Although Trump won the majority of Catholic votes, he is facing strong opposition from Catholic leaders around the country who are condemning his executive order against refugees. Many Catholic leaders are opposed to Trump’s actions because for many it directly goes against what the Bible teaches about helping those in need and welcoming others rather than turning them away. Many leaders also made statements reminding the public that there was once a time where Catholics faced discrimination and hostility because of their religion. As a result, the Catholic Church has had a long history of helping refugees settle in the United States. Eighty three Catholic dioceses out of 196 in the country are involved in resettling refugees in some way.

Pope Francis has even made a statement in which he says “It’s hypocrisy to call yourself a Christian and chase away a refugee or someone seeking help, someone who is hungry or thirsty, toss out someone who is in need of my help.” In his book, “American Religion”, Chaves reports that the number of people with a great deal of confidence in religious leaders has declined to under 25 percent. My hope is that more religious leaders in the country as well as globally will begin to speak out more against Trump’s orders because it could unite Catholic conservatives with Catholic liberals. It could give religious leaders more influence in a positive way to create social change.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/01/30/some-of-the-u-s-s-most-important-catholic-leaders-are-condemning-trumps-travel-ban/?utm_term=.58d2561e24cc

One of the hot topics in news recently has been Donald Trumps travel ban from seven countries within the Middle East. Whether this ban is targeting Muslims or not is up for debate, but there has been a serious outcry from many secular and religious organizations protesting this ban. This article has two polarizing opinions; one being that Christian religious organizations do not want to accept Muslim refugees from Syria, as they find them a threat to Western society. The second opinion being that other Christian organizations are opening their doors the Muslim, Christian and other minority religious refugees within Syria and surrounding areas . Often, the Christian organizations that are refusing to accept Muslim, Syrian refugees are denouncing Islam all together. This article made me think of McGuire’s typology of religion. For example, the Christian faiths that tend to be more conservative would have “tension with society” and only see “one way” of religion. While this may be an exaggeration, as there may be other instances where these groups consider themselves “responsible for society”, in this case they are not taking responsibility for all people involved. On the other hand, the Christian organizations that are welcoming all refugees regardless of faith would be seen in the “responsible for society” category and “many ways” of religion. A phenomenon like this is also seen in chapter seven of Chavez, when he mentions the main “fault line that runs between religion is the divide between liberals and conservatives” (Chavez 82). Although both of the opposing sides in this debate are Christian, it is interesting to see the various political and humanitarian views that preside in one religion.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38819813

Earlier this week, President Trump made an executive order blocking admissions of new refugees and banning the entrance of travelers from seven, Muslim majority countries. Despite world wide protests and countless law suits, Trump and his administration insist that this will help protect the U.S from foreign terrorism. The executive order states that the “United States must ensure that those admitted to this country do not bear hostile attitudes toward it and its founding principles,” insinuating that anyone from a banned nation holds clashing values to that of our Founding Fathers. At a press conference this afternoon, Department of Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly insists that the executive order will be used to assess the effectiveness of our system. The Department of Homeland Security defends the order, saying that it is “not a ban on Muslims” and thus shouldn’t be seen as discriminatory. However, at the conference, Kelly admits that “I would be less than honest if I told you that some of those countries that are currently on the list may not be taken off the list anytime soon.”

In class, we have discussed contemporary trends in religiosity in the United States. A consistent development is that as a body of people, we have grown more tolerant, and even appreciative, of other people’s religions. Different religions have began to see other types of faith as acceptable paths towards salvation, and many religious people have incorporated a variety of religions into their faith. Although many religious leaders have opposed Trump’s executive order, many Trump supporters, who are also Christian, support it. This could suggest a shift in this contemporary trend, in that more American people are less tolerant of different religions than we may have thought.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/01/31/512678699/trumps-immigration-order-is-not-a-ban-on-muslims-homeland-security-chief-says

On Friday, President Donald Trump ordered a travel ban on seven Muslim-majority Middle Eastern countries and refugees. The seven countries banned are Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Syria, Libya, and Sudan. This ban halts immigration for at least ninety days, but the ban can continue on further, and it is expected to do so. The seven countries were put on the “countries of interest” list by the Obama Administration, and President Trump’s orders are lashing right out at former President Obama. The White House claims these procedures as “extreme vetting”, not as a Muslim ban or a travel ban. When presented in social media, however, this order is written as a Muslim travel ban, and many people are fighting back.

Unfortunately, many Americans are afraid of Islam and Middle Eastern countries due to the lack of knowledge and misconceptions about the religion.  Because of this, President Donald Trump decided to take drastic measures within his first week in office. There are protests happening all around the country against this ban. Additionally, many other countries are inviting the refugees to their own country. On social media, videos and footage have been coming out from airport protests from all around the country. Social media has been the main medium for people to express their concern and post information.

One of AP’s top stories this week is headlined “Pope takes over Knights of Malta after condom dispute” and is written by Nicole Winfield (https://apnews.com/acd056cee7144b58a66c1f90db0931d5/pope-takes-over-knights-of-malta-after-condom-dispute). The Knights of Malta is a Catholic group who are based in Rome, despite their name. The help to run hospitals and clinics worldwide.  Several years ago the Knights found out that one of the charity organizations they worked with wee distributing thousands of condoms. The program was quickly shut down with the pressure of the Vatican becoming involved. The individual who played a key role in the operation was the health minister, Albrecht von Boeselager. This act led to his election as grand chancellor of the Knights of Malta. However, the Knight’s leader, Matthew Festing, requested that Boeselager resign; he refused. This led to more trouble for the Knights.  Pope Francis got wind of this all and held and investigation for Boeselager. The Pope then met with Festing and following this meeting, Festing resigned. This has become problematic because the Vatican is not meant to get involved with governmental issues, but it has. Because the Pope “accepted” the resignation of Festing, the issue became a legal issue. On January 28, the Knights of Malta had to officially accept the resignation for it to be legal, which they did; however, they were not required to. The previous events have cause other issues to come to light such as: Pope Francis’ ” increasing clashes with more conservative elements in the church, especially those for whom sexual ethics and doctrinal orthodoxy are paramount” (Winfield, apnews.com).

