https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/03/10/pope-francis-suggests-an-openness-to-ordaining-married-men-as-priests/?utm_term=.4da0bf122515

In 1965, there were 58,000 priests in the U.S. and in 2016 there were only 37,000. Catholic priests are in high demand and less men are wanting to become priests each year. Pope Francis has suggested that he would be open to thinking about allowing married men to become priests, especially in remote areas of the world. For example, the Amazon has only 1 priest for every 10,000 Catholics, so allowing married men to become priests would be extremely beneficial to these Catholic communities. It is unclear if this idea would extend to the United States if approved or if it would just extend to communities around the world that need it the most. Stephen Rossetti, a Catholic University of America Professor, says that Pope Francis would most likely not extend this to the West, but make an exception and allow it in remote countries as a merciful gesture.

The idea might anger some members of the Catholic Church because of the issue of celibacy. Celibacy is what separates Catholic priests from Protestant ones and Catholics view this as something special that their priests have. Pope Francis has said in the past that priests should be celibate, but he also said that it is not technically dogma so it is open to change. Massimo Faggioli, a Church historian at Villanova University, states that the idea of celibate priests is more institutional, financial, and cultural than it is theological.

This potential shift away from traditional rules in the Catholic Church may lead the Church to greater acceptance by secular culture and may make the Church more appealing to outsiders. It would allow more members of society to become leaders in the Church. Having married priests would also make them more relatable, which is likely to attract new members.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/03/13/could-southern-baptist-leader-russell-moore-lose-his-job-churches-threaten-funding-after-months-of-trump-controversy/?utm_term=.cbae1ce03f81

Russell Moore’s position as the president of the public policy arm of the Southern Baptist Church is in contention. The Washington Post article outlines how Moore has continuously critiqued President Trump throughout the campaign period and his first few months of presidency. The Southern Baptist Church is traditionally conservative, and thus typically support Trump’s platform– more than 80 percent of white evangelicals voted for Trump. The article notes that this could be tied to a hope for nominating a Supreme Court Judge that would oppose abortion rights. Moore’s disagreement with Trump has consequently caused contention between the congregation members and leadership. Furthermore, “46,000 churches have threatened to cut off financial support for the SBC’s umbrella fund,” according to the president of the executive committee, Frank Page. This deprivation of funds could cause serious strife for the Southern Baptists. Page continued to insinuate that asking for Moore’s resignation is not out of the question, although he hopes that he can work with those who oppose him to reconcile the disagreement. Moore has been complimented for working towards racial justice, and for encouraging older generations to appeal to more modern politics (this is an inference from the article, but I am assuming this means a push from conservatism towards more liberal politics).  The article notes that having Moore removed from the church would be a loss in terms of implementing racial equality within congregations.

This news story is yet another example of the close tie between politics and religion. I find this story to be particularly interesting, however, because it outlines the contention that takes place when their is political disagreement within a church, when I would assume that religious beliefs could be separate from political party affiliation. This has seemingly proved to be false, which is demonstrated with the potential loss of Moore’s job.

In America there is a picture that is painted stating that Islamic religion discriminates heavily against women, but is it the only religion that does so? Graham Perrett, a writer for the Huffington Post, dives into the question, are other religions promoting inequality among gender? He claims that discrimination against women in religion is so embedded that many men don’t even see it as inequality. They feel that it is simply the way religion has always and is supposed to be done. In the Catholic church there are many places were the discrimination shows such as; women had to cover their head with a mantilla, girls can not be alter servers, boys can avoid politely shaking the hand of a woman at a formal functions and women cannot be priests only nuns. In Orthodox Judaism, some believe that women cannot talk to god and only men get to go to heaven unless the women is brought to heaven by her man. It is unfair to point the finger at Islam and say that they do not treat women fairly when many religions do. Although, the role of women in churches has slowly become prominent, and religion is catching up to social norms. An example of this is some churches allowing women to give sermons, or giving the chance for a young girl to be an alter server.  It is important to see these inequalities in all religions and address them as inequalities, instead of the norms of religion life.

Religion and spirituality are a huge part of human existence. Many people feel that each individual person should be allowed to choose what they want to believe and how they worship. What if, however, part of the religion was say eating a cooked bit of human brain? Reza Aslan, host of “Believer” on CNN did just that. Aslan goes around the world and studies different religious practices from many different people.  Aslan meets up with a sect of Indian religious nomads outside the city of Varanasi in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh. The Aghori, as they are known, reject the Hindu caste system and continue to bathe in Ganges, a river that Hindus considers sacred. An Aghori guru smears the ashes of cremated humans on his face and then invites Aslan to drink alcohol from a human skull and eats what was a bit of human brain. Aslan got lots of backlash from the premier of this episode from both Indians and Americans. “With multiple reports of hate-fueled attacks against people of Indian origin from across the U.S., the show characterizes Hinduism as cannibalistic, which is a bizarre way of looking at the third largest religion in the world,” lobbyist group U.S Indian Political Action Committees. From one Americans point of view is, “It is unbelievably callous and reckless of CNN to be pushing sensational and grotesque images of bearded brown men and their morbid and deathly religion at a time when the United States is living through a period of unprecedented concern and fear,” Vamsee Juluri, a media studies professor at the University of San Francisco. Do we accept another religion even if it involves things that make us feel uncomfortable?

