What Are We Electing?

I believe one of the evangelical Christian leaders who endorsed Mitt Romney commented that he was supporting him for Commander-In-Chief and not Pastor-In-Chief. Yet, it does seem that a candidate's religion is more important than ever in his or her electability.

Jimmy Carter's run for the Presidency was the start, of course. His campaign brought what was an evangelical sub-culture -those who were "born-again" - to the forefront. In 1976, the country as a whole rushed to understand what we who lived in the South understood instinctively, namely what the phrase "born-again" signified. It is appropriate, I think that the lectionary passage of a few weeks ago was the Johannine story of Nicodemus meeting Jesus.

The conservative Christians who had flocked to support Carter soon abandoned him. With the formation of the Moral Majority, Jerry Falwell and others not only put religion on center stage, but put their particular understanding of religion on center stage. Interestingly, they threw their support to Ronald Reagan in 1980, and the phenomenon of the power of the Religious Right in the Republican Party was born.

Now, though, it seems that many are still more interested in having a Pastor-In-Chief leading the country. The Interfaith Alliance has compiled this list of "Top Ten Moments in the race for 'Pastor-in-Chief.'"
10. Mitt Romney is asked if he believes "every word" of the Bible (CNN/You Tube debate (11-28-07).
9. CNN's Soledad O'Brien asks John Edwards to "name his greatest sin" (CNN/Sojourners town hall 6-26-07).
8. James Dobson tells a reporter he does not think that Fred Thompson is a Christian (3-27-07).
7. Barack Obama distributes a campaign flier describing himself as a "Committed Christian" (1-21-08).
6. Hillary Clinton said we need to "inject faith into policy" (CNN/Sojourners town hall 6-26-07).
5. Mike Huckabee explains his rise in the polls by invoking the Biblical story of two fish and five loaves feeding a crowd of 5,000 people (11-28-07).
4. Tim Russert asks all the Democratic candidates to "name their favorite Bible verse" (MSNBC 9-26-07).
3. John McCain says the Constitution established the United States as a Christian nation and that he would prefer a Christian president (9-27-07).
2. Barack Obama asked a congregation to help him "become an instrument of God" and join him in creating "a Kingdom right here on Earth" (10-17-07).
1. Mike Huckabee tells a crowd: "What we need to do is to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to change God's standards" (1-14-08).

Are these the questions or statements that are really of significance for the President of the United States in 2008? Perhaps, we ought to decide whether there really is a religious test for office in America, despite what the Constitution says, or not.

Hurray for coffee shops

There is much joy in the Chittum household. A new coffeeshop has opened in Demorest. The Grey Eagle Coffee Shop, located on Central Avenue, just a few steps from Piedmont College, has been opened for about a week.

On Friday, after Vicki picked me up from work, we stopped in. The proprietor looks like a Grateful Dead and C,S&N afficiando, though I have no direct knowledge of this. I do know he has a long, gray pony tail.

To make it even better, Tom, you notice we are on first name basis already, serves Thanksgiving Coffee. In case you missed my earlier posting on this company, please look back in the archives. I can see many more visits in days to come.

A Prize Endorsement?

The McCain campaign announced that Pastor John Hagee has publicly endorsed the senator. This is interesting on many fronts.

Within the Republican Party, going back to the days of Ronald Reagan, if a candidate did not have the imprimatur of the evangelicals (aka, quite conservative Christians), there was no hope for advancement. McCain has been struggling to shore up his conservative credentials, even as he has been vilified by many in the pantheon of Republican/conservative talk show radio hosts, e.g. as in Limbaugh's attacks on him. Now, McCain has gratefully accepted this endorsement that must be seen as manna from heaven for the campaign.

Mike Huckabee has long been thought to be the only legitimate choice for conservative Christians. Huckabee's credentials would seem to be impeccable. He is an ordained Southern Baptist minister; he supports all of the "right" causes in the "right" way, and then some - Huckabee has gone on record supporting a Colorado bill calling a fertilized egg "a person"; he even preached at Hagee's mega-cathedral at Christmas time. This endorsement must be a bitter blow to Huckabee, despite other conservative Christian leaders who have suported him.

The only problem with all of this for many Americans - and I would hope many Republicans -would be some of the stands that Hagee has taken. Hagee is one who claims that Hurricane Katrina was God's punishment on New Orleans for their tolerance of homosexuality. Hagee opposes any concessions by the Israeli government to bring about a lasting peace in the Middle East; instead, he has criticized cease-fires, believing that Israel should go through and eliminate all of the Muslim groups that "threaten" the nation. In fact, Hagee seems to support a joint Israeli-American pre-emptive strike against Iran.

I have to wonder whether this endorsement is as much of a prize as McCain's campaign suggests. Since many political talking heads called for Obama to distance himself from the views of his pastor, will they do the same for McCain and Hagee? It will be interesting to see.

American Religious Landscape

Much is being made of the new Pew Center Report on religion in America (http://pewforum.org/) and rightly so. The survey got responses from more than 35,000 people across the country so that a better picture of the nature of the American religious landscape can be seen.

