Unrest in Egypt Stirs Fear and Hope

With attacks on Christians already increasing in the Middle East, the populist uprising in Egypt has triggered fears among some that the region's largest non-Muslim population - Egypt's 7 million Coptic Christians - could be at risk.

Copt leaders in the United States said they are terrified that a new Egyptian government with a strong Islamic fundamentalist bent would persecute Christians. They are quietly lobbying the Obama administration to do more to protect Christians in Muslim countries and are holding prayer vigils and fasts such as one that ends Wednesday evening at Copt churches around the country, including four in the Washington area.

"The current situation for the Copts stinks, but [longtime Egyptian President Hosni] Mubarak is the best of the worst for us," said the Rev. Paul Girguis of St. Mark Coptic Orthodox Church in Fairfax County, which has about 3,000 members. "If Muslim extremists take over, the focus will be extreme persecution against Copts. Some people even predict genocide."

Some major U.S. Christian figures, including well-known evangelical leaders and representatives of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, declined to publicly discuss the situation in Egypt, saying they wanted to avoid bringing dangerous attention to the country's Christians by appearing to complain or to advocate for some particular political outcome.

Their trepidation stems from repeated attacks on churches in Iraq, where hundreds of thousands of Christians have fled in recent years, and from the New Year's Day bombing of a Coptic church in Egypt that killed almost two dozen worshipers and wounded nearly 100. The Coptic church is one of the oldest Christian communities in the world and is based in Egypt.

"Egypt is the bellwether because its Christian community is so large and is the strongest in the Middle East," said Paul Marshall, a global religious freedom expert and a fellow at the conservative Hudson Institute. "What happens to Christians in Egypt is very significant. Everyone is watching."

But not all American faith leaders are bracing for the worst. Joel Hunter, an evangelical pastor of a Florida megachurch and a frequent adviser to President Obama, said he's hearing a lot of optimism from Egyptian Christians who believe the uprising will lead to more freedom and religious liberty.

Many younger Christians in the United States also see the protests as something to celebrate, Hunter said, and older, more politically conservative Christians tend to be more skeptical of Islam generally and are worried about how a new Egyptian government will treat Israel.

So far, the protests have focused on jobs, free speech and democratic elections, not religion, so it's unclear what the end of Mubarak's rule would mean for religious minorities. But in recent years, Iraq has lost about half its historical Christian population because of persecution, and Christians have been leaving Iran and Lebanon in lesser numbers.

After last month's bombing of the Coptic church in Alexandria, Pope Benedict XVI publicly urged the Egyptian government and other leaders in the region to protect religious minorities. Egypt's foreign ministry spokesman said the pope's comments were "an unacceptable interference" in the country's internal affairs, and Egypt withdrew its ambassador to the Vatican in response.

Some U.S. Christian leaders said the situation in Egypt might put the issue of religious persecution abroad back on the radar of American Christians. A decade ago the freedom of Christians to worship in places such as Sudan was a top agenda item for American Christians, evangelicals in particular. But experts said this week that wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have absorbed people's attention.

At a congressional hearing last month about the persecution of Christians in the Middle East, Christian leaders urged the administration to lean harder on Egypt's leaders to investigate violence against religious minorities and to lay out a clear strategy in Iraq for their protection.

A 2009 survey by the nonprofit Pew Forum measured governmental and societal restrictions on religion and found that a number of the world's least tolerant countries are Muslim-majority. The list included Iran, Egypt, Indonesia and Pakistan, as well as India, which is majority Hindu. Concerns include bans on public preaching and conversion and the lack of prosecution for religion-based violence.

Some advocates for religious freedom note that moderate Muslims and non-majority Muslims also suffer attacks and that the problem is extremism, not Islam.

Bridges Built Or Burned Between Christianity, Islam Will Profoundly Affect Its Expression Globally

The Muslim population in the United States is projected to more than double by 2030, according to a new Pew Forum report.

There are about 2.6 million Muslim adults and children in the United States (0.8 percent of the U.S. population) in 2010. That figure is expected to rise to 6.2 million (1.7 percent) in 2030, predicted the Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life report released Thursday.

Most of the growth will be due to immigration and higher birth rates among Muslims. Christians are, however, expected to still make up by far the majority of the population. But by 2030, Muslims are predicted to be as numerous as Jews or Episcopalians are in the United States today.

“The Muslim population will double in the U.S., but the report cannot indicate what portion of the spectrum of Islam will be practiced by American Muslims,” pointed out Pastor Joel C. Hunter of Northland, A Church Distributed in Central Florida, to The Christian Post.

