Religion-State Relations

Subterms

    Latest story

    125 Shares166 Views

    World Catholics See the First American Pope as Hardly American

    by

    Catholics around the world were skeptical at first about an American pope. But Pope Leo XIV’s multicultural and multilingual identity has put them at ease.The surprising election of the first American pope felt fraught and disorienting to Roman Catholics around the world, who had considered such an outcome unlikely and perhaps unwelcome — until Pope Leo XIV stepped onto the balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica and chose to speak a few sentences in Spanish.In an instant, the new pope, formerly Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost, signaled that his identity would defy easy categorization. He chose in that pivotal moment on Thursday evening not to say anything in English or mention the United States. He seemed intent on conveying the message that he was not a typical American.It worked. Pope Leo, who was born in Chicago, has Creole heritage, lived in Peru for decades and speaks at least three languages, established himself as a citizen of the world. Catholics around the globe raced to claim pieces of his multicultural and multilingual background as their own.”He considers himself American, but he also considers himself Peruvian,” said Julia Caillet, a 33-year-old osteopath, who was in line outside Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris for a special service for young Catholics celebrating the new pope on Friday evening. “He is a priest of the world.”At a time when President Trump has isolated the United States from its diplomatic allies and trade partners and upended much of the world order, some Catholics worried that an American pontiff might somehow bring the Roman Catholic Church closer to the tumultuous American government.Instead, Pope Leo appears to have reassured them, at least for now, that he would preserve the church as a global moral voice calling for peace and justice, especially for migrants, the poor and victims of war, in the mold of Pope Francis.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    More stories

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      How Francis, a Progressive Pope, Catalyzed the Catholic Right in the U.S.

      by

      His critics were fellow clergy as well as elected officials in the ascendant wing of the American Catholic political realm.A few months before he died on Monday, Pope Francis entered what turned out to be his last high-profile skirmish with his flock in the United States. In a letter in February to American bishops, with whom he had his own complicated relationship over the years, the pope criticized President Trump’s treatment of migrants, claiming that deportations violate the “dignity of many men and women, and of entire families.”Though he didn’t name names, he also seemed to to rebut Vice President JD Vance’s recent interpretation of a Catholic theological concept. Mr. Vance, who is Catholic, met briefly with Pope Francis at his home in Rome on Easter Sunday, making the vice president among the last people to see the ailing pontiff alive.The slap in February, with its intertwining layers of politics and theology, was typical of the often fraught public relationship between Pope Francis and conservative American Catholics. When Pope Francis took office in 2013, many Catholics in the United States were optimistic that his emphasis on inclusivity and ministry to the margins would lead to a “Francis effect” that would enliven the American church for years to come.Pope Francis did end up energizing American Catholics, but not only in the way his supporters hoped. His papacy galvanized a traditionalist stream that had always existed in the American church, and that strengthened and expanded throughout his papacy as a tide of resistance rose in the American church hierarchy, in Washington and in the pews.Pope Francis’ critics represent a minority of the American church but a powerful one. They were not only fellow clergy but also elected officials in a newly ascendant wing of the American Catholic political realm, as Catholic power in Washington developed harder edges in the final months of his life. President Trump stocked his cabinet with conservative Catholics, and elevated Mr. Vance as vice president, a Catholic convert whose views on church doctrine are deeply enmeshed with his political priorities. Catholics make up more than a third of Mr. Trump’s cabinet, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio.But Pope Francis’ critics in the American church had objections that ranged far beyond disagreements over public policy. Critics, including some clergy, have accused him of sowing confusion on bedrock church doctrines, and at the same time of wielding an autocratic leadership style behind a facade of humility and informality. He was seen as haphazardly rushing the church into the future, at a time when many American traditionalists were questioning the changes of Vatican II.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 163 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Pope Francis’ Legacy in the U.S.: A More Open, and Then Divided, Church

