Watch What You Witch For

The Religious Right has been laboring (and lobbying) for decades to get "religion" back into school. By "religion" I mean "Christianity", and by "Christianity" I mean "Really Scary Radical Right Wing Christianity". The debate over providing taxpayer-funded vouchers for students to attend private, religious schools continues to rage on. The Bush White House has even established a White House Office of Faith Based and Community Initiatives to coordinate the investment of greater sums of public money into religious ventures.

Whether or not this is all a good thing or a bad thing, it is a safe bet that Wicca is NOT what the White House and its faith-based allies were thinking of as they schemed to saturate the public square with religion. Be that as it may, there may be a new Wiccan applicant sending in grant proposals for Faith-Based funding in the near future. Maryland resident Elwood "Bunky" Bartlett hit the jackpot through the Maryland lottery recently. The devout Wiccan has since pledged to use a portion of his new found fortune to open up a Wicca school. Wicca, of course, is a Pagan religious practice derived from ancient Celtic and Druidic belief systems. It has been wrongly characterized as Satanic for centuries by mainstream religious authorities, and persecuted as such. Although American communities are no longer in the official practice of burning heretics at the stake, to this day there is a decidedly negative backlash against Wicca and other Pagan practices on the part of conservative, evangelical Christians.

Bunky Bartlett: WBAL TV 11


However, Mr. Bartlett's actions may mark a growing acceptance of Wicca in the United States. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs recently approved of the use of Wiccan symbols on veterans' headstones. Now, instead of atheists and monotheists monopolizing the argument over whether to take the phrase "under God" out of the Pledge of Allegiance, Bunky and the Wiccans can join the fray and argue that the phrase should read "under the gods and goddesses." Even if they don't win that argument, I hope they get a fair chunk of George W.'s faith-based money. Blessed Samhain! Happy Halloween!

-Doug L.

Celtic Harpists


FOR FURTHER REFERENCE:

"Study Finds Worst Performance in Conservative Christian Schools", by Diana Jean Schemo (CommonDreams.org, July 15, 2006)

Pagan Studies.org

Celtic Druidism (Religious Tolerance.org)

Chalice Centre.net

New Order of Druids (DruidCircle.net)

Wicca: A Neopagan, earth-centered religion (ReligiousTolerance.org)

The Real Meaning of Halloween, by Starhawk (Washington Post OnFaith, October 30, 2007)

Samhain- The Eve of All Hallow (Ireland for Visitors.com)

Rudy Giuliani for Prez? Don't Hold Your Breath

What kind of Catholic is Rudy Giuliani? The rare kind who apparently believes that as an anti-government insurrectionist, Jesus Christ should not only have been flogged and crucified, but waterboarded as well.

Now, of course, if you were to ever ask Rudy if Jesus Christ should have been waterborded by the Romans, he would likely give you his patented Giuliani contemptuous response, making reference to how he is a life-long Catholic, Jesus is more important to him than any of his wives, past present and future, yadda, yadda, yadda. Fair enough. BUT, put Rudy in the shoes of Pontius Pilate, and you'd likely see Jesus strapped to the water board on His way to the whipping post, and finally the cross.

What do I base any of this on? Why, Rudy's own comments on the subject. This past week, asked to define whether or not waterboarding amounts to torture, Rudy bravely equivocated, stating, "It depends on how it's done. It depends on the circumstances. It depends on who does it." So, based upon Rudy's worldview of who the good guys and bad guys are (United States= Good, "Islamofacists" and Enemy Combatants= Bad), waterboarding might be fine. For example, if it's done by Americans in the name of the War on Terror, or by Roman Centurions who are "interrogating" the alleged leader of an anti-government insurrection movement. Rudy didn't just equivocate as to the question of who, he even said that it depends on HOW waterboarding is done before you can classify it as torture. So, just to clarify things for Hizzoner: the circumstances of why, where and to whom waterboarding is done may vary on a case-by-case basis, but the how never does. I refer you to the easy-to-read illustrated chart (above) provided free of charge. Please memorize its contents so that you never have to give such a lame and evasive answer to such an elementary question ever again.