“Muslims, like Christians, are not a uniform block of believers. The bridges built or burned between Christianity, Islam, and other religions are likely to profoundly affect its expression in this nation and around the world.”

Hunter was a member of President Obama’s Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships and served on the Inter-Religious Cooperation taskforce. He is also on the board of the National Association of Evangelicals.

“The Future of the Global Muslim Population” report also predicts that the Muslim population worldwide will increase by 35 percent, or from 1.6 billion in 2010 to 2.2 billion by 2030.

This means that the worldwide Muslim population would be growing about twice the rate of the non-Muslim population. Based on this prediction, Muslims would make up slightly more than a quarter (26.4 percent) of the world’s total projected population of 8.3 billion in 2030. In 2010, Muslims make up 23.4 percent of the world’s population of 6.9 billion.

Notably, the report predicts that Pakistan will surpass Indonesia as the country that is home to the largest Muslim population by 2030. Most of the world’s Muslims (about 60 percent) will still be located in the Asia-Pacific region, while about 20 percent will live in the Middle East and North Africa, which are similar proportions to today.

Although the population of Muslims will grow in Europe and the Americas, they are predicted to remain small minorities in the two regions. The United States is projected to have a larger Muslim population by 2030 than any European countries with the exception of Russia and France, although other European countries may have higher percentages of Muslims. Russia is projected to have the largest Muslim population in 2030 with 18.6 million of the religion's followers.

Overall, Muslims are expected to make up about eight percent of Europe’s total population by 2030, up from six percent in 2010. In the United Kingdom, Muslims are projected to comprise 8.2 percent of the population in 2030, up from 4.5 percent today. And in Austria, 9.3 percent of the population is projected to be Muslims, a rise from 5.7 percent in 2010; in France, 10.3 percent from 7.5 percent, and in Belgium 10.2 percent from 6 percent.

Interestingly, nearly a quarter (23.2 percent) of Israel’s population is expected to be Muslims by 2030, up from 17.7 percent in 2010 and 14.1 percent in 1990. During the past two decades, the Muslim population in Israel has more than doubled, increasing from 0.6 million in 1990 to 1.3 million in 2010.

“[This] report will give fodder to the alarmists and will be underplayed by those who just think sociological patterns are interesting,” commented Pastor Joel C. Hunter. “The call for Christians to evangelize the world remains the same no matter what other religious populations are doing, but this development will likely stimulate attention to our growth or lack thereof.”

The Florida megachurch pastor predicted that with the growing effort to expunge religion from society, evangelicals and the growing Muslim population will find themselves partnering on many moral issues in the public square.

The comprehensive 209-page report contains details of different factors that are predicted to contribute to the changes expected in the Muslim population around the world.

On the web:  The Future of the Global Muslim Population

Michelle A. Vu Christian Post Reporter

FAITH IN THE PUBLIC SQUARE: PEACE

Part 4 in a series of teachings from Dr. Joel C. Hunter about how to approach today’s issues biblically, respectfully and effectively.

Commentary: Interfaith Cooperation

Check this out on Chirbit

CMF Public Media (cmfmedia.org) presents a 3-minute commentary by "a voice that matters on an issue that voice believes matters."

Advent Advice: Prepare for a Divine Interruption (Editorial for The Huffington Post)

The Christmas story sounds strangely familiar, not just because it is well known history but because it is in part our story, too. Who of us has not experienced shocking interruptions of what we had hoped would be a predictable course of events?

More than 2,000 years ago, no one was prepared for God to actually do what had been long predicted by the prophets. It was easier to believe that a Messiah, a Savior, would come some day than to think that it could happen in their lifetime.

A baby? Did the angel say "child?" Was that an angel? Who was ready for a baby?

Reactions to surprise varies between believing it is from God and immediately submitting, like Mary, or deciding to quickly dispense with the discomfort, assuming someone has done something wrong, like Joseph's first reaction to Mary's condition.

Part of the surprise was the original cast of characters God chose. Mary was an unwed teenager who had "never known a man." She likely thought of herself as a poor prospect for motherhood. Joseph was a descendant of religious leaders, surely expecting the propriety of a traditional marriage before fatherhood. Herod was a paranoid political figure. The Magi were foreigners, educated scientists of the day, who were not a part of the Jewish faith. The shepherds were just regular working folk, unlikely to be esteemed in religious circles because they could not keep all the ceremonial laws. Who out of that cast would expect to be chosen?

