The White House has invited recently retired NFL Coach Tony Dungy to join the Advisory Council for the Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, Dan Gilgoff reports.
Dungy led the Indianapolis Colts to the Super Bowl in 2007. Known for his strong Christian faith commitment to family, Dungy retired to spend more time with his family and in volunteer work. He has long been involved with groups like Family First, All-Pro Dad, Fellowship of Christian Athletes and the Prison Crusade Ministry, Big Brothers Big Sisters, and the United Way.
Christianity Today's Stan Guthrie recently interviewed Tony Dungy (listen here). CT also covered Dungy in "A Kinder, Gentler Coach" and "Christian Coaches Face Off for Super Bowl XLI."
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 31, 2009 11:38AM | Comments (1)
Here are the top 10 politics blog posts from March:
1. Gingrich to Convert to Catholicism
2. Presidential Prayer Effort Proves to be Bipartisan
3. Supreme Court Declines Case of Praying Football Coach
4. Kathleen Sebelius & Obama's 'Abortion Reduction' Challenge
5. Pennsylvania Buys Bibles
6. One Cheer for Jim Wallis
7. Understanding Obama's Pastors
8. Michael Steele Takes Heat after Abortion Remarks
9. A Dynamic Duo
10. Sarah Palin: Couldn't Find McCain Staffers to Pray With
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 31, 2009 10:07AM | Comments (1)
New England states are weighing same-sex marriage legislation, especially where religious presence may be lacking, according to USA Today analysis.
"A USA TODAY analysis finds that states where the percentage of "nones" - people who say they have no religion - is at or above the national average of 15% are more likely to push expanding the scope of marriage, civil unions or same-sex partner rights," write Cathy Lynn Grossman and Jack Gillum.
Vermont's legislature is expected to vote on a same-sex marriage bill later this week, and the AP outlines other debates going on in the Northeast.
- New Hampshire, which enacted a civil unions law last year, moved a step closer to legalizing gay marriage Thursday when the state House of Representatives voted in favor. The state Senate still must vote, though, and the governor - who signed a civil unions bills last year - opposes it.
- The Vermont Senate has approved a similar measure, but the House has yet to vote. Gov. Jim Douglas vowed Wednesday to veto the bill if it reaches him, spurring a protest that drew about 300 people to the Statehouse on Friday. Protesters say they'll push to get enough votes in the Legislature for a veto override.
- In Maine, a bill to legalize gay marriage has nearly 60 co-sponsors in the Legislature. Gov. John Baldacci, who opposes gay marriage, says he hasn't taken a position on the measure.
Even though is a couple months old, Stateline has a helpful graph showing a state-by-state breakdown.
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 30, 2009 4:23PM | Comments (13)
The University of Notre Dame invited President Obama to be the keynote speaker and receive an honorary doctor of laws degree at commencement on May 17. The invitation has created an uproar from conservative Catholics, since the President has taken executive actions that oppose the Catholic Church's teachings on life ethics. I interviewed Francis Beckwith, a professor at Baylor University who is spending a year as a visiting professor at Notre Dame.
I also posed similar questions to administrators who would be considered experts in religious higher education. Here are some more responses:
Richard Mouw, President of Fuller Seminary in California
My own sense is that commencements are for students and their families, and controversies should be avoided on those occasions. As a frequent commencement speaker, I am very much aware that people do not attend to hear the speaker, and that the best one can hope for is that the speech might have a line or so that sticks with the folks who attend. But they don't need political controversy.
I am all in favor of having speakers on our campuses with whom we disagree. In the evangelical schools, we rightly insist on a kind of orthodoxy on the part of faculty - which means that for students to be exposed to in-the-flesh people with whom the school disagrees, guest lecturers are an important part of the educational process. But commencements ought not to have to carry that kind of baggage.
The wrinkle in this case, of course, is the fact that the proposed speaker is the President of the United States - and one who symbolizes an important positive step forward for a nation (and a Christian community!) that needs to work diligently at healing the racial wounds of the past. But President Obama bears significant responsibility for this controversy. He had given those of us who support the right-to-life cause some hope that he would work to decrease the polarization on this and related issues. Instead this administration has taken an "in your face" approach on abortion and stem cell research - issues that are of great importance in Catholic and evangelical communities.
As someone who still has great respect for Mr. Obama, I am deeply disappointed in him on this particular set of policy questions. If I were the president of Notre Dame, I would withdraw the invitation to him as a commencement speaker and invite him to speak his mind on anything he wants to discuss in a public forum on dealing with divisive moral issues in a pluralistic society.
David S. Dockery, President of Union University
I am sure that the Notre Dame administration has thought through these things carefully prior to extending the invitation. Notre Dame has been inviting presidents to speak at their graduation ceremonies for several decades. When a university invites an outside speaker to such a special event, it is almost always the case that the speaker is invited to speak "to the university community" and not to speak "for the university community." I think that is a very important distinction to make. All of us from time to time have special speakers for special events who do not embody the mission and identity of the university.
But a university is best understood in many ways as a contest of ideas and so having various voices represented is to be expected. Yet, a commencement service is in many ways a blessing ceremony for the graduates and the institution normally wants someone who will speak in a way that will honor the graduates and the university community.
(Wheaton College invited Condoleezza Rice to speak at commencement even though she is pro-choice.)
There seems to me to a vast difference between Ms. Rice's nuanced position on abortion and President Obama's advocacy for full abortion rights and his lack of support for any aspects of the pro-life effort. It is because this difference is so vast that the pushback from the Notre Dame faithful has been so energized.
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 27, 2009 2:25PM | Comments (5)
Sen. Robert Casey, Democrat of Pa., has backed out of giving the commencement address at St. Vincent College in Latrobe, Pa. The college, where former President George W. Bush gave the address (and stirred a lot of his own controversy) two years ago, is headed by Jim Towey, Bush's former director of the Faith-based Initiative.
What, you thought the headline referred to basketball?
(Originally published at Religion News Service's blog.)
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 27, 2009 2:04PM | Comments (1)
Sarah Palin told a group of Alaska Republicans last week about preparing to go on stage for the vice presidential debate. "So I'm looking around for somebody to pray with, I just need maybe a little help, maybe a little extra," she said. "And the McCain campaign, love 'em, you know, they're a lot of people around me, but nobody I could find that I wanted to hold hands with and pray."
McCain staffers have taken umbrage at the suggestion that they're not the praying types.
The rest of the anecdote (starting at the 4 minute mark) is actually quite charming. She asks her daughter Piper to pray that God gives her strength and "speaks through me." Little Piper responds, "That would be cheating!"
What's politically interesting is that Palin could easily have told the Piper anecdote without dissing the McCainiacs. You can see why religious conservatives love her: unabashed about her faith and her contempt for McCain staffers.
(Originally posted at Steve Waldman's blog at Beliefnet.)
