Copyright 2000 Des Moines Register

Reprinted with permission

February 20, 1999 Saturday
SECTION: METRO IOWA; Pg. 4M
HEADLINE: Church group studies questions posed by 'Rent'
By STEPHEN BUTTRY
Register Columnist
The lyrics of "La Vie Boheme" wave a series of red flags before defenders of
traditional values.
"Mucho masturbation!" Mark proclaims loudly and clearly.
"To marijuana!" Collins sings just as clearly.
Other potential affronts are difficult to discern in the clamor of the most
raucous song of "Rent," the touring Broadway show that hit Des Moines this week.
A discussion group at Westminster Presbyterian Church had help in
understanding. The Rev. Kimby Young passed out copies of the lyrics and played
the defiant song on a compact disc for about 30 people before they attended the
musical, a 1990s update of Giacomo Puccini's classic opera "La Boheme."
Reading and listening to the recorded version, the group caught passages that
might have escaped the less practiced ears during the live production:
"To sodomy. It's between God and me."
"To no shame."
"To . . . hating dear old Mom and Dad."
And a few lines I won't even bother trying to sneak past my editors.
It's shocking, Young candidly told the group the first week it gathered.
"There's a lot of vulgarity."
Young, associate pastor at Westminster, listed the issues that "Rent" raises:
homosexuality, homelessness, hopelessness, AIDS, rejection, cross-dressing,
betrayal, poverty, addiction, despair, denial, dignity, death. On and on until
the list, most of it grim, filled two columns of a flip chart page.
"That is life in the '90s," Young said. "That's one reason I love this play
is that life in the '90s is not easy and we better deal with it or we're going
to be left back in the '50s."

Young is leading the discussion group to help people address the troubling
issues "Rent" raises. The group is meeting every Sunday in February. It met
twice before the show's Tuesday opening at the Des Moines Civic Center and will
meet twice after it closes.
Make no mistake: "Rent" is not a religious show. You could argue that it's
anti-religious. With same-sex couples cavorting on stage and open defiance of
some traditional values, the show offends many people's religious sensibilities.
Like it or not, Young said, "Rent" raises timely issues that society and
religion must address. "If the church does not talk about these issues, the
church is going to die."
The show does reflect the importance of friendship. "For that group, and I
think for the generation under 30," said Young, who is 37, "friendship is the
ultimate value."
Liz Sullivan found the Westminster program helpful, both for understanding
the story and the lyrics and for the thoughtful discussion of the issues. She
was moved, she said, by "the sense of unconditional love" among the characters
in the play.
Jane Wilkins, who also found the discussion group helpful for her
understanding, said the show was incredibly sad. "It just put me in mind of how
much splintering off there is in the world."
The central question "Rent" raises for those watching from a faith
perspective, Young said, is, "How do we deal with the despair in the world?"
She repeated the currently popular question, "What would Jesus do?" and
quickly provided the answer. He would be among the troubled Bohemians, giving
them love and hope.
Because emotions run so strong about homosexuality, that issue can become a
distraction to people on either side. Young said a much more important issue in
the show is the characters' desperate need and search for hope.
"Without condemning, because that immediately alienates much of the
population, how do we offer hope to people like the characters in the play?"
Young asked.
Whether you accept or condemn the lifestyles of the characters, if your faith
teaches you compassion, you should be moved by the fears of HIV patients
singing, "Will I lose my dignity? Will someone care?"
And if you're watching and listening in disgust at the story of "Rent," you

should note that playwright, composer and lyricist Jonathan Larson did not
borrow only from Puccini.
Amid the din of "La Vie Boheme" you also hear this line: "Let he among us who
is without sin be the first to condemn."
On the Web
Read more on the Internet at:
www.westpres.org
and www.siteforrent.com
Copyright 2000 Des Moines Register
Reprinted with permission
March 13, 1999 Saturday
SECTION: METRO IOWA; Pg. 4M
HEADLINE: We walk on sandy ground when we question others' souls
By STEPHEN BUTTRY
Register Columnist
Many of the "thou-shalt-nots" we find in the Scriptures forbid things that we
inherently know are wrong: lying, stealing, killing, adultery.
In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus delivered a powerful command about
something that inherently feels right to many who are trying to live a righteous
life:
"Do not judge, or you too will be judged."
I reread that passage this week. I reread the whole chapter (Matthew 7), to
make sure I was reading it in context. I was. The verses that follow include
Jesus' instructions to remove the log from my own eye before I concern myself
with the speck in anyone else's eye.
Jesus was emphatic, addressing his listeners as "hypocrites," a word he
seldom used.
I suppose Jesus gave this admonition because he knew how easy it is to become
self-righteous when one is living, or trying to live, a righteous life.
It's a command that can crimp a columnist's style. If I followed it
wholeheartedly, I'd probably end this column right here. Instead, I'll preface
my remarks by noting that I'm only responding to the statements, not making
judgments about the people who made them.

I've been disturbed lately by some mighty judgmental statements coming from
Christian voices.
You might have read one of the voices earlier this week on the Register's
op-ed page. Cal Thomas gave his views on the Monica Lewinsky interview with
Barbara Walters. (You won't read my views because I was weary enough of the
whole sordid saga that I didn't watch the interview.)
I've been sharply critical myself of President Clinton's behavior. I won't
quarrel with criticism of the president from Thomas or anyone else.
I'll give Thomas a pass on some of the judgmental statements he made. He
opened by calling Lewinsky a slut and a tramp. While I'd rather avoid that kind
of name-calling, that certainly is Thomas' style, and who could argue with the
evidence?
I won't even quibble with his holier-than-anyone "unredeemed souls" response
to Lewinsky's claim that she and the president were "sexual soulmates." It's
shaky ground to judge people's souls, but I'll grant that the line was an open
invitation to ridicule.
I must, though, speak out against Thomas' response to a Lewinsky comment
about Clinton's religious upbringing. "What religious upbringing?" Thomas asked.
"His stepfather was an alcoholic and his mother's version of the trinity was the
trifecta."
Many good Christians (indeed, sincere followers of many faiths) have wrestled
with addictions to alcohol and other drugs. And, despite the fact that many
religions strongly condemn gambling, many gamblers of those and other faiths
work hard to give their children a strong religious upbringing.
In fact, I'll guarantee you that everyone who received a religious
upbringing, including me, my children and Cal Thomas, received it from sinners.
Maybe they weren't drinkers or gamblers. Some of them indulged in the
president's sins of adultery and lying. Some indulged in more acceptable sins
such as greed, gossip, pride and self-righteous judgment.
If only perfect parents can give a child a religious upbringing, we'll end up
closing our houses of worship altogether.
I saw some sweeping judgments also in response to a story I wrote earlier
this year about some issues dividing the Catholic church. I won't respond here
to the criticism of me and my writing. I had my say and critics are entitled to
respond.

