Surely many people grimace when they walk into an unfamiliar house of worship for the funeral or memorial service of a friend or loved one. The surroundings, the theology, rites and style are often strange and daunting. Typically, visitors are on their toes to be sensitive to customs, and they fear they may unwittingly find themselves in the wrong place or somehow about to embarrass themselves. Should guys always put on a kippa at a Jewish temple or grab a service book and practice flipping the pages backwards as Hebrew scripture is read. Can they fold up the kneeler in their pew if they are the only one in that row in a Catholic church? What blessings and statements should they repeat if they are not Catholic? What if they dont feel moved to sway or clap hands at a charismatic church service. If it is a real hugging church or they dont like shaking peoples hands at that greeting time during the service, how can they safely show that? And what would happen if their Lutheran niece stood up during the Eucharist in a Catholic funeral Mass and went forward to receive it from a priest and was oblivious to the strict rules Catholics have about closed communion? Out of respect, there are many who show up at funerals, weddings and baptisms, settings that may make them nervous. They are filled with anxiety that too much unwanted religion will be laid on them. They came to hear about the exemplary life of Harriett, their neighbor of 25 years across the street and didnt want to hear long oppressive scripture and a long funeral sermon about salvation. And, often they are shortchanged about Harrietts life being showcased, instead getting little more than what was written up about her for the paid obituary in the newspaper. Sometimes there is the added pressure of being a stranger and a dread that youre being intentionally watched for your reaction or receptivity to things such that folks will prey on you to possibly join or attend that event Wednesday night for visitors and seekers. Time and again in the service, they are asked to stand and sing a ponderously slow dirge from the hymnal whose insufferable tune they never heard. The strange surroundings give them time to look around and see symbols, stained-glass windows, wall-hangings with scripture and maybe flip through the assorted materials in the pew racks for viewing or taking home. Sometime it is interesting to envision your departed friend I in the context of that congregation, especially if he or she was active there. What was their impact and how did the culture of that faith community reflect in that persons life, behavior and social witness? During these visits to unfamiliar territory, most people come and plant themselves in spots in pews and blend in. Many visitors do only what they have to do and are supposed to do, wary that they might commit a faux pas. Some arrive just before the service and duck out quickly afterwards, not staying for fellowship time. In the end, nonetheless, they have had an ecumenical or interfaith experience. They were exposed to other practices of faith. In most cases, they have seen the most faithful adherents. Some are active true believers, others may be going through the motions. When the visitors get back to the parking lot, they know they have seen and experienced and survived yet another exercise in public faith and gained some new modicum of understanding and acceptance.

There is a lure to lists, especially book lists. In various stretches of my life, I have kept track of the books I read. I would write down the title and author each time I finished one. I somehow quit recording them somewhere when things got too busy, but when I come across the main list from a long stretch of years, I am heartened by the titles, the authors and, often, the fact that some of them were seminal books that have had a place in sustained public discussion.There is a lure to lists, especially book lists. In various stretches of my life, I have kept track of the books I read. I would write down the title and author each time I finished one. I somehow quit recording them somewhere when things got too busy, but when I come across the main list from a long stretch of years, I am heartened by the titles, the authors and, often, the fact that some of them were seminal books that have had a place in sustained public discussion.I especially recall how much respect I gave to a recommended list of book titles I was given in 7th grade English books one should read before college. I launched into that list and read a large number of fiction and non-fiction works that shaped my thinking. My wife, a prolific book reader, has had the discipline to write down titles of all her books. At the end of each year, I always make note of the total in our family Christmas newsletter and wistfully wished I had the time to be so committed to the rich world of books.So we see that Christianity Today magazine, founded by the Rev. Billy Graham, recently compiled the list of The Top 50 Books That Have Shaped Evangelicals. It calls them landmark titles that change the way we think, talk, witness, worship and live. More than 60 people, including evangelical leaders like Tony Campolo, Anne Graham Lotz, Haddon Robinson, Jim Wallis and Philip Yancey, made nominations. Magazine staff then vigorously debated the titles and ranked them. Some wanted the titles to be ranked within subgroups, like those that shaped social action or their spiritual lives. Its mildly interesting to ponder whether C.S. Lewis Mere Christianity or Francis Schaeffers Escape from Reason influenced evangelical apologetics more, the magazine editors said. Editors said the list would invariably spark debate and prompt e-mails. Some books were very well known and got mixed rankings: The Purpose-Driven Life by Rick Warren (No. 42); The Hiding Place: by Corrie ten Boom (No. 48); The Late Great Planet Earth by Hal Lindsey (No. 33); Dare to Discipline by James Dobson (No. 29); The Cross and the Switchblade by David Wilkerson (No. 32.); Christy by Catherine Marshall (No. 27); and Evangelism Explosion by D. James Kennedy (No. 10).Among books with heavy teaching were The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? by F.F. Bruce (No. 47); The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind by Mark Noll (No. 45); Darwin on Trial by Philip Johnson (No. 40); The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism by F.H. Henry (No. 15); and Whats So Amazing About Grace? by Philip Yancey (No. 17). Getting a high ranking (No. 6) is The Living Bible, the familiar, easy-to-read Bible that Kenneth Taylor introduced in 1971. So lets count down the top five books for impact on evangelicals by consensus of Christianity Magazine. 