Professor Michael Emerson

Q: Fewer than ten percent of churches in America are integrated.

A: Yeah, that comes from our research here, actually.

Q: The number is that low?

A: Yeah, seven percent. That’s what it is.

Q: Were you surprised at that?

A: Yes. Well, yes and no. But yeah, that’s pretty low.

Q: Why? What are the reasons for its being so low?

A: There are three things, and it depends on the group that we’re talking about, but there’s history, there’s culture, and then there’s social networks. So, you know, historically black and white, they worship together until about the end of slavery, and people started moving out into separate churches. But it was because of discrimination and racism and such that blacks began to establish their own denominations and their own churches.

Q: They worshipped together before the Civil War?

A: Absolutely. In part because they had no choice, right? If you were a slave, you did what the master said. And they said to worship: “You’re going to worship with us.” Now they had to sit in separate places and sometimes they’d even have to sit outside and look through the windows. But they did worship together. So we didn’t get the denominations and the separate congregations really till about into Civil War time. What’s happened then, of course, is now that we’ve had well over 100 years of this history to establish separate cultures, different ways of worshipping, and different ways of understanding theology so that when people try to come together makes it very difficult. And then, of course, social networks, you know, how do we find a place to worship? We go where our family goes. We go where our friends are, and because our social networks are so segregated by race, we end up with what we have. We also find that, you know, if you’re immigrants, you’re not part of that history. So it’s a little bit different experience. So it may be a language that separates you — again, social networks. But second-generation Asian and Hispanics, second, and third and fourth and so on, they are much more likely to be in integrated churches than are blacks or whites.

Q: Are churches a reflection of our society? We live in different neighborhoods. We work in different jobs.

A: They are. But what we found in the study is that churches are ten times less diverse than the neighborhoods they sit in. So there’s something more going on than just reflecting the neighborhood, yeah.

Q: What is going on? Is it cultural — that it is difficult to accept an outsider? Is a black church accepting whites, or the other way around?

A: I’ve been in both settings and observed, and I think when non-blacks visit a black church they will feel, they always talk about feeling so welcomed and warmly greeted but being surprised or shocked or whatever by the length of the service, by the different worship style. If we go into white congregations, non-whites will sometimes say it felt like worship never started. It was sort of dead and didn’t feel that warmly received. But so — and there are different realities either way, and it makes it difficult for all groups to try and cross boundaries.

Q: Generally white services are more calm and by the book and a lot more emotion in black services. Is that difficult for whites when they go into a black church?

A: Right, right. Preaching styles and people being slain in the spirit and things like that. Now it doesn’t happen in all black churches, and it happens sometimes in white churches, right? But on average they’re quite a bit different.

Q: The congregation saying “Amen”?

A: Call-and-response style, yes, exactly. So whenever different groups get together then there has to be this long period of negotiation. How will we worship? What’s acceptable? What’s not? If I want to say “Amen” can I? It’s one of the things we find in these congregations is that they are much more likely to be sort of up-beat worship styles, more likely that people in these congregations say “Amen,” maybe get up and dance some, tend to be a little bit more lively than a typical white service would be, but not as lively as a typical black service would be.

Q: What is most likely, a black church that’s integrated with whites or vice versa?

A: We rarely see that. Almost never.

Q: Why is that?

A: Because I think whites are used to being in power, so when whites think we ought to have integrated churches they think, “People ought to come to our church. What can we do to get them to come?” I meet almost no one that goes to an African-American church or thinks, “I’m going to do that.” Now there are whites in African-American churches. They’re interracially married. They’re highly committed. Maybe there’s a professor or two, or a student. Once in a while you get people that maybe because of economic reasons, or have a social network, they get attracted. But it’s a very tiny percent so that when we look at, you know, who are pastors and who are the head clergy of these congregations, they’re overwhelmingly white, just a few African Americans, and those folks are usually called to what were formerly white congregations, or they started interracial church from the get-go.

Q: If the pastor is black, are whites going to be less likely to go to that church because the pastor is black and in charge?

A: Yup. It’s the sad fact of how race still works in our country. We find that over and over again.

Q: But a white church doesn’t feel very welcoming to African Americans, right?

A: That’s right, that’s right. So you can see what is the difficulty. I mean, how do you make these things happen? We’ve done a lot of studies to see when they do happen, why, and I mean there’s a variety of reasons. But one, it starts with a commitment where they decide this is going to be who we are. Maybe it’s out of their faith, a new way of looking at their faith, that we must be integrated across race. So they actually put it into their mission statement, and they start changing things as a result. They may change how worship works. They may actively recruit folks and try and get them to come and help them to feel comfortable and get them involved in leadership, and there’s a variety of ways.

Q: Are they glad they did it? Does the church end up being richer for it?

A: I never meet a church that wishes they didn’t do it. I never meet a leader that wishes they didn’t do it. They will all say, to the person, it’s hard. It’s difficult. It comes with complexities and confusion as you’re trying to go across cultures, and you don’t understand, you didn’t mean to offend somebody but you’ve offended somebody. But they will all say it just does something. They could never go back to being a uniracial congregation again. It brings excitement. It brings life. It allows them to be able to know people they would never know, to meet people that are outside the congregation they would have never connected with, you know, through the networks that they developed in the congregation.

Q: Would our society be a better society if we had more integrated churches?

A: I certainly think so, and I argue so, and I give talks on that. Are there risks by putting people together? Absolutely. Is there value in the black church? Absolutely. Is there value in having immigrant churches? Absolutely. But if we don’t have congregations gathering with people of different races, what we’re doing is we are redefining racial division, a racial inequality. I spent a lot of time developing in books why worshipping separately actually impacts inequality, economic, social, on and on. So I really do believe there are huge advantages to being together even though it’s difficult, even though we have a lot to learn.

Q: Is this integration happening more in one part of the country than in another part?

A: It happens a little bit more in the West, where there’s more fluid — where everybody’s originally from somewhere else. So they have a little bit more permission to do it. It happens the least, at the individual level at least, in the South, because the South has very strong, you know, set up black churches and white churches and a long history of that, and so it’s a bigger social cost. One of the things we find when we talk to people that attend these congregations, they all have social cost to it. People want to know why they’re doing that. Sometimes they’re questions about selling out on their race or “Are we not good enough that you have to go to this kind of congregation and not ours?” So there are costs to it, and I think they’re a little bit higher in the South because of its history.

Q: I guess a pastor really sometimes has to walk a tightrope as well as really be an amazing politician, too.

A: Absolutely. Every pastor I talk to says, and particularly if they’re African American they’ll say, “I’m not black enough for African Americans. I’m not white enough for the whites. I’m not Hispanic enough.” There’s always that sense of because we’re so racially defined, if you’re trying to cross the boundaries you don’t fit into any particular space. We just say there are five, you know, racial groups in the US. I say that these folks are what we call a sixth American. There’s something different. They are somebody who — they don’t exist in any particular racial category, so they all feel it and they kind of congregate to each other. So you find a lot of these sixth Americans congregate in these interracial congregations. They hang out together at work, at school, wherever.

Q: There is an impression that in many ways church has meant more to the black community over the years than any other particular section of America.

A: Absolutely. It may be changing, but still it’s the one place, that total control of an institution, that African Americans have. So sometimes, you know, you’ll hear the statement of African Americans saying, “I have to work with whites. I may have to shop with them. But on Sunday I don’t want to have to worship with them. I want to be able to just be myself and let my hair down.” It’s also, of course, as we know, the seat of political organization and the affirming of your blackness and so on.

Q: And hearing liberation theology. Is that fairly common, as in Jeremiah Wright’s church?

A: Yeah, there are variations of it. He says that very strongly, and you’ll find congregations that do that and others that would not say it as strongly. But it is a very common strain. Yeah, absolutely.

Q: Do African Americans worry that if whites come to my church, they’re going to take over?

A: Oh yeah, absolutely. That’s a big fear, right, and when I talk with black pastors, the same thing: If we try to have this move towards interracial congregations, whites will just dominate then. There are so many more of them, and they’re used to being in the position of power. So they’ll just take over, and we’ll lose the one thing we do have.

Q: I imagine there are phrases in the Bible they have to be very careful how they use.

A: Absolutely. There’s a lot of terminology, like “washes whiter than snow,” and these things which when they’re said in a uniracial congregation, they just go fine. But when they’re said in a mixed congregation, some people will get offended and wonder, “Why are you saying that? What are you saying?” And sometimes the clergy are blindsided by that. Other times they realize that ahead of time and say they’re not going to use those terms. So it gets complicated for sure.

Q: Is there a trend? Even though it may be slow, are we seeing more integrated churches?

A: We’re going to see more, and we are seeing more, and I’ll tell you exactly why. Not because white and black are more likely to get together. Only a third of the seven percent of congregations that are interracial are black and white. What’s happening is that Asian and Latino and other groups without that history are more likely to end up in either black churches or white churches and then make them multiracial churches. I talk about that in the US we have two cultures. We do not have an American culture. We have a white American culture and a black American culture. So when those two groups try to get together, [it’s] very difficult because they each feel like they have the right to their culture. If you move here from somewhere else, I often think if I move to Germany, for example, or if I move China and I go worship there I will understand and I’ll be willing to give up a lot of my culture because I’m in somebody else’s homeland. So I’m going to have to act German or Chinese, whatever that might mean. But in the US, when you have two separate cultures, each with its right, each of which has come to exist in this political entity in the last couple hundred years, each feeling like, “I have the right to hold onto my culture,” and that’s what makes it difficult.