I was disturbed, though, by the people who wrote in judgment of people I had
interviewed. I did not quote enough "faithful" Catholics in the story, some
said. I quoted several people who disagreed with the church's stand on such
issues as birth control, mandatory celibacy for priests and ordination of women.
The dissident Catholics I talked to for that story (I didn't quote them all)
included priests, nuns, deacons and parish leaders. These are people who attend
Mass regularly and devote major parts of their lives to the church. To their
faith.
But fellow Catholics dismiss them as lacking in faith.
What is it about the struggles of faith that makes us so eager to judge
others as they struggle?
-----Reporter Stephen Buttry can be reached at (515) 699-7058 or buttrys
@news.dmreg.com
Copyright 2000 Des Moines Register
Reprinted with permission
May 15, 1999 Saturday
SECTION: METRO IOWA; Pg. 4M
HEADLINE: Poor communication fuels conflict on both sides
By STEPHEN BUTTRY
Register Columnist
Are the religious chasms that divide people so deep and so wide that we can't
even talk across them?
I have a suggestion for both sides in the ugly fuss over Christian witnessing
in the Saydel School District: Go visit the neighbor who has offended you. Sit
down and talk about it.
Isn't that a better example to set for the young people both sides care so
much about?
The controversy has reached the school board. The board has a legitimate
question to address: how much access visitors should have to students. But that
really is a sideshow. However the board resolves that question, the underlying
issues dividing the school and the community will remain untouched.
In examining those issues, you can see repeated instances where people should
have talked to each other if they were sincerely interested in learning and
spreading the truth.

Some students and parents in the community say youths from Capitol City
Baptist Church have been telling Catholics, United Methodists and students of
other faiths that they were going to hell.
A parents group compiled a 16-point list of concerns, many of them divisive
statements reportedly made by Capitol City Youth Pastor Steve Christiansen or
youths from the church (no statements were attributed specifically to any
individual).
A parent who hears of such statements from a teen-age son or daughter has
every right to get angry. You'd think some angry, inquisitive parents would
march right over to the church and ask the pastor what he's teaching. No one
did.
Capitol City's senior pastor, Rob Hoffman, spoke at Monday's school board
meeting, denouncing the list and other reported statements about the church's
teachings as lies. He also had not taken the initiative to meet with the angry
parents.
It's absurd and irresponsible that people on either side would make public
accusations without investigating more fully, without going to the source,
without seeking reconciliation. The Capitol City critics simply accepted the
accusations they heard from youths in their families and churches. Hoffman
simply accepted the denials from youths in his church.
Any message is bound to vary as it passes among teen-agers. Emotions, nerves,
hormones, enthusiasm, faulty memory, poor listening, personality and lack of
eloquence can distort communication among teen-agers (and, unfortunately, too
many adults).
Hoffman says he has spoken to the Capitol City youth and the congregation to
stress the importance of a positive witness. Whatever the intended message, the
church bears responsibility for communicating it effectively. The pastor
deserves credit for addressing the church's responsibility.
Hoffman was indignant, and rightly so, in telling the school board that the
teachings of his church had been misrepresented by people who did not even have
the courage or decency to check with the source.
Unfortunately his church risks doing the very same thing. Christiansen is
teaching his youth group about what other denominations believe, and how to
witness to people of those faiths. The group uses a series of booklets written
by critics of those religions, citing Scripture passages the authors say counter
tenets of each faith.
Using Hoffman's own reasoning, Christiansen should have invited the priest or

a lay leader of neighboring All Saints Catholic Church to explain to the youth
group what Catholics believe. Better yet, maybe the youth groups could meet
jointly, with their leaders, to educate each other about their respective
faiths.
Capitol City teaches that salvation comes only through a personal belief in
Jesus as savior. Catholics profess such a belief at their confirmation and in
every Mass. Shouldn't youths from such churches be able to find some common
ground under the leadership of adults of good will?
Maybe they could open such a meeting with a verse that both churches will
find in their Gospels: "Blessed are the peacemakers."
-----Stephen Buttry can be reached at (515) 699-7058 or buttrys@news.dmreg.com
Copyright 2000 Des Moines Register
Reprinted with permission
July 24, 1999 Saturday
SECTION: METRO IOWA; Pg. 4M
HEADLINE: Believers' fervor can help or destroy community
By STEPHEN BUTTRY
Register Columnist
Orlando, Fla. - Spiritual fervor fills many believers with conviction that
they have found the truth. The truth.
That holy fervor and that deep conviction are like fire and wind, two common
images for the Holy Spirit. Fire can warm and wind can refresh. Yet both can
destroy.
Fervor and conviction can turn around a destructive life or revive a listless
church. In the heartfelt prayers and shouted hallelujahs of a revival, you can
almost feel burdens being lifted and promises being made.
But however holy the spirit, the flesh is human. The same fervor and
conviction can divide people who believe in the same God.
Several leaders of Pentecostal and evangelical Christianity gathered in
Orlando last weekend with religion reporters from across the nation. The church
leaders told how congregations and movements have been energized by the Holy
Spirit.
And they warned that spiritual fervor leads some to act as though they alone
have found the way.

The journalists attending the Religion Newswriters Association's annual

conference understand that well. In our business, conflict makes news. Many of
the most-divisive conflicts in religion today, from the local level to the
global, grow from genuine spiritual commitment expressed through human
stubbornness and arrogance.
God would be quite small and un-mighty if he could fit within a single church
or denomination, noted Derrick Hutchins, a superintendent of the Church of God
in Christ, the nation's largest Pentecostal denomination.
Using a coined superlative, Hutchins said, "I'm afraid of any church that
believes they're the onliest one."
Don Moen, executive vice president of Integrity Music, agreed: "God is bigger
than all the little boxes we put him in."
Hutchins noted that many denominations are new this century or just a few
centuries old. It's absurd, he said, for any particular denomination or church
or individual to claim a monopoly on understanding God's will. "What was God
doing before you all got started?"
Several of the speakers believe the United States is on the verge of a
spiritual revival that will cut across the lines that divide Christianity.
When a significant national revival occurs, said Jonathan Graf, editor of
Pray! magazine, "every group that claims the name of Christ will be involved.
When revival hits, it's not going to matter what your stripe is."
The resulting spiritual energy can serve a community in profound ways if it
is directed toward serving people, said Paula White, a pastor in Tampa, Fla. "We
think welfare reform was the greatest thing that ever happened to the church,"
White said, recounting the many social ministries of her Without Walls
International Church.
People cannot claim glory in a genuine revival, speakers noted. "If this is
truly a work of God, it's simply above human organization," said Tom Phillips,
president of International Students Inc., who has ties to the Billy Graham and
Promise Keepers ministries.
Christians, said Hutchins, "are on the same team and our goal is to fight the
devil and his forces and not one another."
In such divisions, matters of doctrine often obscure the shared faith.
"If we want to pick at little religious things," Moen said, "we can tear