5) Knowing God by J. I. Packer who convinced us that the study of God is the most practical project anyone can engage in; 4) The God Who is There by Francis A. Schaeffer, which accomplished something startling and necessary: It made intellectual history a vital part of the evangelical mental landscape, opened up the world particularly of art and philosophy to a subculture that was suspicious and ignorant of both; 3) Mere Christianity By C.S. Lewis, a work of apologetics that editors at Christianity Today editors determined doesnt need any explanation; 2) Understand Church Growth by Donald Anderson McGavran who is credited with creating a science in the examination of church growth and for coining the homogeneous unit principle term and spawning serious examination of the phenomenon of growth; and 1) Prayer: Conversing With God by Rosalind Rinker, in which the author taught us something revolutionary, shifting prayer meetings from formal prayer speeches to a conversation with God, so that today evangelicals assume that casual, colloquial, intimate prayer is the most authentic way to pray. The rankings can be seen at http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2006/october/23.51.html.

My working time — and much of my free time — is spent focused on religion. I read many books for possible Spiritual Life section stories about the endlessly fascinating and boggling word of faith. Then there are the DVDs and videos, long phone conversations, faxes, e-mails, snail mail and reports — competing forces after my ear, mind and heart. All dealing with belief and religion. And I keep an active personal faith life. The cadence and character of religion are infinitely interesting.Years ago, after interviewing a Mesa Mormon for a story, the well-meaning man returned with a leather-bound Book of Mormon, The Doctrine and Covenants and The Pearl of Great Price. Embossed on the cover were the gold letters "Mr. and Mrs. Lawn Griffiths." It was his way of inviting me to explore his faith more fully. It’s been a reference book on my office bookshelf for many years. I politely thanked him, but explained my religion fit me well.This represents my 100th blog since launching Beyond Belief in April. I try to write new commentaries as often as possible.When I give community talks, I’m asked a lot of questions until time expires. Here I present answers to questions sometimes asked and maybe ones that should be asked:Q: How did you get into writing religion?A: I have been writing for daily newspapers since 1972. In 1987, then-Tribune executive editor Max Jennings tapped me to be religion editor because my writings displayed an open-mindedness and energy about the faith community. As city editor of the Tempe Daily News, starting in 1984, I oversaw religion news and produced features. I wrote religion largely full time 1987 to 1994, but then wrote the daily "Town Crier" column. I returned to the Spiritual Life editor job in 1998.Q: What’s the biggest challenge?A: Shortage of time to cover the many potential and worthy religion-related stories to be told in the area; seeking a mix and balance of faiths covered and topics examined.Q: What do you most like in your job?A: Great minds. People of faith who are articulate, quotable, fearless, candid and dynamic. When they can well state the ideas in which their beliefs are grounded, it’s fulfilling work. Too many smart and thoughtful people are rooted in too many religions to be able to say all but one group is wrong.Q: What do you most dislike?A: Dogma and ideologues. There’s a suffocating tyranny in so much of religion. I find my-religion-is-the-true-religion position impossible to accept. Q: But you are a Christian, so what about various New Testament quotes like John 14:6: I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me?A: Writer James Thatamanil says that statement is the defining line between liberal and conservative Christians: Liberal Christians avoid it like the bird flu; and conservative Christians preach nothing else. As a liberal Christian, I cannot accept such exclusive doctrine. If , in fact, Christ actually said that, I liken it to anyone espousing his teachings and message and deeming it The Truth.. Why wouldnt he market himself as the truth? Religions before and since have been doing the same thing. For all its merits, Christianity is not alone in embracing amazing tenets for life. And you dont have to buy it all to qualify as a Christian. Thank God.Q: Do you have a faith life?A: My father was a Baptist, my mother was Congregational. As a child, we attended a Free Evangelical church and later a series of strict, ascetic home churches that turned me off on religion. In college, I worshipped in a Presbyterian church and its social gospel and social justice emphasis grabbed me. My Army dog tags said, "Presbyterian." I married a "cradle" Presbyterian in 1973 and was ordained an elder in 1974, serving four three-year terms as an elder on Sessions through the years as and other three years terms as a deacon and trustee. I have held countless church roles, even in the national church.Q: Doesnt covering the wide landscape of beliefs from New Age to Pentecostal get too confusing and make you jaded?A: Quite the contrary, it only underscores that many, many expressions of belief can accomplish the same things, from giving a set of values to live by to creating community for support, service, love and spiritual growth. To me it proves that no doctrine or belief system has seized dominion on truth.