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 26, 2009 10:24PM | Comments (13)
Ten members of the President’s Council on Bioethics have issued a statement raising concerns about President Obama’s decision to allow federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.
They criticize Obama's characterization of what actually took place in 2001, since President Bush never banned embryonic stem cell research. "The aim of this policy was not to shackle scientific research but to find a way to reconcile the need for research with the moral concerns people have," they say.
The council members say that pluripotent stem cell research has eclipsed embryonic research. They argue, "Because producing them does not require human ova, and because they are patient-specific stem cells that are less likely to be rejected by their recipients, they also have distinct scientific advantages.
The authors write that Obama's decision would encourage cloning human embryos that then must be destroyed. "We cannot believe that this would advance our society’s commitment to equal human dignity," they write.
(h/t Emily Belz)
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 26, 2009 6:11PM | Comments (8)
Author Donald Miller, who campaigned for President Obama, will be on a task force for the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.
Miller became involved with the Obama campaign after he gave the benediction at the Democratic National Convention. He then traveled with the campaign to Christian colleges, including Calvin and Hope Colleges in Michigan. He writes about his new role with the office on his blog but doesn't go into details.
I’ll be meeting with the CFBCI about twice a month, when I’m able to sit on on the conference call, and I’ll keep you informed of their progress. It all sounds really good to me and I’m honored to be one of the people they’ve asked for input. I assure you I’m a small fish on the phone. Perhaps the smallest.
Evangelicals on the office's broader council include Richard Stearns, president of World Vision, Frank S. Page, president emeritus of the Southern Baptist Convention, Joel C. Hunter, pastor of Northland, a Church Distributed, and Jim Wallis, president of Sojourners.
Director of the office Joshua DuBois told me earlier this week that the rest of the members have been chosen and will be announced soon.
Miller anticipates heated questions and tries to answer them on his blog.
1. Why should government be involved in helping people at all? Shouldn’t the church do that?
A: Perhaps, but I don’t think so. We are running an enormous government deficit right now (we ran a surplus during the Clinton years, but counter to many Republicans, Bush increased the deficit enormously) and we do have to pare down our government spending (Obama has increased it further with the stimulus package) so an argument could be made that we don’t have the money to spend in the first place. However, if we did have the money, is it right?
I tend to see people as people and don’t really differentiate between the government and anybody else. If the government can help, why not. They are people and we are people. It’s not like they are robots. As for whether or not the work should be done by the church, it isn’t, so somebody has to do it. The church could solve all problems of poverty, and when it does, I think the government could go back to building roads and putting up stop signs. That said, though, it is difficult for me to imagine how the church is going to help provide healthcare. So if we are involved in the church and think the government shouldn’t be doing this work, the way to make them stop is to make the work go away by doing it ourselves.
2. Why would Barack Obama want to reduce abortions when he is a pro-choice President?
A: President Obama does believe abortion is a dark and tragic reality. He understands the desire for pro-life people to end abortion. As a pragmatist, and in order to reach out, and also to care for mothers who face the difficulty of an unwanted pregnancy, President Obama wants to understand the factors that lead to unintended pregnancy and help mothers keep their children. Studies show that economic well-being and health-care availability help a mother decide to keep her child. President Obama, in part through the CFBCI, wants to reduce abortions through the careful provision of these needs, creating a culture of life.
(As a side note, I asked the Office of Public Liaison whether the President intended to sign the Freedom of Choice act that he promised to sign during the campaign. This was a major battle-cry from the religious right. The OPL stated that there was no current movement on the bill and the President has not and will not sign it anytime soon. This does not mean he will not sign it in the future, only that the bill is not moving through congress at this time.)
That said, this is a complicated issue that, at least during the campaign, created more heat than light. Please use other blogs for sounding boards on this issue. Many pro-lifers tried to take over my blog during the election thus driving away open conversation. I’m sorry but that isn’t the purpose of this blog and I’d like to be able to use it to communicate information on a variety of subjects. You should also know I don’t believe we can create a utopia, and don’t believe we will have a perfect system of government until Jesus returns. Until then, we are only trying to make things better. Thanks so much for your understanding before you leave heated comments.
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 26, 2009 11:59AM | Comments (1)
Vermont Gov. Jim Douglas said he will veto a state bill to allow same-sex marriage if it makes it to his desk.
The Vermont state Senate overwhelmingly approved a bill earlier this week, and the House is expected to vote next week. Here's more from WCAX:
The governor told reporters he doesn't typically announce his intentions like this so far ahead of time, but said he thinks it's the only way to stop speculation about what his move may be, to refocus lawmakers' attention on the state budget.
"I'm announcing I will veto this legislation when it reaches my desk," Douglas said.
Explaining same-sex marriage is a deeply personal issue that crosses political lines, Vermont's Republican governor said he will not sign a bill into law allowing gays and lesbians to marry.
"I believe marriage has always been and ought to remain the union of a man and a woman," Douglas said. "I believe the civil unions law has offered equal rights and benefits under state law to same-sex couples and that should suffice."
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 25, 2009 5:31PM | Comments (26)
President Obama's planned commencement speech at the University of Notre Dame continues to spark controversy, as the local Catholic bishop said he will boycott the event because some Obama policies contradict church teaching.
Bishop John D'Arcy of the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend (Ind.) said Tuesday that "as a Catholic university, Notre Dame must ask itself, if by this decision it has chosen prestige over truth."
"President Obama has recently reaffirmed, and has now placed in public policy, his long-stated unwillingness to hold human life as sacred," D'Arcy said, "and has brought the American government, for the first time in history, into supporting direct destruction of innocent human life."
The young Obama administration has upset Catholic leaders by opening federal funding to international family planning groups and embryonic stem cell research, as well as proposing to rescind conscience protection rules for health care workers that were instituted by the Bush administration.
The Cardinal Newman Society, a watchdog for Catholic orthodoxy on college campuses, has launched an online petition to stop Obama from speaking at Notre Dame that has reportedly gathered more than 100,000 signatures.
There are 67 million Catholics in the U.S.
"We fully expected some criticism and have received it, though nothing more than we anticipated," Dennis K. Brown, a spokesman for Notre Dame told Catholic News Service. "I can't foresee us rescinding the invitation."
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 25, 2009 4:40PM | Comments (14)
Leaders from several prominent conservative Christian groups met Tuesday with the head of the White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships to discuss ways to reduce abortions.
Concerned Women for America President Wendy Wright sought the meeting with Joshua DuBois, executive director of the revamped White House office.
"It was cordial and there's an opportunity for future meetings," Wright said after the meeting, which lasted more than half an hour. "He did seem interested in the kinds of programs that are helping women and children."
Conservative Christian groups have criticized the Obama administration for early policy actions such as opening federal funding to embryonic stem cell research and international family planning groups, and moving to rescind conscience protections for health care workers.
