:

"The Spiritual Health of the Nation is Important"
* 63% of all respondents (A 14 point decline since 2002)
* 79% of church-goers
* 44% of self-identified Liberals

* "Trust"
* 4 in 10 Americans believe today that, in general, people can be
trusted.
* 6 in 10 think "you can't be too careful."
* 85% of Americans "mostly agree" that being ethical will pay off
economically.

* Religious Convictions:
* Since 1999, Americans saying
-- They're "spiritual but not religious" has increased 10
percentage points
-- they're part of a "Christian religious tradition," has declined
6 percentage points
-- they have "no religious tradition" has increased 5 percentage
points
* 18% of the adult U.S. population can be described as "highly
spiritually committed."
* 49% describe themselves as "religious."
* 40% say they are "spiritual but not religious."
* 70% say that because of their faith, they find meaning and purpose
in life.

* Volunteerism (Who Volunteers a great deal or some?)
* 65% of Americans volunteer
* 81% for church-goers
* 87% for those self-identified as "born again"

* Spirituality in the Workplace
* 79% believe open expression of religion at their place of work
should be either encouraged (32%) or tolerated (47%).
* 19% employees report there are groups at their place of work that
meet regularly for prayer or Bible study.

"We see many important trends in this data -- but we also want to
provide the research and analysis to students, journalists, policy-makers,
and the clergy, to draw their own conclusions." said SEI Founder, Malloch.
The research is posted at http://www.SpiritualEnterprise.org.

The Spiritual Enterprise Institute [ http://www.spiritualenterprise.org
] was established in 2005, to stimulate new thinking with regard to
Spiritual Capital, and how it can best be employed to benefit social and
economic development through Spiritual Enterprise.

The Gallup Organization has studied human nature and behavior for more
than 70 years. Gallup's 2,000 professionals deliver services at client
organizations, through the Web, at Gallup University's campuses, and in 40
offices around the world.

The John Templeton Foundation, a funder of SEI, serves as a
philanthropic catalyst for discovery in areas engaging life's biggest
questions -- explorations into the laws of nature and the universe to
questions on the nature of love, gratitude, forgiveness, and creativity.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Monday, January 29, 2007

Meditation found to increase brain size

People who meditate grow bigger brains than those who don't. Researchers at Harvard, Yale, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology have found the first evidence that meditation can alter the physical structure of our brains. Brain scans they conducted reveal that experienced meditators boasted increased thickness in parts of the brain that deal with attention and processing sensory input.

In one area of gray matter, the thickening turns out to be more pronounced in older than in younger people. That's intriguing because those sections of the human cortex, or thinking cap, normally get thinner as we age.

"Our data suggest that meditation practice can promote cortical plasticity in adults in areas important for cognitive and emotional processing and well-being," says Sara Lazar, leader of the study and a psychologist at Harvard Medical School. "These findings are consistent with other studies that demonstrated increased thickness of music areas in the brains of musicians, and visual and motor areas in the brains of jugglers. In other words, the structure of an adult brain can change in response to repeated practice."

The researchers compared brain scans of 20 experienced meditators with those of 15 nonmeditators. Four of the former taught meditation or yoga, but they were not monks living in seclusion. The rest worked in careers such as law, health care, and journalism. All the participants were white. During scanning, the meditators meditated; the others just relaxed and thought about whatever they wanted.

Meditators did Buddhist "insight meditation," which focuses on whatever is there, like noise or body sensations. It doesn't involve "om," other mantras, or chanting.

"The goal is to pay attention to sensory experience, rather than to your thoughts about the sensory experience," Lazar explains. "For example, if you suddenly hear a noise, you just listen to it rather than thinking about it. If your leg falls asleep, you just notice the physical sensations. If nothing is there, you pay attention to your breathing." Successful meditators get used to not thinking or elaborating things in their mind.

Study participants meditated an average of about 40 minutes a day. Some had been doing it for only a year, others for decades. Depth of the meditation was measured by the slowing of breathing rates. Those most deeply involved in the meditation showed the greatest changes in brain structure. "This strongly suggests," Lazar concludes, "that the differences in brain structure were caused by the meditation, rather than that differences in brain thickness got them into meditation in the first place."

Controlling random thoughts

Insight meditation can be practiced anytime, anywhere. "People who do it quickly realize that much of what goes on in their heads involves random thoughts that often have little substance," Lazar comments. "The goal is not so much to 'empty' your head, but to not get caught up in random thoughts that pop into consciousness."

The increased thickness of gray matter is not very much, 4 to 8 thousandths of an inch. "These increases are proportional to the time a person has been meditating during their lives," Lazar notes. "This suggests that the thickness differences are acquired through extensive practice and not simply due to differences between meditators and nonmeditators."

As small as they are, you can bet those differences are going to lead to lots more studies to find out just what is going on and how meditation might better be used to improve health and well-being, and even slow aging.

More basic questions need to be answered. What causes the increased thickness? Does meditation produce more connections between brain cells, or more blood vessels? How does increased brain thickness influence daily behavior? Does it promote increased communication between intellectual and emotional areas of the brain?

To get answers, larger studies are planned at Massachusetts General Hospital, the Harvard-affiliated facility where Lazar is a research scientist and where these first studies were done. That work included only 20 meditators and their brains were scanned only once.

Slowing aging?

Since this type of meditation counteracts the natural thinning of the thinking surface of the brain, could it play a role in slowing - even reversing - aging? That could really be mind-boggling in the most positive sense.

Source: Harvard University (By William J. Cromie)

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Engaging with faith groups

By Editorial Desk | Published 06/15/2006

Engaging with faith groups

Attempts to get faith groups involved in the wider community can lead to cynicism among members, unless carefully handled, according to a new booklet published by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), called 'Faith-based voluntary action'.

Moves by politicians and officials to encourage greater participation can backfire if, for instance, they are seen as claiming 'grass roots legitimacy' on the basis of a group's involvement, without actually engaging with its values and practices.

The 'Faith-based voluntary action' booklet was produced to accompany the first in a series of special seminars entitled 'Engaging Citizens', organised by the ESRC in collaboration with the National Council for Voluntary Organisations (NCVO).

It summarises views from two experts - Professor Vivien Lowndes, of De Montfort University, and Greg Smith, until recently senior research fellow at the University of East London, and now with the Salvation Army in Preston.

The booklet says it is widely recognised that there are many positive elements in the desire of government agencies - nationally, regionally and locally - to engage in partnership with faith-based organisations, and work for social cohesion across these communities.

Many Christian churches do not give community involvement or social care a high priority in their mission, and ordinary members of congregations in those that do, generally find it hard to think strategically, relate their spirituality or faith to wider policies, or see beyond the day-to-day needs of people in their immediate neighbourhoods.

In the booklet, she presents a 'diagnostic tool', devised with Rachael Chapman at De Montfort University which identifies the part faith groups can play in achieving the goals of civil renewal at four levels ? communities, organisations, networks and leadership.

For further information or a copy of the booklet, contact:
Amanda Williams at the ESRC on 01793 413126; e-mail: amanda.williams@esrc.ac.uk

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Sunday, January 28, 2007

Three bullets and the sounds of silence

By Rajdeep Pathak, [RxPG] New Delhi, Jan 28 -

While the nation observes the anniversary of the martyrdom of Mahatma Gandhi Jan 30, few people are aware of the exact place where one of the most infamous political assassinations in history took place.

The streets of Delhi that lead to 5, Tees January Marg - earlier known as Albuquerque Road - seem to hold little or no significance for many. The building, today called Gandhi Smriti, is the historical place where Mahatma Gandhi lived the last 144 days of his life.

After his arrival from Calcutta - on Sep 9, 1947, Mahatma Gandhi was motored straight to the building, then called Birla House. On his visit to Delhi, Gandhi preferred staying at the Harijan Basti, also called Valmiki Mandir, at Panchkuiyan Road, but as the refugees from West Punjab occupied the Basti, after the partition of India, there were concerns over his security.

The epic life of the Father of the Nation ended in the sacred place of the prayer ground of this hallowed house, which today treasures many memories of the last few days of his life. The old Birla House was acquired by the government of India in 1971 and converted into a national memorial and dedicated to the nation Aug 15, 1973.

The imposing structure of the simple Lutyen's style bungalow where Gandhi occupied just a small room has been witness to the developments in post-independent India. It was here, impelled by the communal riots, that Gandhi declared his intention to fast for an indefinite period. Only on receiving assurance from all communities, Mahatma Gandhi broke his fast - the last one - by taking a glass of orange juice from Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad.

The preserves at Gandhi Smriti also include the room where Mahatma Gandhi lived and the prayer ground where he held a mass congregation every evening. It was here that Nathuram Vinayak Godse's bullets felled Gandhiji on his way on Friday, Jan 30, 1948, at 5.17 p.m.

In total contrast one can't help but notice the impassive structure of the National Defence College just across the road, with three cannons staring in the direction of the place personifying the eternal message of truth, peace and ahimsa - which Gandhi stood for all his life. The structure - stands either in total defiance of these ideologies or can even be interpreted as a salutation in 'silence' to that eternal spirit.

On display in the museum are photographs, sculptures, paintings, frescos, inscriptions on rocks and relics pertaining to the years Mahatma Gandhi spent here. The meagre personal effects of Gandhiji too are carefully preserved.

If the Martyr's Column indicates the spot where Gandhi was assassinated, a bronze flame next to the lawns sends the message of continued hope and faith. The sparkling white walls inside the museum are covered with well-documented photographs on the life and message of Gandhi.

By presenting all this through the latest technology, it is an endeavour to reaffirm and relive Gandhian values.

This unique multi-media presentation displays a language of physical interface, actions derived from classical symbols of the spinning wheel, turning of the prayer wheels, touching symbolic pillars, the act of hands touching sacred objects, collaboratively constructed quilts, sacred chanting in the collective group, the touching and rotating of prayer beads and so on.

By adding new dimensions to the historical place, Gandhi Smriti is a centre of pilgrimage, a place of learning. Gandhi is remembered every moment for his passionate adherence to truth and non-violence. He was modern and yet rooted to timeless traditions and values. He was not just a political revolutionary but also a great social thinker.

As Albert Einstein on hearing the news of Gandhi's assassination said, 'Generations to come, it may be, will scarce believe that such a one as this ever in flesh and blood walked upon this earth.'

Sainthood often distances men from men, yet Gandhi was for the poorest of the poor. To stand in silence at least one day in a year for a minute - leaving the daily life chaos behind - before the Martyr's Column, will be a tribute to the man who helped us think as citizens. This would be far greater than the emotional homage that has obscured the thrust and significance of his teachings.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

One - The Movie

"Every once in a while a film comes along to lift the spirit and give hope to the human connections we all share. ONE is such a film."

Sam Ajluni, former panelist
Cannes Film Festival

Circle of Bliss Productions announced the release and availability of the documentary ONE... The Movie. This film asks the big questions of life to people on the street and to many of the world's most renowned and respected spiritual leaders, authors, icons and celebrated masters including, Barbara Marx Hubbard, Father Richard Rohr, Llewellyn Vaughn-Lee, Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev, Father Thomas Keating and B.T. Swami with comment from His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama.

What types of questions do these spiritual masters answer? What happens to you after you die? Describe God. When is war justifiable? What is the meaning of life? How would God want us to respond to aggression and terrorism? And more...

In the spring of 2002 Ward M. Powers suddenly awoke in the middle of night with an idea that called him to action. He needed to make a film that would express to all of humanity the importance of understanding our interconnectedness... a film that would communicate the idea that WE ARE ALL ONE. Powers, a Detroit-area trial attorney who had never done any film making, mail ordered a video camera and embarked on what turned out to be a two-year life-changing odyssey.

The film seemed to have a life of its own. Powers started by asking for help from friends and family but soon, doors opened and support flooded in from all directions. They had no prior experience, industry connections and very little budget, but because of the project's theme they were able to attract an array of technical, creative and production talent required to successfully complete a feature length documentary.

Over the next two years the unlikely crew traveled the country asking 'life's ultimate questions' to Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, the homeless, Sufis, Muslims, street kids, Jews, Taoists, Native Americans, Atheists, philosophers, social architects, prostitutes, mystics, monks, moms, medicine-men, teenagers, working people, and more, capturing wisdom from those in remote monasteries to those in the urban alleyways.

ONE... The Movie, weaves the novice filmmaker's remarkable journey with a tightly edited thematic collage of the interview responses using threads of music and imagery in a style that challenges traditional film genre classifications.

For additional information on theatrical and film festival locations or for more background on the film please visit: www.onethemovie.org.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Science and religion —Albert Einstein

It would not be difficult to come to an agreement as to what we understand by science. Science is the century-old endeavour to bring together by means of systematic thought the perceptible phenomena of this world into as thoroughgoing an association as possible. To put it boldly, it is the attempt at the posterior reconstruction of existence by the process of conceptualisation. But when asking myself what religion is I cannot think of the answer so easily. And even after finding an answer which may satisfy me at this particular moment, I still remain convinced that I can never under any circumstances bring together, even to a slight extent, the thoughts of all those who have given this question serious consideration.

At first, then, instead of asking what religion is I should prefer to ask what characterises the aspirations of a person who gives me the impression of being religious: a person who is religiously enlightened appears to me to be one who has, to the best of his ability, liberated himself from the fetters of his selfish desires and is preoccupied with thoughts, feelings, and aspirations to which he clings because of their super-personal value.

It seems to me that what is important is the force of this super-personal content and the depth of the conviction concerning its overpowering meaningfulness, regardless of whether any attempt is made to unite this content with a divine Being, for otherwise it would not be possible to count Buddha and Spinoza as religious personalities. Accordingly, a religious person is devout in the sense that he has no doubt of the significance and loftiness of those super-personal objects and goals which neither require nor are capable of rational foundation. They exist with the same necessity and matter-of-factness as he himself. In this sense religion is the age-old endeavour of mankind to become clearly and completely conscious of these values and goals and constantly to strengthen and extend their effect.

If one conceives of religion and science according to these definitions then a conflict between them appears impossible. For science can only ascertain what is, but not what should be, and outside of its domain value judgments of all kinds remain necessary. Religion, on the other hand, deals only with evaluations of human thought and action: it cannot justifiably speak of facts and relationships between facts. According to this interpretation the well-known conflicts between religion and science in the past must all be ascribed to a misapprehension of the situation which has been described.

These conflicts have all sprung from fatal errors. Now, even though the realms of religion and science in themselves are clearly marked off from each other, nevertheless there exist between the two strong reciprocal relationships and dependencies. Though religion may be that which determines the goal, it has, nevertheless, learned from science, in the broadest sense, what means will contribute to the attainment of the goals it has set up. But science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with the aspiration toward truth and understanding. This source of feeling, however, springs from the sphere of religion. To this there also belongs the faith in the possibility that the regulations valid for the world of existence are rational, that is, comprehensible to reason.

I cannot conceive of a genuine scientist without that profound faith. The situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.

Though I have asserted above that in truth a legitimate conflict between religion and science cannot exist, I must nevertheless qualify this assertion once again on an essential point, with reference to the actual content of historical religions. This qualification has to do with the concept of God.... The main source of the present-day conflicts between the spheres of religion and of science lies in this concept of a personal God. It is the aim of science to establish general rules which determine the reciprocal connection of objects and events in time and space. For these rules, or laws of nature, absolutely general validity is required — not proven. It is mainly a program, and faith in the possibility of its accomplishment in principle is only founded on partial successes. But hardly anyone could be found who would deny these partial successes and ascribe them to human self-deception....

If it is one of the goals of religion to liberate mankind as far as possible from the bondage of egocentric cravings, desires, and fears, scientific reasoning can aid religion in yet another sense. Although it is true that it is the goal of science to discover rules which permit the association and foretelling of facts, this is not its only aim. It also seeks to reduce the connections discovered to the smallest possible number of mutually independent conceptual elements. It is in this striving after the rational unification of the manifold that it encounters its greatest successes, even though it is precisely this attempt which causes it to run the greatest risk of falling a prey to illusions. But whoever has undergone the intense experience of successful advances made in this domain is moved by profound reverence for the rationality made manifest in existence. By way of the understanding he achieves a far-reaching emancipation from the shackles of personal hopes and desires, and thereby attains that humble attitude of mind toward the grandeur of reason incarnate in existence, and which, in its profoundest depths, is inaccessible to man.

This attitude, however, appears to me to be religious, in the highest sense of the word. And so it seems to me that science not only purifies the religious impulse of the dross of its anthropomorphism but also contributes to a religious spiritualisation of our understanding of life.

Albert Einstein needs no introduction. The above excerpts are from his book Ideas and Opinions

Contributed by Ammar Ali Qureshi

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Saturday, January 27, 2007

Author relates God, science, personal responsibility to global peace

Jan 12,2007

With “God Refined: A Proposal for Peace”, Robert Kezer answers what may be our most important question: Can the average person make a difference in the world, or are we destined to a future beyond our control -- one of increasing war, environmental destruction, and disparity between the rich and poor?
Today, many people feel religious strife is tearing us apart. Yet, rather than our spirituality destroying us, Kezer says it is what has stopped the carnage from getting worse: this, he offers, is a clue for ending the violence consuming our planet.

In God Refined, we are challenged to accept global change as personal responsibility. Kezer shows how beliefs in hell, karmic justice, and the wrath of God are fear-based ideas retarding humanity’s progress -- concepts no longer reasonable for most educated people. Drawing on the Urantia Revelation, he teaches the unified nature of creation, that our relationship with God is personal, and that all religions are considered equal under the umbrella of a single sovereign Creator.

On a planet becoming ever more violent, Kezer offers the tools we need to survive. His approach is simple, direct, and compelling: abolishing war is our responsibility, not that of our leaders. Believing that crisis creates opportunity, he visualizes a new era of global community -- one where women enjoy full partnership with men in all decision-making, from the family level to the world stage. Relating humanity’s evolution to individual personal growth, we are presented with a path to a higher order of existence, one from which peace can have its first true chance.