Rudy's comment about how whether or not waterboarding constitutes torture "depends upon who does it" is at least consistent with his overall selective approach to personal morality and accountability. For example, as a former federal prosecutor it is hard to fathom that Rudy has any sympathy for criminals as lowly as pedophiles. True in general, except for when it comes to Monsignor Alan J. Placa, his special priest friend of over thirty years. Never mind that the Catholic Church has ordered Monsignor Placa to cease performing his priestly duties while the molestation charges against him are under investigation. His personal loyalty to Rudy means that even though his high-profile gig with the Church is on hold, there is always a place for him at Giuliani Partners. It sounds like a really plum job, but what about his vow of poverty? Then again, if he couldn't keep his vow of celibacy...

With regard to the charges facing, and his own association with Fr. Placa, Rudy had this to say: "We give some of the worst people in our society presumption of innocence and the benefit of the doubt." Sure, Rudy. If they are Catholic priests who molest kids, absolutely, right? "Enemy Combatants" held indefinitely without charge at Gitmo? Fuggedaboutit.

So here we have a Catholic candidate for the Republican presidential nomination who:

• Supports gay rights;

• Is pro-choice;

• Is in favor of interrogation techniques that constitute torture; and

• Sees nothing wrong with his continued association with an accused pedophile who has been suspended by the Church until further notice.

Which brings me to the American Catholic Church. Of the four policy positions listed above, I actually happen to share the first two with Rudy. I also happen to know that the Catholic Church shares none of these. Even so, of the four of these, which position of Giuliani's has him in hot holy water with at least one American Catholic bishop? You guessed it: he is pro-choice. I point this out not to argue whether or not one position or the other is right or wrong. I point it out to ask: is this how narrow the agenda of the American Catholic Church has become, that it will only rouse itself to publicly speak out about a political candidate's position on abortion while ignoring his position on torture? Wasn't Jesus Christ a victim of state-sponsored torture? Why in God's name isn't there any official condemnation of Giuliani's pro-torture stance on the part of the Church? Is the Church's pro-life agenda limited purely to being anti-abortion? Is serving as a vehicle for the conservative political agenda now as, or more, important than preaching and living the Gospel? Or have some conservative Catholic leaders managed to conflate the two?

Some American Catholic leaders may apply the term pro-life more liberally than others, but the fact is that the conservative movement has grown in strength within both the Catholic clergy as well as the laity. Over the past twenty-to-thirty years, conservative Catholics have mobilized into a highly influential voting bloc, and are also counted among those who shape as well as make public policy. Five of the 9 members of the U.S. Supreme Court are now Roman Catholic. The bishop of the Archdiocese of Washington, DC presides over the annual Red Mass to inaugurate each new Supreme Court session. Conservative Catholic publications such as First Things and Crisis are highly influential voices, both in official Washington and across the country. Why, with American Catholics enjoying such prominent positions of power and influence, it is hard to fathom why some of their brethren continue to conduct themselves like minority members of the lunatic fringe with a persecution complex.

This is all to ask, what happened to my Church? The Church of my youth thundered against the immorality of funding a nuclear arms race at the expense of impoverished children and families. The Church of my youth boldly asserted that the Gospel of Jesus Christ proclaims a preferential option for the poor, a summons to all people to treat the needs and concerns of the poor as their own. And now? When it isn't liquidating diocesan assets in order to pay for sex abuse settlements, its bishops limit their moral outrage to publicly inveighing against pro-choice politicians and threatening to withhold communion. I haven't heard of any such threat regarding Giuliani's position on torture, or even his support for the Iraq War which the American bishops opposed.

And so, shameless, mendacious politicians like Rudy Giuliani can crow about the merits of torture, equivocate about what actually constitutes torture, and the most the American Catholic Church does in response is to condemn his tacit support for a woman's Constitutionally-protected right to have an abortion. How so truly sad I am, for my Church and for my country. In recent memory, the American Catholic Church was a voice of moral authority on a broad range of social and moral issues, and was beholden to no party or politician. Nowadays, official Church teaching often seems to resemble a dogma chasing its own infallible tail. At a time in our history when true moral authority is sorely needed from both our religious and political leaders, it is found to be grievously lacking in both.