ourselves apart."
The Pentecostal and evangelical leaders were unflinching in rejecting the
suggestion that modern notions of pluralism should soften their commitment to
preaching faith in Jesus as the sole means of salvation.
"If you are a true follower of Jesus Christ, he is the way, the truth and the
life," Phillips said. "You have to proclaim that. He has told us to tell others
about him."
Christians can do that, he said, without a holier-than-thou approach that
harms their message and hurts believers of other faiths.
"To see ourselves as better than somebody else would be totally
inappropriate," he said. "We're just sinners saved by grace."
-----Reporter Stephen Buttry can be reached at (515) 699-7058 or buttrys
@news.dmreg.com
Copyright 2000 Des Moines Register
Reprinted with permission
June 19, 1999 Saturday
SECTION: METRO IOWA; Pg. 4M
HEADLINE: Dads, don't underestimate your role in your children's lives
By STEPHEN BUTTRY
Register Columnist
It's easy for fathers to minimize the impact we have on our children.
When they tune out our nagging about cleaning rooms or doing dishes or
turning down the stereo, we can be forgiven for wondering if they pay attention
to any wisdom or values we might be trying to impart. And it's tempting to think
they won't be paying attention if we don't practice what we preach.
At separate events earlier this month, I heard speakers who argued that our
impact as parents is more profound than many of us imagine. Perhaps not on the
dishes or the room or the stereo. But both speakers said the example we set for
our children leaves an impression not only on their lives, but their children's
lives and generations that we may never see.
On the weekend of Father's Day, it seems appropriate to share these messages.
They are messages of hope for those days when we despair of ever penetrating the
walls of childhood and adolescent distractions. They are messages of reproach
for those days when we rationalize our own childish behavior by convincing

ourselves no one is watching.

Tom Albin, dean of the Upper Room Chapel in Nashville, Tenn., led a workshop
in Ames at the Iowa Annual Conference of the United Methodist Church, talking
about the roles that parents and grandparents play in the spiritual formation of
children and grandchildren.
Steve Farrar of Dallas, Texas, founder and chairman of Men's Leadership
Ministries, spoke at "Men to Men: To the Point," a conference in Des Moines for
Christian men.
"Just love and obey God and it will have a generational blessing on and on,"
exhorted Albin.
"Your job is not to raise a child," Farrar told fathers. "Your job is to
raise child raisers. . . . In a hundred years you ought to be a legend in your
family."
Don't strive to be a legend for some economic or professional achievement,
Farrar said, but "because you love the Lord your God with all your heart, all
your soul and all your might. And you love your wife."
You can argue that both men overstate the lasting impact that any example,
good or bad, can have. Without question, the frugality and sacrifice for which
we praise the generation that grew up during the Great Depression and fought
World War II has vanished a couple generations later.
But think a moment about the people from previous generations who still have
an impact on you. I remain motivated and inspired by a grandfather who died 38
years ago and a grandmother who died 27 years ago. My father has been dead 21
years and my father-in-law has been dead nearly six years, but I can see ways
they still continue to lead in the lives of their grandsons.
Albin and Farrar offered specific advice on ways to provide such leadership
in our families.
Albin urged us to "teach children to have sales resistance so they aren't
sucked into the culture that says you are what you own."
Farrar told how Dennis Rodman's father neglected him and Howard Stern's
father verbally abused him. Both, he said, are examples of "drifting families"
with no leadership or direction. A good father, he said, provides an anchor for
the family.
"When you get anchored on Jesus Christ," Farrar said, "you stop drifting,
your marriage stops drifting, your kids stop drifting."

Both men recommended developing family traditions. Farrar suggested rising

early for Bible study, a practice he learned from his father and has modeled for
his son. Albin suggested washing the dishes together: Make it a time of talking
together, about the day just passed, about the life still unfolding. (There's
one less nagging message for the kids to ignore. But I for one am not going to
make a tradition of cleaning the kids' rooms together.)
We need to communicate over and over how much we love our children, Albin
said. Through our words and our actions, he said, we must tell them, "You are
wanted. You are welcome. You are loved. You belong."
Because many men have trouble verbalizing their love, he recommended
memorizing a simple message to tell children daily: "I love you. And I am so
happy that God sent you to be a part of our family."
-----Reporter Stephen Buttry can be reached at (515) 699-7058 or buttrys
@news.dmreg.com
Copyright 2000 Des Moines Register
Reprinted with permission
May 29, 1999 Saturday
SECTION: METRO IOWA; Pg. 4M
HEADLINE: Priest shortage has obvious solutions
By STEPHEN BUTTRY
Register Columnist
A deeply devout man prayed for God to protect him as the floodwaters lapped
at his front yard, the old joke goes. "God will protect me from harm," the man
said, turning down an offer of refuge from a neighbor in a rowboat.
Soon water was up to his doorstep. The man declined aid from a stranger in a
canoe, again saying, "God will protect me from harm."
Soon the floodwaters were up to the second floor and the man was on his roof.
A motorboat came by, but again the pious man stayed put, continuing his prayers
and saying, "God will protect me from harm."
Soon the man was entering the Pearly Gates. "I don't understand," he said
when he finally met God. "I prayed constantly. I had faith that you would
protect me from harm."
"For heaven's sake, man," the Creator responded. "I sent three boats."

I think of that joke when the Catholic Church urges its followers to "pray
for vocations," the church's continual plea to pray that more young men will
become priests and more young women will become nuns.
I know of quite a few Catholics, including some priests, who pray that the
church will hop into one of the boats that keep going by.
The church's problem is not that it lacks Catholics wanting to enter the
priesthood. The problem is that most of those people are the same gender as St.
Mary or plan to enjoy the sacrament of marriage, as St. Peter did.
The church keeps clustering parishes and juggling Mass schedules and shifting
more duties to deacons, nuns and lay leaders so priests can cover more churches.
And always the church keeps asking the faithful to pray for vocations. Perhaps
the prayer has been answered and the church doesn't like the answer.
The need for more priests was underscored by a news release this month from
the Archdiocese of Dubuque. The basic announcement was good news: A campaign to
raise money for priests' pensions had surpassed its goal.
Figures in the release showed how the priest shortage will grow worse in the
next few years. The archdiocese has 100 retired priests, with another 78
retirements expected in the next 10 years.
Other figures not included in the release add perspective. The archdiocese,
with 212 parishes, has 160 active priests. It expects that number to be 125 by
2002, or half what it was 15 years earlier. At some point soon, the archdiocese
will have more retired priests than active priests.
The church simply doesn't have enough priests to go around. The decline in
the number of priests has been a leading concern of the church for the past
generation.
The Vatican's reasoning for maintaining barriers to the priesthood is
puzzling.
Pope John Paul II has forbidden discussion of ordaining women, saying no pope
has the authority to allow that because Jesus called only men to be his
disciples. Follow that reasoning very far and the shortage will be more severe,
because Jesus also called only Jews as his disciples. On the other hand, Peter,
the disciple Jesus called to lead his church, was married. So the pope could use
his own logic to end the requirement that priests be celibate.
Earlier this year, the Archdiocese of Dubuque completed "Vision 2000," its
plan for continuing strong ministry into the 21st Century. The plan was
developed in consultation with 11,000 Catholics at parish meetings throughout