The article I read titled “Church of England Stance on Gay Marriage in Disarray After Vote” from NBC News discusses the conflict within the wider Anglican communion over their views on gay marriage since 2003. Liberal Anglican churches in the west (especially the Episcopal Church in the U.S.) and more conservative Anglican churches (mainly in Africa) have taken different stances on this issue. The Church of England specifically is now divided as well. In January, the House of Bishops issued a report stating that the Church of England would keep its teachings that marriage is between a man and a woman, but the church will also be welcoming and loving toward members of the LBGT community. The report also stated that the Church would no longer bless same-sex marriages. The House of Bishops is only one of 3 parts of the synod, or the Church’s legislature. Another part of the synod, the House of Clergy, voted against this report, so it could not be endorsed by the synod. The vote against the bishops’ carefully worded position on same-sex marriage has caused the synod’s stance to be a little murky.

In my congregation visit at an Anglican church, I had the chance to hear a little bit of the history of the conflicts in the Anglican communion over their stance on same-sex marriage and homosexuality in general. I find it interesting that such a large, established church is having so much conflict and confusion over choosing a stance on this topic. If the ruling legislature of the Church is not sure of their stance, then many of the 85 million members worldwide who probably adopt the Church’s stances as their own are probably very confused about it all. After hearing about all the different congregations that other students went to, I learned that many churches are more liberal and more inclusive than I had previously thought. It will be interesting to see how the Church of England resolves their conflict over this issue.

The Pew Research Center conducted a study on the religious identity of individuals raised in interfaith households. This study also included the religious “nones” parenting with someone who is religious. As McGuire points out in Chapter 3, children become socialized into the church at a young age, which is important in their religious upbringing. However, this looks much different if the parents are different religious background, especially when one of the parents are religious “nones”. One statistic from this study that I found particularly interesting was the fact that the mother was more responsible for a religious upbringing, therefore the child is more likely to adopt the mother’s religious beliefs. Another statistic that I found that related to Chaves and the decline of institutional religion among the younger generations was that “Those from religiously mixed backgrounds less likely to say religion was salient in their lives when they were growing up”. Diversity in marriages is increasing in terms of ethnic and religious diversity, but with this is the decline of a formal religious affiliation among those children. This study shows how themes within Chaves and McGuire’s books are being played out in American society today.

http://www.pewforum.org/2016/10/26/one-in-five-u-s-adults-were-raised-in-interfaith-homes/

Pope Francis brought a Syrian woman, Nur Essa, and her family to Rome last April, and, apparently, has been extremely open and accepting of her culture and religious views. Essa says that she was pleasantly surprised with the Pope’s accepting nature and willingness to learn about her culture and religion and others’ as well. Essa has met Pope Francis a few times and has had great, accepting experiences every time. She had the opportunity to ask him about immigrant integration in Italy, as she is concerned about her loved ones. Thinking about refugees seeking new homes and wanting to be accepted into a new society to call home reminds me tremendously of the first case study presentation (that I was a part of) that discussed God Needs No Passport by Peggy Levitt. This idea also makes me think about us, the students in this class, visiting different religious congregations. We are all being open to the new experiences and are accepting others for who they are. I think this is an amazing quality for individuals in our society to have, and it is great that the Pope, such an influential figure in society, is being such a lovely example of it.

https://cruxnow.com/vatican/2017/02/20/muslim-refugee-hails-pope-francis-example-religion/

It seems that every day of the new Drumpf presidency bring a new concern. With all of the policies that he has attempted to put in place and the seemingly un-American actions he has taken against a land that was founded on immigrants and the taking of an entire people’s land, one has to wonder if those who voted for him have had any regrets. Some conservative Republicans and members of the Religious Right seem to regret their voting decisions and wish to recant what they so powerfully expressed before the inauguration now that they have seen the consequences of a Drumpf presidency. In an article written by John Stoehr for U.S. News and World Report on February 21st, Stoehr shines light on the hypocrisy of the Religious Right and their inflated moral superiority. He writes that the “Republican view of politics vis-a-vis religion grew dramatically myopic, so much so that in 2016 the same Christian conservatives who agonized over Clinton’s besmirching of the presidency chose to unite behind a lying, thieving, philandering sadist in order to achieve a long-coveted and long-denied goal: outlawing abortion.” (Stoehr, A Come-to-Jesus Moment for Liberals, 2/21/17). Liberals and leftists must learn from the failings of the Religious Right: we need to influence our politics by the simplistic morality of Jesus’s teachings, those of tolerance, freedom, and equality for all.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/thomas-jefferson-street/articles/2017-02-21/liberals-need-to-take-back-religion-from-the-christian-right

A new Pew survey called a “feeling thermometer” rated how people felt about different religions. (Blumberg, www.huffingtonpost.com) Using a rating system from zero to a hundred, the survey determined which groups of faith Americans have warmer feelings about. (Blumberg, www.huffingtonpost.com) Over 4,200 people participated in this survey, and the results were clear. (Blumberg, www.huffingtonpost.com) Good feelings towards the Jewish community were the highest, and feelings towards the Muslim community were the lowest. (Blumberg, www.huffingtonpost.com) Sadly, this clearly reflects the current times we live in. However, compared to an older poll that was done a few years ago, feelings towards most major religious groups have improved quite a bit. (Blumberg, www.huffingtonpost.com) This proves that Americans are continuing to embrace religious diversity more and more. (Blumberg, www.huffingtonpost.com) People are more open to other groups of faith. Interestingly though, the group who had the biggest increase in ratings was the atheists. (Blumberg, www.huffingtonpost.com) This could possibly represent the idea that more and more people are turning away from religion or feel that religion just isn’t as important as it used to be a few decades ago. In the end though, this survey clearly reveals a lot about America’s feelings towards religions or lack there of.