Islam-Muslims

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In Afghanistan, believers in religious minorities have every reason to go underground

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,
In Afghanistan, believers in religious minorities have every reason to go underground

There's a logical reason that Taliban forces have not been accused of destroying any churches in Afghanistan.

"That's the dirty little secret. There were no churches before the Taliban returned to power," said Nina Shea, director of the Hudson Institute's Center for Religious Freedom and a human-rights activist for 30 years. "Christians were already underground because of the constant threats to their lives, so they didn't have any church buildings to blow up."

Everyone remembers the shocking videos when desperate Afghans chased a U.S. military plane on a Kabul runway, pleading to be among those evacuated. At least two people fell to their deaths after clinging to a plane during takeoff.

Ever since, there have been reports about the dangers faced by those left behind, especially Afghans with ties to the U.S. military, the fallen government or workers in secular or religious non-profit groups that remained behind to continue humanitarian work.

Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, Ahmadis, Shia Muslims and members of other religious minorities are also living in fear.

"They are all on the run. They are all in hiding," said Shea, reached by telephone. "People are being hunted down and beaten and are threatened with death if they don't betray members of their families who are considered apostates" by the Taliban.

It's impossible not to discuss religious freedom during this crisis, she added. "Everything the Taliban does is about religion. Religion is involved when they hang people for violating their approach to Islamic law or when they attack women and girls who want to go to school. For the Taliban, this is all connected."

The problem is that religious freedom concerns are often drowned out during debates about politics, economics, climate change and other issues in violent flashpoints around the world.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , ,

Plug-In: Five key story angles linked to Texas synagogue where hostages were taken

, , , , , , , ,
Plug-In: Five key story angles linked to Texas synagogue where hostages were taken

When I first saw news on social media of a ranting man taking hostages at a Texas synagogue Saturday, I immediately clicked the link to an Associated Press report.

To my shock, I discovered that the standoff involved Congregation Beth Israel in Colleyville, Texas.

I first wrote about that suburban congregation nearly two decades ago when I covered religion for AP in Dallas.

In 2004, I did a national feature on “frequent-flier rabbis” filling a need at then-fledgling Congregation Beth Israel and other small Jewish congregations across the nation. That same year, I wrote about Anna Salton Eisen, one of the congregation’s founders, and her Holocaust survivor father, George Lucius Salton.

Just this past October — 17 years later — Eisen trusted me to tell her family’s story again. I wrote a follow-up piece for AP on a surprising “reunion” between Eisen and the children of several Holocaust survivors who were in concentration camps together.

“I started this synagogue with two other families and am heartbroken and fearful,” Eisen wrote on Facebook on Saturday. “What has become of the world?”

I shared her status on my page and asked my friends to pray for a peaceful end. I was so relieved when Rabbi Charlie Cytron-Walker and two other hostages escaped unharmed Saturday night. A fourth hostage was released earlier. The FBI hostage rescue team shot the gunman.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Do athletes have a moral duty to protest Chinese authoritarianism? How about Elon Musk?

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Do athletes have a moral duty to protest Chinese authoritarianism? How about Elon Musk?

Do elite international athletes have a moral responsibility to publicly comment or act in a way that acknowledges their awareness of oppressive — or worse — political conditions in nations in which they compete?

Do societal moral standards require them to speak up, even when criticism and confrontation jeopardize their ability to compete and may threaten to derail an entire career?

The Beijing Winter Olympics — scheduled to begin in early February in and around China’s capital city — makes this a timely question.

Several democratic nations have announced “diplomatic” boycotts of the Beijing competition. They include the United States, Australia, Britain, Canada, Denmark, and Japan. (To be clear: democratic claims alone do not necessarily stifle a nation’s darker impulses and render it “moral.”)

That means that no political office holders from the the boycotting nations will attend these Games, but qualifying athletes are free to make their own choices about competing.

The following paragraphs from the above linked Washington Post article explain the limits on free speech China is demanding (with International Olympic Committee acquiescence).

The IOC has said athletes will be free to express themselves during the Games as long as they abide by IOC rules barring any demonstrations during sporting events or medal ceremonies.

Athletes could raise any number of issues, including allegations of cultural genocide against the Uyghurs in Xinjiang, the erasure of civil freedoms in Hong Kong, and the arrests of human rights lawyers, activists and outspoken Chinese citizens. [Note that the Post left Tibetan issues, a major international sticking point for the West, off this list.]

But Chinese authorities are extremely sensitive to criticism about the country’s human rights record, its role in the outbreak of the covid-19 pandemic, and even the country’s efforts during the Korean War.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , ,

Plug-In: A fascinating look back at the last year in the life of the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.

, , , , , , , , , , , ,
Plug-In: A fascinating look back at the last year in the life of the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Today is Martin Luther King Jr. Day, a day of remembrance for the influential civil rights leader.

Adelle M. Banks, longtime national reporter for Religion News Service, marks the holiday with a fascinating look back at King’s last full year of life.