the diocese.
Vision 2000 includes thoughtful plans for development of lay leadership and
for encouraging cooperation among parishes. These would be laudable goals even
if the church had a surplus of priests. Other goals and strategies in the report
indicate how critical the shortage is.
One calls on the archdiocese and parishes to "provide a program of formation
for presiders at Sunday celebrations when Mass is not possible and for other
rites." In other words, some parishes are just going to have to do without a
priest.
On the same page, the plan calls on the archdiocese to "respectfully
encourage American bishops to consider the issues of ordination that affect the
availability of priests for parishes."
In other words, maybe the answer to all these prayers is in one of these
boats that keep floating by.
-----Reporter Stephen Buttry can be reached at (515) 699-7058 or buttrys
@news.dmreg.com
Copyright 2000 Des Moines Register
Reprinted with permission
October 9, 1999 Saturday
SECTION: METRO IOWA; Pg. 6M
HEADLINE: Catholics and sex: The calm after an unwarranted storm
By STEPHEN BUTTRY
Register Columnist
Sexuality is a minefield for a religious speaker, especially with a Catholic
audience.
Homosexuality. Birth control. Abortion. Pornography. Premarital sex.
Adultery. Sex in the media.
The explosive topics are abundant, lurking everywhere you look and anywhere
you fail to look. The husband and wife talking this week to Catholic parish
ministers about "Sexuality and Spirituality" carefully avoided each land mine.
In their discussion of sensual pleasures, authors James D. Whitehead and
Evelyn Eaton Whitehead spoke more about such delights as the luscious taste of a
fresh peach, the beauty of a sunset or the serenity of a walk on the beach than

they did about the pleasures of marital love. Or forbidden love.

Not exactly as it was billed. By critics, anyway.
The Whiteheads were the subject of vigorous criticism in advance of their
Iowa appearances.
The Rev. John Clarke, pastor of St. Patrick's Church in Imogene, bought an ad
in Sunday's Register, warning that the Whiteheads were "heretics" and "false
prophets." Clarke picketed their appearance in Atlantic, the only one of the
couple's three Iowa talks that dealt with sexuality.
The talk drew about 100 parish ministers, including priests, nuns, school
principals, teachers, counselors and directors of religious education. It was
part of a continuing diocesan program to improve education about sexuality.
The Whiteheads also were attacked anonymously. A flier, which Clarke said he
did not produce, was distributed at several parishes, inviting "queer" Catholics
to come hear speakers who would "affirm your homosexuality and give you a new
theology to replace Catholic beliefs."
The flier, which included a picture of two men kissing, proclaimed one of the
Whiteheads' events to be "sexual dissent night." That night's subject was
actually the role of the laity in the church.
The campaign against the Whiteheads and the Des Moines Diocese also included
a call to the Register. The caller would not identify himself, but said he was
not from Iowa. He faxed a chapter the Whiteheads had written about homosexuality
in a book edited by a priest who recently received a rebuke from the Vatican for
his ministry to gays and lesbians.
This much is certainly true: The Whiteheads do not echo the church's teaching
on homosexuality. Their books, which were available for sale at the Atlantic
meeting, take a more accepting stance than the church, which officially says
"under no circumstances" can homosexual acts be approved.
This much also is certainly true: If everyone who disagrees with any position
of the church was treated as a heretic to be shunned, it would be difficult to
round up enough people for an audience, let alone to find speakers.
Protests would have been valid if the Whiteheads (or anyone who would not
reflect church teachings on homosexuality) were presenting an official church
program on homosexuality. But they weren't.
Bishop Joseph Charron said he was aware of the Whiteheads' views and made
sure in advance that they would not air disagreements with church positions. The

couple assured, he said, that "they had no intention to challenge the teaching
of the church in the Diocese of Des Moines."
Charron, who was attacked along with the Whiteheads in the ad and flier,
rearranged his schedule to be in Atlantic Wednesday. He enjoyed and endorsed
their presentation, saying, "I felt nothing but a real love for the tradition of
the church."
The controversy echoed a fuss raised last summer when the American Baptist
Churches USA met in Des Moines. A speaker at that convention, theologian Walter
Wink, also was denounced as a heretic for his views on homosexuality. The topic
he addressed, though, was violence.
Homosexuality is an issue that too often brings complete condemnation from
either side of anyone who holds an opposing view.
Charron couldn't help but wonder: "If the Whiteheads had disagreed with the
church's teachings on racism or social justice, would these same people have
demanded that I not let them speak because they were heretics?"
-----Reporter Stephen Buttry can be reached at (515) 699-7058 or buttrys
@news.dmreg.com
Copyright 2000 Des Moines Register
Reprinted with permission
October 2, 1999 Saturday
SECTION: METRO IOWA; Pg. 4M
HEADLINE: Blame after recent wave of killings only feeds the hate
By STEPHEN BUTTRY
Register Columnist
Leaders of evangelical Christianity are exactly right when they say
evangelicals have been victims of hate crimes in recent mass murders.
The madman who opened fire in Wedgwood Baptist Church in Fort Worth, Texas,
last month certainly showed hatred of the victims' faith.
The boys who slaughtered 12 students and a teacher at Columbine High School
in Littleton, Colo., might have chosen targets because of their Christian faith.
Under the law, those are hate crimes. If we didn't have hate-crime laws, we
would use that term unofficially because it fits so neatly.
When the Interfaith Alliance of Iowa marches and prays next week to "Stop the

Hate," it should be sure to note the crimes against evangelical Christians.

It's mystifying, though, why the evangelical leaders turn their anger from
the killers to legal authorities and the news media.
"There is a total absence of outrage over the killings at the Baptist church
and in Colorado, as far as the religious aspect is concerned," television
evangelist Jerry Falwell told the Los Angeles Times.
In other interviews, evangelical leaders Pat Robertson, James Dobson and D.
James Kennedy expressed similar dismay.
These leaders note correctly that people spoke of hate crimes after the
shootings this summer at a Jewish community center in California, the Wyoming
beating death of Matthew Shepard because he was gay and the Texas dragging death
of James Byrd because he was black.
The indignant evangelists are ignoring a key difference between those crimes
and the killings in Littleton and Fort Worth: whether suspects survived to stand
trial. There was no point in the Wedgwood and Columbine cases in talking about
the specific crimes the killers committed and how they would be prosecuted. The
killers took their own lives.
Under federal law and many state laws, including Iowa, religion is one of the
motivating factors that can lead to designation of a hate crime. Hate-crime laws
allow for FBI involvement in an investigation and for stronger penalties. But
penalties are irrelevant when the criminal is dead. And the investigation is
greatly simplified.
It's absurd to suggest, as Falwell did, that President Clinton, first lady
Hillary Clinton and Attorney General Janet Reno should have responded more
aggressively to these hate crimes. What were they supposed to do? Try a corpse?
Falwell suggested that the news media had downplayed the religious aspects of
the crimes. I checked it out, running the names of slain Columbine students
through a database of U.S. news reports over the past six months.
Cassie Bernall, the student who, according to some accounts, was killed after
professing her faith in God, appeared in 752 stories, more than three times as
many news accounts as most of the other students.
Only one student, Isaiah Shoels, appeared more times, 801. His parents have
traveled widely speaking about the slayings. They have become controversial in
Denver, facing accusations that they are seeking personal gain from the tragedy.
The third most hits, 565, came for the name of Rachel Scott, whose father has

spoken extensively about her Christian faith.