God Refined: A Proposal for Peace is offered in paperback and in a Complimentary E-book edition for those people for whom the cost would impose a hardship.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Kezer returned to college in 2002 pursuing a self-designed program in Peace Studies: he graduated in 2006 with bachelors’ degrees in International and Religious Studies from the University of Oregon. Working to become bilingual so he can also present in Spanish, he writes and speaks on God, religious tolerance, and our tools for abolishing war. Bob has one adult son and lives in Eugene, Oregon.

ABOUT THE BOOK: ”God Refined: A Proposal for Peace” by Robert A. Kezer 2006. First Edition. 6 x 9; 60 pages. ISBN: 978-0-6151-3810-7. Available through bookstores and in paperback ($12.99 p&h), e-book ($6.98), and complimentary download at http://stores.lulu.com/bobkezer. Publication Date: 1 March 2007.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Thursday, January 25, 2007

Affluenza: Rampant consumerism erodes us

By Paul Majendie Thu Jan 25, 10:37 AM ET

LONDON (Reuters Life!) - Beware the Affluenza Virus. An epidemic of mindless consumerism is sweeping the world with the compulsive pursuit of money and possessions making people richer but sadder.

That is the stark warning issued by best-selling British psychologist Oliver James after a "mind tour" of seven countries chronicling how depression envelopes the affluent.

Globe-trotting from New York to Sydney, Singapore and Shanghai via Copenhagen, Moscow and Auckland, he concluded after interviewing 240 people that "selfish capitalism" has run riot.

Bigger houses, more cars, larger televisions, younger faces -- these goals are frenetically pursued by middle-class workaholics afflicted by "Affluenza."

Always wanting bigger and better is an emotional cul de sac, argues the 53-year-old psychologist, broadcaster and author.

What makes "Affluenza" so readable, and differentiates his eloquent polemic from the legion of self-help books that offer trite short-cuts to happiness, are the potted biographies of the subjects he interviews.

But not all was doom and gloom for the peripatetic psychologist.

He admired the Chinese for their "best is good enough" stoicism and said "I most liked the Muscovites as they still have an interest in the life of the mind."

James the optimistic believes the backlash has begun.

"We are at a turning point. My argument dovetails with the ecological argument -- we cannot carry on consuming in this manner and feel confident our great grandchildren have any future. This inevitably leads us to question consumerism."

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

U of M study finds 1950’s style ideal family model persists in 21st century American churches

MINNEAPOLIS / ST. PAUL (1/17/2007) -- American churches remain a primary source of 1950s family ideology -- a kind of “Ozzie and Harriet” mythology -- that lingers long after modern American family realities have changed, according to a new study by University of Minnesota researchers.

Associate sociology professor Penny Edgell and graduate student Danielle Docka conducted an eight month-long case study of three distinctly different churches -- an evangelical Black church, a Latino parish and an ultra progressive Protestant church. The churches, all in the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area, were chosen because the majority of their congregants fell outside the typical American family model of a married male-female couple with children.

From the challenges to the patriarchal family in the Black church, to the pressures of immigration and cultural assimilation on marriage in the Latino parish, the study found that each congregation, despite their differences, struggled with meeting the demands of today’s non-nuclear family model. Even innovative congregations put limits on ways participants can express the concept of family: the most liberal church, a predominately white, progressive church, struggled to adapt to the idea of leadership roles among its gay and lesbian congregants.

And because their roles have typically expanded beyond mother and caretaker, women congregants in particular are caught in the crosshairs of the tension -- buffeted between real world demands and old fashioned, out-of-date expectations.

Gender roles are at the center of most church struggles and are representative of the struggle to redefine gender roles in society at large.

The study, “Beyond the Nuclear Family: Familism and Gender Ideology in Diverse Religious Communities,” will be published in the March issue of Sociological Forum and was funded in part by the Lilly Endowment in cooperation with the National Survey of Religion and Family Life.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Wednesday, January 24, 2007

New quest in British politics: public happiness

More illusive and harder to measure than wealth, 'subjective well-being' is the new hot-button issue.

By Mark Rice-Oxley | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor

LONDON - Once upon a time, the hot-button issue for politicians in rich countries was "the economy, stupid."

But after decades in which Western nations have gotten richer but not necessarily happier, a new performance indicator – harder to measure and more elusive to deliver – is beginning to emerge.

Some simply call it happiness. The more scientific term is subjective well-being (SWB), a composite of factors including income, health, environment, relationships with friends and family, education, recreation, and faith.

Economists on both sides of the Atlantic believe they are getting good at measuring it, and now the political class in Britain is beginning to take it seriously.
According to happiness rankings by the United Nations, European Union (EU), and magazines like the Economist, the top 5 is normally dominated by the likes of Norway, Iceland, Australia, Ireland, Denmark, and Switzerland. G-7 countries fare less well; Europe's richest troika – Britain, France, and Germany – languish.
British politicians are starting to ask why. In Britain, surveys consistently show that people are no happier than they were 50 years ago, though incomes have tripled since the 1950s.

A poll last year found the proportion of people saying they are "very happy" had fallen to 36 percent today from 52 percent in 1957. Four in five people said government's prime objective should be the "greatest happiness" not the "greatest wealth."

'Department of happiness'

Tony Blair meanwhile has set up a government team, sometimes dubbed the "Department of Happiness" to study how to make people happier. An initial report, which collated international research, came up with some obvious findings, and one or two surprising ones.

"A lot of it is common sense," says lead author Prof. Paul Dolan of Imperial College London. "What do you think is going to make you happy? Spending time with friends and family."

Thus, marriage and good quality relationships are strongly linked to happiness, according to Professor Dolan's report. So are good health, exercise, going for walks, faith (of any denomination), and even casual interactions like talking to a neighbor. But living alone, sickness, indebtedness, and joblessness were all associated with poorer well-being, as were caring for a dependent and commuting.

As for income, it makes one happy up to a point, but there is a diminishing return the higher the income – particularly given the sacrifices that must be made for bigger salaries. A Pew Research poll done in the US in 2005 notes that 50 percent of families with incomes of $150,000 or more say they're "very happy." By comparison, only 23 percent of families making $20,000 or less report being "very happy." But Lord Layard says that more income is not necessarily associated with more happiness. He notes that even if your income is rising, but others are getting richer faster, that can undermine personal happiness.

'Life, liberty, and the pursuit of ...'

The notion of politicians trying to make private individuals happy is not new. The 19th-century philosopher Jeremy Bentham argued that the aim of government should be to bring as much happiness to as many people as possible. Even the US Declaration of Independence in 1776 points out the inalienable rights of man including "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

Critics protest that studying happiness is too subjective to formulate universal policy. But Lord Layard says that even if government cannot always deliver happiness, it can often do much to avert misery. He cites research showing that 1 in 6 Britons suffer from depression or anxiety. Government should, he argues, earmark greater resources to help mitigate this malaise.

Much unhappiness, he adds, stems from childhood; and so Britain is about to pilot a program introduced in America by US psychologist Martin Seligmann, whose work teaching 11-year-olds about how to handle negativity and focus on personal strengths has reportedly had an impact on antisocial behavior.

Philosophers are less sure that happiness should be the preserve of government. Some argue that much of the malaise in Western society is due to higher expectations (we demand more of ourselves), peer pressure (others have raised the bar of success), and the need for recognition as well as wealth: All factors mostly beyond the reach of mere politicians.

AC Grayling, another British philosopher, adds that as horizons have enlarged, there are "new kinds of striving" so that people are just as far from their goals as they were 50 or even 500 years ago. "Modernity has raised expectations," he says. "The reason people don't score more highly is that standards have risen and risen again."

He says workplaces where people are praised results in a happiness "quite independent to the amount they are being paid.... But it's the kind of thing you can't make laws about," he adds. "You can't legislate for feelings."

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Toppling a Taboo: Businesses Go 'Faith-Friendly'

Published: January 24, 2007 in Knowledge@Wharton

Do your Hindu, Sikh and Jain coworkers need a three-day weekend in November to celebrate Diwali? Have you ever asked Muslim employees to help design products destined for a Southeast Asian market? Did you know one colleague urging another to accept Christ as a personal savior is a legally protected act?

In the world of corporate diversity and inclusion, first there was race, then gender and ethnicity, then sexual orientation. Now religion is knocking at the door, and, according to some experts and practitioners, it isn't likely to go away anytime soon. "The train has not only left the station; it's passing through town," says David Miller, executive director of Yale University's Center for Faith and Culture and author of the 2007 book, God at Work: The History and Promise of the Faith at Work Movement. "The question is: Are you going to steer the train or let it run you over?"

"The old paradigm of leaving your beliefs behind when you go to work is no longer satisfying," says Stew Friedman, practice professor of management and director of the Wharton Work/Life Integration Project. "More than ever, people want work that fits in with a larger sense of purpose in life. For many people, that includes a concept of God, or something like it."

Do Ask, Do Tell

At Fannie Mae, a leader in the diversity and inclusion field, recognizing religion has been a natural outgrowth of responding to employee needs, according to Emmanuel Bailey, vice-president and chief diversity officer at the Washington, D.C.-based home finance giant. In addition to conducting a biannual employee survey, the diversity office also initiates conversations with its 16 employee network groups, five of which are religiously based.

"We want a corporate culture that retains employees, so that they value Fannie Mae as a great place to work," says Bailey. "We ask, 'From your own perspective, what could we do to improve the culture here?' We had the Jewish, Muslim and Hindu groups say, 'We always see an acknowledgement of Christmas, but we never see any acknowledgement of Rosh Hashanah, Ramadan or Diwali,'" says Bailey.

The issue came up again recently, when Fannie Mae was rushing to complete its financial restatement following charges that it misstated earnings from 2001 to 2004, among other allegations. "Some of our divisions had to work on a six-day-a-week, 12-hour-a-day schedule," recalls Bailey. "From our employee network groups we learned that this decision cut into certain people's religious observances. That's what led us to the multicultural calendar."

Avoiding Bad Business Decisions

Whether it's prayer breakfasts, study groups or workplace ministries, much of the faith-at-work movement has evolved outside of the church -- in large part because churches in recent decades have been uninterested in, if not hostile towards, the business world, according to Miller, a former senior executive in the financial sector. "Although there are pockets of interest in some churches, it's fair to say that churches, whether evangelical, mainline Protestant or Catholic, have abdicated their theological and pastoral interest in the workplace," Miller says in an interview.

Welcoming faith into a company can also provide unlikely solutions to common business problems. Miller points to Tyson Foods, whose business quadrupled in 2001 when it acquired IBP (formerly known as Iowa Beef Processors). Faced with the task of merging two strong but divergent company cultures, chairman John Tyson "recognized he needed a set of core values that would steer the new Tyson Foods and get people out of their prior identities," says Miller, who advised Tyson in drawing up these new "core values," which state that Tyson Foods is a "faith-friendly company" striving to "honor God and be respectful of each other, our customers and other stakeholders."

Corporate leaders resistant to the idea of being faith-friendly may be persuaded by evidence that religion and spirituality already exist in their workplace, says Bennett, pointing to a 2005 NBC poll in which nearly 60% of respondents said religious beliefs played some role in making decisions at work, and an even higher number said such beliefs influenced their interactions with co-workers. Similarly, recent figures from the U.S. Census show a dramatic rise in the rate of immigration from non-Western countries; one-third of human resources professionals surveyed in 2001 by the Tanenbaum Center and the Society for Human Resource Management said the number of religions in their company increased in the past five years.

Legal Hot Spots

The workplace is not the only formerly faith-free zone to witness an explosion of interest in religion. Public life and politics are now marked by frequent battles over everything from gay marriage to evolution to stem cell research. This could lead companies to worry that if they bring religion into the workplace, they may be opening themselves up to litigation from non-religious employees or members of non-mainstream religions who feel they are excluded.

Proselytizing in the workplace is one legal hot spot, according to Deborah Weinstein, who teaches employment law for managers in Wharton's legal studies and business ethics department. "Courts across the country have interpreted this issue very differently. In a 2006 case in California, the court said persistent and blatant proselytization is prohibited because it could constitute harassment. But other courts, in Colorado, for example, have said employers need to bend over backwards to accommodate those who [believe they] need to proselytize," says Weinstein, whose Philadelphia-based Weinstein Firm provides legal and consultancy services on workforce issues.

Employers may be surprised to learn the extent of religious expression legally protected in the workplace by the Constitution and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employers from discriminating on religious grounds and requires them to make "reasonable accommodations" for employees' "sincerely held beliefs."

Another contentious issue right now is what Bennett calls "diversity backlash," in the form of Christian employee affinity groups opposing domestic partner benefits, refusing to sign diversity statements that include homosexuality, or asking management not to recognize Gay-Lesbian-Bisexual-Transgender (GLBT) affinity groups. While Bennett says these conflicts make some companies "scared to death" of religion in the workplace, Nicole Raeburn, a University of San Francisco sociologist, says many of these disputes have been successfully resolved, sometimes with the help of outside mediators.

Taking the "Faith-Friendly" Plunge

For managers used to keeping religious belief -- or non-belief -- under wraps from nine to five, talking about religion in terms of company policy can feel as strange as wearing your underwear on top of your slacks. Miller suggests leaders use the term "faith-friendly" to ease into the topic, because it accommodates both popular, general spirituality and more specific, orthodox religion.

Like underwear, faith-at-work is not a one-size-fits-all product: Companies have to choose the approaches that fit best. The menu of options for meeting religious and spiritual needs is short but growing. Popular picks right now include allowing employees to swap holiday time; modifying cafeteria food to meet religious dietary restrictions; providing spaces for prayer or meditation; and allowing employees to start faith-based affinity groups.

Hiring corporate chaplains, who do everything from conducting weddings to visiting sick or injured employees in the hospital to advising managers on meeting ethical standards, is another possibility. Tyson, for example, has a director of Chaplain Services, a manager of Chaplain Operations and 122 part-time chaplains working throughout the U.S., Canada and Mexico.

To make sense of the faith-at-work movement, Miller breaks it into four motivating factors. Doing the right thing and being socially responsible are driving concerns for many people, while others want to express their faith through evangelizing co-workers. Another category of people is searching for transcendent meaning in their work, and still others hope to improve or deepen themselves through prayer, meditation or scripture study with coworkers. Some enthusiastic individuals encompass all four categories, wanting to integrate faith and work on as many levels as possible, writes Miller in his book.

This model gives employers a window into how religion can benefit the business side, Miller adds. "Three of these four categories are easy for leaders to embrace. If they have employees who are more ethically grounded -- that's good news. If they have employees who view their work as a calling, rather than being cynical Dilberts -- that's a good thing. And if people's faith heals and restores them amidst the challenges of corporate life -- that's a good thing, too." While the other category -- proselytization -- suggests potential conflict, Miller says, most employers lack "an even basic awareness" of the already existing legal structures that govern evangelism in the workplace.

And how does one create an environment where employees feel this sense of personal responsibility? "That's the job of a progressive, smart company: motivating people to bring what they've got so it can help both them and you," says Friedman. "Most people want to have more of themselves alive and active in their work. The more they can be a whole person at work, the more energy, focus and motivation they have to offer."

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Monday, January 22, 2007

In Search of the Spiritual

Move over, politics. Americans are looking for personal, ecstatic experiences of God, and, according to our poll, they don't much care what the neighbors are doing.

By Jerry Adler
Newsweek
Aug. 29 - Sept. 5, 2005 issue -

In sepulchral black and red, the cover of Time magazine dated April 8, 1966—Good Friday—introduced millions of readers to existential anguish with the question Is God Dead? If he was, the likely culprit was science, whose triumph was deemed so complete that "what cannot be known [by scientific methods] seems uninteresting, unreal."

History records that the vanguard of angst-ridden intellectuals in Time, struggling to imagine God as a cloud of gas in the far reaches of the galaxy, never did sweep the nation. What was dying in 1966 was a well-meaning but arid theology born of rationalism: a wavering trumpet call for ethical behavior, a search for meaning in a letter to the editor in favor of civil rights. What would be born in its stead, in a cycle of renewal that has played itself out many times since the Temple of Solomon, was a passion for an immediate, transcendent experience of God. And a uniquely American acceptance of the amazingly diverse paths people have taken to find it.

A major poll, commissioned jointly with Beliefnet.com, reveals a breadth of tolerance and curiosity virtually across the religious spectrum. And everywhere we looked, a flowering of spirituality: in the hollering, swooning, foot-stomping services of the new wave of Pentecostals; in Catholic churches where worshipers pass the small hours of the night alone contemplating the eucharist, and among Jews who are seeking God in the mystical thickets of Kabbalah. Also, in the rebirth of Pagan religions that look for God in the wonders of the natural world; in Zen and innumerable other threads of Buddhism, whose followers seek enlightenment through meditation and prayer, and in the efforts of American Muslims to achieve a more God-centered Islam.

Whatever is going on here, it's not an explosion of people going to church.

Of 1,004 respondents to the NEWSWEEK/Beliefnet Poll, 45 percent said they attend worship services weekly, virtually identical to the figure (44 percent) in a Gallup poll cited by Time in 1966. Then as now, however, there is probably a fair amount of wishful thinking in those figures; researchers who have done actual head counts in churches think the figure is probably more like 20 percent. There has been a particular falloff in attendance by African-Americans, for whom the church is no longer the only respectable avenue of social advancement, according to Darren Sherkat, a sociologist at Southern Illinois University. The fastest-growing category on surveys that ask people to give their religious affiliation, says Patricia O'Connell Killen of Pacific Lutheran University in Tacoma, Wash., is "none."

But "spirituality," the impulse to seek communion with the Divine, is thriving. The NEWSWEEK/Beliefnet Poll found that more Americans, especially those younger than 60, described themselves as "spiritual" (79 percent) than "religious" (64 percent). Almost two thirds of Americans say they pray every day, and nearly a third meditate.

These figures tell you more about what Americans care about than a 10,000-foot-high monument to the Ten Commandments. Seventy-five percent say that a "very important" reason for their faith is to "forge a personal relationship with God"—not fighting political battles.

Today, then, the real spiritual quest is not to put another conservative on the Supreme Court, or to get creation science into the schools. If you experience God directly, your faith is not going to hinge on whether natural selection could have produced the flagellum of a bacterium. If you feel God within you, then the important question is settled; the rest is details.