And circumstances were just as inconvenient. A pregnant woman traveled 80 miles walking or on a donkey to give birth in a stable for animals because the government had passed a decree demanding a census. An angel, then a host of angels, announced the arrival of the baby who would be God's presence on earth. In this story, God does not come in the form of a conquering hero. In fact, His answer to our hopes and fears is a baby that needs human care and patient attention before He saves us from our own destructive ways. How odd it is to demand that humans expend energy to help God.

No one in the Christmas story can receive Him without some adjustment to their regular lives. In fact, as they receive Him, their lives are not just regular anymore. Now they will live in adjoining worlds -- the baby who will become a great teacher, and give his life as a sacrifice, is the door to heaven. Those who receive him experience an access to heaven while living on earth because heaven came to earth in him.

Of course learning to bridge two worlds is a risky and uncomfortable business. Joseph and Mary become refugees to escape the political figure's attack. The Magi return to their home by a way that will avoid contact with those who demand destruction of the competition. The shepherds return to the field, praising God but wondering how what they have seen relates to their everyday lives.

God came in a way that would reconcile the differences and distances between groups. If shepherds and Magi, if a poor couple and the Roman Caesar, if stars and animals and crowds unaware can be combined in the story of God's special arrival, then cooperation among different groups for the good of all would seem to be God's way.

Once upon a time, God interrupted the lives of people to make them part of a special story. Those of us who commemorate the story are also part of it. During Advent we prepare for Christmas not merely as a ritual but as a hoped-for divine interruption. We look to recognize in the interruption of our routines a chance to see God's arrival again. We are hoping that He will use us with groups that would ordinarily not be in the same story. We are hoping that as our families get together, as we personally ponder in our hearts (as Mary did) all the facets of the Christmas story, God will use us to do something extraordinary in the world again.

The "Glory to God in the highest [is] on earth peace among men [as in male and female humankind] with whom He is pleased" (Luke 2:14).

During this solemn season of Advent, the preparation to re-live the birth of Jesus, we have a choice: We can focus on decorations and gifts and food, some of it fun and bonding. Or we can focus on the door, once a baby, adjoining heaven and earth. We can get ready to worship God in such a way that we will be ongoing agents of reconciliation. We can long for and work for a world where different and distant groups are all a part of the same story -- His.

FIND THIS ARTICLE AT: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joel-c-hunter/advent-preparation-after-_b_788157.html

Hearing over Tennessee mosque puts Islam on trial

MURFREESBORO, Tenn. -- Islam is suddenly on trial in a booming Nashville suburb, where opponents of a new mosque have spent six days in court trying to link it to what they claim is a conspiracy to take over America by imposing restrictive religious rule.

The hearing is supposed to be about whether Rutherford County officials violated Tennessee's open meetings law when they approved the mosque's site plan. Instead, plaintiff's attorney Joe Brandon Jr. has used it as a forum to question whether the world's second-biggest faith even qualifies as a religion, and to push a theory that American Muslims want to replace the Constitution with extremist Islamic law.

"Do you want to know about a direct connection between the Islamic Center and Shariah law, a.k.a. terrorism?" Brandon asked one witness in a typical line of questioning.

Brandon has repeatedly conflated a moderate version of Shariah with its most extreme manifestations, suggesting that all Muslims must adhere to those interpretations.

At one point, he asked whether Rutherford County Commissioner Gary Farley supported hanging a whip in his house as a warning to his wife and then beating her with it, something Brandon claimed was part of "Shariah religion."

The commissioner protested that he would never beat his wife.

County attorney Jim Cope objected to the question, saying, "This is a circus." The rhetoric has conjured up comparisons to another culture clash that played out in a Tennessee courtroom a hundred miles and nearly a century away from Murfreesboro, a college city of 100,000 that is among the fastest-growing communities in the country. In 1925, the world watched as evolution came under attack at the Scopes monkey trial in Dayton, Tenn.

Chancellor Robert Corlew has consistently given the plaintiffs leeway to present testimony by nonexperts and documents that they cannot prove are legitimate, saying he reserves the right to strike things from the record later.

Corlew, who holds an elected office, has given little explanation for why he has allowed the testimony to stray so far afield.

Since it is not a jury trial, the judge can ultimately disregard anything he deems irrelevant. Several attorneys suggested he may want the plaintiffs, three residents who object to how the mosque came about, to feel they were able to have their say.

That could explain why Corlew has allowed Brandon to repeatedly question witnesses about whether Islam is a legitimate religion - even after the Department of Justicestepped in with a brief stating that it was.

