Harper shows his religious side

In an interview with the Quebec City magazine Prestige, Stephen Harper has said that family is more important to him than political success, and the judgement of God more important than the judgement of future historians.

As Harper put it, "To be honest with you, I am a lot more concerned by God's verdict regarding my life than the one of historians".

Regarding his work-life balance, Harper said, "The important thing, for me, is to preserve family ties. I can win elections, but if I lose my family, it's a disaster."

BTW, Harper belongs to the Christian and Missionary Alliance.

Putting Divine judgement over human judgement and family before work is something I can agree with. These are values I share. The question is, then, why do I still find Harper so creepy?

For one thing, I think, it's because his attitude makes you wonder whether he cares about human beings outside of his family circle. And so, speaking of his concern with "God's verdict" (since he raised the subject), I wonder whether he actually thinks about whether God would approve of his particular actions, such as doing all he can to prevent Canada from taking meaningful steps to reduce its carbon emissions. If he does, I wonder why he remains as he is. Or perhaps he feels he has blanket immunity because of his faith alone?

Obama's Ramadan greeting

Barack Obama charms once again with his Ramadan greeting to Muslims around the world.



As he points out himself, though, it's time to see more action on the ground, in addition to encouraging words. Nevertheless, after Bush, this is so refreshing!

Obama's speech seems to have become one of the top stories connected to the beginning of Ramadan this year, as can be seen both on Al Jazeera and the BBC.

Not quite everyone has the same focus, though. I was listening to the BBC Asian Network yesterday, and the presenter, while discussing the onset of Ramadan, said, "What about... getting it on with your partner?" Certainly a legitimate question, although I don't think I would have put it quite that way. :)

Netanyahu seeking Christian Zionist support

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is once again courting the Christian Zionists, that is, Evangelicals who believe that Israeli control over all of Biblical Palestine is necessary for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ (peace be upon him) to occur.

As M.J. Rosenberg of the Israel Policy Forum notes, Barack Obama is far more popular among Jewish Americans than Bibi Netanyahu is. Most American Jews are liberals who support the Democratic Party; Bibi is much more at ease with the Republicans, many of whom share his disdain for the two-state solution. Hence his appearance at the Christians United for Israel (CUFI) conference, recently held in Washington.

The conference was organised by Netanyahu's friend of convenience Pastor John Hagee, who had infamously declared that God had sent the Holocaust to force the Jews to emigrate to Palestine.

As an aside, the official CUFI website, as seen today, states that "There is a new Hitler in the Middle East--President Ahmadinejad of Iran". This, of course, nicely matches Bibi's own stance on Ahmadinejad. The CUFI seems unashamed to say this, despite the obvious and sickening monstrosity of such a statement, given that the lives of Iranian Jews are in no danger, and that Iran, despite the faults of its government, bears no similarity to Nazi Germany.

In a fine example of his usual truthiness, Netanyahu said, addressing the CUFI, that "millions of Christians stand for Israel because they want to see genuine peace in the Holy Land." See, that may be true for some Christians, but Bibi knows better than anyone that the particular Christians he was addressing support Israel for one main reason: they want to hasten the End Days. Besides, by "genuine peace", Bibi obviously understands something akin to the Pirate Code: "Take everything. Give nothing back."

In any case, according to Rosenberg, all this posturing by Netanyahu will amount to nothing, since the Christian Zionists he is aligning himself with are already committed Republicans; they are likely to oppose Obama no matter what he does. Rosenberg believes that, to make a difference in US public opinion towards Obama's policy on Israel and Palestine, Bibi needs to win over Jewish Americans. And that just isn't likely to happen.

Meanwhile, ignoring this sideshow, Obama is in pursuit of some real Middle Eastern diplomacy. You go, Barack.

[This post was written in Istanbul.]

Illinois pastor murdered

Pastor Fred Winters of the First Baptist Church in Maryville, Illinois has been shot dead inside his church by a man who stabbed himself after the attack. The suspect has been arrested (BBC).

Yet another reasons, if one were needed, to take guns off the streets.

Muslims (finally) part of the American family

This will probably come as no surprise, but my favourite part about Obama's inauguration speech was the line "We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus - and non-believers." Something like this would have been nice during the campaign, coming from Obama himself, and not just Colin Powell (although I certainly admire Powell for what he said). Now, though, Obama has righted a significant campaign wrong. The word "Muslim" is thus no longer a "smear"; it is part of what the US is.