- Doug L.

FOR FURTHER REFERENCE (UPDATED, November 3,2007):

"Let's drink some Mountain Dew and go waterboarding!" (Jon Stewart, Comedy Central's The Daily Show, November 1, 2007)

Rudy's BFF: Fr. Placa, or "Priest F"


Voice of the Faithful

What is the Red Mass (History News Network, October 4, 2005)

NY Times, AP reported Donohue's criticism of Edwards campaign bloggers -- but ignored Donohue's own controversial comments and inconsistent outrage (MediaMatters.org, February 7, 2007)

"Rudy Awakening." (WashingtonMonthly.com, October 24, 2007)

"Rudy on Waterbording." (WashingtonMonthly.com, October 25, 2007)

"Ex-Partner of Giuliani May Face Charge." (Washington Post, March 31, 2007)

"Neocon Catholic leaders nurtured by GOP and Conservative Philanthropy on their heels", by Bill Berkowitz (MediaTransparency.org, September 23, 2007)

CIA's Harsh Interrogation Techniques Described (ABCNews.go.com, November 18, 2005)

Faithful Citizenship: A Catholic Call to Political Responsibility (U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, October 2003)

In Brazil, Pope to Face A Church Losing Hold (Washington Post, May 9, 2007)

Instruction on Certain Aspects of the "Theology of Liberation", by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Prefect, Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, August 6, 1984

Liberation Theology.org

Just Peace.org: Seven Sermons of Oscar Romero for Lent

Ann Coulter: Jesus Christ's Happy Little Helper

The Christian faith teaches that the perfection of the self and salvation of the soul come from total supplication to Jesus Christ through His instrument on Earth. Now, each Christian denomination likes to claim the title of said instrument, but let's be honest, we all know who the real tool is: Ann Coulter. As if her mission to hate in the name of Jesus Christ and the Republican Party aren't admirable enough, she is now apparently on a mission to perfect Jews, i.e, convert them to Christianity. Leah Kauffman of Obama Girl fame is even on board.

Leah Kauffman: Perfect Me

So, let's hear it for the bestest little example of Gospel-based love and inclusion ever produced by the Republican Hate Machine. Anyone else out there interested in hopping on the Federal Conversion Express for an express conversion with Ann Coulter? I didn't think so.

-Doug L.

FOR FURTHER REFERENCE:

On CNBC's The Big Idea, Coulter said that "we" Christians "just want Jews to be perfected" (MediaMatters.org, October 10, 2007)

Jews Not Perfect Enough for Ann Coulter (Gothamist.com, October 11, 2007)

Come On, People, Ann Coulter Needs Some Attention! (HuffingtonPost.com, October 11, 2007)

Free To Be You and Me (and Us)

Interfaith people- couples, families- we're special. Sure, we don't like to crow about it, but let's face it- we made some unique and bold choices to be in the relationships we're in. We like breaking new ground. For the most part we come from families who were expecting to pass on familiar traditions, religious and cultural, for us to in turn pass on to our own children. Instead, we have broken the link in the chain of traditional purity, eschewing orthodoxy in order to pursue something else that spoke to us. I can only speak for myself, of course, but I think it's safe to generally say that for those of us in interfaith relationships we saw, and see, value in relationships that transcend theology and dogma. I am personally very happy to see Christians and Jews dating and marrying in greater numbers. I think that there is real power in current generations of young people refusing to perpetuate ancient animosities and hurts, refusing to see either religion as flawed or "less than", refusing to let differences in religious heritage and upbringing to stand in the way of a loving human relationship.