When Farley, the commissioner, told Brandon the federal government defined Islam as a religion, Brandon responded, "Are you one of those people who believes everything the government says? Are you aware the government once said it was OK to own slaves?"

Other faiths have risen to the defense of the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro. The newly formed Interfaith Coalition on Mosques, which is composed of prominent Catholics, Jews, Muslims, and Southern Baptists and other Protestants, has filed a brief in the case.

It's good for the mosque's opponents to get their day in court - testimony is to resume Friday - said the Rev. Joel Hunter, an evanglical megachurch pastor and coalition member.

But it's "really out there" to question whether Islam is a religion, said Hunter, who leads a Longwood, Fla., congregation called Northland, A Church Distributed.

Seeking to prove that the mosque has terrorist leanings, witnesses have pointed out that board member Mosaad Rowash previously had pro-Hamas postings on his MySpace page, something the mosque's leaders have not denied. The U.S. government considers Hamas, a Palestinian Islamic political party with an armed wing that has attacked Israel, a terrorist organization.

The political views of Rowash - who hasn't been called to testify and hasn't commented publicly - and other board members are "totally irrelevant," said Deborah Lauter, the director of civil rights for the Jewish Anti-Defamation League, which sponsors the interfaith coalition.

If all of the members of the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro were public cheerleaders for Hamas, it would still be illegal to discriminate against them because the First Amendment protects freedom of worship, she said.

Even the group that provided the information on Rowash, the Washington-based Investigative Project on Terrorism, doesn't claim that the MySpace postings prove anything about the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro or its members.

Managing director Ray Locker said the Washington group provided the information about Rowash to a Tennessee resident who sent an inquiry about the mosque. He said how such information is used is beyond his group's control.

"We don't consider all Muslims to be terrorists," he said. "The vast majority of American Muslims just want to worship freely, just like members of other religions."

That wasn't the message of witness Frank Gaffney, the president and founder of the Washington-based Center for Security Policy and a former deputy assistant secretary of defense in the Reagan administration.

While acknowledging he was not an expert on Shariah law, Gaffney testified that Shariah, and by extension the new mosque, poses a threat to America.

Shariah isn't really law, at least not law as a universally recognized, codified body of rules and rights, the way Americans have come to know it. Shariah is a set of core principles that most Muslims recognize as well as a series of rulings from religious scholars.

It's some of those rulings, such as stoning a woman to death for committing adultery, that many non-Muslim Americans find reprehensible. But many Muslims, in America and around the world, are equally horrified by them, said Mohammad Fadel, an assistant professor of law at the University of Toronto Faculty of Law and an expert on Islamic law.

The mosque project has had problems outside court as well. A sign at the construction site was spray-painted with the words "Not Welcome" and torn in half, and federal investigators have offered a $20,000 reward for information leading to an arrest in what they say was the arson of a dump truck on the grounds.

Hunter, the Florida pastor, said he studied American history in college and knows that what is happening to Muslims today has happened to other groups in the past.

"Every minority - and Islam is very much a minority in this country right now - has had to struggle for equal rights," he said. "Islam is facing that now and we will not rest until they have equal rights with other religions."

FIND THIS ARTICLE AT: http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2010/11/11/general-us-rel-islam-on-trial_8098629.html?boxes=Homepagebusinessnews

Intersection: Muslim-Christian Relations After Gainesville Koran-Burning Threat

Check this out on Chirbit

Host Mark Simpson speaks with Central Florida Imam Muhammad Musri, who was at the center of negotiations with the Gainesville pastor who planned to burn copies of the Koran on last weekend's anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. He's joined by Dr. Joel Hunter for a discussion of religious fundamentalism. The two men share their surprising views on how this event will affect Christian-Muslim relations.

CNN: National Association of Evangelicals denounces church's Quran burning event

The National Association of Evangelicals, the nation's largest evangelical umbrella group, is urging a Florida church to call off a planned Quran burning scheduled for September 11. Here's the NAE's statement:

NAE Urges Cancellation of Planned Qu’ran Burning

The National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) encourages increased understanding and reconciliation between those of different faiths and backgrounds, and it laments efforts that work against a just and peaceful society. The plans recently announced by a Florida group to burn copies of the Qu’ran on September 11 show disrespect for our Muslim neighbors and would exacerbate tensions between Christians and Muslims throughout the world. The NAE urges the cancellation of the burning.