Q: If you have a white church and Asians move in and Hispanics move in, is it less of a problem than if African Americans –

A: Yeah, I think it’s still a problem, but I think it’s easier, I really do, because of not having that similar history, so that’s why I think two-thirds of these mixed congregations are either white with Asian and Hispanic, or black with Asian and Hispanic.

Q: But if you have a white church, and you have a mix of Asians and Hispanics, it makes it easier for African Americans to come?

A: Yes and no, because what happens is sometimes these congregations will still have the white style of worship, even though they’re mixed, because folks are willing to give up whatever they may have come with. So it’s still quite a stretch for African Americans, yeah.

Q: Music is very, very important in a black church.

A: Absolutely, although every congregation will say, you know, every worship leader will say it’s vital. It’s very important, but again these are, you know, these are different cultural styles. So the tradition from Europe is that you’re supposed to emphasize the mind over the body, so you sing from a very kind of staid perspective. Again, there are charismatic white congregations all over, and they don’t sing that way. But, you know, on the average.

Q: I was recently in South Philly in a neighborhood that has a lot of violence. If the churches there were more integrated, do you think that would work more toward healing the wounds that are there?

A: It would because, you know, think about it. I see this in the way that sermons are preached. How would you give a Black Nationalist speech or campaign for the Republicans when you’re an integrated congregation? It doesn’t happen. But I see it happen in uniracial congregations all the time. But people — when they’re in mixed company, we speak differently. So one of the profound things we found when studying these congregations, the mixed ones, is just how much overlap and interracial ties that develop not only with the people in the congregation, but they start meeting each other’s families, and their friends, and they go to each other’s neighborhoods if they live in different neighborhoods, and at work they meet people they wouldn’t otherwise met, and so it creates a whole new definition of what the group is. So I think it’s a lot harder then to have racial violence against each other.

Q: Are you familiar with the City of Refuge Church and Reverend Rufus Smith?

A: I think they’re doing an amazing thing in that they have all groups. But they have large segments of white and black, and so I think it’s the most difficult of these kinds of congregations to have, and it takes a very deft leader, and him being African American, I mean I’m sure it’ll be interesting when you talk with him. He’ll have to be very knowledgeable of white culture, black culture, and walk these fine lines.

Q: His is more multiracial than, say, Pastor Woo’s –

A: Oh, Pastor [Rodney] Woo would be more multiracial and more groups, right. I think they have people from 40-some different countries. International church is what I would call it. They’re immigrants from all over the world, be they black, Hispanic, Asian, Middle Eastern.

Q: I assume that Pastor Woo’s church is the way it is either because the congregation wanted it, or because he wanted it. How did it end up being that way?

A: It was an all-white church. It was starting to decline. They had to hire a new pastor, and they hired him. But he came under the condition that “I want and I’m called to make this a multiethnic church.” So they knew. He’s interesting because he’s part-Asian, part-white. He’s married to a Hispanic woman, so that’s their family and that’s their vision.

Q: What’s it feel like in one of his services? I’m sure you’ve been there.

A: I think it’s pretty dynamic. There’s a lot of energy there and life, and you’ll have women dressed in their traditional African dress when they come, and you have people from all over the place, and some people have headphones on because they’re listening in Spanish.

Q: So it’s a rich cultural experience.

A: Yes, absolutely.

Q: And Pastor Rufus Smith and the City of Refuge. Tell me a little bit about that.

A: Same thing. There’s a lot of life there, but it’s a different sort, because there’s a lot less immigrants and a lot more racial, the mix of black and white in particular. I’ve actually never been to their worship for an extended period of time, so I can’t comment wisely on it. I can say that I’ve talked to people in both congregations, and there are both positives and negatives. I mean, so if I’ve talked to whites in City of Refuge, sometimes they’ll wonder, “Why do we do things a certain way, and why do we make a big deal out of events?” And what’s happening is they’re falling back on their understanding of the way that church should work. It’s not always working exactly like that, and they feel frustration or confusion. Sometimes people leave. That’s certainly common in mixed churches.

Q: So there are downsides, but the downsides are outweighed by the upsides?

A: Downsides, yeah, and when there are more downsides when churches first start — they go through stages of transforming to becoming multiracial. So in the beginning stages there’s often a lot of pain, a lot of confusion, a lot of people leave. Maybe there’s even anger. But if they make it through that they come to a new agreement, and they start creating a new culture, and it becomes something that people just — a lot of times they’ll say, “I couldn’t live without it. I just have to be there.”

Q: You see it manifest in any other ways, for instance, in the neighborhood? Do they socialize together if they go to church together?

A: They do, and that’s what really surprised us, because it was such strong effects. They’re more likely to live in integrated neighborhoods after they start being in these kinds of congregations. They are much more likely to say that their two very best friends are of a different race, that their circle of friends, their friends in the church, but also in their whole social network, absolutely. We’ve had people say, “Now when I go to work, I don’t feel uncomfortable talking to people of different races, and I go up and introduce myself, and I start making a new friend I wouldn’t have done otherwise.” And again, this connection that you get: I meet Joe at church. Joe’s connected to a whole network of people I don’t know. Joe likes me. He invites me over to his son’s birthday party, and I meet his whole family. I meet his friends. I get to know his neighborhood. That happens all the time.

Q: Will the election of Barack Obama have an impact on interracial churches? Will we see more of them?

A: Oh, yeah. I think with President Obama there’s going to be a discussion, because he himself is multiracial, because we have for the first time a non-white president. There’s going to be talk about what does this mean? What is it? Are we in a new era? And I think it’s going to open up a wider place for a discussion about we ought to come together in our churches, in our neighborhoods, in our work places, in our clubs and our networks. I think it’ll be more acceptable to talk about it. We’ll see what happens. It’ll take some time. But I think it will.

Q: But generally you think it will be positive.

A: Yes.

Q: Can you talk a little bit more about why it is difficult to integrate churches?

A: What sort of difficulties would happen when people of different cultures try to come together to worship? Tiny little things such as let’s tell jokes with each other. Humor is so culturally based that when I try to tell a joke as me being a white American, if I tell other white Americans, they’ll laugh. If I tell an African American, they might not laugh. In fact, they either might not find it funny, or they might find it offensive, and I didn’t mean it to be offensive. So these are the sort of little things that build up over time, just like in a marriage. You know, the little things can build up over time. Then of course there are bigger things that matter, like who do I see up there in the congregation? Do I see myself up there? Well, I don’t. So I ask the clergy why don’t I see myself represented in leadership? And I’m told, and this happens quite a bit, “We don’t think about race when we hire. We just hire the best person for the job.” So then I have to conclude, oh, the best people are all somebody other than my own race. So that’s difficult. How do we interpret the Bible? Should we stress things like justice and that God is somebody who cares about equality of all people? Or is he a God of love and a God who’s there to give me an afterlife? And different traditions stress different — so then there’s that. I talked to an African American who says before she goes into an interracial church, she sits in her car and she listens to gospel music to get her fill, and she goes into an interracial church where they don’t do gospel music, and she’s ready to accept the other sorts of ways of worshipping. So there’s that. There’s always the question of time. Does time at 10:00 mean 10:00 sharp? Or does it mean give or take a few minutes? And a few minutes, is that plus or minus two minutes? Or plus or minus ten, or maybe a half an hour each way? So different groups have different definitions, and then they clash on those. So it takes adept leadership to say we’re going to work through these.

Q: Are you looking at Protestant churches, Catholic churches?

A: Protestant, Catholic, even Muslim. We studied a mosque, and this is when we were at Notre Dame, and in this mosque they had people from a variety of countries, most of them immigrants. In some of the countries, when you go into a mosque you remove your shoes. To not do so could be punishable even by death in that nation. In other countries, it would be a great offense to remove their shoes when they come into the mosque, a sign of disrespect. So there was great clashes when, you know, if you believe you shouldn’t remove your shoes and someone’s taking their shoes off, how can they do this? That actually was such a big clash in this case that they had to put a curtain down the middle of where they would worship. And then they would have the shoe removers on one side, and the non-shoe removers on the other side until they could work through coming to understand why we might both be trying to worship authentically, and because of our cultural background we have these different ideas. But it took a while.

Q: Any particular denominations that you’ve seen the most progress?

A: You find the most in not any particular denomination specifically. It’s the style of worship. So if we have what we call a charismatic worship style, that means upbeat music and a more lively style of preaching usually, people are allowed to clap, say “Amen,” whether they’re mainline Protestant, conservative Protestant, and Catholics, whatever, they’re much more likely to be integrated. There’s one denomination in particular, though, that has pushed very hard to be multiracial in its denomination — not only its denomination but, I mean, in its congregations, and it’s called the Evangelical Covenant Church, http://www.covchurch.org/ which is headquartered in Chicago. Their whole goal is that’s the kind of churches they start, multiracial, and I think they say now 20 percent of their churches are that.

Q: Is there particular Christian scripture that points to interracial acceptance?