As diverse as America itself are the ways in which Americans seek spiritual enlightenment.

Beliefnet, the religious Web site, sends out more than 8 million daily e-mails of spiritual wisdom in various flavors to more than 5 million subscribers. Generic "inspiration" is most popular (2.4 million), followed by the Bible (1.6 million), but there are 460,000 subscribers to the Buddhist thought of the day, 313,000 Torah devotees, 268,000 subscribers to Daily Muslim Wisdom (and 236,000 who get the Spiritual Weight Loss message).

Even nature-worshiping Pagans are divided into a mind-boggling panoply of sects, including Wicca, Druidism, Pantheism, Animism, Teutonic Paganism, the God of Spirituality Folk and, in case you can't find one to suit you on that list, Eclectic Paganism.

Along with diversity has come a degree of inclusiveness that would have scandalized an earlier generation. According to the NEWSWEEK/Beliefnet Poll, eight in 10 Americans—including 68 percent of evangelicals—believe that more than one faith can be a path to salvation, which is most likely not what they were taught in Sunday school. One out of five respondents said he had switched religions as an adult.

This is not surprising in the United States, which for much of its history was a spiritual hothouse in which Methodism, Mormonism, Adventism, Christian Science, Jehovah's Witnesses and the Nation of Islam all took root and flourished. In America even atheists are spiritualists, searching for meaning in parapsychology and near-death experiences.

Empowerment is at the heart of Pentecostalism, which has burgeoned from a single Spirit-touched believer at a Kansas Bible school at the turn of the last century to 30 million adherents in America and more than half a billion worldwide. Marching under the Pentecostal banner is a host of denominations whose names roll off the tongue like a voice from heaven: Church of God, International Church of the Foursquare Gospel, International Pentecostal Holiness Church, the Assemblies of God.

Empowerment requires intensity of effort; Americans like the idea of taking responsibility for their own souls. This may be why Buddhism—a religion without a personal god and only a few broad ethical precepts—has made such inroads in the American imagination.

People like that could become panentheists, too—a new term for people who believe in the divinity of the natural universe (like the better-known Pantheists), but also postulate an intelligent being or force behind it.

Those seeking a more structured nature-based religion have many choices, including several branches of Druidism. "I talk to my ancestors, the spirits of nature and other deities on a regular basis," says Isaac Bonewits, a 55-year-old New Yorker who founded one of the best-known Druid orders. Wicca, the largest Pagan sect, with an elaborate calendar of seasonal holidays and rituals, is popular enough to demand its own military chaplains.

Catholic Charismatic Renewal, which got its start in 1967 when a Duquesne University group on a weekend retreat felt a visitation by the Holy Spirit, now runs thousands of prayer groups in the United States, where worshipers may speak in tongues or collapse in laughter or tears.

The quest for spiritual union with God is as old as mankind itself, uniting the ancient desert tribes of Mesopotamia with the Christian hermits on their mountaintops with American pop singers at the Kabbalah Centre in Los Angeles, poring over the esoteric wisdom encoded in early Jewish texts. And who can begrudge it to them?

The Hasidim pray ecstatically; they dance with the Torah; they fast to achieve a higher spiritual state, and they drink wine for the same reason. With their distinctive black frock coats and curly sideburns, they are a visible and growing presence in New York and some other cities. Orthodox Judaism, of which they are a branch, is on the rise among young Jews who trade Friday-night dances and shrimp egg foo yung for a more intense religious experience. Orthodox Rabbi Irving Greenberg calls the phenomenon "Jews by choice," reflecting the reality that Jewish practice is no longer a tribal imperative. In a world in which practically every religion has its own cable-TV channel, to step inside a synagogue becomes an existential choice.

...the same issue is very much on the minds of America's Muslims. Forced to define themselves in the face of an alien—and, in recent years, sometimes hostile—majority, the second generation especially has turned increasingly observant. Unlike their parents, they may attend mosque several times a week and pray five times a day, anywhere they can unroll a prayer mat. It has not been lost on them that the way to fit in in present-day America is to be religious.

Islam emphasizes the unity of all believers, so American-born Muslims are shedding the cultural accouterments of the many countries from which their parents came, or the political freight of African-American converts. They are intent on forging a purer and more spiritual religion.

So, a generation after the question was posed, we can certainly answer that God seems very much alive in the hearts of those who seek him. We have come a long way, it would appear, from that dark year when the young Catholic philosopher Michael Novak was quoted in Time, saying, "If, occasionally, I raise my heart in prayer, it is to no God I can see, or hear, or feel." To make the point, we gave Novak, who is now 72 and among the most distinguished theologians in America, the chance to correct the record on his youthful despair. And he replied that God is as far away as he's ever been. Religious revivals are always exuberant and filled with spirit, he says, but the true measure of faith is in adversity and despair, when God doesn't show up in every blade of grass or storefront church.

So let us say together: Hallelujah! Praise the Lord! Sh'ma Yisrael. Allahu Akbar. Om. And store up the light against the darkness.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

'God Is Not a Moderate'

Best-selling atheist Sam Harris and pro-religion blogger Andrew Sullivan debate God, faith, and fundamentalism.

Most Americans oppose violence spurred by religious fundamentalism, but few agree on how to address it. In books like The End of Faith and Letter to a Christian Nation, author Sam Harris contends that religion itself--not its more extreme forms--is to blame. This week, Harris debates blogger and Conservative Soul author Andrew Sullivan in a no-holds-barred blogalogueTM. Return here to see Harris' next post--and check Andrew Sullivan's blog for his responses.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Friday, January 19, 2007

Married people are happier than unmarried people

Married people are happier than unmarried people
... so this country's got a problem

from the Morning Sentinel

The New York Times reported this week that, according to the U.S. Census, married women living with their spouse are now a minority of all women.

In 2005, the most recent year for which data is available, 49 percent of women 16 and over are married and living with their spouse; 3 percent are married but separated; 2 percent are married, but the spouse is absent (for example, in the military stationed abroad), 9 percent are widowed, 11 percent divorced, and the remaining 25 percent have never married. Although the Times article focused on single women, the figures for men are, not surprisingly, roughly similar: 53 percent are married and living with their spouse; only 2 percent, however, are widowed; 9 percent are divorced, and 31 percent never married, the remainder being separated or absent from their marriage partners.

In 1965, by contrast, almost two- thirds (65 percent) of women were married and living with their spouse. That figure has steadily declined since then, however: In 1970, the comparable figure was 60 percent; then it was 56 percent in 1980 and 53 percent in 1990. Although the Times did not report the comparable figures for men, they must be roughly similar and reflect the same downward trend.

Although we probably all know some woman or some man who is happy to be single -- who, like the women quoted in the Times, delights in not having to share the remote control or to pick up someone else's dirty socks -- there is reason to believe that such people are the exception, not the rule.

The Pew Research Center released a study last February about the demographic and lifestyle factors that correlate with happiness and unhappiness. Entitled "Are We Happy Yet?," the study relied on a survey of approximately 3000 American adults who were asked to rate how happy they felt and to provide some descriptive information about themselves (such as their race, sex, marital status, income and so on).

The results of the happiness survey provide good reason to be concerned about the trends reported by the Census Bureau. Among the most significant findings was the discovery that married people are substantially happier than the unmarried. 43 percent of married people -- the figure is the same for men and women -- report themselves as being "very happy," while only 24 percent of unmarried men and women say the same. Moreover, single parents of minor children report being significantly more unhappy than their married counterparts: 27 percent of the single parents say they are "very unhappy," while only eight percent of the married parents report an equal level of unhappiness.

But if marriage is so good for us, why is it on the decline, as the Census data suggest?

Such large-scale societal trends as these are typically the product of large-scale social forces, which create short-term incentives for doing what is not in our long-term best interest. Rather than celebrate the increasing number of single-person households, policymakers should recognize instead the fragility of marriage as a social institution and seek ways to encourage women and men to embrace it once more.

Joseph R. Reisert is an associate professor of American Constitutional Law and chairman of the Department of Government at Colby College in Waterville.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Ditch custom and conform: Poll

By KATHLEEN HARRIS

Most Canadians believe ethnic minorities should restrain their cultural customs and conform to those around them, a Sun Media poll reveals.

The national survey conducted by Leger Marketing shows a stunning 85% believe it's important -- if not essential -- that minorities adapt to the lifestyle habits of the city where they live.

The poll shows that while most Canadians don't object to religious practices like prayers, Ramadan fasting or prohibiting alcohol, a whopping 37% think wearing a veil poses a problem. Another 25% take issue with wearing religious ornaments.

The survey found that Canadians who aren't religious themselves are less tolerant of people practising their religious traditions. Men are also less tolerant than women when it comes to faith practices.

As a society, the poll shows Canada isn't overly religious, with 58% of the population confessing they don't practise faith much or at all. People who are of a visible minority are more likely to practise religion than those who aren't.

One-third of Canadians practice Catholicism, while one-fifth are Protestant and another one-fifth classify themselves as atheist.

This online Leger Marketing poll, commissioned by Sun Media, surveyed a representative national sample of 3,092 adult Canadians between Dec. 27, 2006, and Jan. 5, 2007. Responses are considered accurate within plus or minus 1.8 percentage points 19 times out of 20.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Christian Culture Analyst Recaps 2006 Church Trends, Future Directions

By Fred Jackson
AgapePress
January 2, 2007

(AgapePress) -- Christian researcher George Barna has outlined what he considers his most significant findings for 2006. Among these is his assessment that, although large majorities of the public claim to be "deeply spiritual" and say that their religious faith is "very important" in their life, only 15 percent of those who regularly attend a Christian church ranked their relationship with God as their top priority.

According to the researcher, the latest survey statistics suggest Christians may be more attuned to matters of culture and entertainment than to matters of faith.

Barna's recent studies also found that the notion of personal holiness has slipped out of the consciousness of the vast majority of Christians. According to his research group's findings, while just 21 percent of adults consider themselves to be holy, by these respondents' own admission, large numbers have no idea what "holiness" means and only one out of every three believe that God expects people to become holy.

In contrast, however, to this apparent spiritual decline, the researcher also found that there is a group he calls "Christian Revolutionaries" who are growing in number. He says they are the type who show a great interest in things such as personal Bible study and spiritual mentoring. Also, he notes, individual Christians' involvement in house churches is rapidly growing.

In his year-end review, Barna describes what he sees as three general spiritual patterns that are likely to gain prominence in the coming years. The first of these, he says, is diversity: along with new forms of spiritual leadership and expressions of faith, he predicts that ecumenism will expand as the emerging generations pay less attention to doctrine and more attention to relationships and experiences.

The second prediction from the head of Barna Research has to do with what he calls "bifurcation." He expects to see a widening gap between the intensely committed and those who are casually involved in faith matters.

Barna's third prediction deals with the use of media. He says new technologies will significantly reshape how people experience and express their faith, as well as the ways in which they form communities of faith.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Tuesday, January 16, 2007

Teaching Appreciation Diminishes the Impact of Materialism

ROCHESTER, N.Y., Jan. 8

The increasing materialistic nature of young Americans has received considerable recognition in recent years and research shows that youth (ages 8 to 18) who are more likely to be materialistic are less likely to be generous. However, generosity is also dependent on a youth's level of gratitude for the things he or she has. Those who are materialistic but not thankful or appreciative for the things they have are more likely to not display generosity.

These are just some of the results of a survey of 1,213 U.S. children and teenagers (ages 8 to 18) conducted online by Harris Interactive(R) between October 18 to 26, 2006.

Buying things is a priority

Results indicate that both tweens (ages 8 to 12) and teens (ages 13 to 18) would rather spend time buying things than anything else. Seventy-six percent (76%) of tweens and sixty-two percent (62%) of teens say they really enjoy going shopping, and seventy-one percent (71%) overall say they would be happier if they had more money to buy more things for themselves. About half of tweens (51%) and teens (48%) say that when they grow up, they'll be happier if they have more money.

What makes youth happy?

Much of the teen focus is on technology, such as CD's (67%), their own cell phone (65%) and their own computer (63%), as well as money (74%). Tweens are most likely to say money (65%), presents (63%), having popular video/computer games (60%) and their own computer (57%) makes them happy.

Mom is still an important figure in the lives of both tweens and teens, as majorities (91% of tweens and 77% of teens) say that Mom makes them happy. Overall, Friends (85%), Grandma (69%), Dad (67%) and pets (58%) round out the top five of those people and pets that make youth happy.

Generous and thankful tweens and teens

Three-quarters of youth or more say that they like to help new kids at school (91% of tweens, 81% of teens), raise money for needy people (86% of tweens, 79% of teens), spend time helping others (83% of tweens, 81% of teens), share their favorite things with other people (81% of tweens, 75% of teens) and do favors for friends or family even when they're busy (77% of tweens, 75% of teens).

Overall, tweens are slightly more likely than teens to say that they have a lot to be thankful for (92% vs. 86%, respectively), but the large majority of both groups feel this way. Most youth also say they can think of a lot of people who have helped them (81%), and that a list of things they have to be thankful for would be very long (76%).

Summing it up

Aric Rindfleisch, Associate Professor of Marketing at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, views the data in unique terms. "Our results indicate that while materialistic young people display reduced generosity, those who are thankful for their family, friends and possessions are less likely to display these negative effects. This suggests that although parents may be able to do little to squelch materialistic messages, they may be able limit the adverse effects of materialism by cultivating a sense of thankfulness and gratitude in their children."

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Monday, January 15, 2007

The Pearly Gates Are Wide Open

A new Newsweek/Beliefnet poll shows a stunning level of acceptance of other people's faiths.

One of the central tenets of evangelical Christianity is that to be saved-to earn admission into heaven-you must accept Jesus Christ as your savior. Yet 68% of "born again" or "evangelical" Christians say that a "good person who isn't of your religious faith" can gain salvation, according to a new Newsweek/Beliefnet poll.

Nationally, 79% of those surveyed said the same thing, and the figure is 73% for non-Christians and an astounding 91% among Catholics. The Catholics surveyed seemed more inclined to listen to the Catechism's precept that those who "seek the truth" may gain salvation-rather than, say, St. Augustine's view that being "separated from the Church" will damn you to hell "no matter how estimable a life he may imagine he is living."

Other results from the poll indicate that the appeal of religion is more spiritual than cultural. Thirty-nine percent said the main reason they practiced their religion is to "forge a personal relationship with God" while only 3% said it was to be part of a community. This would help explain why many people report having a regular prayer life but not attending church. Seventy-nine percent said they pray at least once a week compared to 45% who said they went to worship services during that time. In addition, 40% said they felt "most connected with God or the divine" when they were "praying alone or meditating" compared to 27% who said they had that sense when they were in a house of worship or praying with others.

The poll also showed a more basic point that may be obvious to Beliefnet readers but not others: spirituality is crucial to most Americans. 57% said spirituality was "very important" in their "daily life" and another 27% said it was somewhat important. Their behavior seems to back up this notion. 79% said they prayed at least once a week and 55% said they read a sacred text -- Bible, Koran, etc -- at least once a week.

The Newsweek/Beliefnet poll produced a number of other fascinating findings:

One quarter of Americans have veered from their childhood faith. When asked to compare their current faith lives to that of their childhood, 68% said it was the same or mostly the same, while 24% said they'd changed faiths mostly or completely or become an atheist or agnostic. The spiritual approaches that seem to be gaining fans were evangelical Christianity and atheism, while Catholicism and non-evangelical Protestants lost ground. Nevertheless...

Most Americans describe themselves as pretty traditional. We tried to get at that question a few different ways. First, we asked directly-if they consider themselves traditional or not. Twenty-five percent said they were either "not traditional" or "on the cutting edge," while the remainder said they were either somewhat or very traditional. Then we asked whether they were "spiritual" or "religious" or some combination. Twenty-four percent said "spiritual but not religious" while 76% said either "religious and spiritual" (55%) or "religious but not spiritual" (9%). We also asked whether they were likely to borrow bits of spiritual wisdom or ritual from other practices. Thirty-two percent said sometimes or often while 66% said hardly ever or never.

Most American families have experienced religious diversity up close. We attempted to assess a typical American's exposure to other faiths or spiritual approaches. In all 42% of Americans either have a different approach from their childhood, saw a sibling shift approaches, or married someone of a different faith. These overall numbers don't explain how these changes might have affected them but it does mean that a large number of Americans have had very personal and direct experience with some religious approach that's different from their original spiritual practice.

We are all intelligent designers. Eighty percent of the population believe that the universe was created by God; only 10% do not. This would seem to indicate that many of those who advocate the teaching of evolution in school do, nonetheless, believe that the universe was created by God.

We are selfless pray-ers. Most people do not spend the majority of their prayer life trying to get God to do something for them. The most common purposes of prayer were "to seek God's guidance," to "thank God" or to "be close to God." Only 9% said it was to "improve a person's life."

Evangelicals love big churches and small groups. Much has been made of the rise of large stadium-sized churches for evangelical Christians. But 61% of evangelicals said they participate in some sort of religious activity outside traditional church at least once a week (compared to 35% for non-evangelical protestants and 35% of Catholics).

In general, younger people are more experimental, less traditional, less Christian-and less passionate about their spiritual lives. While 63% of people aged 40-59 said spirituality was "very important" in their daily lives, 44% of those ages 18-39 said so. Ninety percent of the older group said they were Christian, while 77% of the younger group did. Before the older folks get too worried about kids today, remember that people tend to get more religious as they age.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Astronomy's influence profound, continuing

By Ben Bova

Sunday, January 14, 2007

What good is astronomy?

Are there practical, hard-headed reasons for spending millions and millions of dollars every year so that a small group of scientists can study the universe? Do we ordinary folk get anything out of it?

Let’s take a brief look at the history of astronomy and see if we can find an answer to these questions.

People have gazed awe-struck at the stars since before the invention of writing. In their minds they drew fanciful pictures out of the formations of those pinpoints of light in the night sky. They considered the stars to be the abode of their gods, their mythical heroes and monsters.

The invention of agriculture meant that it was important to be able predict the season for planting. So important that some people became priests. Instead of working in the fields, they watched the stars.