      by

      Months into his papacy in 2013, Pope Francis was asked about gay priests, and he responded, “Who am I to judge?” Across the United States, Catholics and non-Catholics alike took a collective gasp.For years the Roman Catholic Church in the United States had deeply aligned with the religious right in fierce conflicts over issues like abortion, gay marriage and contraception. But Pope Francis wanted a church “with doors always wide open,” as he said in his first apostolic exhortation.Words like these made the new pope a revolutionary figure in the United States, in both the Catholic Church and the nation’s politics. He challenged each to shift its moral focus toward issues like poverty, immigration and war, and to confront the realities of income inequality and climate change. Pope Francis offered a progressive, public Catholicism in force, coinciding with the Obama era, and at the beginning of his pontificate, he moved the U.S. church forward from the sex-abuse scandals that roiled his predecessor’s pontificate.He pushed church leaders to be pastors, not doctrinaires, and elevated bishops in his own mold, hoping to create lasting tonal change in the church through its leadership. He gave voice to the growing share of Hispanic Catholics, as the American church grew less white, and appointed the first African-American cardinal. He allowed priests to bless same-sex couples and made it easier for divorced and remarried Catholics to participate in church life.In doing so, he captured the imaginations of millions both inside and outside the American church who had long felt rejected. At a time of increasing secularization, the world’s most visible Christian leader gave hope to many U.S. non-Catholics who saw in him a moral visionary while much of public Christianity in America took a rightward turn.“He made the church a more welcoming place,” said Joe Donnelly, former Democratic senator from Indiana, who was the U.S. ambassador to the Holy See under President Biden. “For Americans of all different economic strata, for divorced Americans, for basically everyone in our country, his arms were always open.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Administration Sends Politically Charged Survey to Researchers

      by

      Scientists on overseas projects must say whether they work with communist governments and help combat “Christian persecution.”The Trump administration has asked researchers and organizations whose work is conducted overseas to disclose ties to those regarded as hostile, including “entities associated with communist, socialist or totalitarian parties,” according to a questionnaire obtained by The New York Times.The online survey was sent this week to groups working abroad to research diseases like H.I.V., gather surveillance data and strengthen public health systems. Recipients received funding from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the United States Agency for International Development and other federal sources.The questionnaire appears to be very similar to one sent earlier this week to partners of the United States Agency for International Development, which has been all but dismantled by the Trump administration. Both were titled “Foreign Assistance Review.”Recipients were instructed to respond within 48 hours. Some grantees interviewed by The Times feared that impolitic or unsatisfactory answers could lead to cancellation of funding.“Taxpayer dollars must not fund dependency, socialism, corrupt regimes that oppose free enterprise, or intervene in internal matters of another sovereign nation,” the questionnaire said.“A truly prosperous America prioritizes domestic growth, innovation, and economic strength over foreign handouts,” it added.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 50 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      One Nation, Under God

      by

      Americans have stopped leaving Christianity. And the country is overwhelmingly spiritual, a new report found.As religion in America declined, experts administered last rites.Churches were approaching “their twilight hour” as attendance fell, The Brookings Institution wrote in 2011. In his 2023 book, “Losing Our Religion,” the evangelical preacher Russell Moore asked: “Can American Christianity survive?”The answer appears to be yes. People have stopped leaving churches en masse, according to a new study released this morning by Pew Research. America’s secularization is on pause for now, likely because of the pandemic and the country’s sustained spirituality. Most Americans — 92 percent of adults — say they hold one or more spiritual beliefs that Pew asked about:Share of U.S. adults who believe … More

    • 125 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Supreme Court to Hear Catholic Charity’s Bid for Tax Exemption

      by

      The justices agreed to hear an appeal from a Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling that the charity’s activities were insufficiently religious to qualify.The Supreme Court agreed on Friday to decide whether Wisconsin was free to deny a tax exemption to a Catholic charity on the grounds that its activities were not primarily religious.The court has been notably receptive to arguments from religious groups, and the new case will give the justices another opportunity to explore the limits of the First Amendment’s protection of religious liberty.The case concerns a Wisconsin law that exempts religious groups from state unemployment taxes so long as they are “operated primarily for religious purposes.”Catholic Charities Bureau, the social ministry of the Catholic Diocese in Superior, Wis., has said its mission is to provide “services to the poor and disadvantaged as an expression of the social ministry of the Catholic Church.” State officials determined that the charity did not qualify for the exemption because it “provides essentially secular services and engages in activities that are not religious per se.”The Wisconsin Supreme Court said it accepted the charity’s contention that its services were “based on Gospel values and the principles of the Catholic social teachings.” But the court ruled that the group’s activities were “primarily charitable and secular” and did not “attempt to imbue program participants with the Catholic faith nor supply any religious materials to program participants or employees.”The court added that “both employment with the organizations and services offered by the organizations are open to all participants regardless of religion.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 88 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Abortion as an Issue in the Election