A: Scripture is vast, and people can pick and choose what they emphasize, and so for hundreds of years verses that said that you are to welcome the stranger, that with Christ there’s neither Jew nor Greek, male nor female, we’ve broken down the dividing wall with the original church, where Christians were first called Christian was the church of Antioch in which for the first time you had Jews, Gentiles of all different ethnicities come together as one people. That’s when they were called Christians. So these are the kind of things that now when people are trying to move towards multiracial congregations that they’re stressing. They’re talking about these scriptures that say we ought to come together, and that at Pentecost, when that the Holy Spirit is said to have come upon the first Christians, they were given the ability to speak in different languages, and so that no matter who the people were, they could all worship together. But you know, interestingly enough, those things were not talked about much at all for a few hundred years at least.

Q: But it’s there. It’s a fundamental part of Christianity that you should welcome people of all races.

A: That’s right.

BOB ABERNETHY, anchor: We have a Lucky Severson report now on the divisions in one of the most prominent places of worship in the country—Riverside Church in New York. It’s affiliated with both the American Baptist Churches and the United Church of Christ and was built by John D. Rockefeller, Jr. in the late 1920s for its first and much admired senior pastor, Harry Emerson Fosdick. Riverside became widely known for its great preaching, liberal theology, interracial congregation, and commitment to social justice. But now it’s also known for a bitter controversy surrounding its new senior minister, Brad Braxton.

Unidentified minister performing a blessing: Dear God, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, we now bring this servant of God, this man of God before you.

LUCKY SEVERSON: It has become an occasion worthy of note when the Riverside Church installs a new senior pastor. His name is Brad Braxton, and he has come a long way from his humble beginnings as the son of a Baptist preacher in rural Virginia.

Rev. BRAXTON: Pastoral ministry is a wonderful vocation. The opportunity to guide a community of faith amid its joys and sorrows is a significant and high calling.

SEVERSON: Riverside spans the blocks between the ivy-covered walls of Columbia University and the largely African-American Harlem neighborhood. Jennifer Hoult discovered Riverside when she was attending nearby Barnard College and has been coming to services for over 20 years.

Jennifer Hoult

JENNIFER HOULT (Member, Riverside Church): We have had some of the most extraordinary preachers leading this church. I mean Fosdick, Bill Coffin, Jim Forbes — these are extraordinary gentlemen in the clergy, and brilliant theologians and brilliant preachers, I can add.

SEVERSON: Dr. Braxton seems well prepared for the job. He’s a Rhodes Scholar, has a PhD in New Testament studies, and was a religion professor at Vanderbilt. Betty Davis says it’s the kind of resume that stood out among the 200 applicants for the job. She has been a member here for 19 years and was on the selection committee.

BETTY DAVIS (Member, Riverside Church): And what impressed me most about Dr. Braxton was, first of all, his deep spirituality combined with his masterful knowledge. So he really stood out. His energy stood out. He came prepared.

SEVERSON: It seems like a perfect fit. So why, on the day of his installation, did the new senior pastor speak about fear within the congregation?

Rev. BRAXTON (preaching to congregation): Fear not. Fear not. I’m going to preach it until the Holy Ghost tells me to stop.

SEVERSON: He is speaking of the fear some in the congregation have about their new senior minister. His selection has proved controversial, and division within the church is an issue he has not shied away from.

Rev. BRAXTON (speaking to congregation): Move the mountain of distrust and animosity in this congregation by speaking the truth in love.

Ms. DAVIS: As soon as his name was announced, the attacks started. One of the things that some people are afraid of is that the church will turn black. And, you know, I really resent that.

SEVERSON: Betty Davis says Dr. Braxton’s predecessor, Dr. James Forbes, a world-class preacher, also black, also suffered congregational harping, and that the elephant in the room people aren’t talking about is racism. Lois and David Carey have attended Riverside for over 35 years and have seen the church’s membership shift from predominately white to predominately black.

Lois and David Carey

DAVID CAREY (Member, Riverside Church): I feel that Dr. Braxton is getting a holdover from Dr. Forbes, who went through the same thing he’s going through. Only he was there taking it for 20 years.

SEVERSON: Racism have anything to do with it?

Mr. CAREY: I think so, yeah. I’m sad to say it but I think so, you know.

Rev. BRAXTON: I’m obviously dealing with, as did Dr. Forbes, some of the issues of what it means to guide an institution of this magnitude when this institution, like the United States of America, is still wrestling with the great hold that racism has on this country.

SEVERSON: But Jennifer Hoult says her problem with Dr. Braxton is not about color.

Ms. HOULT: My concerns about Dr. Braxton had nothing to do with his race or his personal history. They had to do with his theology.

Rev. BRAXTON (preaching to congregation): Listen again to a portion of James, chapter 3.

Ms. HOULT: What he says consistently in sermons is talking about the only way to God is through a particular fundamentalist path, which is to accept Jesus Christ as your personal savior, and that’s a huge change in our theology. It’s a huge change in our openness and our inclusiveness.

SEVERSON: Braxton denies that he is changing the theology and says he has written articles critical of fundamentalism.

Rev. BRAXTON: I must say as a theologian it is laughable to me that someone would consider me a fundamentalist. My thinking on Scripture, my support of gay marriage, I mean, you roll it out, there is no way, shape, or form that I am a fundamentalist.

SEVERSON: But Braxton’s evangelical preaching, his focus on Scripture, and his leadership style has made some of the congregation ill at ease.

DIANA SOLOMON-GLOVER (Member, Riverside Church): What troubles me the most is that I feel the direction of the church with the new leadership is — has strayed or is straying from the mission of the church, which is open, affirming, and inclusive, interracial, interdenominational, and international.

SEVERSON: Diana Solomon-Glover is in the Riverside choir, has a master’s degree in voice, and works with children with special needs. She’s been a member over 20 years and says Riverside is no stranger to controversy and contentiousness.

Diana Solomon-Glover

Ms. SOLOMON-GLOVER: I look at it as a laboratory experiment. This is the place where we find out if people of varying backgrounds and faiths can actually come together and figure out how to be one people.

SEVERSON: But, she says, the experiment does not seem to be working very well. Riverside has long been known for its concern with diversity and social justice. Braxton agrees he may bring a new take on those issues, but pushes back at critics who think he is not committed to the church’s longstanding mission.

Rev. BRAXTON: I just think that’s patently false, and I think as a pastor, though, it’s born, again, out of fear. What I believe we are actually trying to do in our best moments is to suggest that if in fact we are going to be who we are — that is, a Christian congregation — we must take seriously Jesus and Scripture. Those are non-negotiables for Christian congregations.

SEVERSON: It’s not just theological concerns that Braxton faces. Solomon-Glover was among four church members who filed suit over what they alleged was a violation of Riverside’s bylaws. Among their claims was that Braxton’s compensation package included a $250,000 salary, a housing allowance, and other benefits totaling over $600,000. The church says in reality that package is actually closer to $460,000 and is comparable to that of other leaders of large churches in New York City.

Ms. HOULT: The argument has been made by the council that the reason we’re paying so much is because this is what everyone else does, and what I would say is Riverside has never been about doing what everyone else does.

Rev. BRAXTON: What my family and I were simply trying to do was to respond to a significant calling and one that had significant burdens and liabilities associated with it, and I think it was sensationalized in a way that’s very unfortunate.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN (handing Rev. Braxton a bouquet of flowers): We love you so much. We appreciate you.

SEVERSON: There’s no doubt that many members are quite fond of the new senior pastor, and he of them. But the congenial atmosphere apparently does not extend throughout the congregation, and his critics argue there is a substantial voice of dissent.

Ms. SOLOMON-GLOVER: Those who look at us as dissenters would like to believe that we are small in number. But there are a lot of people who have left the church because of what’s going on in the church, and there are a lot of people who have watched others of us be marginalized and who are sort of in the shadows.

Ms. HOULT: What’s happening right now at Riverside is contentious, hateful. You know, not only do we go and get called names, but we get screamed at by groups of people out of control. There’s no effort by Dr. Braxton to rein it in.

SEVERSON: In a recent Sunday sermon entitled “Speaking in Tongues,” Dr. Braxton appeared to be calling out his detractors on what he called fearful and mean tongues.

Rev. BRAXTON (preaching to congregation): Some days we speak in merciful tongues, other days in mean tongues. We all speak in tongues, and we all one day will have to give an account to God for the kind of tongues we used when dealing with other people.

SEVERSON: The one area of agreement we found among most everyone we spoke with is there is still a lot of healing to be done on both sides. Dr. Braxton says he is hopeful.

Rev. BRAXTON: Amid all of the rancor, much of which has been directed to me, I think unfairly, you keep loving, you keep preaching, you keep teaching, you keep serving, and after awhile maybe some of that fear will dissipate.

SEVERSON: While Dr. Braxton keeps preaching, it is still unclear where Riverside will go from here. Both he and his divided congregation share a hope that the church will continue to stand out, not just as the tallest church in the US, but as a beacon for mainline Protestants everywhere.

For RELIGION & ETHICS NEWSWEEKLY, I’m Lucky Severson in New York.

Welcome to you both. Professor Nasr, let’s begin with you. The reaction throughout the Muslim world — what do you hear?

Dr. VALI NASR (Professor of International Relations, Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University): Very, very positive. There’s no doubt that the speech exceeded expectations from the vast majority of Muslims all the way from Indonesia to Nigeria. Even though the president did not go deeply into policy, I think the level of respect and empathy and seriousness that he showed in terms of engaging the Muslim world was very well understood by the public and very much appreciated.

ABERNETHY: On the other hand, Kate, there was a lot of criticism, wasn’t there, or some guarded comments from officials?