In ancient Egypt, the priests who studied the heavens realized that each year, when the brilliant star Sirius rises in the east just before dawn, the Nile River will flood the land within a few days. This was vital information: the Nile’s annual flood could be predicted!

In cold and cloudy Britain, Neolithic societies built circles of wood or stone, such as the massive Stonehenge, at enormous cost. Those “henges” can still be used to determine when the seasons begin. Stonehenge can even be used to predict eclipses of the moon.

If the stars had influence over the seasons, did they also directly influence the lives of men and women? The art of astrology was born, in which the positions of the stars are used to make predictions about an individual person’s life. It doesn’t really work, but we still have astrology columns in the newspaper today.

A deeper question arose. Why do the planets roam through the sky? Centuries of observation showed that they don’t wander at random; each planet follows an orbit that is predictable.

Johannes Kepler, in Protestant Germany, worked out the mechanics of the planets’ orbits around the sun. And in England, Isaac Newton (born the year that Galileo died) discovered the laws of motion and gravity. Now we could understand the forces that moved not only the planets, but anything in the universe.

For the first time, humans realized that the same force that makes an apple fall to the ground is the force that keeps the moon in its orbit. And moves the planets. And the stars.

But even more important, the triumph of the new view of the universe broke the grip of ancient ideas on the human mind. The authority of the Church was enormously weakened, if not shattered. People began to think the authorities who had been ruling their lives weren’t infallible.

It’s no coincidence that the Age of Reason spawned the American Revolution, with its truly revolutionary idea that people can rule themselves democratically. Kings were on the way out.

Astronomy led to democracy. Astronomy was not the only factor that brought democracy to the world, but by breaking the authoritarian power of the Church, astronomy helped people to realize they could break the authoritarian power of hereditary kings.

In the 20th century astrophysicists discovered that the sun and stars are nuclear power plants. This helped other physicists develop nuclear energy, and will lead eventually to practical fusion power plants on Earth.

Today, astronomers are studying the far reaches of intergalactic space, where they have encountered mysterious problems such as “dark energy.” There is a force in the universe that apparently acts counter to gravity.

An anti-gravity force? How does it work? Astronomers and physicists are trying to find the answer to that question. When they do, we may have a new and extremely powerful force in our possession. Anti-gravity would certainly make travel easier. Even travel to the stars.

Astronomy has had powerful and very practical effects on our society. And it will continue to do so. Studying the stars helps us to understand the universe. And what we understand, eventually we can use to our own benefit.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Church growth keys: Multiracial, happy, more males active

Congregations interested in increasing their weekly attendance would do well to make a plan for recruiting new members, become multiracial and make sure that serious conflict doesn't take root.

That's the message of an analysis recently released by the Hartford Institute for Religion Research at Hartford Seminary. The "FACTs on Growth" report, based on data collected in a 2005 survey of nearly 900 congregations, found that congregations reporting growth in worship attendance between 2000 and 2005 tended to exhibit certain common attributes.

Multiracial congregations had a better chance of growing than those predominantly consisting of one racial group. Some 61 percent of multiracial churches said they had experienced growth, while just 31 percent of predominantly Anglo congregations said the same.

But even more important may be whether people in the pews, no matter their race, actually get along with one another.

Conversely, congregations were most likely to grow if they:
• had a clear mission and purpose as a congregation
• conducted "joyful" worship services
• adopted a specific plan for recruiting new members
• had changed worship format at one or more services in the past five years
What's more, congregations were likely to grow if men constituted the majority of active participants, said Hadaway.

Among congregations in which at least three out of five regular participants were men, 59 percent reported growth. But among churches where no more than two in every five regular participants were men, only 21 percent said they had experienced growth.

"As American congregations become increasingly populated by women," the report says, "those congregations that are able to even out the proportions of males and females are those most likely to grow."

-Religion News Service

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Friday, January 12, 2007

Faith part of college life

Wednesday, January 10, 2007

By Erikah Haavie
Poughkeepsie Journal

Eighteen-year-old Abhishek Bikkani experienced Ramadan for the first time in September.

Though he is a practicing Hindu, Bikkani, a freshman at Stony Brook University, Suffolk County, agreed to fast from sunup to sunset with his roommate, Tareq, and other members of the Muslim Student Association.

Bikkani, a Town of Poughkeepsie resident, said sharing in the event gave him new respect for his roommate and other adherents of the Muslim faith.

For local freshmen away from home for the first time, their first semesters at college have given them fresh views of spirituality and new options to practice their faiths if they choose.

A September 2006 report by the University of California at Los Angeles included a survey of more than 100,000 college freshmen nationwide on the topics of spirituality and religious engagement.

About three-quarters of students said they search for meaning and purpose in life and have discussions about the meaning of life with friends.

At Marist College, the campus ministry is the largest student group on campus with more than 1,000 active students, said the Rev. Frank Kelly, the ministry directory.
Enrollment in ministry programs has remained steady in recent years, but Kelly said numbers and interest are higher than they have been in decades past.

"Kids are coming to us with a stronger desire ... to celebrate God in their lives," he said.

Kelly expected about 30 students to take part in the ministry's new "Renew" program, a weekly session where students share a passage from the Gospels, then talk about what it means in their lives. He's seen 75 sign up so far.

A variety of faiths are active on the State University of New York at New Paltz, including Christianity, Jewish, Islam and pagan, said the Rev. Paul Walley, campus pastor of the Student Christian Center.

The center is supported by six denominations: Episcopal, Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian, Reformed and United Church of Christ.

It offers midweek Communion and "Sundays at 5," supper and student-led Bible study.
Student adapts custom

Convenience has made it easy for Jaimee DiMarco, 18, and a 2006 Arlington High School graduate, to stay active in religious activities.

Her dorm room is directly across from the Hillel House at Boston University. She recently participated in Latkepalooza, where students made their own latkes for Hanukkah.

Since students aren't allowed to have candles in their dorms, DiMarco has had to adapt. She now uses an electric menorah to observe the holiday.

Bikkani, who also graduated from Arlington High in June, said he's seen a lot more diversity since moving from a school with more than 3,000 students to a college with more than 22,000 students.

He's also felt more connected to his religion, since many more students at the college share his beliefs.

In October, he was able to celebrate Diwali, the Hindu festival of lights, with a large group of other South Asian students.

While at home, Bikkani uses the family's puja room to offer prayers to idols.
Jess Kulchock, 18, found the opposite as she moved from Arlington High School to Pennsylvania State University.

She found the campus to be primarily students of Christian faiths.

Kulchock doesn't attend any services on campus, but she will attend Mass when home with her family.

The more popular trend among college students is community service.

Building houses for Habitat for Humanity is a well-supported activity at the New Paltz campus, as is Skip-A-Dinner in the spring, when more than 1,000 students donate the cost of one meal to charities.

Teaching students to care about others and be effective with their lives are important goals, Walley said.

Hundreds at Marist College are also involved in regular community service programs at local schools, nursing homes and other agencies.

Kelly described community service as the "hook" that gets many students involved in campus ministry.

The ministry's motto is "good people doing good things in the name of God," he said.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Study: Profs not very religious

By Jeffrey Weiss
The Dallas Morning News
Posted January 6 2007

College professors aren't all godless heathens, but they are more secular than the general population, according to a new study. And the more elite the institution, the more secular the professors are likely to be.

Among the notable results:

Almost a third answered "none" when asked their religion -- more than twice the percentage found in the general population.

Science professors were the least religious. Accounting professors were the most religious.

More than half the professors at places other than so-called "elite" universities said they absolutely believed in God. About a third of the professors at elite schools took that position. (The study used rankings by U.S. News and World Report to define elite institutions.)

About 30 percent of community college professors considered intelligent design as a serious scientific alternative. Fewer than 6 percent of professors at elite universities took that position.

The study was done by two sociologists, Neil Gross of Harvard University and Solon Simmons of George Mason University. They contacted 1,471 professors at religious and secular colleges and asked about politics and faith.

The purpose of their report, released on the Internet, was to assess the observation by many religious conservatives that America's universities are "a haven largely freed from religious perspectives."

In a much larger survey, released by UCLA earlier this year, more than 80 percent of professors said they were "spiritual."

The studies indicate that spirituality affects how professors teach and interact with the world, said Jennifer A. Lindholm, the UCLA project director.

Her study concluded that the more spiritual professors were more likely to use cooperative learning techniques in the classroom; to use their scholarship to address community needs; and to encourage students to perform community service.

PROFESSIONS
OF FAITH

Key findings on religion among U.S. college professors:

10.0 percent don't believe in God.

13.4 percent don't know if there's a God, and don't believe there is a way to find out.

19.6 percent believe in "a Higher Power of some kind," but not a personal God.

16.9 percent believe in God, but have doubts.

35.7 percent know God exists and have no doubt about it.

SOURCES: Neil Gross, Harvard University, and Solon Simmons, George Mason University

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Thursday, January 11, 2007

Survey: House Churches More Satisfying than Conventional Churches

By Michelle Vu
Christian Post Reporter

Mon, Jan. 08 2007 03:30 PM

People attending a house church expressed a significantly higher satisfaction with their church experience than those attending a conventional local church, according to a new survey.

Two-thirds of house church attendees were “completely satisfied” with both the leadership of their church and the faith commitment of the people involved in their gathering, reported The Barna Group on Monday. On the other hand, less than half of those attending conventional churches expressed the same level of satisfaction with their church leadership or the faith commitment of the worshippers in their congregation.

House church members also expressed a higher level of satisfaction (61 percent “completely satisfied”) with the level of community and personal connectedness of their group compared to those in conventional churches (41 percent).

Two types of people tend to favor house churches: older participants - usually from the Boomer population - and young adults. According to the survey, the older attendees are devout Christians who are looking for a deeper and more intense experience with God and other believers. The young adults attending house churches are interested in faith and spirituality but not in the traditional forms of church.

“Compared to conventional church attenders, house church adherents are much more likely to say that they have experienced faith-driven transformation, to prioritize their relationship with God, and to desire a more fulfilling community of faith,” noted George Barna, who directed the study, in a statement.

"Those who attend a conventional church are generally content to show up and accept whatever their church has on the agenda; they place the responsibility for their spiritual growth on the shoulders of the church," said Barna.

Most house attendees (59 percent) were “completely satisfied” with the spiritual depth of their experience, compared to a minority of adults in a conventional church that were “completely satisfied” (46 percent).

The house church worship in America is a new idea to many Americans; 54 percent of the people participating in an independent home fellowship have been participating for less than three months. The survey suggests that many people are only beginning to consider and become comfortable with the idea of using homes as the dominant place of worship.

Currently, only four out of 10 regular house church attenders (42 percent) depend exclusively on a house church as their primary “church” experience. Many are trying out the experience before completely devoting themselves solely to a house church.

"Americans are emotionally open to belonging to a house church, and surprisingly few have any real objections to others joining such a community of faith," explained Barna. "But the main deterrent to house church growth is that most people are spiritually complacent; they are not looking to upgrade their spiritual experience.

The Barna Research Group founder added that most conventional churchgoers lack a desire to improve their congregation’s ministry or to increase their personal spiritual responsibility.

"On the other hand," he continued, "the intimacy and shared responsibility found in most house churches requires each participant to be more serious about their faith development. Clearly, the house church experience is not for everyone."

The nationwide survey found that most house churches (80 percent) gather every week for about two hours. The most common meeting days are Wednesday (27 percent) and Sunday (25 percent), with an average size of 20 people.

Unlike conventional churches which follow the same format every week, four out of every 10 house churches say the service format varies from meeting to meeting. House church gatherings usually include spoken prayer (93 percent), Bible reading (90 percent), serving people outside of their group (89 percent), sharing personal needs or experience (87 percent), eating and talking before or after meeting (85 percent), and a formal teaching time (76 percent) among other spiritual practices.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Poll: Americans Show Unfavorable Views on Islam

A new poll by a pro-family group found that an overwhelming number of American respondents have unfavorable views on Islam.

Audrey Barrick
Correspondent

Monday, Jan. 8, 2007 Posted: 9:50:AM PST

A new poll by a pro-family group found that an overwhelming number of American respondents have unfavorable views on Islam.

The American Family Association is currently polling Americans on their opinion of Islam as more Americans are converting to be Muslims. The growth of Islam in America is "concerning for a great many people," said Randy Sharp, director of special projects for AFA, according to Agape Press.

AFA thus released the poll to give Americans from all walks of life the opportunity to share their opinion on the matter. And Sharp insisted that the poll is not "Christianized" or just for the Christian religion.

According to the poll, the majority of respondents do not consider Islam to be a peaceful religion or a tolerant religion. And most do not believe America would be a better country if it were a Muslim country.

The majority of respondents also said "no" to placing equal emphasis on the Koran and the Bible in America.

In terms of politics, most Americans do not believe it would be good for America to have more Muslims in elected offices and most said they would not vote for a Muslim presidential candidate.

When it came to charity work, the majority of respondents said Muslim countries do not do more than America to help the poor.

The Islam and America poll comes as more immigrants in America along with Americans are converting to Islam. Although reports have not pinpointed any sort of trend among Americans converting, a handful of them are becoming more attracted to Islam.

"Islam is everything I wanted Christianity to be," said Eric Meek, a Southern Baptist Texan who converted to Islam, according to Dallas Morning News.

The poll on www.afa.net will be conducted until Jan. 15, but Sharp indicated that current results will most likely reflect the final results.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

New Harris Survey Shows Nearly Half of Young Women Are Seeking Accessible Spiritual Guidance

January 09, 2007 08:00 AM Eastern Time

GRAND RAPIDS, Mich.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--

According to a new survey by Harris, nearly half (49 percent) of women in the 18 – 34 age group are looking for spiritual guidance, and 37 percent say they wish it were more accessible. Only 15 percent agree that there’s no time for spirituality in their lives.

“We aren’t different than any generation before us,” says Santino Stoner, NOOMA’s 25-year-old film director. “Our world is different, and in this time-crunched, critical world, we are looking for a high-quality, new way to experience God when and where we want it, and NOOMA is it.”

NOOMAs are short films – approximately 12 minutes long – dealing with topics that everyone encounters, like love, forgiveness and loss. Created by a nonprofit and featuring the teachings of Rob Bell, pastor and author from Grand Rapids, Michigan, the DVDs are available online and in select bookstores and have been viewed by millions around the world.

Other statistics included in the Harris survey:

35% of women 18-34 regularly attend church, temple or other house of worship.
Regular attendance spikes to 50 percent for women 55 and older
Only one woman in ten agrees that there’s no time for spirituality in their lives, but 15% of the 18-34 group say there is no time.
The survey was conducted online by Harris Interactive on behalf of NOOMA between Nov. 27 and Nov. 29, 2006 among 2303 U.S. adults 18 years of age or older with a sampling error of three percentage points.

NOOMA is a new format for spiritual direction when, where and how people want it. It’s a series of short films on DVD featuring teachings on everyday issues like love, grief and forgiveness. NOOMAs are produced by Flannel, a nonprofit organization in Grand Rapids, Michigan. For more information, please visit www.NOOMA.com.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Tuesday, January 09, 2007

Faith: Something worth fighting for

Books on religion and politics show that for millions, God isn't dead

By Victoria A. Brownworth
Special to The Sun
Originally published December 31, 2006

Nietzsche first proclaimed it in 1881: "God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him." Time magazine agreed in 1966, with its infamous black death-notice cover. Yet although 2006 was marked by many cataclysmic events - social, political, military, ecological - nothing on Earth had as much impact as God. Or rather, the belief in God.

According to a recent NBC poll, 80 percent of Americans identify as Christian, 26 percent of whom are evangelicals. Throughout the world, 2.5 billion people call themselves Christian. Another 1.7 billion are Muslims. There are 900 million Hindus, 400 million Buddhists, 15 million Jews. Hundreds of thousands worship other religions from traditional African and Chinese religions to neo-paganism and Scientology.

There are, of course, secularists and outright atheists in the world. But for the majority, theism is a focal point of life, something not only worth fighting for, but, increasingly, worth killing for. Which puts the lie to Nietzsche's statement. God is alive and well in the hearts and minds of three-quarters of the people of the world. For good or ill.

This hasn't stopped adamant atheists from making the case against God, however. If anything, it has bolstered the rationale for atheism. Marx has nothing on 21st-century atheists and their claims of religion being not just an opiate of the masses, but a soporific that allows acceptance of the worst intolerance.

Sam Harris has been on God's case for several years now, first with his best-selling The End of Faith, and now with Letter to a Christian Nation. Richard Dawkins also makes the case against God with his best-seller, The God Delusion. Both writers are succinct in their declarations that religion and belief in God are dangerous if not outright terroristic forces. Both cite Christian evangelicalism and Islamic fundamentalism as the prime sources of intolerance, global war and terrorism. Dawkins stipulates that religion is bad for everyone, that it oppresses women, represses children and suppresses science; Harris agrees. Were it not for religion, each claims, the world would be a more peaceful place, because religion generates hostility and plays into nationalism in the most brutal ways (witness the Holocaust and Darfur). Without religion, rational thought would supersede all else; social unrest would diminish immeasurably.

With so many believers, however, numerous voices are raised contravening Harris and Dawkins. Antidotes to (or at least would-be attempts at) what the Gospel of Luke calls "irreligion," are much in demand. Fox News pundit Bill O'Reilly's Culture Warrior and Ann Coulter's Godless: The Church of Liberalism don't so much assert the importance of God as declaim that if one is politically liberal/progressive, one is, ipso facto, anti-God.

Where is the true God in all of this cant?

God, it seems, is being held hostage. From President Bush to Muqtada al-Sadr, God is used as the excuse for starting and perpetuating wars, not ending them. (Bob Woodward's State of Denial corroborates Bush's claim that God led him to war. However, in his new book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, former President Jimmy Carter remembers telling Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir that "Israel was punished whenever its leaders turned away from devout worship of God."

Depending on which president you believe, God wants incompatible religious answers in the Middle East. So much for presidential omniscience.)