Wright, who called the freedom of conscience "fundamental to the American way of life," said she brought up the conscience issue with DuBois and several White House staffers who attended the meeting. They also discussed programs that encourage men to be good fathers.
The White House did not respond to requests for comment. When the overhauled office was announced in February, the White House said its four target areas would be to poverty reduction, abortion reduction, responsible fatherhood and fostering interfaith dialogue with world leaders.
After DuBois agreed to the meeting in early March, Wright invited representatives of other conservative Christian groups to join her. A total of five people attended from Family Research Council, the Christian Medical Association and Care Net, a network of pregnancy centers that encourages women to continue their unexpected pregnancies.
Kristin Hansen, spokeswoman for Virginia-based Care Net, also said she hopes there will be additional meetings.
"We were grateful for the opportunity to sit down and dialogue," she said. "We are grateful that reducing abortion is a priority for this administration. ... It was a good atmosphere of listening on both sides and we hope to do it again."
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 25, 2009 4:28PM | Comments (3)
Christian philanthropist Howard Ahmanson has announced that he has left the GOP to become a Democrat.
"The Republican Party of the State of California seems to have decided to narrow itself down to one article of faith, which may be described as NTESEBREE: No Tax Shall Ever Be Raised Ever Ever," he writes in a column.
This is how Time described Ahmanson in their cover story on the top 25 evangelicals: "Money makes the Word go round, and this wealthy, conservative Republican couple takes a dizzyingly ecclectic approach to funding evangelism ... The couple, both 55, now are warning powerful conservative Christians about the pitfalls of hubris in the aftermath of their victories over liberals last November."
CT included the Ahmansons in a 2002 story on the "Patrons of the Evangelical Mind."
(h/t Rod Dreher)
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 25, 2009 2:27PM | Comments (6)
Even though her job description focuses on foreign affairs, Hillary Clinton will participate in a domestic political event to receive an award from Planned Parenthood Friday night.
"The 2009 Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) Margaret Sanger Award, the organization’s highest honor, will be presented to U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, who has been a champion of women’s health and rights throughout her public service career," according to the release.
Politico's Ben Smith says it signals a "continuing the Obama administration's forceful, if understated alliance with abortion-rights groups."
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 25, 2009 2:07PM | Comments (1)
President Obama defended his plans tonight for a healthcare overhaul that include a lower tax deduction for wealthy who donate to charities.
"Those of us who are a little bit fortunate are going to have to spend a little bit more," Obama said at tonight's press conference.
Politico's Mike Allen asked him if he's "confident that charities are wrong" that this will hurt giving, and he responded: "yes."
The Washington Time's Jon Ward asked Obama whether he wrestled with the ethics of funding embryonic research.
I think that the guidelines that we provided meet that ethical test. What we have said is that, for embryos that are typically about to be discarded, for us to be able to use those in order to find cures for Parkinson's or for Alzheimer's or, you know, all sorts of other debilitating diseases, juvenile diabetes, that, that it is the right thing to do.
And that's not just my opinion. That is the opinion of a number of people who are also against abortion.
Now, I am glad to see progress is being made in adult stem cells. And if the science determines that we can completely avoid a set of ethical questions or political disputes, then that's great.
The Associated Press has transcriptions of the press conference here, here, and here.
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 24, 2009 10:53PM | Comments (3)
I've always thought it was dopey for Catholic institutions of higher learning to bar on-campus appearances by prominent people who are pro-choice--sort of the spiritual equivalent of sticking your fingers in yours ears and shouting la-la-la-la. But it's not clear to me that giving President Obama an honorary degree, as Notre Dame proposes to do, is the same thing. An honorary degree is, well, an honor--in a way, to cite Tom Reese's example, that Cardinal Egan's invitation to the Al Smith dinner is not. As a non-Catholic, I can think of various reasons for Notre Dame to honor Obama. And I can think of reasons for it not to. There is, in short, something here to fight about. And they're fighting about it.
(Originally posted at Spiritual Politics.)
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 24, 2009 7:56PM | Comments
The Vermont state Senate overwhelmingly approved a bill Monday to allow same-sex marriage, putting the state one step closer to becoming the first to approve same-sex marriage by legislative means.
The Democratic-dominated state Senate voted 26 to 4 in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage. House Speaker Shap Smith, a Democrat, predicted to USA Today that a majority of the House would also vote in favor.
Gov. Jim Douglas, a Republican, has said he opposes the bill, but has not indicated whether he would veto the measure.
If the measure is approved, Vermont would become the third state (following neighboring Massachusetts and Connecticut) to allow same-sex marriage. Vermont was the first state to grant civil unions in 2000.
If approved, the law would replace Vermont's civil-unions law starting September 1. Civil unions performed in the past nine years, however, would still be recognized, according to The New York Times.
Opponents say changing state laws to allow same-sex marriage is both unnecessary and morally questionable.
"Same-sex marriage in Vermont can offer only one benefit to Vermont's gay population: Hopes of increased social acceptance," said the Vermont Marriage Advisory Council. "All legal experts agree that civil unions already provide every legal benefit and protection Vermont can give."
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 24, 2009 3:51PM | Comments (11)
"He can't be here tonight, because he's busy getting ready for Easter," Vice President Joe Biden joked about President Obama at Saturday night's Gridiron dinner. "He thinks it's about him."
(h/t Dan Gilgoff)
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 23, 2009 6:28PM | Comments
Late last night, I was reading the news wires when the news of President Obama's comments on The Tonight Show about bowling and Special Olympics caught my eye.
It's too bad that the president's bowling game isn't better than he claimed, but it's amazingly inappropriate for him to compare himself to Special Olympics bowling. Actually, Special Olympians are pretty good bowlers.
I know that for a fact.
My son, Mathias Dudley Morgan, soon to turn 11, will start his annual SO bowling program any day now. Mathias is a person with Down Syndrome. He bowls, swims laps, runs, ice stakes, square dances, plays softball, basketball, shoots pool. He has never met a ball he didn't like. Ask his teachers and therapy team at Bower Elementary School in Warrenville, Illinois. Ask his two sisters, or his mom.
Mathias and the WDSRA Wildcats (his basketball team) recently completed their season -- it was their best ever. Mathias scored his first points in competition three of the four last games of the season. (Photo: Mathias, far left, and team-mate receive their tournament medals from Coach Bob.)
This morning, Tim Shriver, head of the national Special Olympics program, spoke on Good Morning America and said that President Obama personally had called him from Air Force One to apologize for what the president had said.
Shriver was very good about accepting this apology, but did note the emotional pain that the president had caused. (Which is true.) Then, Shriver took it to a new level. He said the president had provided Americans with "a teachable moment."
But my big question is this:
What do we Americans and American Christians need to learn from (not about) people with disabilities?