Kate Seelye

KATE SEELYE (Vice President, Middle East Institute, Washington, DC): Well, there were. I think people are—there are some who are holding reservations. They want to see if he’s going to translate his words into action. There was also some disappointment on the part of democracy activists who wanted him to be tougher, let’s say, on Arab leaders, who wanted to put more pressure on them. And there were some who wanted him to be tougher on the Israelis. But by and large, people were very positive and felt that he went out of his way to try to bridge this gap between America and the Muslim world.

ABERNETHY: What could be the deeds now that would satisfy the people to whom Obama was talking?

Dr. NASR: I think one of the ways to look at this is that the speech or the series of speeches he’s given is a deed in itself. In other words, our habit in this region is that administrations come up immediately off the bat with a plan of action for something, whether it’s Iran, Arab-Israeli issue, Afghanistan. This president understood that there is no point trying a new policy before you change the context in which you engage the other side. So I think his very first policy, his very first deed has been to gain trust, and I think the first way in which he has to be measured is by trust, and I think Kate’s point, which is correct, there are — I think he’s been successful enough that some actors like the Iranian government or Hezbollah or the Muslim Brotherhood may worry that he’s quickly changing the game on them very fast and effectively, and some of the reaction we’re seeing has to do with that.

Bob Abernethy

ABERNETHY: But a specific deed now to follow this, Kate, what could that be?

Ms. SEELYE: Well, I mean everybody’s waiting to see what he’s going to do vis-a-vis the Arab-Israeli peace process. What steps he is going to take to pressure the Israelis perhaps to halt settlement building. This is what Arabs and Muslims are looking for — concrete deeds with regard to the peace process, frankly.

ABERNETHY: Did you feel on that that he was tilting a little bit toward the Palestinians?

Ms. SEELYE: Well, he acknowledged the Holocaust, he acknowledged the suffering of the Jews, and he also acknowledged the suffering of the Palestinians, and this was really a first. Many presidents have acknowledged the need for a two-state solution, but few have said, you know, I feel for the suffering of the Palestinian refugees. He won high marks for that.

ABERNETHY: I was struck by the language, especially the references to the Qu’ran and other phrases that come out of the Islamic tradition. That can’t help but have helped him in the Muslim world.

Dr. NASR: Absolutely. I mean, there are ways of using the Qu’ran and then there are ways of using the Qu’ran. Often Western commentators or leaders usually use the Qu’ran in order to hit the Muslims on the head with it. In other words, use their own scripture in order to preach to them very selectively. This president, I think, has used a very light touch in terms of trying to use the Qu’ran to convince the Muslims that he believes they belong inside the tent — that there is no such thing as a Judeo-Christian tradition with the Muslim standing out there. The way he used the Qu’ran, particularly at the end, was to say that there is an Islamic-Judeo-Christian civilization—that your values are the same as our values and our values are the same as your values, and look, here is the example by referring to all three scriptures at the same time, and I think that’s what’s most effective.

ABERNETHY: And as you said, this attempt to build respect with the audience he was talking to is the first step in new policy?

Vali Nasr

Dr. NASR: Well, absolutely. If you looked at the Bush administration, their approach was that you are either with us or you’re against us. It’s either black or white, and the burden was on Muslims to prove themselves innocent. In other words they’re guilty unless proven innocent, and they set down a set of markers which basically meant abandon your faith, change it, reform it, change everything, and then you’ll be sort of acceptable. This president is starting from a very different point of view. First of all, he’s creating a massive gray area in the middle. It is not either us or you, that we have a common arena in which we share, and the burden is not on Muslims to prove that their religion matters or that their values are world values. He immediately off the bat said, “I agree with that, and I’ll give you better examples than you can yourselves.”

Ms. SEELYE: Yes, and if I might add to that, I mean he was very sensitive about language and Muslim sensitivities. He never once used the word “terrorist,” because over the past eight years the word terrorist has become synonymous with the word Muslim and Islam. So he avoided these words, and he used language that people applauded. When he talked about the Prophet Muhammad he said “peace be upon him.” That was very important for Islamists and traditionalists watching his speech.

ABERNETHY: What about nuclear weapons? What can you divine in the speech about how that problem can be addressed now?

Dr. NASR: That’s a problem that has to be solved at the negotiation table, and we will not see where it is going until the day the United States and Iran are sitting at the table and discussing it. But I think the president is trying to make it easier or in some ways compel the Iranian government not to hide behind excuses that Americans are not sincere, they’re not serious, there’s no point talking to them. To say that you — look, there is a pathway for you to come in, and the United States is going to engage Iran over these very serious issues from a position of respect.

ABERNETHY: Kate, did you hear anything from people you know in the Muslim part of the world about what we’re talking about? Did anybody say anything to you?

Ms. SEELYE: Oh, absolutely. I had some blogger friends from Saudi Arabia say that they were thrilled by this speech because it wasn’t directed toward Arab leaders. Obama never once mentioned the name of Hosni Mubarak, the host. He was speaking to the youth, to the women, to the people of the Arab world, and that’s very rare in a region where people don’t feel like they’re being addressed by their leaders. Here was this leader of the world superpower saying, “I care about you. I want to help you. Your education is important. Let’s invest in you.” That was profoundly appreciated.

ABERNETHY: Many thanks to you, Kate Seelye, and to Professor Vali Nasr.

BOB ABERNETHY, anchor: In Washington, speculation is running high about where Obama and his family will attend church after they move into the White House. Earlier this year, Obama cut ties with his longtime Chicago congregation, Trinity United Church of Christ, because of its controversial former pastor Jeremiah Wright. Kim Lawton takes a look at some of the Washington churches Obama may want to consider.

KIM LAWTON: If the Obamas want to go with an establishment mainline congregation, they may want to consider National Presbyterian Church. It’s regularly attended by cabinet officials, members of Congress, and Supreme Court justices. Congregational archives claim that most presidents since James Madison have visited the church at least one time. National Pres, as it’s called, has about 2,500 members, and note to Obama daughters Sasha and Malia: there’s an active children’s program with about 400 kids.

Ike and Mamie Eisenhower

National Pres has a special Chapel of the Presidents, dedicated to Dwight D. Eisenhower. Ike was the last president to make this his church home. He was actually baptized here while he was president.

National Pres may say that most presidents have visited, but St. John’s Episcopal makes the claim that every president since Madison has come here at least once.

St. John’s Episcopal Church has a great location. If you’re at the White House, all you have to do is walk across Lafayette Park and you are here. No excuses for being late.

The church was founded in 1815 specifically to offer presidents a place to worship. The historic national landmark is now undergoing its first major renovation in more than a hundred years. The sanctuary was literally gutted, and everything is being refurbished and upgraded, from the floors to the electrical systems.

Rector Luis Leon says St. John’s has a lot to offer a president. In addition to the location, he says the congregation is used to all the Secret Service and its elaborate security measures, and there’s even a special presidential pew.

Reverend LUIS LEON (Rector, St. John’s Episcopal Church): And right about here is where Pew 54, which is called the President’s Pew, will be once we finish the renovations to the church.

LAWTON: It’s the spot first selected by President Madison.

Rev. LEON: He didn’t want the front pew, which would be the most prominent pew. He wanted one that was in the middle of the church so that he would be treated as every other parishioner would be treated here at St. John’s Church, and that’s a standard that we’ve tried to maintain over the years.

LAWTON: So what if a president doesn’t want to sit in that pew?

Rev. LEON: He could sit where ever he wants to sit.

LAWTON: Leon says the church tries to meet the spiritual needs of a congregation made up of people from all over the metropolitan area, from the powerful to the homeless.

Rev. Luis Leon

Rev. LEON: And everybody checks their political partisan membership at the door, and we get along very well because of that.

LAWTON: And after the controversy generated by the fiery sermons of Jeremiah Wright, Obama may be relieved to learn that Leon has a very different preaching style.

Rev. LEON: The one thing we’ve grown accustomed and we are very careful about because we never know who’s in the congregation is that we try not to scold anybody.

LAWTON: Franklin Delano Roosevelt and several presidents after him held pre-inaugural prayer services at St. John’s. Leon says they’ll be ready should Obama chose to do so as well.

Rev. LEON: Our contractors have assured us that the renovations will be completed by the first part of January.

LAWTON: If Obama wants to be part of one of the most historic churches in the African-American tradition, he may want to consider Metropolitan African Methodist Episcopal Church, also known as the National Cathedral of African Methodism. The AME was founded in 1816 by a former slave, Richard Allen, and it’s America’s first independent black denomination. Metropolitan has a long history of social activism. It was a stop on the Underground Railroad, and Frederick Douglass preached from the pulpit here. Today it continues to be a center of progressive religious causes.

We know Obama likes good church music, so he may want to base his decision on that. If so, there’s the Southern Baptist Church Praise and Worship Center, which, by the way, is not affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention. Earlier this year, Southern Church won the Verizon Wireless competition for the best small church choir in the DC region. Co-pastors Charles and Eleanor Doom say they strive for the kind of church music that touches everyone. It’s all part of the church’s exuberant worship style.

Rev. Charles Doom

Reverend CHARLES DOOM (Co-pastor, Southern Baptist Church Praise and Worship Center): We just don’t sit. We are not quiet. We give our physical expressions. We do what the psalmist says. We make a joyful noise unto the Lord.

Reverend ELEANOR DOOM (Co-pastor, Southern Baptist Church Praise and Worship Center): We genuinely love God and appreciate what God has done for us.