I often spend time thinking that we, in this time and place in history, are beset by the yin and the yang. We seem helpless to know what we should be doing right now to avoid the catastrophes of the future. But so much is really clear and self-evident as to what we must do to avoid our destruction, to stop the madness and to immediately begin reforms to avoid chaos and disaster. Why is it so hard to stop doing the stupid things that are PLAIN stupid? Why are we so paralyzed?I imagine many of you wonder if Islam is, indeed, hell-bent on taking over the world. Havent factions of Christianity always sought to take the message of Christ to all ends of the world, reach all people and make disciples of everyone? We think of The Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization, launched in 1974 by 2,500 Christians gathered in Lausanne. Switzerland. It has fueled numerous evangelism movements and certainly missionaries are energized by a perceived Muslim counter-threat to their work.Jason Mandryck, co-author of Operation World, a prayer guide, recently told a Christian leadership development gathering in Malaysia that although Christianity has barely kept pace with the worlds population growth, evangelicalism is far and away the fastest growing major religious movement in the world today. He said it is growing at twice the pace as Islam and three times as fast as the overall world population. He and others say the older generation has dropped the ball on mission work, but a younger generation of committed Christians is taking charge. Wait a minute, Islam regularly is touted as the fast-growing religion. And don’t the Mormon say that, too?The Council on American-Islamic Relations, which describes itself as the nations largest Muslim civil liberties group, is highly productive at informing the press about all things Islamic. One or two long daily digests of stories come to me. They chronicle anti-Muslims events and issues. Much is made in the latest American Muslim News Briefs about two separate incidents at Pace University in New York City where copies of the Quran were found soaking in campus library toilets. It has sparked heated discussions of whether authorities treated them only as vandalism and not hate crimes.Theres an excerpt of a commentary called Targeting Muslims The New Inquisition by Bradley Burston. It was published this week in Haaretz, a Tel Aviv, Israel, liberal, independent Middle-Eastern newspaper. Burston has written a thoughtful, sound piece suggesting non-Muslims understand Islam, appreciate values they embrace and stop being so preoccupied with such shallow things as headscarves. And, yes, we ought to have empathy for Muslims who have suffered so much distrust and verbal and physical attacks since 9/11.Its worth posting some of Burstons excerpts: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/775898.html– "If you are going to have Islamic schools, the question is whether they are going to embrace Western values," Patrick Sookhdeo, a Pakistan-born Anglican priest in England who converted from Islam, told the New York Times this month. "I would argue that Islamic values are not compatible with Western values," he said. And what Western values might these be? Are they the time-honored Western values of intolerance for people of color, suspicion and marginalization of non-Christians, fear and loathing of non-Whites? Exploitation of and contempt for the residents of former imperial possessions and colonies? — Perhaps it is time for us in the Western world to declare that Islam has a right to exist. Perhaps it is time for us to recognize that non-violent, non-Judeo-Christian religious observance is a right, not an act of war. Scarves don’t explode. Veils do not kill. The niqab does not incite.– In the Age of Paris Hilton, however, the West desperately needs women who devote themselves to serious pursuits, to the betterment of society, women who believe that self-esteem and dignity are worthy values. If they choose to wear a veil, and we take offense, that is wholly our problem. We have no business making it theirs.It bears repeating again and again. Unfortunately, much of the Christian West is obsessed that Islam intends to defeat it and impose its religion and culture. A segment of Islam may want that, just as a segment of Christianity wants the entire planet to fall in behind Christ. The many billions of us in the middle including Muslims who understand the dilemma and the grave risks of being mistrusted and demonized need to be active in breaking down religious and cultural walls, in ending fear and wariness and in showing that understanding leads to cooperation and coexistence.