This question has haunted me in one form or another since the moment of Mathias' birth, when I held my newborn son for the first time in labor and delivery, and I clearly heard the voice of an angel telling me, "Your son has Down Syndrome." (That was unforgettable!)
Here are four things I have learned from nearly 11 years of teachable moments:
1. A person with a disability should be given the same dignity, respect, and opportunities as everyone else.
2. Exclusion is harmful, inclusion is always welcome, but inviting persons with a disability to be truly integrated into your life is a game-changing experience and a mysterious blessing beyond measure. (And a lot of hard work, too)
3. When we risk allowing the person with a disability to teach us, it makes our shared humanity more visible and helps us see our own limitations in a new light.
4. God, our Father, has deep purpose in allowing people with disability to live among us.
See you at the bowling alley, President Obama.
Posted by Tim Morgan at March 20, 2009 11:41AM | Comments (5)
Sojourners spokesman worries about linking health care reform with abortion.
At First Things, Keith Pavlischek writes:
Jim Wallis has announced in a public interview:
Making abortion provisions part of healthcare reform will kill healthcare reform. . . There are a number of people who believe this is an issue of deep moral conviction and conscience and there are firewalls that if they are breached will really destroy common ground.
"You have to know a little bit about Wallis to understand why this might be important. This past weekend, the New York Times has reported that President Obama has carefully cultivated relationships with at least five influential ministers - all described as evangelical "centrists" - for private sessions of prayer and occasional political advice. One of these is Jim Wallis. As Joe Loconte says in his Weekly Standard article, "Obama's Prayer Warriors", the label "centrist" is not entirely accurate."
Posted by Stan Guthrie at March 19, 2009 8:52AM | Comments (7)
President Obama wants to reduce the "need for abortion", but one of his cheerleaders David P. Gushee published a column with USA Today titled, "Mr. President, we need more than lip service":
"Mexico City, conscience clause, Sebelius, embryonic stem cells. In each case, I have been asked by friends at Democratic or progressive-leaning think tanks not just to refrain from opposing these moves, but instead to support them in the name of a broader understanding of what it means to be pro-life. I mainly refused."
David Gibson calls Gushee's column "buyer's remorse."
Christian conscience requires me to make this case even if it has no chance of prevailing in American society. And if we lose on abortion, as it appears we will lose for a long time to come, Christian conscience requires me to ask the government not to require citizens to pay for procuring services that violate their sacred beliefs.
... And if we lose there, then the entire relationship between religious faith and American society will move into a period of profound crisis.
President Obama, we need more than lip service on these crucial issues. Bring the transformational change your promises led us to hope for.
Gushee isn't the only one dealing with frustration. Frank Page, a member of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships' council, said he hasn't been pleased with some of Obama's policies.
"At this point I would have to say I have been very frustrated that what little protections there are for the unborn have been quickly and systematically removed," Page told the Baptist Press. "So that has very discouraging. I have been somewhat encouraged that he has promised that he would not force someone -- a health-care worker, for example -- to be involved in an abortion if he or she should object on a conscience basis. But other than that, there has been the removal of protections and policies that would have protected the unborn."
Joshua DuBois, director of the Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, will meet with evangelical groups, including the Family Research Council and Concerned Women of America in an effort to find some common ground, Congressional Quarterly reports. Guessing from FRC and CWA priorities, the discussion will likely revolve around abortion.
Update: Eric Gorski has a helpful roundup on how Christians are optimistic but disappointed about Obama's recent moves.
Focus on the Family's CitizenLink writes that Samuel Rodriguez is also disappointed.
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 18, 2009 11:25AM | Comments (8)
President Obama, according an anonymous source speaking to wire services, expects to name a Special Envoy to Sudan, today, March 18. Here's one report:
US President Barack Obama will on Wednesday name retired Air Force general Scott Gration as his special envoy to Sudan to confront what Washington sees as a "horrendous" situation in Darfur. The President "will be naming Scott Gration as special envoy to Sudan," an Obama administration official said on condition of anonymity. The announcement will come as the United States ratchets up pressure on the government of Sudan's President Omar al-Beshir following his expulsion of international aid groups from Darfur that worsened the humanitarian crisis.
CT news is following this story closely and will update this report soon. Scott Gration, of course, is a fascinating choice from my perspective. He was born in DR Congo and his parents were missionaries.
See this Wikipedia entry for details.
The situation in Sudan continues to go from bad to worse even if that seems impossible to imagine. After President Bashir pledged to kick out 13 agencies for their alleged support for the International Criminal Court, the president has now said he wishes to "Sudanize" all aid coming into the nation.
Posted by Tim Morgan at March 18, 2009 11:01AM | Comments (6)
President Obama met today with the nation's top Catholic bishop, Cardinal Francis George of Chicago, after weeks of growing tension over policy changes in the young administration.
George, the president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, met with Obama for 30 minutes to discuss "important opportunities for the government and the Catholic Church to continue their long-standing partnership to tackle some of the nation's most pressing challenges," the White House said in a statement.
Neither the White House nor the bishops' conference would elaborate about the meeting beyond their short statements.
It was the first time Obama and George have met in person since the November election, according to the White House, though they have spoken twice on the phone.
Though Obama and George have both held prominent posts in Illinois, where they met a number of times, they never developed a relationship, the cardinal said last November. Obama, who is Protestant, was a state senator in Illinois from 1997 to 2004, when he was elected to the U.S. Senate.
"It's always been a friendly meeting, never substantive," George said at a November meeting of the USCCB in Baltimore.
On Tuesday, the USSCB said George "expressed his gratitude for the meeting and his hopes that it will foster fruitful dialogue for the sake of the common good."
The U.S. Catholic bishops have blasted Obama recently for opening federal funding to international family planning groups and embryonic stem cell research, while planning to roll back conscience protections for health care workers.
At the same time, Catholic Charities USA and other Catholic advocates have praised Obama's proposed federal budget, which includes funding boosts for health care, affordable housing, food stamps and Medicaid.
Also on Tuesday, Obama sent the nomination of Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius to the Senate for confirmation as secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. A Catholic, Sebelius has angered conservative Catholics -- including her bishop, Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City, Kan. -- for supporting abortion rights. Naumann said last May that Sebelius should not receive Communion unless she
publicly recants.
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 17, 2009 9:31PM | Comments (4)
Our coverage of T.D. Jakes, Kirbyjon Caldwell, Jim Wallis, and Joel Hunter.
Saturday's New York Times reported that President Obama, in lieu of finding a D.C. church home, "has quietly cultivated a handful of evangelical pastors for private prayer sessions on the telephone and for discussions on the role of religion in politics."
Christianity Today has extensively covered four of the five pastors. (Well, we may have articles on Otis Moss deeper in the non-digitized CT archives. We'll keep looking.)