Throughout the globe God has become a rationale for violence at the expense of peace. Christ's Sermon on the Mount, the keystone of Christianity and the New Testament, is virtually unread and declaratively unremarked by evangelical Christians in the United States. Kuo suggests in Tempting Faith that evangelicals take a respite from politics, that they have lost sight of God in their quest to unite church and state.

There is no Muslim leader to make a similar suggestion to the Muslim world: that theocracy might be the wrong road for nations to take, that God and state should remain separate entities and worship a private matter. However, Jon Meacham, a Newsweek editor, lays out a compelling argument for the separation in his new book, American Gospel: God, the Founding Fathers and the Making of a Nation.

Democracy and religion need not be antithetical, Meacham explains, because they can impel each other. It was, for example, the deism of Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson that led to their beliefs in the fundamentals of democracy.

Freedom of religion as much as freedom from religion drove the fledgling democracy, which had its share of religious persecution. Religious belief is, according to Meacham, distinct from morality, yet forms the underpinning which makes democracy work.

As this year ends and a new one begins, the role of God among all nations must be acknowledged if there is to be any comprehension of why the world is in such foment and chaos. God didn't put us there, but the manipulation of religious fervor has. Meacham implores that our and other nations look more closely at the role of religion in politics as a means toward ending and resolving conflict, rather than instigating new ones. An idea of which God would no doubt approve.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Mark Twain and the Spiritual Crisis of his Age

By Steve Weinberg
SPECIAL TO THE POST-DISPATCH
01/07/2007

Because author Samuel Clemens — better known as Mark Twain — is still a Missouri industry nearly 100 years after his death, the books keep coming. It seems like every aspect of his life has been studied, at least twice.

But Harold K. Bush Jr., a St. Louis University English professor, has found a new byway to explore: Twain's religion. No, not the expected satire and cynicism about religion for which he's known. Rather, Bush emphasizes the positive impact of religion on Twain.

That sounds like a short book. Instead, for more than 300 pages Bush mines a rich lode of material and keeps it interesting, in part by avoiding the pedantic writing style and obscure references bedeviling so many academic monographs.

In many ways, Bush's work is a dual intellectual biography, the other subject being the Rev. Joseph H. Twichell, Twain's friend and minister at the Asylum Hill Congregational Church in Hartford, Conn. Given Twain's way with words, the fact that he attended a church on Asylum Hill must have delighted his mind.

Yes, Twain attended church regularly. He wrote letters filled with religious references while courting Olivia, who became his wife. He was a champion for moral causes before and after achieving fame. He used Christian rhetoric in speeches, articles and books.

Even if Twain had despised Christianity wholeheartedly instead of embracing it frequently, he would have needed to address its tenets in his commentaries about culture. Every successful author reflects his time and place to some extent. For Twain, that meant commenting on religious conflict and spiritual crisis before, during and after the gut-wrenching, heart-rending Civil War.

Charles Darwin's theory of evolution, which spread so rapidly during Twain's lifetime, necessarily called many of Christianity's bedrock beliefs into question; so Twain could not ignore the theory's impact. Sigmund Freud's theories of the unconscious rocked organized religion, too — could it be that every human being was her or his own god, apart from God? Twain had to take notice and comment.

All of this became grist for Twain's mental mill, because "screeds against wealth and greed were a common topic" for him.

Bush does not want to enter battle with Twain biographers — but he cannot help it. Too many of them, he says, have marginalized the "edifying effects of religion in American literary culture. This marginalization has helped foster a caricature of Mark Twain as an acidic, cynical and finally even blasphemous observer of American religious life. One typically thinks of an old, despair- and grief-ridden white-haired man shaking his fist at a silent God, snarling in rage at the weak-minded and hypocritical American church, and writing devastating critical assaults against the contents of the Holy Scripture."

That caricature is wrong, Bush says, then supports his contention again and again with passages from Twain's published writing and personal correspondence.

As he traveled in Switzerland, for example, Twain commented about the scenery, labeling it "the visible throne of God." He elaborated in "A Tramp Abroad" (1880): "One had the sense of being under the brooding contemplation of a spirit, not an inert mass of rocks and ice — a spirit which had looked down, through the slow drifts of the ages, upon a million vanished races of men, and judged them."

Later, in a notebook of jottings, Twain wrote, "He is the perfect artisan, the perfect artist. Everything which He has made is fine, everything which He has made is beautiful; nothing coarse, nothing ugly has ever come from His hand. … The contemplation of it moves one to something of the same awe and reverence which the march of the comets through their billion mile orbit compels. This is indeed a God!"

For any reader who cares about Twain, the pitfalls of biography and the power of religious doctrine, Bush's book will prove rewarding.
__

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

The age revolution: How to live to be 150

Monday, January 08, 2007

Experts believe that the first person to live half way through their second century has already been born. Jeremy Laurance reports on the stunning breakthroughs that science promises, while Sarah Harris outlines 10 ways to extend your life

The first person to live to 150 may already have been born, according to some scientists. Worldwide, life expectancy has more than doubled over the past 200 years and recent research suggests it has yet to reach a peak

It is eight years since Jeanne Calment died peacefully in a nursing home in Arles, southern France in 1998. She was aged 122 years, five months and 14 days - and no one has yet challenged her title as the oldest person with an authenticated birth record to have lived. She attributed her longevity to a diet rich in olive oil, regular glasses of port and her ability to " keep smiling".

Destiny undoubtedly played a part, too. If you want to grow old, choose your parents carefully. The genetic determinants of long life are gradually being unravelled, In recent years at least 10 gene mutations have been identified that extend the lifespan of mice by up to half. The good news is that these super-geriatric mice are no more frail or sickly than their younger brethren.

In humans, several genetic variants have been linked with longevity. They include a family of genes dubbed the Sirtuins, which one Italian study found occurred more commonly in centenarian men than in the general population. Researchers at Harvard Medical School in the US, convinced they have discovered a "longevity gene", are now studying whether adding an extra copy of the gene extends the lives of mice. The long term aim is to find a way of manipulating the genes to add an extra decade or two to the human lifespan.

Other gene variants affect the production of growth hormone and insulin-like growth factor (IGF), both of which increase metabolism - organisms with higher metabolism tend to die sooner. Blocking receptors for growth hormone and IGF, so slowing metabolism, provide possible targets for anti-ageing drugs.

Also promising, but still far from yielding concrete results, are telomeres, which are present in every cell. Telomeres shorten with every cell division, like a burning fuse; when they can shorten no more, the cell dies. Inhibiting the enzyme telomerase to prevent the shortening of the telomeres in effect extends the lifespan of the cell, and, as we are comprised of millions of cells, could extend life.

Ageing cannot be reversed but it may, perhaps, be delayed. The emergence of the extremely old population has only happened in the past 50 years and is chiefly due to improvements in the health, lifestyle and environment of the elderly that started in the 1950s - how we eat and drink, where we live, what we do.

One promising avenue of research is to increase the resistance of cells to the stresses caused by free radicals, unstable molecules that disrupt cellular processes. There is no evidence that the sort of anti-ageing compounds sold over the internet containing anti-oxidants that promise to tackle free radicals actually slow ageing. However, delivering antioxidant enzymes direct to the cell has been shown in mice to extend lifespan by 20 per cent - pointing the way to future research.

But the optimism comes with a warning - that the consistent increase in life expectancy we have enjoyed for the past 200 years could be about to go into reverse. Some Jeremiahs in the scientific community claim ours could be the first generation in which parents outlive their children. The greatest enemy of extending life further is growing obesity, they say. Its effects could rapidly approach and exceed those of heart disease and cancer. Calculations by US scientists suggest that life expectancy would already be up to a year longer but for obesity. As Jeannne Calment indicated, wisely if unexcitingly, on her 122nd birthday, those who live moderately live long.

Ten things you can do to help increase your life expectancy

Exercise regularly

Keeping fit is the elixir of youth. Even 30 minutes of regular gentle exercise three times per week, such as walking or swimming, can add years to your life expectancy.

Aerobic exercise preserves the heart, lungs and brain, elevates your mood, can help ward off breast and colon cancer and prevent atrophy of the muscles and bones.

Live dangerously

Mild sunburn, a glass of wine and some low-level radiation sounds like a recipe for disaster, but many researchers believe that small doses of " stressors" can reverse the ageing process.

While this "hormeosis", is not a licence to lie on a hot beach all day swigging vodka, mild exposure to certain harmful agents can trigger the body's natural repair mechanisms. The body is tricked into producing particular DNA-repair enzymes and heat shock proteins to fix the damage that has been caused. Sometimes the body's repair mechanisms overcompensate, treating unrelated damage - "rejuvenating" as well as repairing it. Hormeosis could stretch the average healthy life span to 90.

Live in a good area

It is not only how you live, but where you live that matters - and the residents of Okinawa in Japan seem to know the secret. These Japanese islands are home to the world's largest population of centenarians.

The clean-living Seventh Day Adventists of Utah also do pretty well, living on average eight years longer than their fellow Americans.

Worst off are those living in poor, polluted urban areas such as Glasgow, where residents of the poorest suburbs have a life expectancy of only 54. Overcrowding, dirt and noise all contribute to high blood pressure, anxiety and depression, which reduce lifespan.

Be very successful

The more rich, privileged, successful and educated you are, the longer you will live. The Whitehall Studies, 1967-77, examined the health of male civil servants between the ages of 20 and 64, and found that men in the lowest-paid positions had a mortality rate three times higher than those at the top level.

The study proved that the more important a task a person is asked to perform, the longer they are likely to live; that the person at the top with the big office, shouting orders will have a more relaxed and pleasurable existence than his frustrated underlings.

And if you can't manage an Oscar, then only one extra year in education could increase your life expectancy by a year and a half.

Eat the right foods

Certain foods delay the ageing process and may increase life expectancy. Green leafy vegetables such as spinach and broccoli are rich in antioxidants and beta-carotene. Diets high in fruit, vegetables, fibre and omega-3 oils, and low in fat may prevent high blood pressure and heart disease.

In their low-fat diet of fruit, vegetables and rice, the long-living people of Okinawa also consume more soy than anyone on earth, and soy is linked to low cancer rates. Eating cooked tomato daily can slash your risk of heart disease by 30 per cent, found research at Harvard.

Challenge yourself

An active mind is as important as an active body. Studies show that you can boost your immune system and delay the onset of conditions from depression to dementia by keeping your brain engaged and stimulated.

Leonard Poon, director of the University of Georgia Gerontology Center found that people who reach three figures tend to have a high level of cognition, demonstrating skill in everyday problem-solving and learning. And Marian Diamond of the University of California, Berkley, found that rodents who were given problems to solve and toys to play with, lived 50 per cent longer.

Enjoy your life

Good relationships are the key to longevity. Social contact staves off depression, stress and boosts the development of the brain and immune system.

Most research shows that people with family, friends, partners or pets, live longer than those who don't. Marriage is also a good idea if you want to meet the 100-mark, adding an average of seven years to the life of a man, and two to a woman.
Indulgence, too, can be good for you.

Find God - and friends

It's official: having religion pays off - and not just in the after-life.

Nearly 1,000 studies have indicated that those who go to a place of worship are healthier than their faithless counterparts - and live an average seven years longer.

One in 10 of the nuns of the convent of the School Sisters of Notre Dame in Minnesota have managed to reach their 100th birthday. But atheists should not despair: experts believe that a sense of community, and of belief in something larger than yourself, are vital ingredients in a long and happy life.

Reduce your calories

One hundred years of hunger is what you can look forward to if you follow the Calorie Restriction philosophy. Practitioners of CR believe that by reducing your calorie intake (by between 10 and 60 per cent) you can extend life expectancy by lowering your metabolism and the production of harmful free radicals. It sounds like torture, but there is research to suggest that it works.

One study reported that participants who ate 25 per cent less for three months had lower levels of insulin in their blood, a reduced body temperature and less DNA damage.

Get your health checked

To last a century, stay ahead of life-threatening illnesses. It is possible with regular blood tests to detect the first signs of prostate cancer, one of the commonest causes of cancer deaths in men over 85.

If you're between 60 and 69 you can have free bowel cancer screening, cervical screening for women aged 24 to 64, and mammograms for women aged 50 to 70.
_____________________________________

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Monday, January 08, 2007

Noted scientist discusses religion's role at Colgate event

Francis S. Collins, director of the National Genome Research Institute at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and head of the team that mapped the human genome, firmly believes in science and evolution.

He believes in God, too.

Two mutually exclusive ways of thinking? Many scientists think so.

Not Collins. The author and physician-geneticist makes a compelling argument that faith and science can not only peacefully coexist, but complement one another as well.

“My view is that God showed the mechanism of evolution right at the very beginning of the creation of this universe, and used that mechanism with full intention of it resulting in organisms that have intelligence, that have a higher nervous system enabling them to receive things like the moral law, the ability to practice free will, and a hunger to search after God,” he said Dec. 5 at a Colgate Conversations event in Washington, D.C.

“Those are all things that characterize almost all of our species.”

Collins discussed what he called “the questions science can’t answer,” such as why humans exist, if there is a God and if that God cares about man, and what happens after people die.

“Science is the way to understand the natural world, but the questions I posed might not be possible to answer within the confines of pure naturalism, pure materialism — they are really spiritual questions,” he continued. “If you want to address them at all, you have to approach them in some other way.”

Collins talked about how he eventually discovered that faith and science could coexist, and how he started to subscribe to the idea of theistic evolution and all of its trappings.

“If God gave us the ability to uncover how the world works, should we not use that information and should we not, in the process of carrying out scientific discovery, increase our awe at the Creator, not decrease it?” he asked.

He urged those present to find some kind of “harmonious scientific middle ground,” and concluded the talk saying, “there’s more than one way of knowing [about truth] and we can celebrate all of those ways.”

Discussion touched on reconciling faith and suffering, Intelligent Design, stem cell research, bioethics, and the separation of church and state, among other things.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Survey: Why Some Churches Thrive and Others Decline

Audrey Barrick
Correspondent

Friday, Jan. 5, 2007

Why do some congregations in America grow and others decline? A recent survey measured several key factors on what's causing churches to thrive and others to remain stunted.

Congregations that are willing to change to meet new challenges experience greater growth than those less up to the challenge.

According to the Faith Communities Today 2005 survey, 46 percent of congregations that said they "strongly agree" with willing to change experienced the highest level of attendance growth. Among those that said they "somewhat agree," 37 percent are growing strongly. And among those who disagree on any level, only 15 percent have the highest level of attendance growth.

Geographic communities also affect congregational growth. Congregations located in newer suburbs are more likely to experience growth than congregations in any other type of location. The second best area for growth is in the downtown or central city of metropolitan areas. Those in rural areas and small towns are least likely to grow.

The composition of the congregation plays a major role in church growth as well. Congregations that are most likely to grow are younger ones, consisting of those founded from 1975 to the present. The survey revealed that the older the congregation is, the least likely it is to experience growth. Additionally, the more older adults a congregation has, the more unlikely it is to grow. And a larger proportion of younger adults also lead to growth opportunities.

"The mere presence of older adults is not problematic in and of itself," the report stated. "But a congregation where a large proportion of the members are older tends to have a cluster of characteristics that inhibit growth."

Such characteristics include no children being born to members, a lack of a clear sense of mission and purpose and a lack of vibrant worship or involvement in recruitment.

Another composition makeup affecting growth is racial diversity. Congregations that are multiracial are most likely to have experienced strong growth in worship attendance. Congregations least likely to grow are predominantly white, non-Hispanic ones.

The survey further found that a higher proportion of women in the congregation is associated with decline rather than growth in the church. Congregations that are able to attract larger proportions of men are more likely to grow.

Declining attendance numbers among mainline denominations is nothing new. But the study noted a surprising finding – a lack of growth among Catholic congregations despite continued increases in the overall Catholic population.

While some say theological differences account for the declining attendance in mainline churches compared to evangelical churches, the survey found that there is very little relationship between growth and theological orientation.

Less conservative churches are also most likely to grow.

"More important than theological orientation is the religious character of the congregation and clarity of mission and purpose," the survey highlighted. "Growing churches are clear about why they exist and about what they are to be doing."

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Poll finds most of us believe in angels

By The Associated Press

WASHINGTON — A bluebird in the garden, a spirit in a house, a kind man on the side of the road. Americans are big believers in angels, although not necessarily the ones with halos and wings.

An overwhelming majority, almost regardless of background and religious conviction, think angels are real, according to an AP-AOL News poll exploring attitudes about angels, and more.

Belief in angels, however people define them, is highest — almost universal — among white evangelical Christians, 97 percent of whom trust in their existence, the poll indicates. But even among people with no religious affiliation, well more than half said angels are for real.

Among the findings about angels:

Protestants, women, Southerners, Midwesterners and Republicans were the most likely to believe in angels, although strong majorities in other groups also shared that faith. Belief in angels declined slightly with advanced education, from 87 percent of those with high school education or less to 73 percent of those with college degrees. Overall, 81 percent believed in angels.

The poll of 1,000 adults was conducted by telephone Dec. 12-14 by Ipsos, an international public opinion research company. The margin of sampling error for all adults was plus or minus 3 percentage points.

If it’s one thing to believe in angels, it’s something else to explain exactly what an angel is.

“A presence that you feel around you, is my opinion,” said Elizabeth Daves, 63, of Flemington, N.J. “I accept them — to come whenever they want to.” And she said they came, and have comforted her, since her mother-in-law died in their house.

Edward Pelz, 80, of Grabill, Ind., said he believes that angels are guiding him, even though it’s impossible to explain to anyone else.

“Have I ever seen one? Nope. We depict an angel as a person that’s white, has a robe on, has wings on back. I’m not sure that’s the way they look. So for me, I think sometimes there’s angels that aren’t that way.”

Pelz recounted a story about a man who showed up to change his tire when he had a flat in Ohio five years ago.

“I look at life — I say, well maybe I had an angel with me here today. It could have been just another man doing a good deed.”

Angels have a place in religion

A group, all women this day, gathered on a December morning at the Franciscan Spirituality Center in La Crosse, Wis.

They gathered to speak of angels.

They recited prayers asking for angelic protection. They listened to songs about angels. They shared reflections on angels.