I heard a pastor recently complain how difficult it is to get potential new members to his church to commit to attend a series of classes to learn about the local church and the greater denomination before they would be formally received into membership. They didnt want a lot of classes over an expanse of time lest it muffed their nights and weekends and everything else they have going.Maybe its a generational thing, the pastor surmised. An unwillingness to commit. Conflicted lukewarm joiners used to the freedom of independence. Maybe because society seems more wary about religion and more standoffish, these thinking-about-joining folks have the upper hand as to what faith community ends up getting them if any do at all. Seekers have so much to choose from in their odyssey. Results of the Spiritual Quest, a survey of 112,232 students at 236 colleges and universities gave hope that the faith community should be able to recruit the next generation if they better understand them. The study, funded by the well-known John Templeton Foundation, found 76 percent of students reported being on a search for meaning and purpose in life, while 17 percent said they were not. Three in four said they were actively having discussions with peers and friends about it. More specifically, 77 percent agreed it was either essential or very important that they actively try to attain wisdom; 67 percent in becoming more loving persons; 54 percent found it essential or very important to seek beauty in their lives; 54 percent were for improving the human condition; 49 percent to attain inner harmony; 45 percent affirmed the importance of finding answers to mysteries of life; and 42 supported developing a meaningful philosophy of life. By a high number, students saw going to college as crucial to their finding meaning in life. Among freshman, it was 71 percent. To all the above issues, women routinely gave more assent to them in quest for meaning. For example, 59 percent of women and 48 percent of men are seeking beauty in their lives, according to the study. When students were asked to identify their religious preferences and they were put up against the spiritual quest topic, it was largely inconclusive. The surveyors sought to see whether higher scorers on spiritual quest would or could state a preference. Mormons and Unitarians most often were identified (39 percent). Lows were Jewish (24 percent), Quaker (26 percent) and Lutheran (27 percent). Those who are high scorers on spiritual quest are more likely than their low scoring peers to say they were secure in their religious beliefs (48 to 40 percent) and to report that they pray (39 percent versus 15 percent) or meditate (10 percent versus 1 percent) on a daily basis, found the study, carried out with a $1.9 million grant. It surely affirms the importance of the university as that amazing setting and idea marketplace for vigorous exploration and debate about belief, faith and relevance.The study found students feel poised to use an ethic of caring as they learn, understand and begin engaging in the world. They seem more comfortable with an ecumenical worldview approach and a greater connection to all humanity. And for some, internal struggles about spiritual matters and conflicting feeling about the beliefs nurtured in them continue to broil as their own spiritual ethos and identity take clear shape and unfold.