My second favourite line was, "To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect." And as part of the launch of this "new way forward", in his interview to Al Arabiya, Obama said "America is a country of Muslims, Jews, Christians, non-believers", moving the Muslims into first place. This is not to say that the Muslims must have precedence in lists; rather, my point is obviously that delegitimising the Americanness of Muslim Americans has just got a lot harder.

It's certainly too early to say that American Muslims have "arrived", but it's a good start. It makes me happy for my American Muslim wife, but also for Muslims in the West in general, as well as for the US, which, it seems, is indeed on its way to building a "more perfect union".

[This is my 300th post on Notes on Religion.]

----------------
Now playing: Cat Stevens - Father And Son
via FoxyTunes

Report claims British govt ignores Anglican Church

A report drawn up by the Cambridge-based Von Hugel Institute for the Church of England is claiming that the British government pays "lip service" to the Church, as well as to other branches of Christianity, and favours Islam and other minority religions.

The report, entitled "Moral, but No Compass", claims that the government has demonstrated a "lack of understanding of, or interest in, the Church of England's current or potential contribution in the public sphere." Instead, the government focuses "almost exclusively" on Muslims and other religious minorities.

According to Stephen Hulme, the Bishop of Lowe, the Church spokesman on urban affairs, government departments had "nothing, absolutely nothing" in the way of information on Church of England activities. At the same time, according to Bishop Hulme, the Church of England is and has long been the biggest volunteer organisation in the country.

The report also calls for the establishment of a Minister of Religion position in the cabinet. According to Bishop Lowe, the proposed minister's role would be to coordinate relations between the government and religious groups (BBC).

It's not surprising that there is something of a backlash when Britain's official religion is marginalised by the government. At the same time, though, the number of practising Anglicans in Britain is about the same as the number of practising Muslims. It's no wonder, then, that the British government pays attention to its Muslim community. Nevertheless, more balance would probably be better for everyone.

Merry Christmas!

I would like to wish all my Catholic and Protestant readers a Merry Christmas!

During this joyful season, let us remember the ties that bind together those who believe in God and Jesus (pbuh).

You can see some pictures showing Christians celebrating Christmas in nine different countries around the world here.

US church gets fined for desecrating Marine's funeral

The Topeka, Kansas-based Westboro Baptist Church has been fined US $10.9 million (Canadian $10.2 million) by a court in Maryland for invasion of privacy and emotional distress resulting from its protests at the funeral of Marine Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder, who died in Iraq in March 2006.

Members of the church attended Snyder's funeral with signs saying "Thank God for dead soldiers" and "You're going to hell".

The Westboro Baptist Church, which is not affiliated with any Baptist movement, claims that the losses suffered by the US in the Iraq War are the result of Americans' toleration of homosexuality. In their defence, members of the church argued that they had a constitutional right to free speech. The church plans to appeal the sentence (BBC).

What I don't understant is this: if the members of the church do think homosexuality is so offensive, why say "You're going to hell" at the funeral of a soldier who probably had nothing to do with that orientation? Why adopt a repulsive practice to fight something which the church considers repulsive?

Orša holds an "Orthodox" birthday

The Belarusian city of Orša (Orsha) is currently celebrating the 940th anniversary of its founding. The celebration is entitled "An Orthodox Christian Orša" a "spiritual and educational" fair called "An Orthodox Christian Belarus". Several Orthodox parish choirs were due to perform at the Orša Centre of Culture.

The festivities, which stretch over several days, also include art exhibitions, a conference entitled "Orša in the Historico-Cultural and Religious Development of Belarus", an air show, horse rides, a Medieval reenactment, and a concert (BELTA).

The question is: why are the celebrations emphasising only one aspect of Orša's diverse religious heritage, and creating the impression that the city has been entirely Orthodox for the 940 years of its existence? What about the fact that Orša became a centre of Calvinism in the 16th century? What about the city's rich Catholic and Jewish history?

I don't know if Aliaksandr Lukašenka (Lukashenka) is personally responsible for the decision to marginalise non-Orthodox groups from Orša's celebrations, but he has certainly set the tone of the official promotion of Orthodoxy in the country, a position only a third of Belarusians agreed with in a 2002 poll (while 67% of the population is Orthodox). Interestingly enough, the President describes himself as an "Orthodox Christian atheist".

Evangelical becomes LA anti-gang head

Rev. Jeff Carr, an Evangelical minister, has been appointed Director of Gang Reduction and Youth Development Programmes in Los Angeles.

It is estimated that there are 40,000 gang members in the city.

Upon his appointment, Rev. Carr said, "We can't arrest our way out of this problem. We have got to figure out how to provide opportunities to communities who have been bypassed for years" (BBC).