LAWTON: There’s a closeness here — a feeling of family.

Rev. C. DOOM: We use these terms in the church “brother” and “sister.” Those are kindred terms — those are family terms. We are very oriented in terms of family. We believe that strong families make strong churches.

LAWTON: Pastor Doom often preaches a vigorous sermon.

Rev. C. DOOM: I try to preach something that will meet the needs of the people where they are.

LAWTON: Are they long sermons?

Rev. C. DOOM: I’ve been guilty of that, yeah. I tell people I’m not a helicopter-type preacher. A helicopter goes straight up. I’m more like a 747. It takes me time to go down the runway, get clearance, and take off.

LAWTON: An added bonus: there are lots of church dinners, and Southern boasts that it has many great cooks.

Rev. C. DOOM: We have various services where food is involved. You know, church people love to eat, so we fellowship around food. Amen.

LAWTON: Obama may want to attend New York Avenue Presbyterian, the church of one of his presidential heroes, Abraham Lincoln.

Some presidents have based their church decision on denominational ties. Jimmy Carter chose First Baptist, where he sometimes taught Sunday school classes. The Clintons regularly attended Foundry United Methodist, the denomination Hillary grew up in.

Obama was a member of the United Christ of Christ for more than 20 years. There are eight UCC churches in Washington, including Plymouth UCC, which describes itself as a church striving to connect people to God, people to people, and people to great causes.

Then again, National City Christian Church might fit several qualifications. It’s part of a sister denomination to the UCC. It’s close to the White House. It’s historic, and it also has several presidential ties. Reverend Stephen Gentle is senior pastor.

Rev. Stephen Gentle

Reverend STEPHEN GENTLE (Senior Pastor, National City Christian Church): National City Christian Church is an exciting place to worship and to come and grow spiritually. It’s a multicultural, multiracial, bilingual congregation that seeks to be welcoming to all people.

LAWTON: Gentle says with his sermons he tries to engage both the heart and the mind.

(to Rev. Gentle): Do you preach a long sermon?

Rev. GENTLE: That’s a relative question. No. They could be longer.

LAWTON: National City Christian has a variety of musical styles, from a gospel choir to classical musicians who also perform at weekday noon concerts at the church.

Two presidents have made this their church home, James Garfield and Lyndon B. Johnson, and both are immortalized in stained glass windows in the sanctuary. Garfield was the only ordained minister to be U.S. president, and he was highly involved here until his assassination in 1881.

Rev. GENTLE: President Garfield, James Garfield, was not only an active participant in our congregation, but when he was in worship would often be asked to preside at the Lord’s Table, our Communion service, or sometimes even to preach.

LAWTON: LBJ and Lady Bird were also active here.

Rev. GENTLE: I’m told that often they would go down for coffee at our social time and would spend as much time as they would like, just greeting and visiting and taking photos with members of our church and other guests.

LAWTON: LBJ’s window has symbols that depict some of the highlights of his presidency: the establishment of Medicare; space advances at NASA; and, of course, racial reconciliation and the signing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. There’s a special presidential pew here, too, deemed by LBJ’s Secret Service team to be the safest place in the church. It’s right near an exit. The deacons always brought Communion here to the president first.

“We would be delighted to find just the right pew for the Obama family.”

Rev. GENTLE: I’ve been told that the reason they wanted the president and his family to be served first is so that no one would tamper with the Communion, and they would be safe.

LAWTON: Gentle says while they have a special spot reserved for the president, they are flexible.

Rev. GENTLE: Of course, we would be delighted to find just the right pew for the Obama family should they ever like to worship here.

LAWTON: Whatever congregation the Obamas choose will have to make numerous accommodations, from security to the inevitable national scrutiny. But as one religious leader told us, the most important consideration for Obama will be finding a place that will nurture his soul.

I’m Kim Lawton in Washington.

ABERNETHY: We may not know yet where the Obamas will go to church, but we do know that the new president will attend a public prayer service at Washington’s National Cathedral on the morning after his inauguration.

KIM LAWTON: Rabbi Shea Harlig is on a mission to get Jews to embrace a more traditional practice of their faith. As an emissary of the Chabad-Lubavitch movement, he works nearly nonstop. He leads prayer services and Torah studies.

DINA HARLIG (Chabad of Southern Nevada, speaking to students): OK, now. When I come in you’re going to be sitting in a circle.

LAWTON: He and his wife, Dina, sponsor a Jewish school for children, and they promote keeping a kosher diet. The rabbi is waging his campaign in what may seem an unlikely mission field — Las Vegas, Nevada.

“Let’s bring as many Jews as possible back to our sacred tradition.”

Rabbi HARLIG: Once you get away from the strip, it’s like any other city, except that you have slot machines in every grocery store.

LAWTON: The Harligs are part of a vast and sometimes controversial effort aimed at Jews in every corner of the globe. It was the vision of the late Chief Lubavitch rabbi, Menachem Mendel Schneerson, who led the Lubavitch movement for more than 40 years. Lubavitchers simply call him “the Rebbe.”

Rabbi YEHUDA KRINSKY (Chabad-Lubavitch World Headquarters): The Rebbe established what you might call an outreach program decades ago with the intention to reach out to the Jewish people wherever they are, whoever they are regardless of background, to teach them about their faith.

LAWTON: Schneerson emphasized traditional Hasidic teachings, strict religious observance, and deep mysticism. He also preached that the coming of the Messiah, “the Moshiach,” was near.

Rabbi HARLIG: The Rebbe has established that we should usher this age when godliness will be revered to all, and the struggle between good and evil will cease, and there’ll be true peace in the world. So we look at our goal of bringing Jewish people closer is that they should fulfill their mission. This is one of the ways we could hasten, to speed up the coming of the Messiah.

LAWTON: Like other Hasidic groups, Lubavitchers fled persecution and political upheaval in Europe, bringing their 18th-century way of life to 20th-century America. They established a flourishing community in Crown Heights, Brooklyn, which has become the movement’s international headquarters. While other Hasidic groups maintained a strict focus inward, the Rebbe instructed his followers to spread the Chabad-Lubavitch vision outward.

Rabbi Yehuda Krinsky

Rabbi KRINSKY: He often said he could not rest until every Jewish child, every Jewish person was afforded a proper Jewish education to know how to live as a Jew and as a human being.

LAWTON: Married men and women called “shluchim”— emissaries — were dispatched around the world to establish Chabad centers, even in places where there were only a few Jews. They call themselves the Rebbe’s Army, and they’ve enlisted for life.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN (speaking at event): … to gather together all of us together to gain this friend, to be true soldiers in the Rebbe’s Army.

LAWTON: There are more than 4,000 emissary couples in 47 U.S. states and 73 foreign countries.

UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN (speaking at event): Romania!

LAWTON: Roll calls at Lubavitch meetings, such as this women’s conference, show their massive reach. There’s a special emphasis on Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, where the Lubavitch movement has its roots.

Leah Mindle Lipszic

LEAH MINDLE LIPSZIC (Emissary to Crimea): Most of the people in the country through 75 years of Communism were totally, totally deprived of any knowledge of Judaism.

LAWTON: But emissaries are also in other challenging places. They’ve led special services in Nepal, and they’ve lit a Hanukkah menorah in Las Vegas. Such a mission field was just what Shea and Dina Harlig were looking for when they arrived more than a decade ago, shortly after their marriage. There was no kosher food, no ritual bath, little Jewish education. So the Harligs set to work. Today, they’ve opened a new $1.5 million Chabad center with regular prayer services in a “shul” or synagogue and a “mikveh” — a bath for women’s monthly purification rituals.

Rabbi HARLIG (speaking to customer): Keep kosher? Are you keeping — are you learning about kosher?

LAWTON: Rabbi Harlig is now the local kosher foods supervisor. Several grocery stores sponsor entire kosher foods sections, and there are several kosher restaurants, including a Chinese restaurant, Shalom Hunan. They established the Torah Tots preschool, and a Desert Torah academy with grades K through 4. The instruction is both secular and religious. Most of the parents are non-Chabad Jews.

Ms. HARLIG: We have the parents really involved as much as we can, and we explain a lot what we do — whatever program we do — we always have them understand what’s going on.

LAWTON: Rabbi Harlig teaches Jews that observance and good deeds are a way to enhance spirituality and connect with God. Lynn and Arne Rosencrantz are members of the Conservative congregation who’ve participated in Rabbi Harlig’s classes and donated to Chabad projects.

Lynn Rosencrantz

LYNN ROSENCRANTZ (Chabad Supporter): They make me hungry to learn more. They encourage me and motivate me to learn more about Judaism, to be a better Jew, to aspire to be the best kind of Jew that I can.

LAWTON: But Lubavitchers also generate especially because of their Messianic beliefs. Schneerson died in 1994. He had not designated a successor. Lubavitchers believe he is still guiding them. Every year, people flock to his gravesite in Queens where they seek his intervention for miracles. Chabad leaders say every “shaliach” or emissary continues to be inspired by the Rebbe.

Rabbi KRINSKY: I would say that there’s not a shaliach in the world who — and all the members of his or her family — that don’t feel the Rebbe constantly looking over their shoulder. His blessing is almost palpable. The success is so phenomenal.

LAWTON: At the time of Schneerson’s death, some Lubavitchers believe the Rebbe himself was Moshiach — the Messiah. That belief has persisted and apparently grown, something that offends many Orthodox Jews.