Each year when I fill out my Mesa United Way card, I always attach a note instructing them to not direct any of my payroll giving to the Boy Scouts of America. I simply state that as worthy as the Scouts work may be, I cannot condone their discrimination of homosexuals and atheists.I know full well that the Scouts will NOT get any less money, in the long run, because of my personal stand but its worth making a statement. For years, I have half-heartedly bought pancake breakfast tickets from the members of the troop at my church when theyve approached me, but I dont go out of my way to support their fund-raising. I have restrained myself from starting a conversation with a young Scout about the whole discrimination issue.I was not surprised or bothered by last weeks U.S. Supreme Courts choice not to hear the Scouts appeal of a California Supreme Court ruling. The Berkeley Sea Scouts had objected to the city of Berkeleys marina ending their free use of a public boat slip, or berth, even though other non-profit organizations were continuing to get spots free. Berkeley had allowed the Scouts free use since the 1930s. Berkeley is where free-speech protests first raged three decades ago. In 1997, the city adopted a nondiscriminatory policy regarding use of the marina that became the basis for the action against the scouts. In 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court came down on the side of the Boys Scouts saying it had the right to ban openly gay Scout leaders as part of their First Amendment rights of free assembly and its right to operate by its own codes of conduct. But in March, the California court decided unanimously that local governments have no obligation to give benefits to an organization that discriminates. New reports said the city told the Sea Scouts if they dropped their ties to the BSA or simply disavowed the nation groups position of discrimination against gays and atheists, they could get free berth space. But the Scouts refused. Its leader had been paying $500 a month to put one boat in the marina. Previously it had to remove two other boats because it could not afford the cost.The troops membership dropped from about 100 to 40 in the wake of the subsidy issue. After the Oct. 16 ruling, the progressive American Humanist Association applauded the high courts actions, saying public tax dollars ought not be extended to a group that discriminates on religious grounds. People are entitled to their own beliefs religious or otherwise but they are not entitled to public funds to support the discriminatory practices of those beliefs, said the Humanists executive director Roy Speckhardt.It was heartening that after the Supreme Courts 2000 ruling favoring the Scouts, a number of Scouts around the U.S. turned in their badges to protest the discriminatory policy. In the long run, the Scouts may have prevailed there, but it will continue to suffer fallout and setbacks like the Marina issue. In 2006, such an organization continues tied up in its own knots when it believes it can judge the character and content of boys and young men by how they regard God or how they were dealt their sexual orientation. As Speckhardt said, it is an outmoded and hurtful practice of exclusion that will dog the BSA until a new generation of enlightened leadership comes along.

The Arizona Catholic Conference has released its 2006 Voters Guide as part of the latest issue of The Catholic Sun, and it is billed as an important educational tool to provide unbiased information on the upcoming election. Readers are encouraged to reproduce the four-page insert and distribute it to parishes.Candidates for all state and federal offices in Arizona were asked 12 questions that were first presented to them in June, well before the September primary. Republican, Democratic and Libertarian candidates were asked to indicate whether they support, oppose or had no answer to the questions. (www.azcatholicconference.org)The first thing that jumps out is the number of candidates who, for various reasons, did not return their surveys. While some may say they never received the survey so they could not respond, most surely saw no political value in posting their stands, especially with the questions about abortion, contraception and a definition of marriage. Candidates typically get a whole bunch of such surveys from interest groups, teacher organizations, the media and others. Sometimes the questions are innocuous, but most often the questions are directly related to the groups own hot button issues and to answer honestly to such groups wont help them win.The guide lists 201 total candidates. Candidate did not answer survey was noted 97 times. Thus 48.2 percent of all seeking offices did not respond to the Conferences inquiry. It was worst in the races for the Arizona Senate — 31 out of 56 not responding, or 55.4 percent. The state House races found 45 percent (46 of 102 hopefuls not responding). Eleven of 25 running for the U.S. House of Representatives chose not to respond. Eight of 15 for state executive offices did not send back surveys. Of the 97 not returning them, 66 were Democrats, 18 were Republicans, nine were Libertarians and the rest were Reform or Independent candidates. Among the 12 questions were: prohibiting all forms of human cloning; legalizing physician-assisted suicide; amending the United States Constitution to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman; and requiring informed consent for abortion to inform a woman considering an abortion about the medical and psychological risks, fetal development and abortion alternatives, and to include a 24-hour period for the woman to review the information. In some cases, there are asterisks by names of candidates who felt compelled to elaborate on their answers lest a support/oppose oversimplified their positions. One House candidate (Lynne Pancrazi in District 24) gave no S or O, but did respond to all questions with written comments. Same for Libertarian U.S. House District 2 candidate Powell Gammill.So have the non-responders struck a blow to the democratic process? The short answer is yes, but I dont believe they could be called cowardly or even disingenuous. Stark 15-word, unqualified statements about some of societys most knotty issues can be daunting and even unworthy for S or O responses. In districts where candidates have a strong hold of their seats, there is less risk in giving answers that might be unpopular to Catholics, in this instance. Or by not answering at all may carry no real risk. But where races could be close, the risks of honest answers - giving a firm "no" or "yes" answer — may be political folly. Some candidates may actually resent a large religious institution so brazenly posing such contentious moral issues. And if you are running for the Arizona Corporation Commission, you may ask yourself, "What do these have to do with the cost of electricity?"Finally, many candidates know full well that the issues identified by the leadership of an organization, in this case the Arizona Catholic Conference and diocesan hierarchies, are not necessarily supported entirely by members/followers. And there is, in fact, opposition within the ranks for issues the church supports.