Carr seems like the right man for the job. Religion, when properly presented, often gives people the kind of hope they need in order to move away from self-destructive behaviour.

The question is, though: how much religious influence will Carr be able to bring to bear in his new position, given the separation of church and state in the US?

Northern Ireland gets home rule

The leading Protestant and Catholic political parties in Northern Ireland have begun implementing their power-sharing agreement, paving the way for a restoration of home rule in the province. Ian Paisley of the (Protestant) Democratic Unionist Party has been sworn in as First Minister, while Martin McGuinness of the (Catholic) Sinn Féin has become Deputy First Minister (BBC).

The BBC's James Robbins has written an interesting retrospective piece looking at the long and winding road to peace in the region.

Congratulations, Northern Ireland! Let's hope the agreement sticks.

Priest-imam football match cancelled in Norway

A football (soccer) match between Church of Norway priests and Muslim imams, which was scheduled to be held on 5 May in Oslo, has had to be cancelled because the two sides could not come to an understanding regarding female players.

Two days before the match was supposed to be held, the imams' team announced that they could not play against a mixed-gender team, because Islam does not allow unrelated men and women to come into close physical contact. The Church of Norway team agreed to make the game an all-male event. However, the female ministers who had been dropped from the team were angry at the development, which led the team captain to tender his resignation.

As a result, the Church of Norway called off the match. According to a Church spokesman, though, "both sides have learned to better understand our cultures and we have had an open discussion" (BBC).

I think that, first of all, the imams should not have made such a big deal out of the presence of female players on the Church of Norway team, but, having said that, I think that the Church team also displayed a large measure of inflexibility. Come on, now. Men and women don't play on the same teams in professional football matches. Why do they have to play together in this sort of bridge-building event? Why not hold a separate football match for female Church of Norway ministers and a team of Muslim women? If that is discrimination, isn't the existence of separate men's and women's World Cups a form of discrimination as well? Where are the Church of Norway's protests at regular, all-male or all-female football matches?

Northern Irish Loyalist group renounces violence

The Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF), a Protestant Loyalist terrorist group in Northern Ireland has renounced violence, and has declared that it will give up terrorism starting tomorrow. The UVF is responsible for killing over 500 people in Northern Ireland during the Troubles. It also killed 33 people in the Republic of Ireland in 1974.

The UVF said that it had put its arms "beyond reach", but is refusing to give them up completely (BBC).

It's about time, and let's hope the UVF will be courageous enough to take the next step: complete disarmament. If the peace process in Northern Ireland continues successfully, perhaps the province could become a model for Iraq.

Christians celebrate Easter

Christians around the world -- Catholics, Protestants, and Orthodox -- celebrated Easter yesterday, on 8 April. According to Christian belief, Easter commemorates the resurrection of Jesus Christ (pbuh) after his crucifixion, making this the most important of Christian holy days.

The BBC has compiled two photo series showing Christians in different parts of the world celebrating Easter. The first one focuses on Orthodox Christians, with pictures from Palestine, as well as Bulgaria and Russia.

The second series shows Christians celebrating in Belarus, China, Cuba, France, Germany, Iraq, the UK, Ukraine and Vatican City.

Christians celebrate Palm Sunday

Christians are celebrating Palm Sunday, which is the Sunday before Easter. It commemorates the day when, according to the New Testament, Jesus Christ (pbuh) rode into Jerusalem on a donkey, and was welcomed by townsmen holding palm branches.

This BBC photo series shows Christians celebrating the holiday in the Philippines, India, Vatican City and Jerusalem itself.

This year, Western Christians (Catholics and Protestants) and Orthodox Christians are on the same Easter schedule.

Northern Ireland rivals agree to share power

The leading Protestant and Catholic politicians of Northern Ireland have agreed to a power-sharing accord, and are planning to form a joint government for the British province. The agreement between the (Protestant) Democratic Unionist Party, led by Ian Paisley, and the (Catholic) Sinn Fein, led by Gerry Adams, paves the way for the devolution of power by Britain to the province, and for domestic affairs to be regulated in some degree by a local assembly and executive (BBC).

Finally! Now for the Iraqis to reach a similar deal.

Religious mutual funds

Religiously inspired mutual funds, which invest according to the ethical criteria of the religion their shareholders follow, are a rapidly growing segment of the market. This article reviews several Catholic, Protestant and Islamic mutual funds. While these funds do not, on average, outperform the market, the investor does derive the satisfaction of using his money in keeping with his principles (Morningstar.com).