One woman told about how an angel had saved her from a car accident. Another explained how, when she’s having difficulty with someone, she asks the angels for help.

“There’s a longing in the hearts of people for meaning, for something that’s beyond their control, that satisfies a deep longing in their hearts,” said Sister Joan Weisenbeck, a Franciscan Sister of Perpetual Adoration who is a retreat and spiritual director at the spirituality center.

“I think angels kind of come into that realm,” she said.

During Advent, Weisenbeck has led weekly prayers at the center that focus on different archangels: Raphael, Michael and Gabriel.

“When we talk about angels, it’s more important to talk about God than it is about the angels, and to trust in God’s intervention and God’s presence in our lives,” said Weisenbeck.

Angels, she said, “always point toward God.”

To some, they’re messengers, go-betweens for the mortal and the divine. Their images range from sword-bearing guardians to outlines children make in the snow that disappear like footprints.

And when Christmas approaches, angels become more prominent in the minds and homes of Christians than perhaps any other time of the year. They are the statues on the edges of nativity scenes, the figure atop the Christmas tree. So even though a baby in a manger is the Christian reason for the season, it’s also a time to explore just what these other creatures might be.

Linked by traditions

In the Book of Genesis, after God tells Abraham to sacrifice his son, an angel of the Lord intervenes and tells Abraham not to lay a hand on the boy.

In the Gospel of Luke, the angel Gabriel appears to a young virgin with the news she will bear the son of God.

But angels aren’t just messengers that move between humanity and God.

They also link several of the major religions.

“Angels are popular among Christians, Jews and Muslims,” Weisenbeck said. “No one religious tradition seems to kind of grab onto angels (and say), ‘Now this is ours.’”

Both Judaism and Islam have angel stories that, as in Christianity, are rooted in scripture but have been developed into traditional teachings and tales.

“Angels in the Jewish tradition are not used as intermediaries — that is, you don’t pray to an angel, you pray to God,” said Rabbi Saul Prombaum of Congregation Sons of Abraham. “In the Hebrew conception, once an angel finishes its job, it disappears.”

Archangels, Prombaum said, are a little different because they are more developed in religious texts.

Prombaum said while angels in Judaism are indeed messengers, the Hebrew word for them — mal’ ak — is related to a word that means labor motivated by a creative intention.

Prombaum said Jews have a traditional story that when a person leaves synagogue on the Sabbath, he or she is accompanied by two angels who make a bet. One wagers the person’s home will be set up properly for the Sabbath meal, the other against. The losing angel must say, “So may it be the same way in the coming week.”

A similar idea is found in Islam.

Wahhab Khandker, an economics professor at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, said Muslims are never alone, but have two angels recording their deeds, good and bad.

But angels are completely submissive to God and have “no part in my salvation,” Khandker said. “They have no part in taking me to the good thoughts or taking me to the bad thoughts. No, they’re just only recording.”

While Muslims do not pray to angels, Khandker said, when Muslims are praying, they’re accompanied by angels.

Both Judaism and Islam teach that humans are superior to angels.

The ‘magic’ of religion

Angels sometimes have a more active relationship with humans in Christianity.

The Bible mentions angels hundreds of times. A Google search brings up 93.8 million hits, compared with 403 million for God.

Mary of the Angels chapel in St. Rose Convent has more than 160 representations of angels. The Catholic Catechism states that “from infancy to death human life is surrounded by (the angels’) watchful care and intercession.”

Hallmark cards show angels. A baseball team in a city named after angels is named after angels. Even Jimi Hendrix sang about an angel.

Still, not everyone believes in them.

“Angels are part of that element of religion that is magical, mystical and perhaps superstitious, so it conflicts big-time with rationality,” said Prombaum.

When images are created of angels, he said, humans begin to disagree with certain depictions — such as portrayals as chubby cherubs.

“Part of the problem is once you objectify something that is mystical, it loses some of its magic,” Prombaum explained.

The biggest challenge angels present to rationality is that they represent the idea God intervenes in the lives of humans.

The Rev. Jerry Hatlevig, pastor of Connect Church in Onalaska, Wis., believes angels do protect humans. He said angels can’t bring people to Christ but can save them from destruction.

No matter what the perspective on angels, they don’t appear to be leaving the public consciousness anytime soon.

Bishop April Ulring Larson, head of the La Crosse Area Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, said her family used to joke that her father wore out a guardian angel every year.

She tells a story about landing in Hong Kong with bags that included more than a dozen books as thick as dictionaries — gifts for a companion synod in Ethiopia. A bus let her off after midnight in the middle of a Hong Kong bar district.

She was alone, unable to speak the language and lost.

And then a man approached her who didn’t speak English but who understood what she needed. He led her through the streets and under the darkness of bridges until she made it safely to her destination.

“I trusted him,” Ulring said. “I’m absolutely positive that he was an angel. I’m not saying he wasn’t a man in Hong Kong, but I know that he was a gift and a messenger in Hong Kong to me.”

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Friday, January 05, 2007

Religion, the 2006 Elections, and a look ahead

Religion and the 2006 Elections

Exit polls show that the religious divide that has come to characterize American politics persisted in the 2006 election; white evangelicals and those who attend church frequently continued to support Republicans by large margins, while secular voters and infrequent churchgoers were similarly lopsided in their support of Democrats. But a survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted in the days immediately following the election, suggests that Americans across a number of different religious groups had fairly positive reactions to the election.

Exit Poll Results – The "God Gap" Widens

In recent years, some have asked whether the Democratic Party has a serious "God problem" – an inability to appeal to evangelicals and other highly religious Americans. But the results of this year's election raise the parallel question of whether the Republican Party can appeal to non-Christians and less religious voters. Exit polls find that the Democrats' gains were concentrated among non-Christians and secular voters, indicating an even larger political divide between highly religious voters and the rest of American society.

The GOP held on to voters who attend religious services more than once a week, 60% of whom voted Republican compared with 61% in 2002. A majority (53%) of those who attend church at least once a week also supported Republicans. But less frequent churchgoers were much more supportive of Democrats than they were four years ago. Among those who attend church a few times a year, for instance, 60% voted Democratic, compared with 50% in 2002. And among those who never go to church, 67% voted Democratic; four years ago, only 55% did so. As a result, the gap in Democratic support between those who attend church more than once a week and those who never attend church has grown from 18 percentage points in 2002 to 29 points today.

Though white evangelical voters have been the bedrock of the GOP throughout this decade, many wondered in the days leading up to the election if the party's troubles this year would hurt their prospects with this key voter group. But the GOP actually did very well among white evangelicals in 2006: 72% voted Republican in races for the U.S. House nationwide, and they gave strong support -- about two-thirds or more -- to Republican Senate candidates in several key states, including Tennessee, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Missouri and Virginia. These levels of support are comparable to those registered by evangelicals in 2004, when approximately 75% voted for Republican congressional candidates.

And, after see-sawing all year in the polls, President Bush's approval rating among evangelicals on Election Day was 70%, far higher than among the electorate as a whole. Though that was down 10 points from its level two years earlier, the decline was no greater among evangelicals than among the rest of the electorate.

Evangelicals generally mirrored the rest of the public in the importance they attached to several key issues: Iraq, the economy and corruption and scandals. But while other voters who said corruption was extremely important voted heavily for Democratic candidates, exit polls reveal that two-thirds of white evangelicals who cited corruption voted for Republicans.

Evangelicals split from other voters in the very high level of importance they attached to values issues such as gay marriage and abortion: 59% said these issues were "extremely important" to their vote, compared with just 29% for other voters.

Among another key religious group – Catholics – the House vote divided much as it did in the last midterm election in 2002. The Democrats captured 55% of the Catholic vote, compared with 44% for the Republicans. The Democratic advantage was aided by a strong 75%-24% margin among Hispanic Catholics. But among white Catholics, a key swing voter group, Democrats and Republicans divided the vote almost evenly (50% versus 49%). Though Democrats did see an increase in support from white Catholics compared with 2004 (from 45% to 50%), these results represented virtually no gain for Democrats compared with 2002, when white Catholics also split their vote (48% Democratic, 49% Republican).

The exit polls clearly show that the Democrats' gains in 2006 came largely among non-Christians and secular voters. House Democratic candidates gained 25 points among Jews and 7 points among those of other non-Christian faiths, compared with 2002. They also picked up 10 points among the much larger group of secular voters.

Pew Post-Election Survey

Though religious differences in vote choice persisted in 2006, people in most religious groups say they are happy that the Democrats won, they expect the party to be successful and, with the exception of white evangelical Protestants, they favor giving the party considerable latitude to pursue its agenda.

A post-election survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Nov. 9-12 among 1,479 Americans, found that all major religious communities want the Republican Party to try to work with Democratic leaders, even if it means disappointing some of their supporters. At the same time, all religious groups except black Protestants say that Democratic leaders should try to work with President Bush to get things accomplished. Only a third of black Protestants share this view.

Election Reactions

Most Americans (60%) – including majorities of white mainline Protestants (56%), black Protestants (84%), white Catholics (60%) and seculars (72%) -- say they are happy that the Democrats won the election. Only among white evangelicals did as many express unhappiness as happiness with the Democrats' victory (41% each).

Similarly, by a 50%-21% margin, Americans say they approve of Democratic congressional leaders' policies and plans for the future. Nearly half of white mainline Protestants (48%) and majorities of black Protestants, white Catholics and seculars express approval of the Democratic agenda. White evangelicals express much lower approval for the Democrats' plans, but nearly as many evangelicals express approval (32%) as disapproval (37%). And majorities of all religious groups, including 57% of evangelicals, expect the Democrats to be successful in getting their programs passed into law.

Majorities of black Protestants, white Catholics and seculars, along with a plurality of white mainline Protestants, say that Democratic congressional leaders, rather than President Bush, should take the lead in solving the nation's problems. Only among white evangelicals do those saying President Bush should take the lead (46%) outnumber those who favor seeing Democrats lead the way (31%).

But regardless of who they think should take the lead in Washington, majorities of all religious groups (including 66% of white evangelicals) say that Republicans should try as best they can to work with Democrats to accomplish things, rather than standing up to Democrats on the issues. Likewise, majorities of white religious groups and a plurality of seculars say that Democrats should try their best to work with President Bush, rather than stand up to him on the issues. Only among black Protestants does a majority (55%) favor standing up to the president rather than cooperating.

Views of the Parties

Pluralities or majorities of partisans within nearly all major religious groups rate their own party more negatively than positively. Among Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, 56% overall say the party is doing only a fair or poor job standing up for its traditional positions on things like reducing the size of government, cutting taxes or promoting conservative social values; just 42% say the party is doing an excellent or good job. White evangelicals rated the party about the same as other Republicans -- neither more positively nor more negatively. White mainline Protestants, however, were considerably more negative about the GOP than other religious groups, with 67% rating the party's performance as fair or poor.

On the Democratic side, the differences across religious groups were more modest. Black Protestants, a key part of the Democratic coalition, were divided in their views about the performance of the party: 47% said the party was doing an excellent or good job, while 48% said it was doing only a fair or poor job; white evangelicals and white Catholics were similarly divided.

Issue Priorities in 2006

As described above, Election Day exit polls revealed that most Americans viewed a variety of issues as important in the election. But Pew's post-election survey, which asked Americans to identify which issue was most important in their voting decision, finds that Iraq was the central issue of the campaign. Indeed, a majority of voters saw the Iraq war as one of the top two issues in the election (53%), with the economy second (37%), followed by values issues such as abortion and marriage (27%). About one-fifth of the voters gave priority to corruption and scandal (23%), terrorism (21%) and illegal immigration (20%).

However, issue priorities differed across the major religious communities. White evangelical voters put values issues at the top of their agenda (49%), slightly ahead of the Iraq war (47%), with the economy third (32%). Fewer than one-in-six mentioned corruption and scandals.

By contrast, white mainline Protestants fell close to the national average, with most naming the Iraq war (53%), followed by the economy (40%) and corruption (29%). White Catholics showed yet another pattern, with comparable numbers naming the economy and Iraq as their top issues, followed by illegal immigration (31%).

Election Information in the Church

Among Americans who reported attending religious services at least monthly, nearly three-in-ten (27%) say that information about political parties or candidates in the recent election was available at their place of worship in 2006. Among those who said they voted in the election, 22% reported that election information was made available at church – a higher proportion than in the presidential election of 2000 (14%) but not as high as in 1996 (28%).

Half of the black Protestants (50%) said that information about the elections was made available at their churches; nearly one-third (30%) of white evangelicals also reported this. Fewer white Catholics (21%) and mainline Protestants (14%) said they were exposed to political information through their churches.

Very few respondents said that they were encouraged to vote a particular way by clergy or other religious groups, however. Just 7% of churchgoing voters said they had been urged to vote for particular candidates or parties; 4% recalled being urged to vote Republican, 1% Democratic and 2% could not remember for whom they were encouraged to vote. This was comparable to elections in 2000 and 1996.

A Look Ahead: 2008 Presidential Candidates

Relatively few religious differences are seen as yet in voter preferences for presidential candidates in 2008. Across all religious groups, Sen. Hillary Clinton receives at least plurality support among all Democrats and Democratic-leaners, including a majority among black Protestants (54%). Sen. Barack Obama is a distant second among Democrats and leaners, with 19% support. Among black Protestants, Obama receives as much support as he does among other religious groups (21%), but he still trails Clinton by more than 30 points. Indeed, Obama was second among all groups except white evangelicals, among whom former Sen. John Edwards claimed the second spot with 16%.

Among Republicans and Republican-leaners, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Sen. John McCain are tied for the top spot among white mainline and white evangelical Protestants. But Giuliani leads McCain among white Catholics by 38%-24%. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice receives a similar level of support among white evangelicals (24%) as Giuliani and McCain, but she trails both among white Catholics, with 12% support.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Thursday, January 04, 2007

Online Prayer Helps Cancer Patients

By Robin Lloyd
Senior Editor
posted: 04 January 2007

Prayer might not cure cancer, but it makes some cancer patients feel psychologically better, new research claims.

Transcripts of online support group sessions for 97 breast cancer patients were analyzed, and researchers at the University of Wisconsin-Madison found an association between improved mental health and patients who used a higher percentage of words such as pray, worship, faith, holy, and God during those sessions.

(Interviews with the patients later on showed that those who use these words were engaging directly in prayer, not just sprinkling those words in their dialogues.)

The association held even when the researchers compared patients with similar levels of religious beliefs. The study did not select for patients of any particular religion, but participants expressed mainly Christian beliefs, although there were a few Native American and Hindu religious quotes in the transcripts.

All in the mind

Patients in the study filled out a survey before participating in the online support sessions and then another one four months later to assess psychological changes. A text analysis program run on the session transcripts revealed that those who used more of the words suggestive of religious beliefs and practices had higher levels of functional well-being, lower levels of negative emotions and felt more strongly that they had control over their situation (or were experiencing self-efficacy).

Bret Shaw, lead author of the study, and his colleagues investigated only the psychological mechanism behind prayer and prayerful words, not issues of divine intervention or physical health, Shaw told LiveScience.

Many cancer patients pray in online support groups to help them cope with their illnesses, Shaw said.

“We think the mechanisms of effect were trusting in God's plan for their life, in believing in an afterlife (reduced negative emotions), self-directing religious coping or presuming that God gives one the skills and resources they need to face their challenges (self-efficacy) and focusing on what's going well in their lives as a gift from God rather than what's not going well (functional well-being),” Shaw said.

Shaw said that he sees prayer and religious expression, in this study, as a coping mechanism that helps people put a more positive spin on their fate and illness, not as a placebo effect.

Healthy prayer

Some previous research has concluded that prayer has health benefits.

For instance, one study reported that people who regularly attend church have better lung function, regardless of whether they smoke or exercise. Another study stated that regular church-goers live longer—about 2 to 3 years longer than people who attend less frequently or not at all.

Although most doctors are willing to discuss religion with their patients, few of them recommend prayer or pray with their patients. And one large study recently concluded that prayer has no effect on the recovery of patients after heart bypass surgery. Instead, patients who knew they were being prayed for had a slightly higher rate of complications, said Herbert Benson of Harvard Medical School.

Shaw said it’s possible that the results of his study were influenced by the fact that all the study subjects were women.

“It’s well known in the literature on online support groups that women are more likely to participate in online support groups, and there is also evidence that they tend to be more expressive in their participation within these groups (which is not necessarily different than findings for face-to-face support groups either),” Shaw said.

It’s possible that religious talk in the sessions had some negative effects on patients, Shaw wrote in the study, published in the journal Psycho-Oncology. Previous research has found that some religious coping, such as a belief that one is being punished with illness by God, is associated with diminished mental health and quality of life.

Some participants in Shaw's study reported that they were so averse to the religious talk in the online sessions that they turned away from them.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Movie Review: The Miracle of Friendship in a Perilous World : The Lesson of Charlotte’s Web

By Dr. Marc T. Newman December 15, 2006

(AgapePress) -

Allan Bloom, Neil Postman, and other cultural critics have noticed that the west is increasingly filled with people who live in isolation from one another. Plugged into personal entertainment devices that shield them from having to converse, or locked into screens that imitate intimacy while promoting anonymity, many young people have become relationally retarded.

It is ironic that, while technology has opened new ways for people to "communicate," a large number of teens complain of feeling alienated. The simple answer to isolation and alienation is friendship — but it appears that few have time for that anymore. The General Social Survey noted this year that 25 percent of those surveyed said that they have no one with whom to talk over important matters, and that most people reported having only two close friends.

Charlotte’s Web, the latest offering from Walden Media and Paramount, reinforces the value and beauty of friendships for an audience at risk of moving toward isolation. Charlotte’s Web is the story of Wilbur the pig, and how one spring he struck up unlikely friendships with a little girl and a large spider that, quite literally, saved his life. What Charlotte’s web did for Wilbur, literally, I hope Charlotte’s Web can help do for viewers, figuratively. Young people (and most adults as well) need reminders about how people care for one another in a perilous world, and how miraculous such friendships can be, especially when they require sacrifice.