Among the details that Banks uncovered in a review of RNS’ 1967 archives: The Baptist pastor’s “growing outspokenness against the Vietnam War and his advocacy for the poor, while it garnered support from celebrities such as Dr. Benjamin Spock, drew criticism from evangelist Billy Graham and others.”

Banks, a 27-year RNS veteran, spearheaded an exceptional 2018 project on the 50th anniversary of King’s April 4, 1968, assassination.

Those stories, still worth a read, include:

• Remembering King’s last sermon with renewed hope

• A faithful journey from cotton field to White House: Q&A with a sanitation worker

• Three Memphis sites key to King’s legacy draw visitors

Power up: The week’s best reads

1. Why the Catholic Church Is losing Latin America: “The rise of liberation theology in the 1960s and ’70s, a time when the Catholic Church in Latin America increasingly stressed its mission as one of social justice, in some cases drawing on Marxist ideas, failed to counter the appeal of Protestant faiths,” report the Wall Street Journal’s Francis X. Rocca, Luciana Magalhaes and Samantha Pearson.

“Or, in the words of a now-legendary quip, variously attributed to Catholic and Protestant sources: ‘The Catholic Church opted for the poor and the poor opted for the Pentecostals.’”

The Journal’s story from Brazil follows The Associated Press’ recent trend piece (highlighted in last week’s Plug-in) on a surge of evangelicals in Spain, fueled by Latin Americans.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Talking to Jesus? This is big New York Times news when a Hollywood spiritualist is involved

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Talking to Jesus? This is big New York Times news when a Hollywood spiritualist is involved

Let’s see. If you were going to write a New York Times article in which someone claimed to be channeling the Buddha, would you, at some point, talk to Buddhists? Maybe even a scholar whose work is rooted in Buddhist thought?

What about Judaism? If someone was claiming to channel Moses, would you talk to a rabbi or two about that? Maybe a scholar who has studied Jewish mysticism?

How about Islam? How would a reporter approach the claims of someone who says she is channeling Mohammad? And what would Islamic believers think of this process?

With these questions in mind, let’s look at that chatty first-person piece that ran more than a month ago at the Times with this headline: “In Good Spirits — Carissa Schumacher channels the dead for her A-list celebrity clients. But most days, she’s in the forest.”

The headline omits the big reveal: Schumacher claims to channel the spirits of the dead, including her most famous connection — Jesus. This is tricky territory, as demonstrated in the wild correction at the end of this long feature:

Correction: Nov. 29, 2021

An earlier version of this article described incorrectly the biblical name Yeshua. The name refers to multiple people, including Joshua; it does not refer solely to Jesus Christ. The article also referred incorrectly to the Old Testament; while the name Yeshua appears in it, Jesus Christ does not.

Ready for the overture?


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Religion news 2021: Which story was No. 1? Return of Taliban or Jan. 6 riot at U.S. Capitol?

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Religion news 2021: Which story was No. 1? Return of Taliban or Jan. 6 riot at U.S. Capitol?

For journalists who braved the chaos, the Jan. 6th riot on Capitol Hill offered a buffet of the bizarre -- a throng of Proud Boys, QAnon prophets, former U.S. military personnel and radicalized Donald Trump supporters that crashed through security lines and, thus, into history.

Many protestors at Trump’s legal "Save America" rally carried signs, flags and banners with slogans such as "Jesus is my Savior, Trump is my president" or simply "Jesus 2020." In this context, "Jesus saves" took on a whole new meaning.

Some of that symbolism was swept into the illegal attack on the U.S. Capitol.

In its poll addressing major religion events in 2021, members of the Religion News Association offered this description of the top story: "Religion features prominently during the Jan. 6 assault on the U.S. Capitol by pro-Trump insurrectionists. Some voice Christian prayers, while others display Christian or pagan symbols and slogans inside and outside the Capitol."

Consider, for example, Jacob Anthony Chansley -- or Jake "Yellowstone Wolf" Angeli. With his coyote-skin and buffalo-horns headdress, red, white and blue face paint and Norse torso tattoos, the self-proclaimed QAnon shaman, UFO expert and metaphysical healer became the instant superstar of this mash-up of politics, religion and digital conspiracy theories.

"Thank you, Heavenly Father … for this opportunity to stand up for our God-given inalienable rights," he said, in a video of his U.S. Senate remarks from the vice president's chair. "Thank you, divine, omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent Creator God for filling this chamber with your white light and love. Thank you for filling this chamber with patriots that love you and that love Christ. …

“Thank you for allowing the United States of America to be reborn. Thank you for allowing us to get rid of the communists, the globalists and the traitors within our government."

That was one loud voice. A big question that must be answered, in future trials and the U.S. House investigation, is whether it's true -- as claimed by the New York Times -- that the "most extreme corners of support for Mr. Trump have become inextricable from some parts of white evangelical power in America."


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , ,

Sikhs, Santas and prophets: Do beards symbolize good or bad character?