However... the tug of tradition and familial ties is strong. We may be perfectly happy in our interfaith relationship, and still feel the pang of longing for something more familiar and comforting. At the same time we are confronted with the question of identity: Who are you? If I am no longer intending to raise my children in the Catholic tradition, what exactly is my plan? Who or what am I? If I don't want them to be exclusively Jewish either, what alternative do I propose? Who will they be? I could ask the rabbi at the neighborhood synagogue to split the difference- throw in some Gospel readings every so often, but don't worry about serving communion. Or maybe the neighborhood parish priest wouldn't mind reciting the Sh'ma at the beginning of Mass and adding a Torah reading to the service. Right. I'm sure I'd get real far with either of these.

Nor should I. I mean, I made the choice to pursue a non-traditional life path as far as faith and religion are concerned. There's nothing about my right to make that choice that obligates traditional faith communities to rearrange themselves to accommodate what I am looking for. That's on me. That's on us.

The Good News (technically not the Gospel variety, but obviously related) is that we are not alone, neither in our choice to marry outside of our respective faiths, nor in our pursuit of worship space and worship experience that does combine various aspects of our traditions. A wonderful example of this pluralistic approach in action is The New Seminary in New York City. The seminary's motto is, "Never instead of, always in addition to." The basic approach of the seminary appears to be one of teaching respect and reverence for all religions as legitimate paths to God. Seminarians are not asked to convert to a faith that is not their own, or to otherwise leave the faith they were raised in in order to enroll. The seminary is not about creating a pan-religion amalgam that homogenizes all religions into one mega-faith. Instead, the New Seminary simply refuses to demand that seminarians make the false choice between this or that faith, or to otherwise see more value in one faith and less value or "truth" in all others. The seminary states that "We believe that it is not the form of religious practice that is important, but the spiritual intent that underlies it. We recognize that God is in all things and in ALL people." And as I wrote in an earlier post, "it is no irreverence or betrayal to participate fully in the rituals and sacraments of faith traditions different than one's own."

The work of the New Seminary should be celebrated and applauded by those of us in interfaith relationships. The most threatening aspect of our relationships, to religious institutions, to family members, and even to ourselves sometimes, is the fear that nothing of our faith traditions and heritage will be passed on to our children because we're too busy dancing around the notion that you can only be Jewish, Christian, Muslim, or whatever other faith, but you cannot be both. For what it's worth, I'm with the New Seminary on this one- yes, you can.

Free to Be You and Me (Title Track)

Bottom Line: Who are we? I believe that as interfaith couples we are called to be trail blazers and examples to the wider community. We are called to move beyond the fear-driven false choice of either/or. Self-segregating ourselves within our traditional faith communities has obviously not resulted in a more harmonious worldwide human community. To demonstrate that we have the courage of our convictions we need to see the value in truly interfaith worship, in forging new paths towards being "both" in our respective households.

Yes, our respective faith traditions are beautiful and have their own unique character and history. However, this only has real value as far as our families and communities are concerned when we demonstrate how our unique faith and cultural heritages can also make room in our homes for our spouses traditions as well. We celebrate our spouses' traditions not instead of our own, but in addition to these. In doing so we serve as role models of peace, humility and respect for our children and for society in general. We keep what is good and beautiful about our traditions leaving behind the tendency to use these as an excuse to keep ourselves separate from others who are different. "Never instead of, always in addition to." Shalom.

-Doug L.

The Who: Who Are You?


FOR FURTHER REFERENCE:

On Interfaith, by Rabbi Roger Moss (NewSeminary.org)

Bad Girl's Guide: Inter-Faith Relationships (Vixentales.blogspot.com, September 13, 2007)

Am I a Person or a Jew? (Jewish Atheist blog, July 30, 2007)

Questions and Answers About Raising a Child in a Multi-Religious Family, by Racheline Maltese (Associated Content.com, June 6, 2006)

Debating The Year of Living Biblically (Slate.com)

Interfaith Observations, Pt. 1 (Way Is Vast blog, October 10, 2007)

"Faith space opens: Old Union facility promotes interfaith worship." (The Stanford Daily, October 9, 2007)

How Does God Speak in Interfaith America? (Mainstream Baptist blog, October 8, 2007)