Reform of the nations woeful drug enforcement policies seem to be getting a boost from the faith community, especially in the area of medical marijuana use and mere possession by adults. In neighboring Nevada, religious leaders have launched a bold effort to legalize, then regulate marijuana. Reform of the nations woeful drug enforcement policies seem to be getting a boost from the faith community, especially in the area of medical marijuana use and mere possession by adults. In neighboring Nevada, religious leaders have launched a bold effort to legalize, then regulate marijuana. Pastors of many mainline Protestant churches, rabbis and even a nun 33 people in all have signed on with support for a faith resolution for marijuana regulation . It states that marijuana use and abuse should be addressed primarily by medical and mental health professionals, educators, families and religious communities, with the role of the criminal justice system limited to instances in which a marijuana users behavior threatens the health and safety of others.The current policy using punishment to control marijuana use has not reduced marijuana abuse or related harms, but has instead resulted in excessive and unjust punishments, widespread disregard for the rule of law and an out-of-control distribution system run by dangerous criminals intent on spreading its use to youth and other vulnerable segments of the population, the resolution says.The clergy mince no words: Adults should not be arrested or locked up for consuming marijuana. They should be able to obtain it from a legally regulated market instead of the criminal market. Actions that endanger or harm others, such as driving while under the influence of marijuana, should remain a crime, the resolve. In particular providing marijuana to minors should continue to be criminalized. In other words, you can substitute marijuana for beer and liquor, and its about the same story. Folks with the Interfaith Drug Policy Initiative, whose slogan is compassion, not coercion, offer a long litany of reasons why this particular battle in the war on drugs needs a change in tactics. When something is not working, we, as a society, must have the courage to try something different, said a retired Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod pastor from Laughlin, Nev., the Rev. Jerry Pruess. He said the nation had the courage to end the Prohibition experiment when it failed and was doing more harm than good. Even the most conservative among us do not advocate that we return to that disastrous policy which made criminal gangs rich and wreaked havoc on our streets.A Southern Baptist pastor from Reno, the Rev. William Cobb, said he doesnt believe it wise for anyone to use marijuana. Drugs ruin enough lives, he said. But we dont need our laws ruining more lives. If there has to be market in marijuana, Id rather it be regulated with sensible safeguards than run by violent gangs and dangerous drug dealers.Last June, Beliefnet conducted a poll on the Internet about change in marijuana laws: Do you believe in the legalization of marijuana? There was at least 92 percent support for at least medical marijuana. Seventy percent said for both medical and recreational use and 22 percent for certain medical conditions and with a doctors prescription. Just 7 percent said no way. Those who go onto Beliefnet are typically spiritually inclined people.Eleven states allow medical marijuana without prosecution, including California, Nevada and Colorado. Arizona voters once OKd its use, but the Legislature changed rules and advocates have never been able to get anything permanent. In June, the Presbyterian Church (USA) joined with the United Methodist Church, the Episcopal Church, United Church of Christ, Union for Reform Judaism, Unitarian Universalist Association and Progressive National Baptist Convention in support of medical marijuana. These Nevada pastors, along with the Interfaith Drug Policy Initiative (www.idpi.us) surely are intent on taking advantage of the public opinion and reality to press for a saner policy in decriminalization and letting adults use one more thing provided in nature. Lawmakers should take note.