The killers allegedly selected victims because they were athletes, blacks or
professing Christians. Even with our nation's heavy emphasis on racial problems
and our obsession with sports, the evangelical victims received heavy media
attention.
Even a boy whose father criticized the National Rifle Association and called
for more gun control, popular topics among liberals, didn't receive one-third as
much news media attention as Bernall.
Through the centuries, Christians have been the victims of much hate and
persecution. Christian leaders are right to point out that this hate continues
today.
Christians also have contributed greatly to the world's abundance of hate,
with persecution of Jews, Moslems, other Christians, Native Americans, blacks
and homosexuals.
Christians also have clear guidance in how to prevent and respond to hate:
Love your neighbor. Love your enemy. Turn the other cheek.
This is not a time for more venom and blame. This is a time to see if love
can overwhelm the hate that fills our world.
-----Reporter Stephen Buttry can be reached at (515) 699-7058 or buttrys
@news.dmreg.com
Copyright 2000 Des Moines Register
Reprinted with permission
February 19, 2000 Saturday
SECTION: METRO IOWA; Pg. 4B
HEADLINE: House choice of chaplain reflects anti-Catholic bias
By STEPHEN BUTTRY
Register Columnist
The conservative Christians who lead the U.S. House of Representatives have
undercut the conservative Christians who insist the United States can and should
be a Christian nation.
There is no such thing as a Christian nation. Christians are too divided for
that.
Prejudice among Christians toward other Christians is so strong that the

House has never hired a chaplain from the nation's largest Christian
denomination. In more than 200 years, the House has selected 58 chaplains, and
not a single one has been a Catholic priest.
The Senate has been more accepting of the church of some 62 million
Americans: One Catholic served one year as Senate chaplain back in the 19th
century.
This not a coincidence or a statistical oddity. The same church has accounted
for only one of our 42 presidents. John F. Kennedy won 40 years ago only after
addressing insulting concerns about his loyalty.
Before I explain the current fuss over the House chaplain, I should
acknowledge that I am Catholic.
I don't see this as an illustration solely of anti-Catholic bias. Catholics
have a lot of company in facing religious prejudice. We haven't had any Jewish
presidents (or House chaplains) either. Or Muslim. Or Mormon. Or Pentecostal.
Candidates for chaplain or president from any of those groups might face greater
prejudice than a Catholic does.
Those groups, however, are much smaller than the Catholics and some don't
have as long a history in our population. Statistically, their turn might not
have come up yet anyway, even if religious prejudice didn't affect these
decisions.
Catholics, though, are such a large segment of the population, and of the
Congress, that it's absurd to suggest that their exclusion from the House
chaplaincy is not due to discrimination.
If Christians could and would unite in a "Christian nation," such a position
would rotate uninhibited among the churches. With allowances for the charisma of
individual ministers and the periodic rises and declines of various churches,
the historical roster of chaplains would roughly reflect the population. The
largest denominations would have the most chaplains and the smaller churches
would have an occasional chaplain.
Let's be candid about one thing: The position is probably unnecessary, almost
certainly not worth the $138,000 annual salary.
The chaplain opens House sessions with prayer and arranges for guest clergy
to open some sessions. He (yes, reading through the list, it appears they all
have been men, but that's a different prejudice for a different column) also
gives spiritual counseling and pastoral care to members of Congress.
Congressmen speak fondly of retiring Lutheran Chaplain James Ford, but I

doubt that many are in the chamber when he offers his daily prayer. Most
congressmen can (and probably do) call for spiritual guidance on pastors from
their home church and the church they attend in Washington.
Nonetheless, we've had legislative chaplains since the first Continental
Congress in 1774. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1983 that the position itself
did not violate the First Amendment's prohibition against establishment of a
state religion.
The history of the position illustrates, though, why that prohibition, and
the accompanying guarantee of religious freedom, were necessary.
With Ford's retirement, House Speaker Dennis Hastert appointed a bipartisan
committee to screen candidates for chaplain. The committee's leading choice was
the Rev. Timothy O'Brien, a Jesuit priest from Marquette University.
Instead, Speaker Dennis Hastert and Majority Leader Dick Armey opted late
last year to nominate the committee's third choice, Presbyterian Charles Parker
Wright.
In the outcry that followed, critics have suggested that some questions
O'Brien was asked in the interview process (about celibacy and clerical collars)
showed religious bias.
Admittedly, the resulting controversy reflects Democrats' glee at causing
problems for the Republican House leadership more than it reflects Democrats'
concern over religious discrimination. Democrats
have had plenty of chances to break down this barrier.
Evangelist Billy Graham weighed in this week, urging Hastert to stand by
Wright. The speaker may bring the nomination up for House approval next week.
Whoever replaces Ford, his opening prayer should call for healing of the
religious prejudice and division that still remains in this "one nation under
God."
Copyright 2000 Des Moines Register
Reprinted with permission
February 5, 2000 Saturday
SECTION: METRO IOWA; Pg. 4M
HEADLINE: Gospel messages get lost in search for literal truth
By STEPHEN BUTTRY
Register Columnist
Modern readers often miss the point of stories about the life of Jesus, says

theologian John Dominic Crossan.

"We are reading First Century documents," noted Crossan, a central figure in
the controversial Jesus Seminar. "We have to ask what was the point of the
story."
Crossan, professor emeritus at DePaul University in Chicago, is spending the
weekend in Ames. He was scheduled to lecture Friday evening at Iowa State
University on "The Historical Jesus."
Today and Sunday, Crossan will speak at United Church of
Christ-Congregational, Sixth Street and Kellogg Avenue. Today's programs begin
at 9:15 a.m. and 7 p.m. Sunday's program starts at 9 a.m.
His writings and the Jesus Seminar, a twice-annual gathering of theologians
studying historical evidence from biblical times, have challenged many
traditional views of what the Bible teaches about Jesus.
Even if you interpret the Bible literally and don't embrace Crossan's view of
the historical Jesus, he provides important context and raises thoughtful
questions about the meaning of Gospel stories.
In modern times, he said, discussions of Jesus often focus on whether
miracles such as the virgin birth, walking on water or the resurrection actually
happened. Some say they are impossible. Others say these wonders prove Jesus'
divinity and the stories must be accepted literally.
"We give the First Century no room for metaphor," Crossan said in an
interview this week.
At the time, he said, every religion told stories of miracles and
resurrections, of gods fathering human children. People readily believed the
stories.
Christians writing in the early church did not argue that the virgin birth or
resurrection made Jesus unique, Crossan said, because other faiths made similar
claims.
Pagan writers, on the other hand, did not counter that those things were
impossible. "There were no rationalists in the First Century," he noted.
The early Christian argument, Crossan said, was, "our Jesus is superior to
all your sons of Jupiter put together."
In the literary style of the day, Crossan said, the early church told
parables about Jesus.