      by

      More from our inbox:Veterans as Poll WorkersAn Immigrant’s StoryPolitical Messages: Time to Turn Up the Sound Allison Dinner/EPA, via ShutterstockTo the Editor:Re “November’s Second-Most-Important Election,” by David French (column, Oct. 14):I find it difficult to understand why the heart has become a determiner of fetal life in abortion discussions and law when it’s the brain that makes us truly human.According to much neurological research, the brain doesn’t reach its major development until the end of the second trimester, about 24 weeks into a pregnancy, also known as viability. The brain then continues to develop through the ninth month of pregnancy, and certain parts, such as the frontal cortex, are not fully developed until adults reach their mid-20s.All of us, even lawmakers, should pay attention to the neurological science instead of emotional reactions to sounds.Ellen CreaneGuilford, Conn.To the Editor:I personally am deeply conflicted on the issue of abortion, but the problem I have with many pro-life supporters is that they never talk about support after the baby is born.Live babies and children need diapers and food and child care and good schools and support for college or learning a trade and safe schools and streets. If you have no concrete plans to eliminate child poverty, improve public education and put gun controls in place, can you really say that you support children?Ending the conversation (and legislation) at birth is not pro-life, but pro-childbirth.Margaret DowlingPhiladelphiaWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Are We in the Middle of a Spiritual Awakening?

      by

      When I asked readers who identified as spiritual but not religious to reach out to me, I was astounded by how much variety there was in the faith experiences of individuals in this group. Some said they found spirituality both in the beauty of the physical world and in communing with other people.“I found the 12-step program to be sort of a spirituality that worked for me,” a woman named Maggie who lives in the Northeast told me. (I’m not using her last name because one of the tenets of her 12-step program is anonymity.) “It’s about making a connection with a higher power. It’s about trying to improve that connection with prayer and meditation,” she said.Maggie lost her taste for organized religion, she said, after being disappointed by the way her church handled a situation in which a minister had an affair with an employee. She finds the 12-step program to be free of that kind of hypocrisy and appreciates the “bone-scraping honesty” of her fellow group members. People talk about “what’s really going on in their lives,” she said. “It’s refreshing and often relatable, and it feeds me.”As I read and listened to the wide range of spiritual stories that readers shared with me over the past few weeks, I thought about the way that nones — the catchall term that describes atheists, agnostics and nothing-in-particulars — can imply blankness and almost a kind of nihilism.But as I learn more about the idea and the history of being spiritual but not religious, and the growth of this self-definition over the past few decades, alongside the documented move away from traditional church attendance, I wondered if I hadn’t given enough weight to new expressions of faith. Rather than seeing this moment as reflecting the slow demise of organized religion in America, one that leaves some people bereft of community and meaning, it’s worth asking if we’re in the middle of the birth of a messy new era of spirituality.First, I want to be honest that I’m not going to be able to give a definitive answer through the data here. The polling around questions of spirituality is pretty noisy, because the terms “spiritual” and “religious” are “so amorphous and they overlap so greatly,” said Robert Fuller, a professor of religious studies at Bradley University and the author of “Spiritual but Not Religious: Understanding Unchurched America,” when we spoke last week.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Russia Committed Human Rights Violations in Crimea, European Court Finds

      by

      The European Court of Human Rights listed multiple violations. Its findings paint a grim picture of life under a decade of Russian occupation.The European Court of Human Rights ruled on Tuesday that Russia and its proxy security forces in Crimea have committed multiple human rights violations during its decade-long occupation of the former Ukrainian territory.In a case brought by the government of Ukraine, the court found evidence of the unlawful persecution and detention of those who criticized Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, as well as the systemic repression of ethnic and religious minorities in Crimea. The evidence presented to the court painted a picture of a region under the tight grip of Moscow’s authoritarian control, where any criticism is harshly punished and accountability is nonexistent for the politically connected.Between 2014 and 2018, there have been 43 cases of enforced disappearances, with eight people still missing. The disappeared were mostly pro-Ukrainian activists and journalists, or members of Crimea’s Tatar ethnic minority, the court found. Investigations of the disappearances went nowhere, the court added in its judgment.Men and women were abducted by the Crimean self-defense forces, by Russian security forces or by agents of Russia’s Federal Security Service, or F.S.B. Those who were detained endured torture, like electrocution and mock executions, and were kept in inhumane conditions, particularly in the only pretrial detention center, in Simferopol.Russian authorities also transferred some 12,500 prisoners to penal colonies in Russia from Crimea. Ukrainian political prisoners in particular were transferred to distant prisons, making it near impossible for their families to reach them. The court ordered that Russia return these prisoners.Masked Russian soldiers guarding the Ukrainian military base in Perevalnoe, in the Crimea region of Ukraine, in 2014.Sergey Ponomarev for The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More