Rabbi David Berger

Rabbi DAVID BERGER (Professor of History, Brooklyn College): The belief that the messianic mission of the true Messiah would be interrupted by his death and burial in an unredeemed world is a position which Jews rejected, and rejected vigorously, vehemently. I believe that the belief itself is a betrayal of Judaism.

LAWTON: Chabad leaders are very reluctant to publicly discuss the extent to which Lubavitchers believe Schneerson was the Messiah.

Rabbi KRINSKY: We live in a free country. People can believe what they — whatever they want. But it is certainly not an obligation upon anyone to campaign or to point fingers at anybody, saying that this is Moshiach, this is potential Moshiach or whatever. I think it’s dangerous, actually. People don’t understand what the whole concept of a Moshiach is really about. It’s a delicate subject, and they can get lost in the quagmire.

Rabbi HARLIG: It’s possible. Who is it going to be for sure? I don’t know. Most important thing is let’s do our work, let’s bring as many Jews as possible back to our sacred tradition, and the Messiah will show up, and whoever it’s going to be it’s going to be, as long as he finally comes.

LAWTON: And Rabbi Harlig says he’s doing what he can to see Las Vegas get ready for the Messiah’s arrival.

Rabbi HARLIG: My hope is that Moshiach should be here and the strip will be turned into big yeshivas — rabbinical schools. And I envision all the big hotels with the thousands of rooms is going to be rabbinical students studying. That’s my vision.