Peril Is Ordinary If you go to the theater this week, there is no shortage of spectacular perils to face : blood-thirsty Mayan warriors (Apocalypto), ultra-violent African diamond hunters (Blood Diamond), terrorists (Casino Royale), madmen (Déjà Vu), evil magicians (Eragon), bad movies (Eragon), monomaniacal toads (Flushed Away), and a back-stabbing legendary figure (The Santa Clause 3). The good guys are placed, relentlessly, in dangers so extraordinary that, while you enjoy them vicariously, it is unlikely you would actually be threatened by any of them in reality. One of the great virtues of Charlotte’s Web is the way it illustrates the simple truth of just how ordinary peril can be.

When little Wilbur is born, he is a runt. Because Wilbur is small and weak, because he is different from his piglet brothers and sisters, he is in peril. Being weak in a competitive culture, we learn, is to be in mortal danger — a lesson as applicable to the real world as it is the cinematic one. But being normal, even being big and strong, is no sure salvation.

Once Wilbur survives his infancy, he discovers that — like every other pig — he is destined to be sold. Ultimately a compromise is struck and Wilbur ends up at the Zuckerman’s farm across the street from Fern’s house. But the pardon is only temporary. In no time at all a savvy rat named Templeton makes it clear that Wilbur’s future is in lunch meats. "They’re saving you for Christmas," Templeton tells Wilbur. When Wilbur protests that "humans love pigs," Templeton replies, "They love pork."

Fern is Wilbur’s first and staunchest ally. When she comes across her father on a (fittingly) dark and stormy night as he is about to do away with Wilbur, the act strikes her as uniformly unfair and unjust. Though the world’s way is to attack the weak, Fern’s words and actions indict the world’s wisdom in favor of the universal principles of fairness and justice. "He can’t help that he was born small !" Fern says to her father. And when Mr. Arable turns pragmatic, arguing that the sow won’t feed him, Fern stands behind her virtues and says, "I will." And true to her word, she does feed Wilbur. She also talks to him, reads to him, and forms a true bond of friendship with him.

Fern’s human responsibilities make constant companionship impossible (and, as she finds out when she tries to sneak Wilbur into school, against the rules). Unfortunately, the barnyard is not a friendly place, and Wilbur finds himself alone, until a voice greets him from above with "Salutations." The one thing all of the unfriendly animals agree upon is their distaste for Charlotte the spider. But Charlotte reaches out to Wilbur, and Wilbur returns the favor.

The relationships between Wilbur and Fern and Charlotte are not merely pragmatic. They like each other, though there is no rational reason that they should, other than spontaneous mutual delight. It is not an accident that Fern loves Wilbur, or that Wilbur finds Charlotte beautiful. They each look on the other with the eyes of a friend. That is the miracle. As C.S. Lewis aptly points out, friendship "is the instrument by which God reveals to each the beauties of all the others." One of the most visible, tangible expressions of that beauty is when it is exhibited in sacrificial love.

Both Fern and Charlotte demonstrate their friendship for Wilbur by making and keeping promises. To rescue Wilbur, Fern pledges to feed and care for him, even though it requires her to risk the displeasure of her father, and costs her time. Charlotte vows to find a way to spare Wilbur from the smokehouse, even though she spins her life away creating words in her web to achieve that goal. Though Fern and Charlotte are not under any external obligation to Wilbur, they freely choose to sacrifice for him because that is what friends do for one another.

Wilbur is a very young pig, so it takes him awhile to learn the lessons of friendship. But because he has great mentors, he learns them well. By the end of the film, Wilbur engages in some self-sacrifice of his own, and has the painful adult experience of discovering that not all sacrificial acts are appropriately acknowledged. Sometimes our thoughtfulness is taken for granted. But lack of thankfulness from the recipient does not mar the generous heart, which always finds ways to sustain itself.

When Charlotte has to choose a word that reflects her desire for Wilbur’s inner-pig, she rejects "glory" and "remarkable" and chooses "humble" instead. The humble heart will always think of others first. It is a noble virtue that attracts like-minded people, and leads to life-long friendships.

It is not a terrible thing for young people to recognize that they inhabit a perilous world. Fairy tales and great children’s literature have been effectively teaching that lesson for generations. Ordinary peril is part of the human experience. But to counteract that condition, God gives us friends — if we are willing to look for them and extend ourselves to others in order to make the connection. People demonstrate their friendship by sacrificing for one another, even when it is painful to do so. To make friends and be friends are two of the highlights of being human. Friendship is to be cherished, and never taken for granted.

For children, adults with children, or for anyone with the eyes of a child, these lessons are reinforced by Charlotte’s Web, a beautiful, and tender-hearted film. Go see it. And bring a friend.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Wednesday, January 03, 2007

Congressman to be sworn in using Quran

Congressman to be sworn in using Quran By FREDERIC J. FROMMER, Associated Press Writer
51 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Rep.-elect Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress, will use a Quran once owned by Thomas Jefferson during his ceremonial swearing-in Thursday.

Ellison, D-Minn., contacted the library about the book last month, Dimunation said.

Some critics have argued that only a Bible should be used for the swearing-in. Last month, Virginia Rep. Virgil Goode (news, bio, voting record), R-Va., warned that unless immigration is tightened, "many more Muslims" will be elected and follow Ellison's lead. Ellison was born in Detroit and converted to Islam in college.

Ellison spokesman Rick Jauert said the new congressman "wants this to be a special day, and using Thomas Jefferson's Quran makes it even more special."

"Jefferson's Quran dates religious tolerance to the founders of our country," he added.

An English translation of the Arabic, it was published in 1764 in London, a later printing of one originally published in 1734.

It was acquired in 1815 as part of a 6,400-volume collection that Jefferson sold for $24,000, to replace the congressional library that had been burned by British troops the year before, in the War of 1812.

"It was a real bargain," Dimunation said.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

So-called tolerance meets tradition, and absurdity ensues

Originally published January 3, 2007
By J.R. Labbe
FORT WORTH STAR-TELEGRAM

Proof that tolerance is becoming intolerable: Students willingly attending a university that was founded at the request of the Anglican church are miffed because there's a cross in the sanctuary of the campus chapel.

The "controversy" at Virginia's College of William & Mary reportedly has been churning since October, when university President Gene Nichol ordered that the cross in the Wren Chapel be stored in the sacristy unless someone specifically asks for it to be displayed during a service.

His reasoning?

The diverse student population includes some who are "put off" - that's how Washington Post reporter Fredrick Kunkle phrased it - by the cross.

In a chapel.

Apparently it was too much of a strain for those of other faith traditions to ask to have it removed for weddings or other non-Christian services.

Once the news hit alums, Nichol softened his stance. The cross could be placed in the Wren Chapel on Sundays. The rest of the week it's back in the closet.

Granted, William & Mary, the second oldest college in the country, is a public university. Under the leadership of then-Virginia Gov. Thomas Jefferson, W&M became a university in 1779. All of the property was deeded to the Commonwealth of Virginia in 1906.

But does that mean today's W&M must turn away from acknowledging the school's complete history in a bid not to "put off" current students?

According to the historical facts listed on the William & Mary Web site, "the clergy of the Church of England in Virginia adopted at a convention 'Several Propositions' for founding a college to consist of three schools: grammar, philosophy and divinity.

"On July 25, 1690, Lt. Gov. Francis Nicholson authorized several gentlemen to take subscriptions in Virginia for the proposed college, and on the same day the clergy issued an appeal for financial support to merchants in England who were trading in Virginia."

Fast-forward to 2006.

In that passage of time, it's understandable that students attending today's William & Mary might not be well-versed in the school's history and the circumstances of its founding - although one would think that potential students would conduct a little research about an institution of higher learning before applying.

Nichol defended his decision to remove the 18-inch brass cross, which was a gift to the school from the Bruton Parish Episcopal Church in Williamsburg and has been on display for decades, by saying he is not "willing to compromise on that fundamental principle of equal access for all."

It's not as if the chapel bore a huge sign that read, "For Christians only. All others need not enter." No one was denied use of the chapel. No one was forced to keep the cross in place during non-Christian ceremonies or events.

The Wren Chapel is what it is - a Christian church.

As 1990 graduate Amy Bryce Paul wrote on the Save The Wren Cross blog, "if you choose to visit a CHAPEL for meditative purposes, please do not be offended if there happens to be a cross within sight (much as you would expect to find books in a library). I would also say the same to a Christian who perchance wanders into a synagogue or a mosque and is 'surprised' by any religious symbols they find there."

Nichol, who has been university president since July 2005, missed an opportunity to teach a lesson in true tolerance and civil discourse.

Unfortunately for William & Mary, Nichol may get a chance to defend his decision in court: The Liberty Institute is contemplating a First Amendment lawsuit that would argue he is not exhibiting neutrality to religion but hostility to it.

After all, the Bill of Rights says nary one word about a right not to be "put off."

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

What's more important than the truth?

Monday, January 1, 2007

In 2005, satirist Stephen Colbert developed a word he called "truthiness." Colbert defines it as "truth that comes from the gut, not books."

Guess what? "Truthiness"is the 2006 word of the year, according to an online survey conducted by dictionary publisher Merriam-Webster.

What can be more important than the truth? And what can be more difficult to attain?

Although we easily grasp its critical need intellectually, the capacity for emotional readiness is yet another challenge. Here are three reasons why living the truth is difficult:

• The truth vs. evaluation. In a stand-up comedy contest I entered several months ago, a young man who used notes won the contest. The contest was rigged, as he won because he brought the most friends (who paid) to the show.

In your work environment, how many workers get truthful evaluations? How often are true flaws sugarcoated or ignored to make it easier on the supervisor and to save face. The employee "saves face" and loses his heart and soul.

• The truth vs. for-profit. It's scary how easy it is to get a site on the Web. There are thousands of bogus companies making a lot of illegitimate money from the naïve and the elderly. The world of advertising is filled with misleading information and half truths in order to compete favorably.

Next to politics, the world of selling is probably the most challenging arena to be truthful. Is not the truth often in conflict with closing a sale? Don't we often hear the favorable about a product without a word about the flip side?

• The truth vs. the mask. On the level of humanity, a difficult choice for many people is diplomacy vs. honesty. Diplomacy frequently masks words to avoid honesty.

On a deeper level, we wear masks at work to avoid the consequences of the truth. The harried employee who is treated cruelly by his boss smiles back weakly. He wants to tell the boss to "shove it," but it's a question of truth or consequences. Then, this same person may very well take it out on some innocent family member at home.

These examples challenge us as a society. Usually, there is no control. We can control, however, living our truth every day.

To live the truth requires that we know our truth. And our truth may conflict with the truth of others. This truth is whether our behavior is aligned with our values and beliefs. The net result is the natural law that states: "When our behavior matches our beliefs, we have a legitimate claim to inner peace."

When behavior and beliefs are in conflict, we live in a fairyland of illusion and untruths. Suggestion: Consider living your truth a resolution for 2007. Happy new year!

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

On oath taking, including on the Koran

TERRI CHOATE
Posted: 1/2/2007 03:24 pm

“Cross my heart and hope to die,” all of us kids affirmed to emphasize the truthfulness of our statements when I was a kid. These words were accompanied by an X gesture across the left breast. I can’t remember ever lying or even fudging the truth when making that declaration—because, of course, even if we weren’t directly addressing God, the assumption was he’d accommodate our hope if our pledge was false.

Today as members of the 110th Congress are sworn in, they will declare: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”

Newly-elected members do this en masse. Although many bring a Bible to the ceremony, they don’t swear on it. Later they may place a hand on a Bible during a private, ceremonial swearing in. Today, one of these private ceremonies will be a bit different because Keith Ellison, a Democrat elected from Minnesota’s fifth district, has broadcast his intention to employ a Koran rather than a Bible at the event. Ellison’s announcement was condemned by Los Angeles columnist and talk show host Dennis Prager, a Jew, because Prager believes “the Bible is the source of American values.”

Nevertheless, UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh, writing on National Review Online (11/29/06), points out that what really counts in an oath is how the promise is weighted, and he quotes the Federal Rules of Evidence on a courtroom oath: “Before testifying, every witness shall be required to declare that the witness will testify truthfully, by oath or affirmation administered in a form calculated to awaken the witness’ conscience and impress the witness’ mind with the duty to do so.”

Requiring anyone to take an oath (“the performance of a religious act”) on “the holy book of a particular religion is a religious test,” continues Volokh, expressly forbidden by the Constitution, whose authors recognized the reluctance—even in the 18th century—of some, such as Quakers, to swear oaths at all. Consequently, “[T]he legal culture created by the Constitution makes room for many religious cultures, and allows all their adherents to be equal citizens and equal officeholders,” Volokh declares.

Certainly, this is our hope and expectation for Representative Keith Ellison and, indeed, for all Americans who are also Muslims.

But Dennis Prager does have a point. American values have been shaped by the Bible as modified through the centuries by enlightened reason and also shaped by the secular law of the Constitution. Americans of all faiths or uncertain faith or no faith unite in the respect for the individual encoded in our Constitution. This, we believe, includes several million American Muslims, but since 9/11, revelation of militant, extremist Islamic belief worldwide, coupled with the silence of moderate Muslims at home, disturbs.

On December 26, speaking before an exuberant Muslim audience in Dearborn, Michigan, Rep. Ellison said, according to the Detroit Free Press, that Muslims “should remain steadfast in their faith and push for justice: ‘You can’t back down. You can’t chicken out. You can’t be afraid. You got to have faith in Allah, and you’ve got to stand up and be a real Muslim,’” he said, adding that “Muslims can help teach America about justice and equal protection.”

Even more important would be for American Muslims to teach radical Islam about justice and equal protection.

Here’s why that’s needed (quoting from Mark Steyn’s “America Alone”):

“In the 2005 rankings of Freedom House’s survey of personal liberty and democracy around the world, five of the eight countries with the lowest “freedom” score were Muslim. Of the forty-six Muslim majority nations in the world, only three were free. Of the sixteen nations in which Muslims form between 20 and 50 percent of the population, only another three were ranked as free: Benin, Serbia and Montenegro, and Suriname.”

The reason may be that traditional Muslims, and most especially militant Muslims, choose to live under sharia or Islamic law. Sharia literally means “the path in the sand created by camels walking to water-spots,” but, according to Free Muslims Coalition, one organization of American Muslims that does speak out for secular democracy and against Islamic extremism (see www.freemuslims.org), sharia when used spiritually, properly means “guidance.” However, the group points out, while modern law (Western law) is based on human rights, sharia is based on “perceived duties to God.”

Sharia does not, either, grant full human dignity to women. Interestingly, as sharia developed in the 200 years following Mohammed’s death in 633 A.D., the new law expanded women’s rights; women could inherit (but only half as much as men), and women could divorce their husbands (but had to go to court and pay a fee whereas men could and can divorce unconditionally). At the time of its inception in the dark ages, sharia advanced human rights, but before the enlightenment liberalized Western attitudes, progress froze well short of justice and equal protection.

And yet, surprising to secular Americans, many Muslims in Western countries (although not noticeably in the U.S.) do desire to live under sharia.

Mark Steyn quotes a poll of British Muslims that found over 60% want to live under sharia in the United Kingdom. Perhaps the 40% minority are female. Certainly no woman of intelligence or spirit would voluntarily accept a status of being, roughly, half equivalent to a man.

But more likely those Muslims in the West who desire sharia are those who do not feel a connection to Western society because they haven’t assimilated into the national culture they live among. Some may not want to assimilate. For sure there are a lot of Western social pathologies to criticize. Some may feel superior to the widespread immorality and godlessness they perceive in the West. Fortunately, most of these live outside the United States.

In the U.S., Muslims are more diverse within themselves and better integrated into the larger society. They come not only from Arab lands, but from South Asia, North Africa, and Iran. Some 33%, like Keith Ellison, are U.S. born African-Americans. Overall American Muslims are better educated and wealthier than the typical Americans they live next door to, and the mosques they worship in tend to include a broader range of religious opinion (all according to recent reports in the Christian Science Monitor and the Boston Globe).

Yet, this is not totally a “not to worry” scenario. Freedom House has found radical Wahhabist literature easily available to U.S. Muslims. Robert Leiken, director of immigration and national security at the Nixon Center, points out that assimilation may not be “an antidote to radicalism (Boston Globe).” In particular, young Muslims may be especially sensitive to the increased attention and concern they’ve experienced since 9/11.

Therefore, Ellison’s election could boost the antidote. If not merely assimilation, perhaps political participation will continue to discourage home-grown radicalism. Ellison’s speech in Dearborn can be seen as a traditional appeal to his political supporters as well as to fellow religious. Judging by his website, Ellison will vote like a typical very liberal Democrat in the 110th Congress. Conservatives like myself don’t hail his viewpoints, but we must acknowledge they are American liberal rather than Islamic religious. Some may even be anathema to extreme Islamicists. This is a good thing and may contribute to a more secular (and moderate) Islam both here and worldwide.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Tuesday, January 02, 2007

Survey shows diminishing role for religious institutions in Morocco

A survey of religious practices among Moroccans will be published in February 2007.

Magharebia has obtained an exclusive preview of the results, which show a decreasing role for religious institutions and growing influence of the media in forming religious knowledge.

By Imrane Binoual for Magharebia in Casablanca

A soon to be released survey of religious practices in Morocco will show that the majority of Moroccans prefer to pray alone, and use audiovisual media and the internet for information on their religion, Magharebia has learned.

The role of traditional religious learning institutions in forming religious knowledge is diminishing, according to the study.

The survey results, which will be made public in February 2007, come from three months of survey work sponsored by Prologues magazine and the King Abdelaziz Foundation for Islamic studies and human sciences. The poll comprised 135 questions put to a sample of 1,250 people from different age groups and backgrounds. The questions covered all forms of religious practice across Moroccan society, including men, women, youth, elderly, urban and rural residents.

The results show how Moroccans' religious practices have evolved. About 65% of those interviewed pray on a regular basis and a significant portion of Moroccans practise their religion in an individual manner, rather than collectively. As for sources of religious knowledge, the survey has demonstrated the ever-growing role of satellite channels, audiovisual media in general, cassettes and the Internet. These channels have become essential sources, taking the place of traditional written sources, to the level of 85%.