This article is applicable to both the discussions brought up in class on Tuesday. The first being the polity of the Roman Catholic Church. Because there is an Episcopal polity, the bishops are the head of the church. The Pope is the head bishop, therefore he has the most influence. This is seen in his power to interfere in a government institution. This article also sheds light on McGuire’s typology. The Catholic church has shifted in recent years and in Pope Francis’ time to become more responsible for society as well as believing there is more than one way. There is still tension within the church, but Pope Francis is making changes and has the most influence within the Catholic Church.

There’s has been a long standing belief among fans that God influences the outcomes of football games, among other sports. A new survey that was recently released says that 25 percent of Americans believe this to be true, especially when it comes to the Super Bowl and its outcome. (www.christianheadlines.com) Past surveys showed slightly higher numbers. In 2013, it was 27 percent of Americans and in 2015, it was 26 percent. (www.christianheadlines.com) While there is a slight decline, clearly there is still a significant amount of the American population who believes this. This is something interesting to think about. While surveys show that people are becoming less affiliated with religious organizations, other surveys suggest that these same people still have a strong belief in God. (Chaves, Pg. 57) Those who don’t always attend services on regular basis also still say they believe in God. (Chaves, Pg. 49) This reveals that while religious affiliation and attendance has gone down, the core beliefs in things like God and the afterlife still remain quite strong. Many people who are spiritual, but not necessarily religious, still believe in God and that God influences our world. This belief concerning football and God may just be an example of this in some way.

Many believe that Trump’s actions this weekend are an attempt to move the U.S. away from being a religiously free country and towards becoming a Christian country that is hostile to other religions. This opinion comes after the executive order signed by Trump banning refugees and citizens of seven majority Muslim countries from entering the U.S. This order also said that religious minorities (aka Christians) from these countries would be giving priority eventually for entering the U.S. This way, Trump is still looking out for people of his own religion, but being hostile towards everyone else. Today in class, we discussed McGuire’s categorization of religions, including the characteristic of many religions that believe their way is the only way. This can be seen in Trump’s first actions of his presidency. His actions reflect the attitude that Christianity is the only way and that people of other religions do not deserve to be in this country. If he continues to enact policies with this mindset, the U.S. will move towards becoming a theocratic country that is no longer religiously free.

Religious leaders across all religions have condemned Trump’s immigration ban. There are few issues in which unite religious leaders, but the new executive order is one of them. Trump signed a executive order banning travel from seven Muslim-majority countries for 90 days and suspending all refugee admission for 120 days. This ban applies to seven countries; Syria, Iraq, Iran, Yemen, Libya, Somalia, and Sudan.  According to CNN, “Since the order was released on Friday, a growing chorus of top Christian, Muslims, Jews and leaders of other faiths have denounced it, calling it contrary to their spiritual traditions and the country’s values.”  A letter to Congress and President Trump from the Interfaith Immigration Coalition has more than 2,000 signatures, including from the heads of several Jewish organizations and Protestant denominations. These heads represent millions of Americans.  Cardinal Blase Cupich of Chicago, a top ally of Pope Francis, expressed his distaste at the new ban, “The world is watching as we abandon our commitments to American values.” Also, nearly 18,500 people have signed a statement promoted by a coalition of evangelical groups pledging to welcome refugees and urging elected officials to assist them. The Rev. J. Herbert Nelson, the top official in the Presbyterian Church in the United states, called Trump’s order “a miscarriage of justice” and “I urge the president and his administration to reverse this very harmful decision regarding refugees.” As we learned in class, religious leaders can have a large impact on how the community handles situations. Different religions have different leaders, but majority feel that Trump’s ban does not reflect their values.

In an article written by Jerome Socolovsky and Emily McFarlan Miller for Religion News Service, the manner in which Donald Trump’s inauguration is addressed. One aspect among many that was unusual for an inauguration was Trump’s insistence on various clergy members; six clergy members—more than any other inauguration before—participated in the spectacle, offering different prayers and readings. Along with the overwhelming amount of clergy members participating in Trumps swearing-in ceremony, he also made the decision to place his hand on two bibles while taking the oath of office. Both bibles made for interesting choices; one of them being a family bible and the other the Lincoln bible, borrowed from the Library of Congress. Trump’s use of a family bible may seem surprising to some, considering how little information he has presented to the public about his own religious beliefs. However, the morning of the inauguration, Trump made a special point of attending a church service in what may be interpreted as a show of solidarity with his voters, most of whom are conservative members of the religious right. Countless religious Trump supporters were ecstatic for his inauguration, and found the ceremony especially customized to their religious standards when “…he briefly quoted Scripture, drawing on Psalm 133: ‘How good and pleasant it is when God’s people live together in unity!'” (Socolovsky and McFarlan Miller, 1/20/17). Whatever Trump’s religious identity may be, his use of such an extravagant number of clergy members seemed to point to compensation on his part. if Trump can appease and maintain the idealization from his supporters—56% of whom attend religious services weekly—it can easily be assumed that he will keep them happy and feeling secure in their religiosity in whatever ways he can (Pew Research Center, http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/how-the-faithful-voted-a-preliminary-2016-analysis/ft_16-11-09_relig_exitpoll_attendance/).