He cited the story of Jesus walking on the water. "What was the point of the
story?" Crossan asked. "Was it history or was it a parable saying that if the
church took off without Jesus it was going to sink?"
The story of Jesus riding into Jerusalem on a donkey might have been an
"anti-caricature of a conquering hero." The story is important for its depiction
of Jesus, Crossan said, "but whether it actually happened, I can go easy on."
Gospel writers didn't intend such stories to be taken literally any more than
Aesop expected readers to believe that foxes could talk, Crossan said.
Context also is important in reading the teachings of Jesus, the theologian
said.
"When Jesus is talking about the kingdom of God, he is not talking about
heaven, the afterlife," he said. Instead, Crossan believes Jesus was saying how
God would run the world.
Such a notion was radical and dangerous. "He was criticizing Caesar by saying
he isn't running the world the way the gods want."
Jesus was executed "as a public warning," Crossan said.
While other faiths in the First Century also were telling about miracles and
resurrections and powerful gods, Jesus stood out because he was "the incarnation
of a god of justice," Crossan said.
"It's hard for us to think how great Jupiter once was and how easily he
died," the theologian said. "He just died because no one believed in him any
more."
Jesus, on the other hand, brought an enduring message, and Crossan would
rather focus on the message than insist on the literal truth of reported
miracles.
He notes that people who interpret the Bible literally do accept some
metaphor. For instance, they don't suggest that Jesus was literally the Lamb of
God.
"I am not saying the Bible is not true," Crossan said. "I'm not saying the
Bible is not inspired."
Parables can be divinely inspired, he said. "Jesus tells parables about God,
and we don't get uptight about that."

-----Reporter Stephen Buttry can be reached at (515) 699-7058 or buttrys

@news.dmreg.com
Copyright 2000 Des Moines Register
Reprinted with permission
January 15, 2000 Saturday
SECTION: METRO IOWA; Pg. 4M
HEADLINE: Religious marriage programs lower divorce rate
By STEPHEN BUTTRY
Register Columnist
Churches and religious programs can make a difference in the strength and
durability of marriages.
They don't make much difference by trumpeting family values and condemning
divorce. They make a difference by helping couples prepare for the lifelong
commitment of marriage. They make a difference by helping couples improve
communication skills. They make a difference by helping couples through the
conflicts that can tear apart a marriage.
Many evangelical Christians were troubled by a survey released last month by
the Barna Research Group, a polling company that examines cultural trends
related to values and beliefs.
Born-again Christians are more likely to be divorced than the general
population, Barna's poll of nearly 4,000 American adults found. The survey
showed 27 percent of those who were born again had experienced at least one
divorce, compared to 24 percent of adults who had not been born again. Baptists
and non-denominational Christian churches had even higher rates than the full
born-again sample.
Among Catholics and Lutherans, 21 percent had been divorced.
Barna's report calls the high divorce rate among born-again Christians a
"surprising outcome." Aren't these, after all, the people who have created such
a stir over family values?
Chuck Hurley, president of the Iowa Family Policy Center, wondered the same
thing I did: Maybe these people were born again in the wake of a divorce, so the
church was helping heal their wounds rather than failing to save their
marriages.
Maybe not. Dave Kinnaman, research director for Barna, said, "Nine out of 10
born-again divorcees divorced after they made their commitment to Christ."

The news "saddens me a great deal," Hurley said. "But it doesn't totally
surprise me."
Mike McManus wasn't a bit surprised. McManus, a syndicated newspaper
columnist who writes about religion, heads an organization called Marriage
Savers.
Lutherans and Catholics don't have lower divorce rates because their clergy
condemn divorce more vehemently, said McManus, a Presbyterian. Rather, he said,
they generally do a better job of preparing couples for marriage and supporting
them in marriage.
McManus developed a program called "Community Marriage Policy," where clergy
of many different denominations in a city pledge to require premarital
counseling that includes an "inventory" to identify potential problems in a
relationship. Mentor couples help couples both before and after the wedding and
in times of trouble.
Cedar Rapids this week became the second Iowa community in which pastors have
signed such an agreement (a smaller group of Quad Cities pastors made a marriage
pact in the mid-1990s).
The premarital counseling helps some couples decide they aren't well suited,
and they break off their engagement. Others identify problem areas and get help
in dealing with them, to give their marriage a stronger foundation.
To strengthen marriage after the wedding, McManus and Hurley advocate wider
use of programs such as Marriage Encounter.
Mary Mahoney, a coordinator of Worldwide Marriage Encounter for the Des
Moines area, said the weekend retreats help rekindle the relationships of
couples whose marriages are in the doldrums, with children and work pushing the
couple's relationship into the background.
The retreats teach couples to "use communication techniques to kind of awaken
that union and strengthen and enrich their spirituality," Mahoney said.
Worldwide Marriage Encounter and United Marriage Encounter offer retreats in
Iowa in February, March and April. United Methodist Worldwide Marriage Encounter
is planning retreats for later in the year.
Another program, Retrouvaille, is led by couples who came back from the brink
of divorce. The program helps troubled couples work through devastating issues
such as adultery and alcoholism.

*
A personal disclosure: My wife, Mimi, and I spent a few years as a mentor
couple in Catholic marriage preparation programs in Kansas and North Dakota.
McManus interviewed me about our experiences and quoted me in his book,
"Marriage Savers."
-----Reporter Stephen Buttry can be reached at (515) 699-7058 or buttrys
@news.dmreg.com
* Iowa marriage enrichment programs:
* United Marriage Encounter, (319) 264-8889
* Worldwide Marriage Encounter (515) 276-6901, (319) 556-2580
* United Methodist Worldwide Marriage Encounter, (712) 325-9695
* Retrouvaille, (800) 470-2230
Divorce statistics
Percentage of groups who have been divorced at least once:
* Non-denominational Christian: 34
* Jewish: 30
* Baptist: 29
* Born-again Christians: 27
* National average: 25
* Mainline Protestant: 25
* Mormon: 24
* Lutheran: 21
* Catholic: 21
* Atheist or agnostic: 21