Most of the news reports about the survey that I have read zero in on the shifting religious affiliation of the American people. Respondents to the survey were asked to identify in what faith group they were raised as a child and what their current religious affiliation is. There were clear gainers and losers in this. The two groups that had the most significant net loss are the Catholics, with a 7.5% loss, and the Baptists, with a 3.7% loss. The two groups with the largest net gain are the Unaffiliated, with a gain of 8.8%, and the non-denominational, with a gain of 3.0%. This puts the Unaffiliated segment as the fourth largest 'religious' group in the country.

I am still reading the survey, so I reserve the right to comment on it again, but I do wonder what any of you who may be reading this think about these trends and whether you have 'switched' religious affiliation.

My previous attempts at generating 'audience participation' on this blog have been wildly unsuccessful. Yet, hope springs eternal and all that, so I invite comments - operators are standing by.

To Be Fair

In my post entitled "To Hijab or Not To Hijab," I mentioned a school in Kansas that refused to allow a female basketball official call the high school male basketball team's game. The early report I read indicated that the school official said that it was because they do not believe a woman should have authority over males.

I have now found the press release from the school. I shall post it in its entirety and let the school official speak for himself.

Press Release - February 19, 2008

It was falsely alleged and widely reported that the decision of St. Mary’s Academy not to allow a woman referee to officiate at a basketball game was based upon the idea that women can never have authority over men. This alleged reason was neither stated nor is it held by any official of St. Mary’s Academy, as evidenced by the fact that the faculty and staff of St. Mary’s includes many honorable ladies of talent and erudition. Logically, St. Mary’s Academy, a Catholic institution, adheres in spirit and discipline to Divine Law. The Fourth Commandment obliges due honor to father and mother, as well as to all authority.

St. Mary’s Academy follows the directives of the Catholic Church regarding co-education. The Church has always promoted the ideal of forming and educating boys and girls separately during the adolescent years, especially in physical education (Cf. Divini Illius Magistri - Encyclical on the Christian Education of Youth, by Pope Pius XI, 1929 and The Instruction of the Sacred Congregation of Religious on Co-Education, A.A.S., 25 (1958) pp. 99-103). This formation of adolescent boys is best accomplished by male role models, as the formation of girls is best accomplished by women. Hence in boys’ athletic competitions, it is important that the various role models (coaches and referees) be men.

In addition, our school aims to instill in our boys the proper respect for women and girls. Teaching our boys to treat ladies with deference, we cannot place them in an aggressive athletic competition where they are forced to play inhibited by their concern about running into a female referee.

Rev. Fr. Vicente A. Griego
Headmaster, St. Mary’s Academy

Now, nothing that Father Griego wrote actually shows that he does not hold the view attributed to him. All he said was that such a view is not held by me or anyone at the school. There can be many honorable women of talent on the staff, and he could still hold the view attributed to him.

Giving him the benefit of the doubt, though, do you buy the reasons he does give? Is it any better that he does not want a woman providing educational instruction for the "boys" in his school? His authority dates back to 1929 and 1958, not necessarily known for progressive ideas on gender roles. Furthermore, as a referee for a 32 minute high school basketball game - I think HS games are 4-8 minute quarters- I do not know that having a female official actually falls into the realm of role model - proper or not. Lastly, rarely is "running into" the ref any problem in a basketball game.

It might just be me, but I still think his reasons are flawed.

Necessary Reminders

This afternoon was the 17th Annual Celebration put on by the Alliance for African-American Music. Piedmont College and Covenant Congregational Church have been actively involved in this group for many years, so I am part of the Alliance and serve as Publicity Chair. The goal of the group is simple; using music, we work to create a muti-cultural, multi-racial, and inter-generational music program on an annual basis. Additionally, we collect an offering that funds a scholarship in music for a minority student at Piedmont College. Obviously, this is a fitting event for Black History Month.

The choir from the Shady Grove Baptist Church, an African-American congregation, closed the program, which was held at the Level Grove Baptist Church, a white SBC congregation. Bishop Burns, the pastor of Shady Grove, led the closing benediction. As he spoke in appreciation of the participants and worshippers at the event, he reminded us all that, at one time, his church would not have been welcome inside this year's host church.

Now, I am not a person of privilege. My family was not upper-class or even upper-middle class. Our home was in the "not as nice" part of town. I was the first in my immediate family group to graduate from college. Still, I know that, as a white male, I have enjoyed certain benefits just because I am a white male, even if they were not always immediately obvious to me.

Bishop Burn's comment and my reflections on my status put me in mind of an item in the latest issue of Christian Century. The item related a story from David Novak, a Jewish theologian, who was walking down the street in a southern town in 1963. The gutters of the street were filled with mud because of a heavy rain during the night. As Novak approached the synagogue where he would attend Yom Kippur services, an older black woman approached him. She stepped off the sidewalk, into the muddy gutter, to let him pass by on the sidewalk. According to the item, in remarking on the encounter, Novak said, '"So, on the holiest day of the year, when I was supposed to feel that I was being cleansed before God, I felt profoundly dirty, not for what I had done, but for what I represented" to this woman ...' I wonder how many people have figuratively 'stepped into the gutter' because of what I represented to them. I wonder how many have done so because of you?