Religious liberty and freedom itself rise and fall together, Newsweek editor Jon Meacham emphasized in his lecture on Sept. 26 at Gammage Auditorium at Arizona State University. The author of American Gospel: God, the Founding Fathers and the Making of a Nation sought a middle ground in the current polemics and polarization of American religion.Religious liberty and freedom itself rise and fall together, Newsweek editor Jon Meacham emphasized in his lecture on Sept. 26 at Gammage Auditorium at Arizona State University. The author of American Gospel: God, the Founding Fathers and the Making of a Nation sought a middle ground in the current polemics and polarization of American religion.In his talk, the 2006 free public lecture in the Jonathan and Maxine Marshall Distinguished Lecture Series, Meacham said too much is made of tolerance, but not enough on allowing respectable public debate on religious ideas, a discipline that serves to strengthen religious liberty. His examination of American history has turned up clear patterns of religion co-existing with the political realm through mutual understanding. Meacham told how President John Tyler (1841-1845) penned a proclamation, after the death of President William Henry Harrison, who scarcely was in office a month. He called America a Christian people and asked them to pray for Harrison. It prompted a private letter of objection from a Jew from Virginia, Jacob Ezekiel, saying the president should not be so limiting. Tyler realized his mistake and changed his thinking. It was to his everlasting credit that he admitted he was wrong, Meacham said. People understand that at the heart of the American religious tradition there has been a history of fair play and a simple feeling that when in doubt, do the right thing — be fair and treat one another as you would wish to be treated, Meacham explained. Despite fierce differences through the decades, I think history bears out that when we are driven by motives that are partly religious and partly political and partly altruistic, we get the right result.The magazine editor said it is futile to separate religion and politics because both are people-centered. He suggested applying a Madisonian test and determining the forces at work. Is there a religious argument for something? Is there a partisan argument for something? Is there more of a historical or ideological argument something.He said those on both the American religious right and left grouse that events, public policy and culture are unfolding to their detriment — that a Trojan horse has entered the public square full the forces that will forever doom them. Whether the right thinks the Bible and prayer have been taken out of schools or the left is certain the Supreme Court has become a pawn for religious conservatives, there is a healthy stand off and a genius in the American system to prevent aberrations. We are called by our American traditions, and I think by our religious and moral ones, he said, to listen to one another and respond to Rodney Kings cry, Cant we all just get along? Meacham said, There is much to be said for a democratic covenant in which leaders are honest with us, transparent about their motives and why they are proposing what they are proposing. That covenant works when the public demands accountability.In a way, religion becomes one thread in the tapestry, not the whole tapestry, he said in the lecture underwritten by the Marshalls, former owners of the Scottsdale Progress, a forerunner of the Scottsdale Tribune.

As a reporter, I swallowed hard each time I drove to the rural areas of Hazleton, Fairbank or McIntire, Iowa, to write stories about the Amish. I knew they would be reluctant to talk to me, wary of my intentions, fussy about photography. Some of it came back Monday as I followed the news coverage of the horrific bloodshed in an Amish school near Nickel Mines, Pa. I thought about the raw intrusion and the scrutiny of the outside world. I pulled out the Amish file in my home filing cabinets and found brittle, yellowed clippings from 1975, 1976 and 1977. In search of Honesty: Old Old Amish Move from Missouri to McIntire was a full-page feature I did for the Waterloo (Iowa) Courier in the spring of 1975. The article told how Amishman Jerry Bontrager brought his family to that place after surveying land options in Missouri, Wisconsin and Minnesota. The price of land, the quality of existing buildings and black soil are what made him and others choose northern Iowa farms owned by non-Amish. The electric power lines would be disconnected, the indoor bathroom stripped, and other vestiges of modern living would be removed. Bontrager related some buyers remorse, how he had learned he had poorly drained land, sink holes and quicksand. I didnt know that before. He held back when asked why he made the move. He shifted his weight against the side of the small henhouse he was leaning against. Then he spoke, I wrote. Church matters was the reason. Some people didnt live up to our rules, he spoke carefully, choosing each word. Weve got rules in church like other churches, and the state has rules, and we have to stick to them. People didnt live up to what we thought were honest. But Bontrager wanted to say no more. Bontrager told me how the northern Missouri area offered bad temptations to their children. There was a lot of heavy drinking down there. Im not very fond of that drinking. Then there were problems in Missouri with how they marketed their raw milk. I ended that long article with this. We hope were doing the right thing, Bontrager confessed. But its planting season. Times too short to doubt. The Amish believe farming is the calling closest to God. God made the land and man made the city where evil is centered, they believe. McIntire will indeed be tested. And in the end, the Amish hope they find it a blessing, a place of honesty, a haven from temptation and a productive farming community. There were other clippings, one from December 1977 on how the Amish didnt celebrate Christmas much: A 71-year-old Amishman grins when its suggested his people may be missing on much that is positive and good about Christmas. Not atall, he says. A man like him with 76 grandchildren may be glad that gift-giving is as little regarded as it is by his sect.