God’s Continent by Philip Jenkins

God’s Continent: Christianity, Islam and Europe’s religious crisis

Jenkins has two solid books on world Christianity and completes the Future of Christianity trilogy here. (The others: The Next Christianity: the coming of global Christianity and The New Faces of Christianity: believing the Bible in the global south).

This one has several things to say about Europe. The dilemma of a secular elite that is facing both Christian and Muslim minorities. Their secular values demand protection for minorities, but also assume that religion will fade so that rationality can rule. What to do? Ban all religious expression? Try to follow the US model? Let Christianity maintain a privileged position?

This is complicated by the fact that the religious minorities that are not of native stock. The fastest growing group religious groups are made up of immigrants and their children. This is true of Christian sects, not just Muslim groups.

A conflation of immigrant identity and religious identity. Faced with minority status in a new country with new rules, immigrants often regain religious fervor that they didn’t need in their homeland, where their religion was taken for granted.

The threat of Eurabia, a Europe over run by a fast breeding, which Jenkins (and most others) find over hyped, since immigrant populations usually end up with birth rates matching that of their adopted country.

But how does Europe deal with even a 15% minority population? In the US we are used to a situation where 10-15% of our population is foreign born. Despite persistent nativist pressure, we keep absorbing new populations and keep on ticking. But can Europe hope to replicate this? American may be a nationality, but it isn’t an ethnic group (speaking as an eight generation American).  The Germans, Dutch and Danes have a pretty good idea what traditionally constitutes a citizen. They are also relatively small groups. Denmark has about the population of Wisconsin (5.5 million). Currently, 9% of the population of Denmark is foreign born, though many of those are from other parts of Scandinavia. How would Wisconsin handle a sudden influx of 100,000 Muslims?

The best thing about this book is the very well informed and even handed nature of Jenkins’ discourse. He knows his stuff and is ready to share the numbers behind what he is saying. He doesn’t have the answers, but he is asking all the right questions. Like his previous titles in the series, well worth reading, both for the religious aspects and the security angle.

Catholics and Obama, part the first

On dog-whistles and weasel words.

The Sunday before the election, our bishop had a letter read at every parish at every Mass. No problem with that, though I had already voted. Of course, waiting until the last moment to speak your piece might be considered an authoritarian trick, meant to end discussion instead of promote it.

The letter (since removed/unlinked for the diocese’s website) said some straightforward thing. The bishop and the diocese do not endorese candidates or political parties. We should look at the candidates’ records. We should learn, explore, consider.  No problem with that. It is totally in line with the Church’s documents on Faithful Citizenship.

Then there were the dog whistles, the nudge-nudge, wink-wink and the weasel words.

To begin with, there was the contention that abortion is the only issue that matters in this election. Some concern there. That is contradicted by Faithful Citizenship and 2000 years of tradition. As Chesterton said, a truth too closely held becomes heresy.

Next, the subtext that the bishop would certainly have endorsed the Republicans if it wouldn’t have cost the Church it’s non-profit status and that we should all understand this. Nope. If it is a matter of the murder of millions and the fate of the eternal souls of the members of his diocese, am I to understand that he isn’t speaking out because it might cost the institution some cash? If so, he belongs in one of the lower circle of Dante’s Hell. That would be a degree of moral cowardice that I can not consider him capable of. So…I find him innocent. He said what he meant and he meant what he said, just like Horton. No endorsement, covert or otherwise.

Next, the unspoken thought that only the Republicans are dedicated to reducing abortions. If that were true, abortion would indeed be rare. Since Roe vs. Wade, we have had Nixon, Ford (Carter) Reagan twice, Bush, (Clinton twice) and Bush twice. It is not those who say Lord Lord, but those who do something who enter the Kingdom. Given all those votes and all those years, the Republicans have put five Catholics on the Supreme Court, but not taken any substantial actions to reduce abortions. One might almost think that Republicans require this issue to keep their party together and would be fools to seek a resolution. It is not necessary to condemn Republicans as hypocrites, it is enough to point out that they are not accomplishing what they say they will do.

Next, the letter is based on an analysis of the Freedom of Choice Act, which makes it clear that it will maximize abortions, practically demanding that doctors kidnap women off the street. On further investigation, this analysis was prepared by the Family Research Council, the political arm of Dr. Dobson’s Focus on the Family and seconded by hard right Catholics. Sorry. I don’t take political advice from Focus on the Family. The track  record of their analysis is right up there with Fox News – wrong just about all the time and badly askew. I also don’t take religious advice from Dr. Dobson and neither should Catholic bishops. Shame on them for finding data to wrap around their policies. Very unorthodox.

Next, the notion that the solution that America needs on abortion is criminalizing it. Just arrest enough women and the problem will go away. Just vote to criminalize it and your hands are clean, even if nothing ever happens. Very unBiblical. Very unChristian. If Christians and Catholics oppose abortion, they should be working every day to make certain that no woman ever feels the need to have one, that circumstances never make abortion seem the best alternative. Their money and their time should be dedicated to that end, not the election of one political faction. Then our hands would be clean.

Finally, opposition to FOCA will be fierce. It is a half loaf that will satisfy hunger. It will leave the way clear to set strict limits on late term abortions (centered on viability, not trimesters). It will hit the political and moral sweet spot that will sufficiently satisfy people that action has been taken, that abortions can and will be reduced. This is a middle ground that sets aside criminalization. I think that it will find support within the bell curve of our country and the criminalization crowd will go fa-nuts.

To my mind, until we abandon the entire concept of criminalization, we will make no progress on abortion. If we as Christians do, we can start acting the way Jesus would and show the world that we care about life, not just elections and power.

I’m baaaaaack

OK, so no one noticed I was gone.

Well, I’m back. Been very busy lately with non-blogging activities. Spent a day or three canvassing for Obama, which I felt compelled to do. If my sons can spend 2 years in Iraq, I can walk around town for a couple days to participate in the election of their commander-in-chief.

Plus, I have been working on a publishing project. It involves reprinting an out of copyright book with additional content (lots more photos and an appendix). Since this was always going to be self-published, it involved a learning curve on a number of issues and in some ways was more work than actually writing a book.  Preview it here – Grit, grief and gold

So now, back to business. Expect some reviews soon. I have some comments about the election (how can I not), though I don’t intend to make this site political. I’ll be covering the process of self-publishing, but don’t want to be too informative until I have more information. The proof copy is being printed now and the proof is in the proof.