Source: Barna Research Group

On the Web
Read more on the Internet:
www.marriagesavers.org
www.barna.com
Marriage Encounter sites:
www.wwme.org
www.UME1975.org
www.encounter.org
Copyright 2000 Des Moines Register
Reprinted with permission
April 8, 2000 Saturday
SECTION: METRO IOWA; Pg. 6B
HEADLINE: Foes in abortion fight: Just mirror images
By STEPHEN BUTTRY
Register Columnist
Enduring conflicts feed on themselves, to the point that people keep fighting
just because that is what they always have done.
Abortion is such a battle.
Each side believes passionately in its cause. One side defends the rights and
lives of innocent unborn children, while the other defends the rights and lives
of desperate pregnant women. One side fights with the fervor of a religious
crusade, the other with the conviction of a civil rights struggle.
They are mirror images, but neither side realizes it.
On both sides of the divide, compromise feels like selling out. So they
battle as they have done for more than a quarter-century.
The fuss over Iowa legislation to require "informed consent" and a 24-hour
wait prior to abortions illustrates the way these two warring camps fight just
to continue the fight.
The requirements the Legislature passed -that women receive information about

alternatives to abortion -are quite reasonable. However, they also would make
little or no difference in the decisions of women considering abortion.
Abortion opponents, who are unable to outlaw the procedure, feel like they
must restrict it however they can. Abortion defenders are just as insistent that
any regulation violates women's rights.
Lawmakers' votes on the bill and Gov. Tom Vilsack's veto Friday are rooted in
where they stand in this perpetual fight, rather than in any details of the
legislation.
Paperwork was ingrained in modern medicine long before abortion opponents
dreamed up this requirement. Insurance companies make sure that patients
understand what they are undergoing before a physician picks up a single
instrument, or at least that the patients sign papers saying they understand.
That's the flaw in this legislation, if its advocates really care about
informing patients: Paperwork prior to surgery won't get it done.
If you've ever undergone surgery, you know that you sign stacks of papers
first, and you're too anxious to understand or focus on them, if you read them
at all. True informed consent is not a function of paperwork. If a caring
medical staff doesn't take the time to explain options and procedures fully,
more forms and pamphlets aren't going to finish the job.
Abortion opponents truly believe that they could cut the abortion rate if
patients only understood their options and fully understood fetal development.
To accomplish that, though, the opponents need to educate prospective patients
about those matters before they become pregnant.
A patient generally doesn't call an abortion clinic for help in making the
decision. She calls because she has decided, and this bill wouldn't inform a
patient of anything before she calls the clinic. Abortion opponents need to make
their case earlier, rather than simply adding to the paperwork once the patient
has decided.
Nonetheless, the requirements of such legislation are not a bit onerous.
Several states have similar laws, and the Supreme Court has upheld them as
constitutional.
The bill's requirements are simple: One day before the abortion, a patient
must be told about the father's responsibility to support a child and about
possible medical assistance benefits for prenatal care, childbirth, neonatal
care and abortion.
The patient also must be told that printed materials are available for her

review. The brochure would tell about fetal development and about adoption
agencies and agencies that would assist in childbirth and parenthood. The woman
would not be required to read the brochure or even receive it, just to sign a
form saying she was offered the chance.
Why in the world would advocates of women's rights oppose a measure to give
women information before making an important decision? If clinics think the
information provided by the state isn't complete, they could provide additional
information.
If a woman's decision to end a pregnancy would be reversed by seeing drawings
of fetal development, then even the strongest pro-choice advocates should
recognize abortion might not be the right choice for her.
This is how severely this fight twists combatants into knots: Advocates for
women argue against assuring women receive information before making an
important decision, and conservatives pretend they believe solutions can be
found in government paperwork.
Reporter Stephen Buttry can be reached at (515) 699-7058 or buttrys
@news.dmreg.com
Copyright 2000 Des Moines Register
Reprinted with permission
March 11, 2000 Saturday
SECTION: METRO IOWA; Pg. 4B
HEADLINE: Pope's confession for church presents opportunity
By STEPHEN BUTTRY
Register Columnist
Confession, they say, is good for the soul.
The Catholic Church has taught that for ages, making confession and
reconciliation a sacrament. Twelve-step programs make confession an important
part of recovery from addictions. Couples with lasting marriages know the
importance of seeking and granting forgiveness.
Confession, though, does not nullify sin or reverse its impact. For
confession to be meaningful, it must be the first step of reform.
Pope John Paul II will ask forgiveness Sunday for sins committed by Catholics
through the centuries. The pope's confession, though unlikely to satisfy many
who feel wronged by the church, can be a significant step in healing historic
and current wounds.
He is wise to examine the church's conduct and seek ways to reconcile with

those it has hurt. The pope has declared the year 2000 to be a Jubilee Year,
expanding on the biblical jubilee concept of forgiving debts to call for a
spirit of deeper personal and collective forgiveness. In that spirit, Sunday's
apologies are completely appropriate.
The pope, however, must avoid seeming like part of the endless string of
people making hollow apologies these days. He can't make amends by sounding like
just another Bill Clinton or John Rocker, saying he's sorry without really
admitting wrongdoing.
The difficulty of confession, especially for an institution that claims
holiness and infallibility, is illustrated by the laborious tone of the Vatican
document released this week in preparation for the pope's apologies.
"Memory and Reconciliation: The Church and the Faults of the Past," runs
17,000 words, plus 102 footnotes. You can tell it was authored by a theological
commission. It is not so much a heartfelt plea for forgiveness as it is a
scholarly tome explaining how the church can be a holy institution (and thus not
at fault) made up of sinners (for whom the pope will apologize).
John Paul speaks with warmth and sincerity that will give his apology a more
genuine tone than the document. If he tries as mightily as the theological
commission did to limit the church's blame, however, he also will limit any
healing he can accomplish.
The document pays far more attention to historic wrongs than to current
divisions in the world, among Christians and within the pope's own flock.
Hopefully, the pope will reach out to people hurting now.
However short the apology may fall compared with people's wishes and
expectations, the gesture itself is significant. The Catholic Church cherishes
and honors its traditions, so it is not irrelevant for the pope to apologize and
ask forgiveness for historic, even ancient, wrongs for which he holds no
personal blame.
The Vatican document indicates that John Paul will apologize for the sins of
Catholics responsible for the Crusades and the Inquisition, two of history's
most egregious examples of violence and injustice in the name of religion.
That's a fairly simple apology, since both scandals are in the distant past,
with victims and violators long in the grave.
More touchy will be the expected apology for the silence of too many
Christians in the face of the Holocaust. This atrocity remains fresh in the
memory of Jews living today.
John Paul has tried before to recognize the church's failure to stand against

the Nazis' efforts to exterminate Jews during World War II. He always pulls his
punches, though.
If the pope truly wants reconciliation with Jews, he must be more specific in
his apology and move beyond words to actions. Jews cannot take seriously an
apology from a pontiff who wants to beatify Pope Pius XII, who stood by in
silence during the Holocaust.
Israeli Chief Rabbi Israel Meir Lau was quoted by the Associated Press: "It
is impossible to correct a crime of the past without any mention, for example,
of Pius XII when he stood on the blood of the victims and did not say a word."
Whatever good Pius did, that shame is too large to ignore. Pope John Paul can
add meaning to his apology by halting the beatification. That will show that
he's sorry, which is always more important than saying you're sorry.
-----Reporter Stephen Buttry can be reached at (515) 699-7058 or buttrys
@news.dmreg.com
Copyright 2000 Des Moines Register
Reprinted with permission
March 18, 2000 Saturday
SECTION: METRO IOWA; Pg. 6B
HEADLINE: Pope's reconciliation efforts should continue
By STEPHEN BUTTRY
Register Columnist
This column last week failed to sufficiently acknowledge the debate over Pope
Pius XII's action or inaction during World War II.
I wrote about Pope John Paul II's apology for Catholic sins through the
centuries. In the three paragraphs that dealt with Pius XII, who was pope from
1939 to 1958, I did not mention the spirited defense some historians are making
on behalf of the pope whom John Paul is pushing for sainthood.
Letters from three readers added to my understanding of the dispute over the
actions or inaction of Pius XII. I'll discuss their contentions shortly, but
it's important to place that dispute in context of the pope's efforts at
reconciliation with Jews and others that Catholics have hurt through the ages.
If John Paul wants full reconciliation with the Jews, it doesn't matter who's
right in the dispute over whether Pius XII did and said all he could or should
have during World War II to oppose the Holocaust.