NAE President Leith Anderson said, “It sounds like the proposed Qu’ran burning is rooted in revenge. Yet the Bible says that Christians should ‘make sure that nobody pays back wrong for wrong, but always try to be kind to each other and to everyone else’ (1 Thessalonians 5:15).”

In 1996 the NAE addressed religious persecution saying that “If people are to fulfill the obligations of conscience, history teaches the urgent need to foster respect and protection for the right of all persons to practice their faith.” [i] In the same resolution, the NAE pledged to “address religious persecution carried out by our Christian brothers and sisters whenever this occurs around the world.”

The NAE calls on its members to cultivate relationships of trust and respect with our neighbors of other faiths. God created human beings in his image, and therefore all should be treated with dignity and respect. The proposed burning of Qu’rans would be profoundly offensive to Muslims worldwide, just as Christians would be insulted by the burning of Bibles. Such an act would escalate tensions between members of the two faiths in the United States and around the world.

“We have to recognize that fighting fire with fire only builds a bigger fire,” said Joel Hunter, Senior Pastor of Northland, A Church Distributed, in Orlando, Fla., and member of the NAE Board of Directors. “Love is the water that will eventually quench the destruction.”

Anderson said, “The most powerful statement by the organizers of the planned September 11th bonfire would be to call it off in the name and love of Jesus Christ.”

FIND THIS ARTICLE AT: http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2010/07/30/national-association-of-evangelicals-denounces-churchs-quran-burning-event/

Evangelicals Support U.S., Russia Nuclear Arms Treaty

Evangelical leaders say the nuclear arms reduction treaty signed by President Obama and Russian President Dmitri Medvedev on Thursday will increase the chances of world peace.

Evangelical leaders say the nuclear arms reduction treaty signed by President Obama and Russian President Dmitri Medvedev on Thursday will increase the chances of world peace.

The treaty, called New START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty), will reduce the stockpile of nuclear weapons in both countries and restore an inspection team to verify their arsenals. The inspection agreement expired in December.

"Wisdom is better than weapons of wars," said the Rev. Dr. Joel C. Hunter, senior pastor of the Orlando-based megachurch Northland - A Church Distributed, citing Ecclesiastes 9:18. "If implemented, the New START agreement will reduce the number of outdated nuclear weapons and the likelihood of terrorist appropriations of those weapons as it increases monitoring of nuclear material."

"It therefore will increase the chances of world peace from both state and non-state actors."

The new treaty, if ratified by lawmakers in both countries, would require each country to have a maximum of 1,550 strategic warheads, down from 2,200. It would also limit both countries to 800 total launchers, down from 1,600.

New START is seen as a sign of President Obama's commitment to make good on his promise of a nuclear weapon-free world.

Almost exactly a year ago, Obama had given a speech in Prague where he articulated his commitment to seek a world without nuclear weapons. On Thursday, Obama and Medvedev signed the historic arms reduction pact also in Prague.

"I can hardly imagine a more important foreign policy goal for Christian citizens of the United States than pursuing a realistic, comprehensive strategy to reduce the number of strategic nuclear weapons - weapons which cannot be used in any conceivable scenario in accordance with the principles of just war," said Andy Crouch, senior editor at Christianity Today International.

Crouch called the New START treaty a significant step towards "greater security, stability, transparency, and predictability, and toward the ultimate goal of shaping of a world where the use of nuclear weapons, by anyone, is truly impossible."

The United States and Russia has 95 percent of the global stockpile of nuclear weapons. The huge buildup of nuclear weapons in both countries is a result of the Cold War. Other countries with nuclear weapons include the United Kingdom, France, China, India, and Pakistan.

Israel is thought to have nuclear weapons but has never publicly declared it does, and Iran and North Korea are also suspected of possessing or building nuclear weapons.

The New START treaty, the first was in 1991, was signed just two days after the Obama administration released its Nuclear Posture Review, which more clearly defines in what situation and against whom the U.S. can use nuclear weapons.

Under the 2010 Nuclear Posture Review, the U.S. cannot use nuclear weapons to attack a non-nuclear country that complies to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The new document also changes nuclear command structure to help prevent accidental launch, rejects new nuclear weapons programs, and reduces the role of nuclear weapons in the U.S. national security strategy.

Christian anti-nuclear weapons group Two Futures Projects calls the Nuclear Posture Review a step towards a "morally sound" nuclear policy.

The Rev. Tyler Wigg-Stevenson, director of the Two Futures Project, told The Christian Post Wednesday that in a post-Cold War era the U.S. can no longer depend on the deterrence strategy to maintain world peace. These days,he said, nuclear weapons can fall into the hands of terrorists who do not care if we retaliate with nuclear weapons because some of them have a suicide bomber mentality.