, , , , , , , ,
Sikhs, Santas and prophets: Do beards symbolize good or bad character?

THE QUESTION:

Santa take note: Do beards symbolize good or bad character?

THE RELIGION GUY'S ANSWER:

Any self-respecting Santa Claus will have actual or artificial paunch, a red suit and, perhaps most important, that luxuriant white beard. Yet notwithstanding shopping-mall Santas and St. Nicholas, as well as St. Nicholas of Myra, the bearded but monk-skinny 4th Century original, some fear that beards symbolize questionable character.

Take the New York Yankees. Please. In 1973, boss George Steinbrenner was perturbed by a player's sloppy appearance during the National Anthem and ever since no player or other employee has been allowed to have a beard or long hair "except for religious reasons." The Yankees presumably borrowed their famed appearance code from the U.S. military and police departments.

And yet. Jesus Christ is portrayed with a beard, since in the 1st Century mostly the upper crust had the time and money to bother with shaving. As for revered secular figures, Abraham Lincoln decided to become America's first bearded president for unknown reasons just after his 1860 victory (though predecessors John Quincy Adams and Martin Van Buren sported serious sideburns).

A cloud of suspicion hovers over chin whiskers in the U.S.-based Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (nicknamed LDS and, formerly, "Mormon"). Headquarters personnel are almost always clean-shaven, and the same for young male missionary duos unless their district leader happens to allow beards.

This is not, however, a matter of doctrine.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , ,

About that RNS/AP series on women leaders: Aren't most religions 'male-led'?

, , , , , , ,
About that RNS/AP series on women leaders: Aren't most religions 'male-led'?

Unless your local media runs articles by the Associated Press or Religion News Service, you might not be aware of their current series on “women’s roles in male-led religions.”

Most religions are pretty patriarchal, aren’t they, unless you count numerous female deities as making Hinduism women-friendly. But wait — there was that whole thing about female temple prostitutes — so maybe even Hinduism favors the guys as well.

So let’s look some news about issues linked to this.

In 2018, the Lilly Endowment Inc. put together a $4.9 million grant to fund 13 new positions at The Associated Press, Religion News Service and The Conversation in an effort known as the Global Religion Journalism Initiative.

Since then, evidence of this collaboration have been sparse, so this new series that premiered last week is one of the first major efforts on that front.

First out of the blocks was a Dec. 8 piece in The Conversation by Deborah Whitehead of Religion News Service giving a summation of womens’ efforts –- over a broad swath of denominations and religions -- to either be ordained or attain more power in their congregations. The main holdouts, she said, were Orthodox Jews, Latter-day Saints, Roman Catholics and Southern Baptists.

I’m not sure why she didn’t mention Eastern Orthodox Christians, who likewise don’t ordain women but once had a tradition — in the distant past – of female deacons. See here for a debate among two Orthodox scholars about the matter.

The way Whitehead’s piece –- and indeed the entire series that I’ve seen to date — is that women’s ordination is the logical, progressive next step. The sub-headlines that describe the opposing point of view include “Opposition to change” and “Other forms of discrimination,” so it’s not hard to see where this series is headed. This is advocacy journalism, especially when it comes to changing the priesthood in ancient churches


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Just how big is the Mississippi abortion case at U.S. Supreme Court? Well, THIS BIG

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Just how big is the Mississippi abortion case at U.S. Supreme Court? Well, THIS BIG

“The most important abortion case in decades” is how the New York Times’ Adam Liptak describes it.

“The most significant abortion case in a generation,” agree the Wall Street Journal’s Jess Bravin and Brent Kendall.

“The biggest challenge to abortion rights in decades,” echo The Associated Press’ Mark Sherman and Jessica Gresko.

It’s not hyperbole: Roe v. Wade, the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion nationwide, faces its biggest test yet. The Washington Post’s Robert Barnes explains:

The Supreme Court on Wednesday signaled it is on the verge of a major curtailment of abortion rights in the United States, and appeared likely to uphold a Mississippi law that violates one of the essential holdings of Roe v. Wade established nearly 50 years ago.

Whether the court would eventually overrule Roe and its finding that women have a fundamental right to end their pregnancies was unclear.

But none of the six conservatives who make up the court’s majority expressed support for maintaining its rule that states may not prohibit abortion before the point of fetal viability, which is generally estimated to be between 22 and 24 weeks of pregnancy.

At Christianity Today, Kate Shellnutt reports that “pro-life evangelicals who had rallied for the cause for decades were encouraged that the conservative-leaning court appeared willing to uphold a contentious Mississippi law that bans abortion after 15 weeks.”

Other helpful religion coverage:

• How faith groups feel about this major abortion case (by Kelsey Dallas, Deseret News)

• Before there was Roe: Religious debate before high court’s historic ruling on abortion (by Adelle M. Banks, Religion News Service)

• Religion abortion rights supporters fight for access (by Holly Meyer, The Associated Press)


Please respect our Commenting Policy