Links to our coverage after the jump.
T. D. Jakes:
T.D. Jakes Feels Your Pain
Though critics question his theology, this fiery preacher packs arenas with a message of emotional healing.
By Lauren F. Winner | posted Feb. 7, 2000
Apologetics Journal Criticizes Jakes
Christian Research Institute publication questions preacher's view of Trinity.
By Douglas LeBlanc | posted Feb. 7, 2000My Views on the Godhead
"Hearsay, not heresy": Jakes responds to Christianity Today's article
By Bishop T. D. JakesInterview: Jakes on the Loose
Bishop T. D. Jakes, whose best-selling book, Woman, Thou Art Loosed! is now a full-length motion picture opening this week, talked to us about the movie and its potential impact.
From Christianity Today Movies | posted Sept. 28, 2004
Kirbyjon Caldwell:
The Minister of 'Good Success'
Meet Kirbyjon Caldwell - megachurch pastor, real-estate whiz, community developer, and the President's spiritual confidant
By Jenny Staff Johnson | posted Oct. 1, 2001
Jim Wallis:
Where Jim Wallis Stands
The longtime activist on abortion, gay marriage, Iraq - and biblical orthodoxy.
Interview by Ted Olsen | posted April 16, 2008Mr. Wallis Goes to Washington
The transformation of an evangelical activist.
By John Wilson | posted June 14, 1999Book review: The Elusive Middle
Jim Wallis's attempt to transcend party politics in The Great Awakening never takes off.
Review by Collin Hansen | posted Apr. 16, 2008
Joel Hunter:
Joel Hunter Leads Blessing for Obama
Evangelical megachurch pastor reflects on the inauguration and gives a few predictions.
Interview by Sarah Pulliam in Washington, D.C. | posted Jan. 23, 2009Joel Hunter Prays with Obama
Evangelical pastor believes the new president-elect will have a listening ear.
Interview by Sarah Pulliam in Washington, D.C. | posted Nov. 6, 2008Joel Hunter's Super Tuesday Take
Florida pastor believes early results show a shift in evangelical trends.
By Sarah Pulliam | posted Feb. 5, 2008
Posted by Ted Olsen at March 16, 2009 1:33PM | Comments (1)
RNC Chairman Michael Steele is creating a big fuss after his interview with GQ where he said women have the right to choose abortion.
Are you saying you think women have the right to choose abortion?
Yeah. I mean, again, I think that's an individual choice.
You do?
Yeah. Absolutely.
Are you saying you don't want to overturn Roe v. Wade?
I think Roe v. Wade - as a legal matter, Roe v. Wade was a wrongly decided matter.
Okay, but if you overturn Roe v. Wade, how do women have the choice you just said they should have?
The states should make that choice. That's what the choice is. The individual choice rests in the states. Let them decide.
Do pro-choicers have a place in the Republican Party?
Absolutely!
Politico's Ben Smith reports that Steele put out this statement:
I am pro-life, always have been, always will be.
I tried to present why I am pro life while recognizing that my mother had a "choice" before deciding to put me up for adoption. I thank her every day for supporting life. The strength of the pro life movement lies in choosing life and sharing the wisdom of that choice with those who face difficult circumstances. They did that for my mother and I am here today because they did. In my view Roe vs. Wade was wrongly decided and should be repealed. I realize that there are good people in our party who disagree with me on this issue.
But the Republican Party is and will continue to be the party of life. I support our platform and its call for a Human Life Amendment. It is important that we stand up for the defenseless and that we continue to work to change the hearts and minds of our fellow countrymen so that we can welcome all children and protect them under the law.
Charmaine Yoest, the president and CEO of Americans United for Life Action responded:
"I think it is very troubling for a public figure, of either party, particularly one who presents himself as pro-life, to describe the abortion issue as being a matter of 'individual choice,'" That is language straight out of Planned Parenthood's messaging playbook," Yoest said she hadn't heard from the RNC. "There are millions of pro-life Americans, Republican and Democrat, who are looking for leadership on the life issue and they will find Mr. Steele's comments disturbing and demoralizing."
Steele also called homosexuality and individual choice, but his comments on abortion are taking the most heat.
Do you think homosexuality is a choice?
Oh, no. I don't think I've ever really subscribed to that view, that you can turn it on and off like a water tap. Um, you know, I think that there's a whole lot that goes into the makeup of an individual that, uh, you just can't simply say, oh, like, "Tomorrow morning I'm gonna stop being gay." It's like saying, "Tomorrow morning I'm gonna stop being black."
So your feeling would be that people are born one way or another.
I mean, I think that's the prevailing view at this point, and I know that there's some out there who think that you can absolutely make that choice. And maybe some people have. I don't know, I can't say. Until we can give a definitive answer one way or the other, I think we should respect that.
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 12, 2009 10:12AM | Comments (19)
Columbia Journalism Review is reporting that the Atlantic’s Ross Douthat will be picking up where Bill Kristol left off at The New York Times. I spoke with Douthat, who is Catholic and in his late 20s, just before the election about where evangelicals fit in the Republican Party. Here's the NYT memo:
Folks:
Some exciting news. We’ve hired Ross Douthat, currently of Atlantic. Ross will be joining the Times staff in mid-April and will be based in the Washington bureau. He will start out primarily online, but will soon be writing with increasing frequency, and then regularity, on the Op-Ed page, in the Monday slot opposite Paul. At some point, he’ll also resume his work as a blogger, which I highly recommend.
If you don’t know Ross, you’ll find him funny and smart and sharp. He’s going to be a great addition to our team. I know you’ll make him welcome.
Andy
By the way, if you stumble over his name like I do, it's "Dow-thut."
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 11, 2009 3:51PM | Comments
Conservatives aren't happy about President Obama's reversal on federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research, Politico's Carrie Budoff Brown writes.
And Dan Gilgoff reports on the faith-based VIPs at President Obama's stem-cell research signing yesterday.
- Maureen Shea, Episcopal Church USA, Director of Government Relations
- James Winkler, United Methodist Church, Secretary of the General Board of Church and Society
- Rabbi Steve Gutow, Jewish Council for Public Affairs
- Rev. Welton Gaddy, Interfaith Alliance
- Nancy Ratzan, National Council of Jewish Women
- Nathan Diament, Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations
- Rabbi David Saperstein, Religious Action Center for Reform Judaism
The Associated Press' Eric Gorski breaks down some of the religious debates surrounding the issue. And Chris Good writes that Rick Warren won't be making a statement on Obama's decision, but last time I checked, Warren doesn't really make many public statements.
In an analysis piece for The New York Times Nicholas Wade writes that while President Obama's reversal of the stem-cell policy will make accounting easier for researchers, research on embryonic stem cells, "though still important, has been somewhat eclipsed by new advances."
