Our President’s Faith
It should have come as no surprise when President Barack Obama recently described himself as “a Christian by choice.” The president described in detail his journey to the Christian faith in his book Dreams from My Father. Still, unfounded suspicions about the president’s “true” religious faith persist, proof that what Richard Hofstadter called the “paranoid style in America politics” remains as insidious as ever. Speaking to local families in Albuquerque, N.M., in September, the president was asked once again why he is a Christian. “Jesus Christ dying for my sins spoke to the humility we all have to have as human beings, that we’re sinful and we’re flawed and we make mistakes and we achieve salvation through the grace of God,” Mr. Obama said.
The same week it was reported that Michelle Obama, while vacationing in Spain this summer, told a local Salesian priest that her husband keeps a picture of Mary Help of Christians in his wallet. Ms. Obama did not explain why the president chose this particular icon of Mary, who serves under that title as patroness of the Salesian Order. It seems unlikely that the president was drawn to Mary Help of Christians because of her reported intercession in two major battles against Turkish forces. It is also improbable that Mr. Obama is a “closet Catholic,” as some commentators have mischievously suggested.
Perhaps the answer lies in the humility that undergirds President Obama’s faith. Mary has always been invoked to intercede for Christians who know they are sinful but still seek God’s mercy. That our president is aware of the need for such grace should be evidence enough, for those who still require it, that he is our brother in Christ.
Halfway to Heaven
If ignorance is bliss, then respondents to the U.S. Religious Knowledge Survey are halfway there. For they answered correctly, on average, only half the 32 questions posed in interviews during May and June 2010 for the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. An average of 50 percent, however, would mean in most schools that the class failed the exam. That is the real outcome in this case. Reporters have noted that atheists/agnostics, Jews and Mormons, in that order, outscored Christians. But the three top groups correctly answered only 65 percent, 64 percent and 63 percent respectively of the questions—nothing to brag about.
Most respondents (two-thirds or more) knew that public school teachers cannot lead the class in prayer, that an atheist is one who does not believe in God, that Mother Teresa was Catholic, that Moses led the Exodus, that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, that the Constitution says government shall not establish nor interfere with religion and that most people in Pakistan are Muslim. But only half knew that the Koran is the Islamic holy book, that the Jewish Sabbath begins on Friday, that Joseph Smith was Mormon, that the Dalai Lama is Buddhist, that Martin Luther inspired the Reformation and that the four Gospel writers are Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.
Catholics, with 14.7 correct answers, scored below average. And nearly half (45 percent) did not know the church teaches that the consecrated bread and wine in holy Communion are not merely symbols, but “actually become the body and blood of Christ.”
While college graduates scored highest overall, lack of education alone does not explain why Catholics fared so poorly. Religious ignorance, however, does explain why many adult Catholics have difficulty in two areas: teaching the faith to their children and understanding how Catholic belief and practice fit in an increasingly pluralistic society.
The Right to Breastfeed
Last July the manager of a Johnny Rockets restaurant in Kentucky told a mother who was nursing her 6-month-old daughter that she would have to go outside to a public bench, or else nurse her baby in a bathroom stall. The incident led to protests with signs like “Johnny Rockets is not a family restaurant” and “No, I will not feed my baby in your bathroom.”
Kentucky is one of 44 states that permit breastfeeding in public. California’s enlightened civil code states that a mother may breastfeed her child in any location; on receiving a jury summons, a nursing mother can request a year’s deferral.
Although breastfeeding provides an infant with essential nutrients to protect against illnesses like diarrhea and pneumonia, the number of women who nurse their babies is declining. The higher the mother’s educational level, the more likely she is to breastfeed. A pediatrics study in 2010 found that if 90 percent of mothers breastfed their child for six months, the United States could save $13 billion in medical costs and prevent almost 1,000 infant deaths yearly.
Last year Representative Carolyn Maloney introduced the Breastfeeding Promotion Act which would protect a mother’s right to breastfeed. It requires employers to provide mothers “with reasonable break time and a...non-bathroom place to express milk” up to the child’s first birthday. The bill deserves support. In its larger sense, the issue underscores the rights of women, as well as health considerations for them and their children.
All over the world children are nourished by their mothers. Thank heavens for breast milk. Perfect for babies.
And my husband always thought it came in such cute containers!
But banning nursing in public? Only a sick mind would equate feeding a baby with defacating. Nursing clothes, a loose-fitting shirt, a cloth diaper or a small blanket enabled me to show less skin & cleavage when nursing in public than the average teenage girl shows everyday in fastfood restaurants.
always the case. I question the doctors who do not provide sound education in this area. I have
a nurse daughter-in-law who refused to breastfeed as she thought it 'gross'. Had she been educated better in her field she would have felt differently, I believe. Our daughter breastfed both my grandchildren and it was a beautiful experience for her and all.
Thank you for the article.
Caroline McEnroe
Human milk is designed by our Creator for humans. Therefore, feeding human babies human milk is not only natural, but also right, and true, and faithful.
We are societally confused about the "rights" of women to nurse their babies in public. It is the baby who has a "right" to eat when he is hungry. If the optimal food is instantly available, and free of cost, it is outrageous that a civilized society would consider making it difficult for the baby to receive this.
Nursing a baby is almost always possible, but not always easy. Most mother/baby couples who cease nursing did not receive the support they needed, and concluded that the endeavor was not possible, when in fact it was difficult. Persevering through any initial difficulties will be possible for most, and the difficulties will pale in comparison to later assisting the same child through middle school math.
Eating is precisely a natural function with substantial health benefits, and is done in public ALL the TIME. Try comparing apples to apples, Guy.
How sad that so many of us think of a baby enjoying his food as gross. I suppose watching some of our educated, adult friends and relatives eat might be considered gross, too. Like, really gross. But we forgive them and love them anyway, because they're cute, or funny, or have big eyes which melt your heart, or a thousand other reasons. Plus, they gotta eat.
I can’t resist, I gotta jump in on this one.
30+ years ago my (now, ex) wife would breastfeed my then infant daughter when schedule demanded, where ever the two were …including church, during Mass, if needs be. As was his custom, Msgr. O’Donnell would, during the “exchange of a sign of peace,” walk up one side and down the other, the length of the church, shaking hands with those sitting on the aisle in the pews. One Sunday, he got to Kathy, who was sublimely nursing away; he extended, and then quickly withdrew his outstretched hand; a tad shaken, he made a good recovery and carried on to the others. I don’t recall any incidents of people reacting negatively over Kathy breastfeeding in public. Msgr. was a bit flustered for a second and it was kinda funny at the time, but we all seemed to have survived. And this would be a great segue to my bragging about my daughter and grandkids, but I’ll resist the temptation.
It is very disappointing to encounter the strong anti-intellectual attitude in the Catholic community. It is amazing to encounter how many Catholics hate the New York Times? Many it seems to me obediently listen to and accept the comments made by provocateurs in the media. Many Catholics that I meet prefer to read tabloids. This is surprising since many of these people have come from the same Catholic educational background as myself.
It is my impression that many Catholics want to reside in an intellectual ghetto?