wnet/religionandethics/files/2008/12/1214cover_thumbpost.jpg The Chabad-Lubavitch movement established what you might call an outreach program decades ago with the intention to reach out to the Jewish people wherever they are, whoever they are, regardless of background, to teach them about their faith. ]]> http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/episodes/december-5-2008/the-growth-of-chabad/1545/feed/ 1 http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/episodes/november-28-2008/u-s-hispanic-catholics/1482/ http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/episodes/november-28-2008/u-s-hispanic-catholics/1482/#comments Wed, 26 Nov 2008 19:50:33 +0000 fabiana ramirez http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/?p=1482 JUDY VALENTE: Many Catholics have never seen anything like this in their local parish — an Aztec dance honoring the mother of Jesus. It is part of the observance of the feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe, the Virgin Mary, said to have appeared before the Mexican peasant Juan Diego in the 16th century. This feast day, highly important to Hispanic Catholics, is only vaguely known to much of Catholic America. But it may be a glimpse into the future of the U.S. church. Friar GILBERTO CAVAZOS GONZALEZ (Catholic Theological Union, Chicago): The largest Catholic population in the United States is Latino. The youngest Catholic population in the United States is Latino. The fastest growing population in the United States is Latino. VALENTE: The distinctive forms of worship and devotion among Hispanic Catholics are practiced not by immigrants alone, but by American-born, English-speaking Hispanics as well. The intensity of their religious expression, and their growing numbers, are changing the face of the U.S. Catholic church. Estimates vary, but the percentage of American Catholics who are Hispanic is anywhere from one-third to 40 percent, and because some Hispanics don’t register in their parishes — the undocumented, for example — some say the figure may be as high as 50 percent. What do Hispanics bring to the American church? Friar CAVAZOS GONZALEZ: Certainly the recognition of the presence of God in day-to-day life, in what we call the “quotidiano” — the everyday, day-in routine, humdrum of life. VALENTE: This is the home of Martin and Victoria Enciso, Mexican immigrants who belong to Good Shepherd parish on Chicago’s West Side. Victoria Enciso VICTORIA ENCISO (Congregant, Good Shepherd Catholic Church, Chicago): From the moment you wake up, you kneel like a camel, and I wake up like a camel. You know how a camel wakes up, with both knees? I wake up praying. VALENTE (to Ms. Enciso): So you wake up in the morning and you immediately get down on your knees and pray? Ms. ENCISO: And I bless my blanket that I have and the house that I have, because if you don’t then what do you have? VALENTE: The devotional life of Hispanic Catholics takes some dramatic forms. On a frigid December night people from Good Shepherd walk through the streets of Chicago, a procession in honor of the Virgin of Guadalupe. At five o’clock the next morning, their church is packed for the mananitas, an hour of singing praise to the Virgin. Father MARCO ANTONIO MERCADO (Pastor, Good Shepherd Catholic Church, Chicago): The first thing we want Our Lady to listen to in the morning is the music from her beloved sons and daughters. So that’s the meaning of the mananitas. VALENTE: Latino Catholics do not attend Mass any more frequently than other Catholics, but there is a fervency to their worship, and essential to that worship is the Spanish language. Friar CAVAZOS GONZALEZ: It took me a while before I realized that God understands English, and I think that people like to pray in the language that they’re comfortable in. I think that people like to pray in the language of their heart. El Día de los Muertos VALENTE: Processions abound. In November, El Día de los Muertos, the Day of the Dead, honors family members who have passed on. Just before Christmas, the posada depicts the struggle of Mary and Joseph to find lodging for the night. And on Good Friday, Via Crucis, the Way of the Cross, re-enacts the crucifixion of Christ, sometimes graphically. Fr. MERCADO: Many of the things that we do is they are not part of the official liturgy of the church. But we do it. Why? Because in the history of the church, especially in Latin America, many times they didn’t have the priests or they didn’t have enough priests – VALENTE: — which is why so much devotion takes place in the home. Enrique Gonzalez has been in this country 20 years, but tradition persists. ENRIQUE GONZALEZ: We were always taught that church is part of our home, that we go to church together to pray in unity, but that we also have to be at home and pray by ourselves. VALENTE: The living room in his small apartment has an altar to deceased family members. Mr. GONZALEZ: This is my grandmother and this is my grandfather, and both of them are together. They’re having their communion. These were people that took care of me, that took care of my family, that were part of my family. VALENTE: At church, Martin and Victoria say the rosary with their four children. Martin feels that Hispanics bring a joyfulness to worship and family values to the church. No one in either of their families has ever been divorced. At home, Victoria has a collection of angels and a prayer she learned from her grandmother. Ms. ENCISO: The angels are always around us. VALENTE (to Ms. Enciso): What were the words of the prayer? Ms. ENCISO: “Sweet angel, my sweet angel, pray with me. Pray for me in the morning and in the evening always. Don’t ever leave me alone.” VALENTE: This neighborhood had long been Polish-American, but by the 1990s it was changing. The old parishioners were leaving Good Shepherd. In fact, Father Marco was brought in just to close it down. But since his arrival, Sunday attendance has more than tripled and is overwhelmingly Hispanic. Fr. MERCADO: We started to open the doors to the really Hispanic community, which means all the traditions of the Hispanic community. VALENTE: Those traditions include the quinceanera, sometimes called the blessing of the 15th birthday. Here, a young girl renews her baptismal promises to live out her life according to the teachings of Christ. And in a tradition of his own, Fr. Marco often invites children to the altar during Mass. Father Marco Antonio Mercado Fr. MERCADO: I explain to them we’re going to bless the bread and the wine, and it’s going to become the body and blood of Jesus. So for you to know exactly the moment when this is going to happen, I want you to raise your hands when I raise the host. Ms. ENCISO: All churches follow the same Gospel, but you don’t feel them. But when our pastor walks out there and he preaches the same words, you feel his energy. He comes down to us. He’s there with us. I mean, he knows who he’s talking to. VALENTE: And yet there is a certain ambivalence toward the clergy, springing from the history of Mexico, which was both evangelized — and conquered — by Christians, and where Catholic priests were once repressed by the government. Friar CAVAZOS GONZALEZ: I come from a very anti-clerical family. You know, my grandmother told me she loved me despite the fact that I had become a priest. VALENTE: But among struggling Latino immigrants, the role of the priest is crucial. Fr. MERCADO: In Hispanic culture, the priest is everything. We are the priest, we are doctors, we are lawyers, we are counselors. We’re everything. VALENTE: American priests are already overworked. Others have been recruited from Mexico, but the shortage of clergy in Latin America is even more severe than it is in the U.S. Cardinal FRANCIS GEORGE (Archdiocese of Chicago): Yo soy el buen pastor, dice el senor. I am the good pastor. VALENTE: Chicago’s cardinal and several of its bishops speak Spanish, but nationwide only six percent of Catholic clergy can speak the language. Friar CAVAZOS GONZALEZ: In 20 years time, if I could dream, you know, I’d like to see 50, over 50 percent of the U.S. Catholic bishops being Latino. “In Hispanic culture, the priest is everything.” VALENTE: What concerns the hierarchy right now is that many Latinos are being lured away to the passionate and emotional services in evangelical and Pentecostal churches. Some Latinos who want to remain Catholic also want the Mass to change. MARTIN ENCISO (Congregant, Good Shepherd Parish, Chicago): We’re going to see a lot more life in church. I think life that’s been missing, because I mean a lot of people, at least a lot of people I knew growing up, said, “Oh yeah, I went to church. We just sat there. We kneeled, prayed.” Church is more than that. You need to feel alive when you go to church. This is the word of God. VALENTE: There is little doubt about the growing political influence of the Hispanic clergy, especially in the now high-profile issue of immigration. Friar CAVAZOS GONZALEZ: We expect that the hierarchy of the Church is going to advocate for the poor, for the marginalized, for the outcast, and right now a lot of the poor, the marginalized and the outcast are us. VALENTE (to Fr. Cavazos Gonzalez): Is there some aspect of what the Hispanics bring to the Catholic Church in America that might be perceived as negative? Friar Cavazos Gonzalez Friar CAVAZOS GONZALEZ: We are accused of being machistas, for example, of being male-dominated, and to a certain extent we are. And yet at the same time, we’re a very matriarchal society or matriarchal culture. Do those things, do those two realities enter into conflict with each other? Yes, they do. VALENTE: Hispanics will not easily abandon their culture and their practices. How well their culture can meld with that of other U.S. Catholics will be a challenge to the parish priest. Fr. MERCADO: In many of the churches where the priest is able to integrate both communities and both communities can learn from each other has been a great success. Friar CAVAZOS GONZALEZ: We’re awakening the U.S. Catholic Church to the realization that it is one part of a church that is so much larger than itself. VALENTE: Some traditional American parishes have begun to adopt Hispanic practices, though few, if any, would go so far as to re-enact the apparition of the Virgin of Guadalupe to the peasant Juan Diego, which was done recently at Good Shepherd. As for the U.S. church – Friar CAVAZOS GONZALEZ: I don’t think we’ll ever have a Latino face. I’d like to think that we will have a culturally diverse face. VALENTE: Culturally diverse, he says, but also, he hopes, united. For RELIGION & ETHICS NEWSWEEKLY, this is Judy Valente in Chicago. The distinctive forms of worship and devotion among Hispanic Catholics are practiced not by immigrants alone, but by American-born, English-speaking Hispanics as well. /wnet/religionandethics/files/2008/11/1213_hispaniccatholics_thumbnail.jpg ]]> http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/episodes/november-28-2008/u-s-hispanic-catholics/1482/feed/ 9 http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/episodes/november-21-2008/online-religion/1460/ http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/episodes/november-21-2008/online-religion/1460/#comments Fri, 21 Nov 2008 21:13:14 +0000 janice henderson http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/?p=1460 LUCKY SEVERSON: The Park Street Church on the Boston Common has witnessed two centuries of American history. John Adams and Paul Revere are buried in the old Granary graveyard next door. In their time, church services were usually limited to the reach of the pastor’s voice. Pastor DANIEL HARRELL (Park Street Church, reading from the Book of Revelation): She held the golden cup in her hands filled with abominable things.) SEVERSON: That would have made it more difficult for Pastor Daniel Harrell, one of the ministers here, to carry out his experiment. He wanted his congregation to explore the Old Testament Book of Leviticus by actually living according to its archaic laws for one month and then to log their experiences on the Internet. Pastor HARRELL: I think there was probably some fear. Sort of given the reputation of the burdensomeness of the law, how in the world would we follow this? But I managed to do a little coercion and put on some, a little bit of pastoral guilt and, you know, had some folks sign up, and it ended up being a great group, very diverse. Pastor Daniel Harrell SEVERSON: It ended up being another illustration of the power of online religion. Browse the Internet, and there are examples everywhere: a Web site called GodTube, for instance, which was founded in 2007 and now attracts more than a million-and-a-half visitors a month. One of the site’s most popular videos is a little girl reciting the 23rd Psalm. UNIDENTIFIED YOUNG GIRL (from GodTube video): Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death . . . SEVERSON: Hundreds of religious organizations are reaching and connecting believers of most every kind around the globe. For Jews, there’s a Web site called JewTube; for Muslims, one called Muxlim.com. There are Hindu and Buddhist sites, and for those not quite as mainstream, Web sites as diverse as The Virtual Church of the Blind Chihuahua, which is actually a site that reflects about man’s relation to God. Nowadays, with the latest technology, virtual churches provide a 3-D space where the user can walk in, sit down, and listen to a sermon. The very first virtual church, the First Church of Cyberspace, was founded at this real church in Montclair, New Jersey back in the Internet Dark Ages — 1994 — by then pastor Charles Henderson. Pastor CHARLES HENDERSON (Founder, First Church of Cyberspace and Editor, CrossCurrents Quarterly): It was really overwhelming. I mean, here I was, the minister of a local congregation in New Jersey, and somehow I came up with this idea of the First Church of Cyberspace and within about three months I was in The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, on television and radio. I mean, it was just explosive, and here I was doing something that now would be regarded as incredibly simple and primitive. SEVERSON: What helped make Pastor Harrell’s Leviticus project a success was actually the secular Web site Facebook, which allows people to interact with friends and strangers almost instantly. Pastor HARRELL: I thought, why don’t we do it in a way that allows people in our congregation to engage a conversation with folks who are actually trying to abide by it, much like the ancient Israelites would have, as well as followers of the Old Testament throughout history? But to do that in public fashion, you know, could have been difficult if not for a vehicle like Facebook. SEVERSON: Heidi Campbell is a professor at Texas A&M University and author of the book “Exploring Religious Community Online.” She says there are very tangible reasons why the religious experience through chat rooms and social networking sites has increased in popularity — online prayers, for example. Dr. HEIDI CAMPBELL (Assistant Professor, Department of Communication, Texas A&M University and Author, “Exploring Religious Community Online”): In fact, some of the people in my early research said that they felt more cared for and that people, when they said they were praying for them online, that they really meant it because there was some tangible artifact that they could see to really show that they were praying for them. Dr. Heidi Campbell SEVERSON: She says the Internet extends the “global body of Christ” because someone or some prayer is always there, and she says for those too shy or introverted to speak up in church, the Internet offers anonymity. Dr. CAMPBELL: That anonymous nature allows them to ask the questions, to get the feedback, to say things that they would never be able to say in a face-to-face environment. SEVERSON: This is Cathleen Falsani’s Webs site. She is a columnist for the Chicago Sun-Times and author of two books, “The God Factor” and, most recently, “Sin Boldly.” She signed up for Facebook fishing for contacts. But before long she was connecting regularly with old friends and new friends. CATHLEEN FALSANI (Columnist, Chicago Sun-Times and Author, “The God Factor”): I happened to have the laptop open in bed, and I saw one friend of mine’s status update pop up and change, and it said, “I’m really sad that Mark died today.” I said, “Please tell me you’re kidding.” I didn’t hear anything back. So I emailed another friend, and shortly after that he said, “No, Mark was killed this morning.” SEVERSON: Their friend Mark was killed while in the lead Humvee of a convoy outside Sadr City, Iraq. Ms. FALSANI: We ended up mourning online because we’re all over the place, and it was just a way to sort of talk about Mark, and there was a little memorial that sort of started there, and then it moved to its own Web site, but we kept talking. Cathleen Falsani SEVERSON: Falsani says online conversations often turned to issues of theology and spirituality. (to Ms. Falsani): You speak of it almost in a spiritual way. Ms. FALSANI: Yeah. We started — a number of us started calling it kind of flippantly a while ago “church.” It feels like church. But it really has, for some of us, become church. SEVERSON: Falsani was surprised that a secular Web site like Facebook could become, for her, an online church.  