[T]he president's support of embryonic stem cell research comes at a time when many advances have been made with other sorts of stem cells. The Japanese biologist Shinya Yamanaka found in 2007 that adult cells could be reprogrammed to an embryonic state with surprising ease. This technology "may eventually eclipse the embryonic stem cell lines for therapeutic as well as diagnostics applications," Dr. Kriegstein said. For researchers, reprogramming an adult cell can be much more convenient, and there have never been any restrictions on working with adult stem cells.
He writes that politicians have often created the hype that embryonic stem cell research would lead to quick cures.
Scientists have not publicly objected to such high-flown hopes, which have helped fuel new sources of grant money like the $3 billion initiative in California for stem cell research.
In private, however, many researchers have projected much more modest goals for embryonic stem cells.
And in case you're looking for more casual reading, Christianity Today has a special section on embryonic stem-cell research.
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 10, 2009 11:21AM | Comments (7)
President Obama just lifted the Bush administration’s limits on human embryonic stem cell research.
Obama also said that the government will never open the door to the use of cloning for human reproduction. "It is dangerous, profoundly wrong, and has no place in our society, or any society," he said.
Yesterday, Charmaine Yoest, president and CEO of Americans United for Life, debated Art Caplan, director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania, over what Charmaine calls "the research of the past."
Around 60 percent of Americans agree with using stem cells derived from human embryos for medical research and 61 percent consider such research morally acceptable, according to Gallup. However, the question of the poll can impact the responses. Gallup asked whether it was morally acceptable or morally wrong to use stem cells from human embryos for medical research.
The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life asked respondents: All in all, which is more important, conducting stem cell research that might results in new cures OR not destroying the potential life of human embryos involved in this research. About 50 percent said conducting research was more important and 35 percent said not destroying embryos was more important. Only 31 percent of evangelicals favored research while 57 percent favored not destroying embryos.
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 9, 2009 12:29PM | Comments (9)
Bush-era compromise removed in the name of "science."
Today President Obama is expected to lift the existing ban on federal funding for research using new lines of stem cells taken from human embryos. Here's how CBS and the AP introduced the news:
President Barack Obama is expected to sign an executive order and memo Monday in an East Room ceremony that will end a divisive policy decision by his predecessor, while sending a clear signal that science - not political ideology - will guide his administration.
So much for objectivity. Actually, President Bush announced the ban in 2001 as a compromise position so that researchers could continue using existing stem cell lines (from which the embryos had already been destroyed), while prohibiting taxpayer money from paying for research that destroys human embryos. In the eight years since the ban was announced, research on human embryos has remained fully legal if funded privately.
It has not been very productive, however. While dozens of treatments using adult stem cells (from which no embryos are destroyed) have been produced for conditions ranging from Parkinson's to autoimmune disorders, the results of research using human embryos have been scarce at best--and sometimes downright scary.
Further, with new research showing that pluripotent cells can be produced from adult stem cell lines, the supposed scientific necessity to destroy human embryos to advance research would seem to be removed. And yet President Bush's compromise is deemed anti-science as all funding restrictions are swept aside (pending the institution of some ethics guidelines), forcing taxpayers to pay for research that many find deeply morally objectionable.
Just who is being ideological, anyway?
Posted by Stan Guthrie at March 9, 2009 9:02AM | Comments (10)
President Obama plans to overturn Bush-era policy Monday that limited federal tax dollars for embryonic stem cell research, according to The Washington Post.
His executive order will overturn President Bush's August 2001 order that barred the National Institutes of Health from funding research on embryonic stem cells. Bush also vetoed legislation that would have expanded federal funded research.
Advocates for embryonic stem-cell research say it would allow scientists to find cures for diseases like Parkinson's. Opponents believe that creating them involves the destruction of human life and they argue that using adult stem cells is good alternative.
Rob Stein writes that Congress is also likely to consider legislation that could prevent any future presidents from creating restrictions.
Picture of Da Vinci's study of cells and a fetus courtesy of Wikimedia Commons
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 6, 2009 4:43PM | Comments (2)
Surprising headline from the San Francisco Chronicle: "Justices seem to be leaning in favor of Prop. 8."
I don't find it surprising because I thought Proposition 8, the California ballot measure that amended the the state constitution to limit marriage to a man and a woman. Legal challenges were inevitable, but Prop. 8's constitutional defeat was not. I'm just surprised the Chronicle's already started the 10 count.
Here's the story:
"There have been initiatives that have taken away rights from minorities by majority vote" and have been upheld by the courts, said Chief Justice Ronald George. "Isn't that the system we have to live with?"
George wrote the majority opinion in the court's 4-3 ruling in May striking down California's ban on same-sex marriages - which voters, in turn, reversed in November by approving Proposition 8, a constitutional amendment defining marriage as being only between a man and a woman.
Another member of last year's majority, Justice Joyce Kennard, said the challenge to Prop. 8 brought by advocates of same-sex marriage involved "a completely different issue" from the court's ruling that the marriage laws violated gays' and lesbians' rights to be treated equally and wed the partner of their choice.
"Here we are dealing with the power of the people, the inalienable right, to amend the Constitution," Kennard said. Speaking to a lawyer for same-sex couples, she said those who want to overturn the voters' decision "have the right to go to the people and present an initiative."
There were some indications of divisions among the justices on the validity of Prop. 8 during the hearing, which lasted more than three hours at the court's San Francisco headquarters. But on a separate issue, all seven appeared to agree that the 18,000 same-sex couples who married before Prop. 8 passed would remain legally wed.
The Los Angeles Times says more of the same. Something that's different and worth reading is this article that Mollie Ziegler Hemingway wrote for Christianity Today before Thursday's California Supreme Court hearing. Here's the lede:
Obnoxious mobs that won't tolerate disagreement don't usually win supporters.
A manager at a Los Angeles Mexican restaurant was targeted for her $100 contribution in support of traditional marriage. Protesters hounded her out of her job, and did the same to a Sacramento theater director and the director of the Los Angeles Film Festival. Churches and Mormon temples were vandalized. The mainstream media ran an all-out public relations campaign in support of same-sex marriage. Hollywood quickly put together "Prop. 8: The Musical," an Internet video that mocked Jesus, the Bible, and Christians.
"Want to cause a nice long backlash to gay rights? That's the way to do it," said lesbian social critic Camille Paglia.
Obnoxious, bigoted mobs that won't tolerate any disagreement don't usually win supporters. Or, as the usually insufferable Objectivist Ayn Rand said, "Argument from intimidation is a confession of intellectual impotence." Of course, if the media are to be believed, same-sex marriage is a done deal. "Same-sex marriage is inevitable. It just takes time," a Seattle Post-Intelligencer columnist wrote.
The conventional wisdom is that traditional marriage is a demographically lost cause. Younger voters are more likely to support same-sex marriage than older voters, we're repeatedly reminded. Indeed, 61 percent of voters over 65 supported Prop. 8, while 61 percent of people under 30 voted against it.