In reconciliation, you don't insist on your version of the facts. Facts are
often in dispute. In reconciliation, you do what you can to heal wounds.
Pope John Paul II has made outstanding steps toward reconciliation with the
Jews. He established diplomatic ties with Israel. He condemned anti-Semitism as
a sin. In a 1998 document on the Holocaust, he acknowledged that Christian
anti-Semitism contributed to the climate that made that atrocity possible. Next
week John Paul will be the first pope to make a state visit to Israel.
The Central Conference of American Rabbis and the Rabbinical Assembly,
representing 3,000 Conservative and Reform rabbis, this week jointly praised
John Paul's "courageous strides in working to heal the historic breach that has
separated our communities."
Other Jewish leaders were disturbed that the pope's apology Sunday did not
specifically mention the Holocaust. The pope will have an opportunity to make
amends Thursday when he visits the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial in Israel.
Some are speculating that he will announce in his visit to Israel that he
will drop his move to beatify Pius XII much sooner after his death than most
receive that recognition.
Perhaps critics of Pope Pius are too harsh. Three readers, John Crowley, Tom
Chapman and Andy Sullivan, wrote to point out that some historians dispute the
notion that Pius was silent in the face of the Holocaust. The pope's defenders
cite instances when the pope did criticize the Nazis and say he surreptitiously
aided Jews during World War II. They point out that Jewish leaders praised Pius
when he died.
Pinchas Lapide, a German Jewish historian, estimated that the papal relief
and rescue agency helped to save 860,000 Jews.
Chapman sent an article by Jesuit historian Robert Graham, who wrote:
"Increasingly, with the evidence of their own experience, local and world Jewish
representatives learned to turn to the pope for help. This confidence was never
disappointed."
Catholic historian John Cornwell took a much harsher view in his book,
"Hitler's Pope: The Secret History." Other historians also contend that Pius was
silent at critical times before and during World War II.
I don't pretend to know enough to say whose facts are correct in this
argument between historians. Nor do I pretend that the pope was powerful enough
to stop Hitler.
However, the Vatican illustrated the weakness of the case for Pius XII with a

statement that insulted many Jews and led to calls for a boycott of John Paul's
visit to Israel.
Archbishop Pietro Sambi, the top Vatican diplomat in Israel, defended Pius by
saying, "I am convinced that a great strong condemnation would have increased
the persecution of Hitler against the Jews." Such a speculative claim is absurd
when you consider that Hitler killed six million Jews.
If the record of Pius XII is worthy of sainthood, it will hold up through the
years, when this debate has faded or been settled. For now, though, Pope John
Paul can demonstrate the sincerity of his desire for reconciliation by telling
Jews next week that he will leave this matter to future popes.
Thomas More, who lost his life for his courageous stand against Henry VIII,
waited 400 years for sainthood. Pope Pius XII can wait a while.
Stephen Buttry can be reached at (515) 699-7058 or buttrys@news.dmreg.com
Copyright 2000 Des Moines Register
Reprinted with permission
April 24, 1999 Saturday
SECTION: METRO IOWA; Buttry Stephen; Pg. 4M
HEADLINE: Despite some fumbles, White keeps charging
By STEPHEN BUTTRY
Register Columnist
Reggie White preaches with the same fervor that quarterbacks used to fear.
He doesn't appear as comfortable pacing before a congregation in a suit as he
did charging past offensive tackles in pads and helmet. Sometimes he fumbles to
find a Scripture passage or reads too long from an article or outline. But he
keeps on charging.
He works his lack of polish into his routine, charming with a
self-deprecating humor. And when he's on a roll, away from his notes and
speaking from the heart, White can be a riveting speaker.
The former football star still draws capacity crowds and still inspires
standing ovations. But he's not seeking applause now, he insists.
"I'm tired of trying to please man," White said Wednesday night at Grace
Church, his sixth Des Moines preaching engagement in six days. "I want to please
God."
Earlier in the day, I'd talked on the phone for a while with a man White had

not pleased. The caller took issue with the strong opposition to homosexuality
that the former Green Bay Packer had voiced in a Sunday sermon. That man was
annoyed, as many are about White's success in using his football fame to gain a
forum for his religious views.
His clumsy use of racial and ethnic stereotypes last year before the
Wisconsin State Assembly drew as much attention as his statements about
homosexuality. Though White eagerly embraces the controversy that surrounds him,
he avoided discussions of ethnic attributes in the Des Moines speeches I heard.
He repeated his condemnation of homosexuality in only one of the three
sermons I heard during his Des Moines visit. It would be a mistake to dismiss
White as a one-note preacher currying favor with gay bashers.
I spent nearly three hours listening to White in recent days and heard far
more bashing of the Christians who cheered his words. He called them wimps, too
timid to proclaim their faith.
Wednesday's sermon, appropriately, focused on violence. "Our children are
going mad," White said, after reading a long list of violent incidents at U.S.
schools. "We're dealing with evil and wickedness."
Again, White's prescriptions wouldn't please everyone. But the church crowd
clapped and shouted "Amen!" in approval when he called for sterner punishment of
children in the home.
"When my children act up, they get whuppings," White said. "You literally
hate your children when you spare the rod."
White, who jokingly threatened to take off his belt for the children sitting
on the steps to the stage, dealt a few lashes at the news and entertainment
media. The media, he said, care less about violence that has been tearing apart
the inner cities for years than about shootings in rural and suburban schools.
"As Christians, we've got to get some control of the media," White said.
"We're reading lies every day. We're watching lies every day."
At every turn, White included fellow believers in his wrath. He scorned the
division of Christianity into seemingly countless denominations. "God didn't
intend for us to be separated," White said. "Why do we despise each other more
than the world despises us?"
Speaking to any non-Christians in the crowd, he apologized: "Please forgive
us, because we have been knuckleheads. . . . That is not what Jesus is about."
White said he used to preach that it was easy to follow Jesus. "But God spoke

to me and said, 'Quit lying to those folks.' "

Following Jesus, he said, invites suffering and ridicule. "If you're not
getting persecuted, if you're not getting insults, I believe that's because
you're trying to please everybody."
At the same time that White is moving beyond his football career, he
comfortably embraces the athletic fame that he knows fills the sanctuaries where
he speaks. He sells his books in church lobbies and flashes his Super Bowl ring
proudly as a prop when making a point about teamwork and sharing in glory.
And he's quite comfortable sharing the glory with his Heavenly Father. He
won't sign autographs at church events, White stated emphatically.
"If you want an autograph, let my Daddy write his name on your heart."
-----Reporter Stephen Buttry can be reached at (515) 699-7058 or buttrys@
news.dmreg.com