The survey also picks up on the shrinking role of institutions providing religious teaching in the acquisition of religious knowledge. These institutions, such as the family, the mosque, the school, the brotherhood etc., do not play the role they used to play in giving Moroccan people a grounding in religion.

As for the status of women, the survey highlights the ever-growing role of women in the field of religion.

"This religious sociology work has been carried out according to standard practice," said Mohamed Sghir Janjar, Prologues director and assistant director of the King Abdelaziz Foundation for Islamic studies and humanities. According to Janjar, "The aims of the survey, like the objectives of Prologues are purely scientific and look for better knowledge of Moroccan society. We hope that this work will serve to develop religious sociology and social sciences in general in our country."

The survey was carried out by three Moroccan researchers -- sociologist Mohamed El Eyadi, political analyst Mohamed Tozy and anthropologist Hassan Rachik -- who were assisted by a team of field workers.

The survey work started three months ago and the data collected is being sorted. The results run to more than 5,000 pages of statistics. "We shall publish part of the results of this survey in a book, in Arabic and in French," Janjar told Magharebia. "This publication shall be accompanied by an introduction to the subject of sociology and religion in Morocco, and an analysis of young people and spiritual activities. Another analysis will look at women and religion, while a final chapter will be devoted to religious values, practices and behaviour," he added.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Cosmic resolutions for 2007

Howard Smith
Monday, January 1, 2007

This was a productive year for astronomers investigating the origins of the universe, as a wealth of new data confirmed and refined the modern scientific picture. For most people however -- the 64 percent of Americans who say religion is "very important" to them (according to the Pew Research Center) -- this year presented spiritual challenges. The new results may have bolstered science, but they seemed to confirm the irreconcilable conflict between science and religion.

Meanwhile authors Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris launched a broadside attack against religious belief. As we contemplate a new year, it is worth stepping back to consider what is happening, why it matters, and what to do.

Yes, today for the first time in history we know with some certainty how the universe was created. About 13 billion years ago, the cosmos we know was an infinitesimal speck. It exploded, expanded and is now about 46 billion light-years in size. The foundations for this "Big Bang" description were laid in 1929, after earlier puzzles led Edwin Hubble to his unexpected observation that other galaxies are moving away from us. Albert Einstein's theory of relativity explained those motions as cosmic expansion, shocking virtually all scientists (including Einstein) who had imagined that our own galaxy was the universe, and that it was eternal and unchanging.

Hubble measured the velocities of 46 galaxies. This year, several teams of astronomers reported their measurements of hundreds of thousands of galaxies, confirming that the universe was born and has been expanding ever since.

There was other impressive news. The embryonic cosmos was fabulously hot and dense. Light in this environment was scattered by hot plasma like headlights in a fog. But the universe was expanding, and as it swelled, it cooled. About 380,000 years after creation, once matter had cooled enough for atoms to assemble, light traveled freely. That light is seen today as "cosmic background radiation." Discovered in 1965, it has become, like the motions of galaxies, a diagnostic of what happened way back then.

In March, scientists using NASA's WMAP satellite announced their latest results: in the standard model, the universe is 13.73 billion years old, with a statistical precision of plus or minus 100 million years. (Last month, the 2006 Nobel Prize in Physics went to two astronomers who had measured this radiation with a pioneering 1989 NASA satellite.

But who cares about arcane science? Last February, the National Science Foundation released Science and Engineering Indicators 2006, a public survey of science attitudes that has been repeated for 30 years. The survey results suggest that you care. It consistently finds that Americans think "science and technology are making our lives healthier, easier and more comfortable" (91 percent), that "the benefits of scientific research outweigh the harmful results" (84 percent), and that "even if it brings no immediate benefits, scientific research that advances the frontiers of knowledge is necessary and should be supported by the federal government(83 percent)."

On a gloomy note, the survey reports only 35 percent of adults knew the universe began with a big bang; 29 percent said the Sun goes around the Earth.

People tend to be fascinated by cosmology, whatever their scientific literacy or religious perspective, because it helps to frame the context of meaning in life. As British physicist Stephen W. Hawking opines, "We want to make sense of what we see around us and to ask: What is the nature of the universe....[W]here did it and we come from?" We also care because context can have ethical implications.

There is long tradition of deriving moral lessons from cosmology, with familiar examples being theological. The story of Adam and Eve, for instance, teaches that God made all humans related, descendants of one couple. In the 16th century, the Jews who were followers of the Jewish mystic tradition of Kabbalah taught that the cosmos was born and is changing, and derived a cosmic lesson: humanity can affect that change, as righteous deeds improve the fabric of creation. The contrasting, predominant scientific view -- a static universe -- persisted until Hubble, and lacked this ethical imperative.

Atheism prompts a cosmological ethic as well. This year Dawkins, in "The God Delusion," argued for replacing righteousness with a blend of Darwinian personal ethos and rational calculation. Unfortunately, he makes his case while chastising the faithful with boundless hubris. His indifferent reductionist philosophy peremptorily discards the morality of religion. Dawkins' book tries to quantify human attitudes and rationalize human spirit, but in so doing it leaves the creation without an ethical context, and thoughtful religious believers dismayed if not a bit bewildered.

It is possible to appreciate both the insights of religion and the lessons of science. This year's precise, self-consistent cosmology certainly prompts one ethical reflection: science's intellectual openness and quantitative inquiry have been wonderfully productive. They are worthy of emulation. Here's another: newly uncovered puzzles (dark matter, cosmic acceleration) compel humility. We do not know it all. Cosmology and Kabbalah illustrate that science and religion, presupposed opposites, speak to the same mysteries. Their perspectives, while different, are not necessarily contradictory. Their moral imperatives can enrich and motivate both rational and righteous behavior.

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Seeing the future, now: A world without religion or violence. (Really.)

From the lips of contributors to the online magazine Edge to God's ears (one wonders if She or It may be listening):

Asked to respond to the question, "What are you optimistic about?", dozens of scientists and other thinkers have looked ahead to the future. On a Web site that routinely examines atheism, new scientific findings and a realistic view of world events that cuts through all sorts of dogma, some respondents to the "Edge Annual Question 2007" predict that someday religion will finally take a back seat to other ways of looking at and understanding the environments in which people live, work and play.

Global warming is making big chunks break off from Arctic ice islands; will an international reaction to the climate trend fuel a new kind of global governance?
Edge's future-themed article is making some news. Britain's Guardian has summarized some of its contributors' thoughts. "Philosopher Daniel Denett believes that, within 25 years, religion will command little of the awe it seems to instill today." Denett believes the "spread of information through the Internet and mobile phones will 'gently, irresistibly, undermine the mindsets requisite for religious fanaticism and intolerance.'"

Oxford University evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins predicts that "the physicists of our species will complete Einstein's dream and discover the final theory of everything before superior creatures, evolved on another world, make contact and tell us the answer."

Harvard University psychologist Steven Pinker believes that violence in the world is on the decline. He writes: "Most people, sickened by the headlines and the bloody history of the 20th century, find this claim incredible. Yet...every systematic attempt to document the prevalence of violence over centuries and millennia..., particularly in the West, has shown that the overall trend is downward....Anyone who doubts this by pointing to residues of force in America (capital punishment in Texas, Abu Ghraib, sex slavery in immigrant groups, and so on) misses two key points. One is that, statistically, the prevalence of these practices is almost certainly a tiny fraction of what it was in centuries past. The other is that [they] are, to varying degrees, hidden, illegal, condemned, or at the very least (as in the case of capital punishment) intensely controversial....[W]ars and killings are scrutinized and documented, so we are more aware of violence, even when it may be statistically less extensive."

The Internet as tool of social change: The number of people using it in China grew by 30 percent in 2006 (to 132 million), but the government still blocks some foreign news sites

Among many provocative observations in Edge's wide-ranging survey are those of musician, composer and record producer Brian Eno (David Bowie, U2, Talking Heads). Eno writes: "The currency of conservatism...has been that markets are smarter than governments," a notion that "has reinforced the conservative resistance to anything resembling binding international agreements."

However, Eno notes, the "suggestion that global warming represents a failure of the market is therefore important." Will a phenomenon like the warming trend force governments around the world to finally work together in earnest? If they do, and if "a single[,] first instance of global governance proves successful," Eno argues, "it will strengthen its appeal as a way of addressing other problems - such as weapons control, energy management, money-laundering, conflict resolution, people-trafficking, slavery, and poverty. It will become increasingly difficult for countries [like the U.S.] to stay outside of future treaties like Kyoto - partly because of international pressure but increasingly because of pressure from their own populations."

In his Edge contribution, Eno really does sound optimistic. He also writes: "Something like real democracy (and a fair amount of interim chaos) could be on the horizon. The Internet is catalyzing knowledge, innovation and social change,...proving that there are other models of social and cultural evolution[,] that you don't need centralized, top-down control to produce intelligent results. The bottom-up lesson of Darwinism, so difficult for previous generations, comes more naturally to the current generation. There is a real revolution in thinking going on at all cultural levels...."

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Monday, January 01, 2007

Keeping the faithful

As busy season ends, churches try to keep their pews packed

By RAQUEL RUTLEDGE
Posted: Dec. 30, 2006

They've done what they could. They decorated their sanctuaries with wreaths and bows. They and their choirs delivered "Joy to the World" and "Hark! The Herald Angels Sing" with discipline and passion. And they dug deep for their most meaningful and inspirational sermons.

Although they did it not out of selfishness, but in celebration of their savior's birth, pastors and priests at many churches are now hoping, and praying, that something in their Christmas services was compelling enough to bring the visitors back again.

These next couple of Sundays will tell.

As people wrap up their post-holiday sale shopping, many will be in the market for something less material, more soulful.

Along with their New Year's resolutions to lose 15 pounds or quit smoking, many Americans will seek a place of worship at the start of the year, vowing to nurture their spirituality in 2007.

Although church shopping occurs year-round, experts say Easter, back-to-school time in September and the Christmas and New Year's holidays are the biggest seasons.

Nearly 30% of 161 churches surveyed in December said they were boosting their marketing efforts with extra services and special programs over the holidays, and 16% said they beefed up their advertising, according to an informal poll conducted by ChurchMarketingSucks.com, an edgy, online resource for churches and an offshoot of the Center for Church Communication.

Some of a church's success will depend on how well leaders linked their upcoming events to the needs of the congregation and how well they communicated them, said Brad Abare, founder of ChurchMarketingSucks.com.

"It's important to make sure that we are not just focusing on getting butts in pews but having specific things they can attach themselves to . . . and giving them a reason to come back," Abare said.

Equally important was the feeling or vibe church leaders and members emitted to newcomers, said Paul Wilkes, the author of "Excellent Catholic Parishes: The Guide to Best Places and Practices."

Church shoppers are seeking a place where they feel very welcome, Wilkes said.

"In the old church, the pre-Vatican II church, the name of the game was to get 'em in and beat them up so they felt so guilty they'd have to come back," Wilkes said. "Now it's 'Glad you've come for the first time or have come home. We're here all the time for you. We're your family. Come on back.' It's a kinder, gentler approach."

The top reasons people want to return to a church are tied to the quality of the sermon and the friendliness of the people, according to the latest nationwide U.S. Congregational Life Survey.

There are, however, certain outreach efforts that can advance interest and nudge people in the direction of the church, leaders of churches say.

The Catholic Archdiocese of Milwaukee ran 60-second radio ads over the holidays reminding people that "Christmas is renewed at every Mass" and encouraging them not to turn away from Jesus after the season.

The United Methodist Church of Whitefish Bay launched a major outreach effort before Christmas with its re-enactment of the journey to Bethlehem. More than 1,600 people attended, many of whom were first-time visitors to the church, said Janet Hartzell, pastor of congregational care. The church is still tracking the impact of the event and is following up with visitors, Hartzell said.

Timing of the follow-up is critical, said Curt Gunz, owner of Great Commission Resources, a Texas-based consulting firm. Most church shoppers will make their decision on a potential new spiritual home within 36 hours of their visit, Gunz said.

"New Year's is one of those times when people stop and take stock of their life and see what direction they are going," Gunz said. "Churches need to be ready for that."

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

World Church Leaders Promote Justice for New Year 2007

Church leaders have given their New Year messages as the world greets 2007.

by Daniel Blake
Posted: Monday, January 1, 2007, 12:44 (GMT)

Church leaders have given their New Year messages as the world greets 2007. The spiritual head of the 77-million member worldwide Anglican Communion, Dr Rowan Williams, has said Christians need to feel the same hunger for justice that ended the slave trade if the world is to be changed for the better.

Two days following the hanging of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein -- an event the Vatican condemned as "tragic" -- the Pope said on Monday that human rights must be put at the centre of the global struggle to end war.

In a homily at St Peter’s Basilica, the pope said, “It is because every human individual, without distinction of race, culture or religion, is created in the image and likeness of God, that he is filled with the same dignity of person,”

He added: "That is why he must be respected. No reason can ever justify doing with him whatever one pleases, as if he is an object."

Marking his second New Year since succeeding John Paul II, the 79-year-old Pontiff said, “Today people speak a lot about human rights, but it is often forgotten they these need a stable base, not one that is relative or a matter of opinion."

In particular, he said, that this means respect for individuals and freedom to practice religion.

The Pope also used his sermon on world peace to single out the Middle East: “How can we not turn our attention, once again, to the awful situation right in the land where Jesus was born? How can we not implore through persistent prayer that the day of peace also arrives in that region as soon as possible?”

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, also speaking in his New Year message, broadcast on BBC Television in the UK on New Year's Eve and repeated on New Year's Day, drew on the example of William Wilberforce to urge people to act to change the world.

"Jesus talks about being hungry and thirsty for righteousness, for justice. And if we hear that in the way it's surely meant, we have to conclude that he means that we should feel there's something missing in us, something taken away from us, when another person, near or far away, has to face need and suffering. We get to be ourselves only when we wake up to them and their needs."

The message was filmed in Holy Trinity Church in Clapham, and the Arndale Shopping centre in Wandsworth, South London and also featured footage shot during his visit to World Food projects in Southern Sudan. The reformers, he said regarded the slave trade as making the whole of humanity less than human:

"People like William Wilberforce and Henry Thornton felt they were made less human than they should be by the appalling injustice of the slave trade. They felt a hunger for justice - a sense of being spiritually impoverished - "undernourished" because of slavery.

People, he said, may feel overwhelmed or even bored by constant appeals, but change could only come if people were moved to act:

"When we look at the familiar images of other people's suffering, do we feel a void inside ourselves, a yearning for something different and a conviction that it needn't be like this? That's where change begins. And it's one of the differences that faith can make; faith in God and in people. It's worth remembering this year those who struggled to do away with the slave trade. If we lived in a society that tolerated slavery now, wouldn't we feel soiled and diminished by it? Wouldn't we feel hungry for something different? So what are the things today that make us feel the same?"

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Issues could have religious spin in '07

Bill Theobald
Gannett News Service

WASHINGTON — Many Democrats talked openly during the fall campaign about their faith and how it influenced their policy positions in an overt attempt to counter the power of the religious right.

Now that they have won control of Congress, people can expect in 2007 to see a new set of issues being presented with a religious spin.

Restricting gay marriage and promoting prayer in schools as "values" issues are likely to be replaced by helping the poor and protecting the environment.

Beyond that, the 535 members of the 110th Congress will be the most religiously diverse in history and includes the first Muslim and the first two Buddhists ever to serve.

Even with that diversity, some observers and even members are skeptical whether religious affiliation will make much difference in Congress.

Tim Walberg, Battle Creek's incoming congressman from the 7th Congressional District, said he didn't envision religion being a super-factor for either party.
"If we abide by the Constitution that we will take an oath of office to uphold, I think that we'll all get along pretty well," said Walberg, who attends the United Brethren Church and is a former Baptist pastor. "The Constitution was put there by our framers, who were men of faith, to make sure that the federal government treated the majority and minority with justice."

Rabbi Michael Lerner, who earlier this year helped launch the Network of Spiritual Progressives to counter the religious right, said he believes his network and other similar efforts likely contributed to Democrats' success. But he's skeptical of an immediate impact in Congress.

"I don't think (things) change that quickly," Lerner said. "It may mean that for some in Congress who want to end the war, there will be more willingness to draw on those themes and similarly with respect to poverty."

Roman Catholics will again comprise the largest denomination represented in the next Congress, with 155 members, or 29 percent of the total, according to a breakdown compiled by Menendez. Nationwide, 24.5 percent of residents are Catholic, according to the American Religious Identity Survey.

Next are Baptists, followed by Methodists, Presbyterians, Jews and Episcopalians.
The growth in recent decades in the number of Catholics, from around 100 to current levels, and in the number of Mormons, from a half-dozen to 15, is one trend Menendez has tracked.

And of course there is the election to the House of the first Muslim, Keith Ellison of Minnesota, and Buddhist Reps. Mazie Hirono of Hawaii and Hank Johnson of Georgia.

Ellison is declining interviews until after he is sworn in and Johnson won't discuss his faith.

Hirono was raised in Buddhist traditions but said she is not a practicing Buddhist. She said the Buddhist values of truth, wisdom and peace are part of what led her to public service.

But she is adamant that there should be a separation of church and state.

"I think that political leaders should not infuse religion as a central part of why they do anything," Hirono said. "When I serve, I do my best in terms of what is good for the community, what is just, what is fair."

Indeed, the interplay between faith and politics can be seen in the efforts of two Democrats —Baptist Rep. Lincoln Davis of Tennessee and Catholic Rep. Tim Ryan of Ohio — to reduce abortions.

Davis, who is anti-abortion, is proposing a package of social programs to support pregnant women, particularly poor women, as a way to cut the number of abortions. He also believes issues such as the minimum wage should be viewed in religious or moral terms and used by anti-abortion groups to judge a member's commitment to reducing abortions.

Ryan, also anti-abortion, is proposing a similar package of social programs but his legislation also calls for more funding for contraception, putting him odds with the leadership of the Catholic Church.

"It is a difficult to not be in complete agreement with the church, but I also have a public responsibility to reduce abortions," said Ryan, who received a letter from his diocese asking him to withdraw his legislation.