But if history and demographics are on the side of same-sex marriage, one wonders why journalists, Hollywood executives, and gay activists didn't just sit tight and wait. Why voluntarily sabotage their cause with a coordinated campaign of bigoted, violent, and hateful reactions to recent public votes on the matter?
Despite the story pushed by the mainstream media, the only statistics that really matter are at the ballot box. And marriage supporters have been victorious in each of the 33 states that have put the issue up for vote. The only significant success the same-sex marriage crowd has had has been achieved by judicial fiat. In California, a never-before-assembled coalition of evangelicals, Catholics, and Mormons raised $40 million and generated hundreds of thousands of volunteers.
"In spite of repeated efforts by gay activists and mainstream media types to portray this as an issue nobody but the gay-rights people really care about, the Prop. 8 victory itself demonstrates the marriage issue is drawing new attention," said Maggie Gallagher, president of the National Organization for Marriage.
And just because younger voters support same-sex marriage now doesn't mean their attitudes won't change. As people age, they tend to get married, have children, and worship more regularly - all of which weigh heavily in voting decisions.
The violent mobs and sneering media confirm one of the arguments made by traditional marriage proponents: Same-sex marriage and religious freedom are on a collision course.
That collision course came up when I voted no on Prop. 8. I still would prefer to not see government in the business of marriage, but I also don't think government should force religious folks in non-emergency professions to perform services they believe God abhors.
In her article, Mollie notes a few of these cases:
A lesbian couple in Albuquerque successfully sued a Christian photographer because she declined to shoot their commitment ceremony. When Massachusetts legalized same-sex marriage, Catholic organizations had no option but to shut down their adoption services.
The California Supreme Court ruled that doctors must provide reproductive services to lesbians despite religious objections. A Methodist camp in New Jersey lost its tax exemption after it told a lesbian couple they could have their commitment ceremony anywhere except in buildings that are used for religious services. The list goes on.
There is a difference between preaching tolerance and legally mandating acceptance.
(Originally published at The God Blog.)
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 6, 2009 3:14PM | Comments (7)
Remember how Elizabeth Dole lost her North Carolina Senate race after launching a "Godless" ad against her opponent?
Dole's campaign manager Marty Ryall writes for Politics Magazine thinks the two shouldn't be linked together, and he why they took the Hail Mary approach. Ryall's explanation has little to do with religion or faith and everything to do with poll numbers.
The second ad is still on YouTube:
Ryall explains how they debated over what graphics and voiceovers to use for the ad.
The ?rst draft of the "Godless" ad had a picture of Kay Hagan at the end with a graphic that read "What was she thinking?" and a voiceover that said "There is no God." I objected to that because it looked like we were answering the question for her, and that she was thinking there is no God. The group agreed. The next version dropped the graphic, but still had the voice saying, "There is no God." The voice in the ad is the executive director of the Godless American's PAC on a TV appearance with Bill O'Reilly.
It was never an attempt to fake Kay Hagan's voice, or imply that she thinks there is no God. The intention was to provide an exclamation to the ad, showing how radical this group is. In hindsight, that voiceover should not have been in the ad. It gave her another avenue of counter-attack to discredit it.
In the end, he writes, the ad had little impact on the election results.
The risk was huge and not worth taking until it was evident we could not win without it, and that was not clear until about 10 days out. Had the ad run about 20 days out, it may have made it closer, but the data we had at that time did not warrant taking such a large gamble. However, in the end the ad had very little impact if any, in the defeat of Elizabeth Dole.
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 4, 2009 12:20PM | Comments (1)
The U.S. Supreme Court has turned down an appeal from a high school football coach who was banned from bowing his head during student-led team prayers.
Without comment Monday, the nation's highest court ended Coach Marcus Borden's efforts to overturn a township decision that as a public employee, Borden cannot mix religion with his work as a coach.
The high court's decision leaves intact a federal appeals court's April decision that Borden's desire to bow his head and take a knee during team prayer is an endorsement of religious activity at a public school.
Neither Borden, who has been the football coach at East Brunswick High School since 1983, nor his attorney, Ronald Riccio, could be reached for comment.
Borden has been fighting for the right to bow and kneel in prayer with his team since November 2005, when he filed a federal lawsuit arguing the school district's regulations were overly broad. He won a U.S. District Court ruling in July 2006 in which a judge decided those rules were unconstitutional, but that decision was reversed at the appellate level.
Riccio asked the Supreme Court in October to review the appeals court decision, arguing then that Borden's case was of national importance because "it addresses what public school educators are permitted to say and do when public school students engage in religious
activities in their presence."
Richard Katskee, an attorney with Americans United for Separation of Church and State, which represented the board of education in court, said in a prepared statement that "children have a clear right to attend public schools without religious pressures being brought to bear by
school personnel."
"Coach Borden was out of bounds, and the courts were right to blow the whistle," Katskee said. "I hope that other coaches and school personnel learn a lesson from this."
Todd Simmens, president of the East Brunswick Board of Education, in the same statement said "public school officials simply may not engage with students in religious activity."
"The board of education and district officials have, throughout this case, made certain no school employee supervises or otherwise participates in any type of prayer with our students," Simmens said. "Needless to say, the board is pleased that, in this case, the courts reaffirmed this long-standing constitutional principle."
The school district said Borden had a long history of leading prayers before he was ordered to stop after complaints from some parents. Borden resigned as coach in protest of the school board ruling in 2005, but rescinded the resignation within a week and hired Riccio to represent him in his quest to coach the team the way he had for more than two decades.
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 3, 2009 4:07PM | Comments (13)
The Pennsylvania state General Assembly spent $13,700 this year on 220 Bibles and other religious texts for legislators for taking oaths, the Philadelphia Inquirer reports.
All but seven of the 203 House members received one, with 72 picking the New American Catholic Bible, making it the most popular choice.
State Rep. Chris Ross (R., Chester) got a copy of the Quran. He said yesterday that he took the Jan. 6 oath on his own Bible, but ordered the Muslim holy book because he had always wanted to read it.
State Rep. Dan Frankel also got a Quran, but it was an ordering mistake. He traded it in for another copy of the Torah - the sixth he has received from taxpayers since first being elected in 1998.
After it was announced that President Obama would use Abraham Lincoln's Bible, Noreen Malone wrote for Slate about how after Grover Cleveland, it turned into BYOB, where presidents would often bring a family Bible.
(h/t Howard M. Friedman)
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 3, 2009 11:34AM | Comments (5)
A national grass-roots network that came together after the 9/11 terrorist attacks for the sole purpose of praying for the president has lost more than 25,000 members since Barack Obama's election last November.
But in that same time, more than 41,000 have signed up.