God Big Enough to Embrace All, by Bishop John Shelby Spong (Washington Post On Faith, April 13, 2007)

The Center for Progressive Christianity

Tikkun Magazine

Network of Spiritual Progressives

Homophobic Hall of Hypocrisy

It's a big world, and I'm the first to acknowledge that everyone is entitled to his or her own personal opinion on any topic. The one thing I ask is that a person back up his or her opinions with the appropriate corresponding behavior. For example, if you are a high ranking Vatican Monsignor who is in full support of the Catholic Church's teaching that homosexuality is inherently disordered, please don't let yourself get caught on camera hitting on a young gay man. Or, if you are a member of Congress with a long history of publicly opposing any bill offering any legal protections for members of the BGLT community, please do not tap dance your way into a police sex sting in the men's room of the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport.

If you are detecting a theme here, then you've got more on the ball than certain hypocrites serving as public figures. I'm specifically referring to the growing number of prominent conservatives, religious leaders and public servants, who rant and rail against homosexuality in order to agitate voters and members of their congregation. Recreationally speaking, though, it seems as though they have more than a passing interest in this "sin" that they constantly flog in public. As the line from one of my favorite songs goes, "My father was a deacon who would often wake up reekin' of the sins he had condemned the day before."

Unkosher Jesus Homophobic Hall of Hypocrisy: Fall Edition, 2007

SENATOR LARRY CRAIG (R-IDAHO):

What can you say about a public official who has a
100% Homophobic Voting Record while leading a double-life as an airport bathroom hustler. In the past ten years, Sen. Craig has voted on bills affecting the lives of gay Americans as follows:

• 1996: Voted YES on the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) prohibiting same-sex marriage.

• 2000: Voted NO on expanding hate crimes to include sexual orientation.

• 2002: Voted NO on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes.

• 2006: Voted YES on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage.

• 2006: Voted YES on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage.

His wide stance notwithstanding, he has taken a very narrow stance when it comes to the question of gay rights. Then, after stating that he would resign his Senate seat in the wake of the scandal, Craig switched positions again, vowing remain in the Senate and fight to clear his name. Oh, really? Maybe I'll let Amy Poehler and Seth Myers have the last word on that one...

MONSIGNOR TOMMASO STENICO (RC-VATICAN)
SITUATION: Responded to an Internet solicitation for a gay sex encounter that turned out to be a sting operation to out gay clergy.
BEST LINE: Stenico's claim that he engaged gay men in sexual banter "to better understand this mysterious and faraway world which, by the fault of a few people-- among them some priests -- is doing so much harm to the Church."

This stuff is funny only in the sense that it is somehow satisfying to see a hypocrite suffer public humiliation for his own actions. It is not funny, though, because, in the case of the careers of these two men, the real victims of their hypocrisy are the gay men and women whose lives have been so negatively impacted by the actions of these men and their like-minded colleagues. Vilifying gay people for any reason, political, religious or otherwise, is sinful. Vilifying gay people from a position of power while you yourself are gay- that is just sad and loathsome.

The root of the word humiliation is humiliare, or "to humble". Sometimes the good that can come from painfully humiliating public scandals such as these is that the humiliated party comes away from his experience a little wiser, a little more humble. Looks like the value of these "teachable moments" have been wasted on Senator Craig and Monsignor Stenico. As Jesus Himself said, "Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet." I guess some piggies never learn.

- Doug L.

FOR FURTHER REFERENCE (UPDATED, November 10, 2007):

The Windy, Windy Night, by Sycamore Smith


Florida state Rep. Bob Allen guilty in bathroom-sex case (Orlando Sentinel, November 10, 2007)

"Pressured" resignation in another GOP gay scandal (RawStory.com, October 31, 2007)

Larry Craig Spoofs (Wonkette.com, October 9, 2007)

Priest only "pretending" to be gay (CNN.com, October 14, 2007)

"Haggard Says that He Is 'Completely Heterosexual'." (Denver Post, February 6, 2007)

"Foley Built Career as Protector of Children." (Washington Post, October 1, 2006)