Wigg-Stevenson called for a "wholesale reassessment" of the U.S. nuclear security paradigm in the 21st century.

"The status quo is not protecting our people," he asserted.

"We can't wait until a crisis happens. We have to do all the work up ahead," he said, commenting on the possibility of terrorists obtaining nuclear weapons.

He added that in a just war framework the only somewhat moral explanation for possessing nuclear weapons is to deter an attack. But one cannot make a moral case of deterrence to permanently possess nuclear weapons.

The Baptist preacher said Christians should view their responsibility to advocate for the abolishment of nuclear weapons like their faith commitment to fight human trafficking or eliminate extreme poverty. Though anyone with a conscience would care about these issues, Wigg-Stevenson said Christians should bring the "zeal" to the issue because they believe in protecting innocent life.

President Obama will continue addressing the nuclear weapons issue next week during the nuclear security summit in Washington that will draw the world's top leaders.

Michelle A. Vu Christian Post Reporter

FIND THIS ARTICLE AT: http://www.christianpost.com/article/20100408/evangelicals-support-u-s-russia-nuclear-arms-treaty/index.html

NEWSWEEK: White House Religion Panel "Gets It Right"

By Lisa Miller | Newsweek.com | Mar 10, 2010

There has been some bellyaching in recent months—including by me, and also especially in The Washington Post—over the relevance and influence of the task force of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships (a god-awful mouthful of an administrative tag if ever there was one). This was a committee of about two dozen people, appointed by President Obama just over a year ago, asked to address some of the country's most important values issues and make recommendations to the president. Rumors persisted that relations within the council were acrimonious and, given that council members had such differing views on questions of faith—they were progressive and conservative and were at odds over the best government role inside churches and other faith-based institutions—there was no way to hammer out any but the lowest-common-denominator type of resolution. The most persistent complaint, and the one that I continue to hear, is the worry that their recommendations, which they offered to the president this week, would not get a fair hearing at the highest levels of the administration.

That would be a shame. The report addresses interrreligous dialogue, climate change, fatherhood, and poverty among other things. There are, certainly, some namby-pamby recommendations in the report—upholding fatherhood as a good thing, for example—but elements of the report have heft. Especially serious and provocative are the task force's recommendations on the subject of reforming the Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships itself. Though bureaucratic and unsexy, these recommendations essentially demand that the administration clarify the muddy and inconsistent ground rules for religious groups seeking federal funds for charitable work. This has long been a legislative and administrative quagmire, characterized by misunderstandings, favoritism, and legal challenges. At this moment in time, when Boston's Catholic Charities has closed its historic adoption agency rather than take government money and so be required to adopt children to homosexual married couples, such clarification would seem necessary indeed.

Council members were able to agree that the constitutional separation of church and state is foundational and that recipients of government money be more clearly informed about what that means in terms of their activities—at the federal and at the local level. Most interesting, the task force asked the president to revise language that bars religious groups receiving federal aid from "inherently religious activities, such as worship, religious instruction and proselytizing" saying the word "inherently" allowed too much room for misunderstanding. "Explicitly," they said, would be a better word choice.

The task force was also able to agree that protecting the religious identities of religious institutions is crucial. They disagreed over things like whether a religious organization receiving government aid could perform social services in a room containing religious symbols, and whether churches receiving government money should be required to set up a separate corporation for those funds. In a political environment of gridlock and frustration, the clarity of these agreements—and even of the disagreements—is welcome.

The most difficult question, however, was left aside, for the Department of Justice to decide at another time. This is the question of whether faith-based organizations receiving government money should be able to hire and fire based on religion. This fight is a mini culture war in itself, for it goes to the question of religious and civic identity. The left sees it as a question of civil liberties, the right one of unwelcome government intervention in the lives of private institutions. Conservatives and liberals promise that this is a hill upon which they are willing to die.

Now the White House task force has disbanded, and a new one—along with new issues—has not yet been named. Which of the task force recommendations will be adopted, and when, remains the driving question; if the president delays, he will have squandered considerable goodwill. In the meantime, I will make my own recommendation. Please change the name of the faith-based office. Please.

Lisa Miller is NEWSWEEK's religion editor. Her book Heaven: Our Enduring Fascination With the Afterlife is due out from Harper in March.

Find this article at

http://www.newsweek.com/id/234706

© 2010