For John Lind, president of the Scottsdale, Ariz.-based Presidential Prayer Team, those figures indicate that the ministry that aimed to be nonpartisan when it began in 2001 has lived up to its mission.
"The only ... president we've been under has been (George W.) Bush, so you've got to be realistic and say, `Wow, this could be a substantial dip in our database,' but it wasn't," he said in an interview. "I think it's a positive. It's almost two-to-one new member to unsubscribed."
That doesn't mean it's been a smooth transition for all of the nearly half-million members who receive weekly e-mail updates guiding them in how to pray for the president. Some have sent the ministry messages saying that it has been "very difficult" to move from praying for Bush to praying for Obama.
"I did not want to pray for Obama because I didn't vote for him, but then I realized that I had to pray for him, and it has literally changed my life to pray for him," wrote a woman who only signed her name as "Betty."
"God really changes our hearts if we allow him to do so. So, thank you for your part in getting us all together."
Other team members, like Barbara Brown from Foresthill, Calif., said they realized that they needed to put prayer ahead of politics after Election Day.
Brown was quoted in a recent profile on the ministry's Web site: "I still have to remind some of my Democrat friends that no, President Obama did not inherit all of our nation's problems from President Bush's administration, and I have to remind some of my Republican friends that even though we did not vote for President Obama, he is now our president and he deserves our respect, honor and prayers as commanded by God."
Lind said since the ministry went online in 2001 it has had 1.7 million people take part in its initiatives, which include praying for not only the president and his administration but military members and grandparents.
The site featured several "40 Days to Pray the Vote" projects leading up to the election and "77 Days of Prayer" between Election Day and Inauguration Day. The latest initiative is "Praying Through the 1st 100 Days" of the Obama presidency; more than 31,500 people have signed up for a daily e-mail that provides them with a verse of Scripture and a short prayer at the start of each day.
"It just kind of jump-starts their day," said Lind.
Officials of the ministry say they don't have specific information about the party or church affiliation of their members, but they believe most have traditionally been evangelical Christians.
Peggy Gustave, who directs member services, estimates that about 95 percent are Christian. She is aware of some Jewish members and at least one Baha'i member. On a recent day, she said she received 1,500 e-mail messages.
"I think with some people, they kind of want to be encouraged to pray for this president, even if they see that some of his agenda may not follow their bent," she said. "We refer them back to our mission Scripture, ... which says to pray for those in authority over us. Period."
Lind offered similar encouragement when he recorded his latest message for "Presidential Club" members who donate $25 or more a month to the ministry, saying the prayer efforts for the Obama administration are necessary.
"He and his administration are facing ... enormous things on their plate," Lind said he told them. "We can't let our guard down."
In that message, Lind also mentioned that he and six board members prayed with Bush in person during a 26-minute visit to the Oval Office on his last full day as president.
He called the meeting "just a terrific time."
Bush spokesman Rob Saliterman confirmed that team members met with the former president on Jan. 19.
Lind said team officials hope to have the same opportunity with Obama.
"We've tried to kind of let the dust settle a little bit," he said. "We want an appointment with President Obama."
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 3, 2009 9:37AM | Comments (4)
Buried in an large New York Times Magazine profile of Newt Gingrich is a little nugget of information: A Baptist since graduate school, Gingrich said he will soon convert to Catholicism, his wife's faith.
At a moment when the role of religious fundamentalism in the party is a central question for reformers, Gingrich, rather than making any kind of case for a new enlightenment, has in fact gone to great lengths to placate Christian conservatives. The family-values crowd has never completely embraced Newt, probably because he has been married three times, most recently to a former Hill staff member, Callista Bisek. In 2006, though, Gingrich wrote a book called "Rediscovering God in America" - part of a new canon of work he has done reaffirming the role of religion in public life. The following year, he went on radio with the evangelical minister James Dobson to apologize for having been unfaithful to his second wife.
The Rev. G. Avery Lee, a longtime pastor of St. Charles Avenue Baptist Church in New Orleans who died earlier this year, wrote to The Times-Picayune about Gingrich's faith.
"He was not a member of any church," Pastor Lee wrote in a 1994 letter to The Times-Picayune. "He said that in his study of political theory he noted how much influence the church had had on political theory and asked if I could explain."
After their initial conversation, "We talked often. Newt began coming to church. To make it short, I baptized him (by immersion) into the membership of the St. Charles Avenue Baptist Church.
"He found there a liberal approach to both theology and sociology. . . . Whether our teachings had any effect or not, he was at least exposed to the basic Baptist principle of freedom: personal freedom before God, an open mind before an open Bible, the separation of church and state, and compassion toward other people as sinners saved by the grace of God.
"He also may have learned that we Baptists fuss and fight a lot with each other. It has been suggested by some that in baptizing him, I didn't hold him under long enough."
Update: A Focus on the Family employee emailed me to note that Dobson is not a minister as Matt Bai describes him for The New York Times. Dobson founded a ministry called Focus on the Family.
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 2, 2009 2:41PM | Comments (205)
In the fight over whether to confirm Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius as Secretary of Health and Human Services, traditional pro-lifers will focus on Sebelius's views on late term abortion and other legal restrictions.
Interestingly, pro-life Democrats have continued with an argument they began raising during the campaign: that what matters is not whether one supports legal restrictions but whether one reduces the number of abortions. Catholics United, a liberal pro-life group has launched a pre-emptive strike praising her for cutting the abortion rate by 10%.
Pro-life progressives pushed this line during the campaign, earning both the mockery of traditional pro-lifers and, apparently, the votes of some pro-lifers (a surprising number of whom voted for Obama.)
Here's the rub: abortion rates seem to be most influenced by economic factors. Abortions go up during hard economic time. That means the number of abortions will likely go up under Obama. If Democrats set up abortion reduction as the standard, what will they say if the numbers go up under Obama?
UPDATE: Abortion seems to be shaping up as a big element in the Sebelius fight.
Operation Rescue here attacks her links to the "abortion cartel"
(Originally posted at Steve Waldman's blog at Beliefnet.)
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 2, 2009 2:07PM | Comments (2)
Here are the top 10 politics blog posts from February:
1. Bristol Palin: Abstinence 'not realistic'
2. Obama Signs Executive Order on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships
3. Take That, Hustler!
4. Twittering the National Prayer Breakfast
5. Pope Gives Pelosi a Stern Reprimand
6. Obama Lauds Faith-Based Initiatives, Gives Personal Testimony in Prayer Breakfast Address
7. 12 States Weigh Ultrasound Abortion Bills
8. Pro-Lifers, It Turns Out, Were a Big Part of Obama's Winning Coalition
9. Hillary Clinton: Obama Will Enlist Muslim Help
10. Can Gov. Bobby Jindal Recover?
Posted by Sarah Pulliam Bailey at March 2, 2009 1:09PM | Comments