Pastor Harrell was equally surprised at the response on Facebook to his Leviticus challenge. He says people with no connection to his congregation posted their comments about the experiences members recorded while attempting to live and dress and eat according to the word of God in Leviticus. THOMAS KEOWN (speaking in Facebook video): The man should put his hand on the head of the animal. SEVERSON: Those members who attempted the experiment called themselves Levites, and some, like Thomas Keown, made their own videos to share on Facebook. His was a humorous look at a visit to his family farm in Ireland where he tried to touch the head of a cow as Leviticus instructs. The cow apparently didn’t see the humor. Mr. KEOWN: I think it’s completely free of defects, but free of any interest in allowing me to put my hand on their head. So Facebook was the primary means by which this experiment was public. It was the way that people outside the church and inside the church were able to play their part in it, were able to be part of what we, as a small group, were doing. SEVERSON: Kristi Vrooman made her Facebook video about the search for meat that complies with Leviticus standards. KRISTI VROOMAN (speaking in video): And these animals were not, were not injected with hormones? UNIDENTIFIED GROCERY STORE CLERK: They were all free-range. Ms. VROOMAN: It surprised all of us, really, that people outside of our own church, outside of our religious tradition were commenting — people from Sweden, people from Israel. Pastor HARREL: It certainly has added a layer of connection that would have been difficult to otherwise create. I guess the question, or the jury, is still out as to whether that will supplant, you know, the kind of connection that we actually like to have in real time. SEVERSON: Skeptics of online religion say it’ll never match the church experience — the social experience where the faithful know one other, share coffee and conversation, look each other in the eye. They say Internet religion is religion-lite. Its defenders disagree. Ms. FALSANI: It was completely counterintuitive to me, and I could not have imagined this kind of blessing, this kind of communion and community — and we use the word “community” tongue-in-cheek but also seriously, coming about from a piece of technology. I just — I wouldn’t have believed it if it hadn’t happened to us. But it did. SEVERSON: Critics of online religion say it might work for an individual, but it doesn’t foster family togetherness. Pastor Harrell says he is aware of the criticism, but now he is also more aware of the Internet’s possibilities. Pastor HARRELL: You know, it is in the end a tool, you know, that can be employed for good or evil, I guess, and we’d like to think we’re using it for good. SEVERSON: Charles Henderson, who is now the editor of CrossCurrents Quarterly, says the Internet should not replace the real thing. Mr. HENDERSON: I think that the experience online has to be considered as a supplement to real friendships and real community life in local congregations. It’s not a replacement for that kind of real community, although some people do use it as a substitute for religious community. I don’t think that is the ideal. Pastor Charles Henderson SEVERSON: But for Cathleen Falsani and others like her, the old-time church is being replaced, for now, by religion on the Internet. Ms. FALSANI: You know, I was finding that I was getting more hurt by congregational life than I was being fed and that I could find that elsewhere and still be safe spiritually. And so this is a beautiful thing for someone like me to have, and I’m not the only one who’s experienced that in the group. SEVERSON: Although most churchgoers still prefer religion the old-fashioned way, an increasing number, especially those under 30, are exploring religion online. A study in 2001 by the Pew Research Center found that one-in-four adults use the Internet for religious and spiritual purposes. That was seven years ago. Today, the number is probably considerably higher. For RELIGION & ETHICS NEWSWEEKLY, I’m Lucky Severson reporting. A number of us started calling it “church” kind of flippantly. It feels like church. It really has, for some of us, become church. /wnet/religionandethics/files/2008/11/p_cover_thumbnail1.jpg ]]> http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/episodes/november-21-2008/online-religion/1460/feed/ 2 http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/episodes/november-14-2008/catholic-church-and-labor/1322/ http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/episodes/november-14-2008/catholic-church-and-labor/1322/#comments Fri, 14 Nov 2008 21:15:00 +0000 fabiana ramirez http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/?p=1322 LUCKY SEVERSON: There was a time when a labor strike like this one against the Catholic Church in Scranton, Pennsylvania, would have been difficult to imagine. The Church, after all, has always been the champion of workers rights. These workers are Catholic school teachers whose union was suddenly shut out of the Scranton Diocese. Michael Milz MICHAEL MILZ (President, Scranton Diocese Association of Catholic Teachers): It’s union busting of the worst sort because we’re used to union busting in the 21st century. But we’re not used to those kind of tactics coming from the Catholic Church. How can you not say it’s hypocrisy when you say that when they urge other employers to allow their workers to have the right to organize, yet deny it to your own workers? SEVERSON: The Scranton Diocese had recognized the union, which represents about a third of its teachers, for over 30 years until Bishop Joseph Martino arrived. He commissioned a study of the dwindling parochial school enrollment. The bishop then consolidated four unionized high schools into one and said it would no longer work with the union. It caused an uproar in Scranton’s heavily unionized Catholic community. Bishop Joseph F. Martino Bishop JOSEPH F. MARTINO (Diocese of Scranton): Many people do not understand all of the facts, and I think if they saw the kind of rhetoric that I’ve endured from various sides they would see that we are beyond the stage of talking at this point. So I have made a decision and I don’t think the word has gone out yet. But it is final SEVERSON: The Bishop’s stance might not have caused such an outcry if not for the Church’s long record on workers’ rights. Over a hundred years ago, Pope Leo XIII issued an encyclical supporting workers’ rights to a living wage and union protection. In the 1960s, the Church defended the farm workers’ right to organize. And as late as 1986, U.S. Catholic bishops proclaimed that “no one may deny the right to organize without attacking human dignity itself.” RITA SCHWARTZ (President, National Association of Catholic School Teachers): It’s one thing to champion a farm worker or a textile worker. It seems to change radically when it’s your own employees that are trying to unionize. SEVERSON: In fact, since the 1970s, Church leaders have attempted, sometimes successfully, to bust Catholic teachers unions across the country. Brian Benestad teaches theology at the University of Scranton, a Jesuit school. He says there are times when fighting the union is justified. Professor Brian Benestad Professor BRIAN BENESTAD (Theology Department, University of Scranton): The right to form a union is really not an absolute right, and I think a bishop, when he would look at a teacher’s union, he would have to see if that union would at all get in the way of the aim of the school — you know, for example, if the existence of the union would be some kind of obstacle to maintaining the Catholic identity, you know, or the academic excellence or even the financial viability of the school. SEVERSON: The union says money was not a big issue — that parochial teachers understand they will earn considerably less than public school teachers. Ms. SCHWARTZ: I told Catholic teachers many times if they taught for the money, if they were here for the money I hope their medical plan was good, because they needed to have their heads examined. SEVERSON: Joseph Casciano is superintendent of Scranton’s Catholic schools. He says money is always an issue, and coming up with more would require increasing tuition, something many parents can’t afford. He is concerned that because there is so little money available for salaries, the union would instead demand, for example, that teachers not be required to attend functions like Mass with the students, and that, he says, would sidetrack them from their jobs as ministers of the Gospel. Rita Schwartz JOSEPH CASCIANO (Superintendent of Schools, Diocese of Scranton): We only want what we’ve always wanted and that is that you accept your responsibility as one of the ministers in our Church, and we believe we do whatever it takes to fulfill that mission. Ms. SCHWARTZ: To keep people who have a legitimate right to have a say over the conditions of their employment — to keep them from doing that and using as an excuse that they are ministerial, that’s to me hiding behind religion. SEVERSON: To replace the teachers union, the bishop created one of his own, representing not only teachers but all diocesan employees. Prof. BENESTAD: These are associations of the administrators, and the teachers and the staff people and the aids, and they meet on a regular basis to discuss, you know, everything pertaining to working conditions, benefits and wages. Mr. MILZ: They created a company union, which is illegal in every other workplace in America. The only legitimate representation that employees can have is when they decide the method of representation that they want to have with their employer. SEVERSON: Milz was a high school history teacher for 33 years before he was let go, along with other teachers, when the diocese consolidated schools. He was told that other teachers had more seniority. Mr. MILZ: I was fired for my union activity. There were a lot of teachers who had more seniority than me. But there were also a number of teachers who had lesser seniority that I did. SHARON HOURIGAN: Kevin thought Mike Milz was probably the best teacher he ever had. SEVERSON: Sharon Hourigan’s son Kevin and her daughter Megan were attending Catholic schools at the time. She says she was shocked when she heard what the diocese had done because she knew the sacrifices teachers were making, even when there was a union. Sharon Hourigan Ms. HOURIGAN: I saw the teachers that were, you know, sitting in broken chairs and, you know, falling out of them half the time, and they would spend their money on supplies for the classroom. They would take their free time to tutor the kids, and it was just incredibly appalling to me that after all of this time, after 30 years of this kind of service, that they would be treated so shabbily — just appalling. SEVERSON: Denying the union was not a risky venture because the diocese knew the law, as it is now, is on its side. In 1979, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Catholic teachers were not protected by the National Labor Relations Act because they weren’t included in it. But when the act was written, the vast majority of Catholic teachers were nuns and priests. Now it’s different. Today nine out of 10 teachers are lay teachers. In a last ditch effort to get union protection under state law, the Pennsylvania House is debating legislation, known as House Bill 2626, which is similar to laws already enacted in three states. It would force the diocese to bargain collectively with teachers’ unions in religious schools of all faiths and allow them to bring grievances to the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board — a bill the diocese strongly opposes. Prof. BENESTAD: If the Catholic schools are required to recognize the union, then you’re going to have government, you know, intervening in the school, making decisions about whether the bishops’ invocation of doctrine is really genuine. SEVERSON: John Dean is a lawyer and serves on the board of Holy Redeemer High School. He argues that the proposed legislation violates the separation of church and state. JOHN DEAN (Board Member, Holy Redeemer High School, Diocese of Scranton, speaking at school board hearing): House Bill 2626 would constitute a governmental intrusion into our interest in the continuing stability and religious identity of our children’s educational path and an unconstitutional impingement on our rights to religious freedom. What concerns me as a parent of Catholic students is that our teachers currently accompany our students to Mass. It is certain, certain that the teachers’ union will attempt to negotiate that as a term and condition of employment. I do not want the school system . . . AUDIENCE shouts in protest. Mr. DEAN: I do not want . . . Mr. MILZ: That is a lie. That is a lie. Wherever you got that information, you were misinformed or lied to. SEVERSON: The legislation will be reintroduced in both Houses when the legislative session begins in January. While the union holds out hope, Sharon Hourigan seems to have lost hers. (to Ms. Hourigan): Has this affected your faith? Joseph Casciano Ms. HOURIGAN: Huge, hugely, yeah. It’s very hard for me to say this, and it’s scary for me to say this, especially publicly, but I’ve lost my faith. I really have, and I have to say that given all of what has gone on in our little town, in our diocese, I admire anyone that can hang onto it. Mr. CASCIANO: What do we have to compromise, and where do we have to compromise? It affects the mission of the Church. One of the concerns that was at the forefront was always the mission of the schools — that it would truly be that our schools would truly be Catholic and that they would do what they are supposed to do, which is an extension of the Church itself. SEVERSON: For now that mission will proceed as dictated by Bishop Martino. An appeal from the union to the Vatican was recently denied, and the bishop’s right to go forward without a union was upheld. For RELIGION & ETHICS NEWSWEEKLY, I’m Lucky Severson in Scranton, Pennsylvania. There was a time when a labor strike like this one against the Catholic Church in Scranton, Pennsylvania, would have been difficult to imagine. The Church, after all, has always been the champion of workers rights. There was a time when a labor strike like this one against the Catholic Church in Scranton, Pennsylvania, would have been difficult to imagine. The Church, after all, has always been the champion of workers rights. /wnet/religionandethics/files/2008/11/p_cover_flashboxthumbnail.jpg ]]> http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/episodes/november-14-2008/catholic-church-and-labor/1322/feed/ 6