#Alma mater Wheaton College

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

In June 2022, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization overturned more than a half-century of Supreme Court precedent. Five justices voted to deny constitutional protection for a woman’s right to choose and gutted privacy as a fundamental right. Texas and 13 other states now bar abortions in almost all circumstances. Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina have enacted six-week bans.

Writing for the Supreme Court majority, Samuel Alito, a George W. Bush appointee, explicitly compared the death of Roe to the end of state-enforced racial segregation, 68 years before. Back in 1954, in a landmark ruling, Brown v. Board of Education, a unanimous court overruled the doctrine of “separate but equal.” These days, Brown is under attack from Alito’s allies on and off the bench.

In their new book The Fall of Roe, named for Roe v. Wade, the 1973 ruling that previously safeguarded federal abortion rights, Elizabeth Dias and Lisa Lerer masterfully lay out how the cultural right and pro-life movement refused to take “no” for an answer, played the long game, and attained the victory for which they had yearned. Dias and Lerer also capture the somnolence of the left and how “intersectionality” came to divide old allies.

Dias is the New York Times religion reporter. A graduate of Wheaton College, the late Rev. Billy Graham’s alma mater, she holds a master’s degree in divinity from Princeton Theological seminary. Lerer, a veteran of five presidential campaigns, covers politics for the Times. The two of them got Hillary Clinton to speak for the record.

The Democratic presidential nominee in 2016 acknowledges that her party underestimated its adversaries, but doesn’t point the finger at herself.

“We didn’t take it seriously, and we didn’t understand the threat,” Clinton said. “We could have done more to fight.”

“I just think that most of us who support the rights of women and privacy and the right to make these difficult decisions yourself, you know, we just couldn’t believe what was happening.”

“Our side was complacent and kind of taking it for granted and thinking it would never go away.”

Even as polls show that abortion rights have widening public acceptance, the mechanics of federalism have left legislatures in red states to act as a counterforce to the more liberal national ethos, a point stressed in The Fall of Roe.

“Republicans had the state legislatures,” Dias and Lerer write. “They had a top-to-bottom network. They had the court. They had the power to change American life.”

The Fall of Roe also sheds light on the infrastructure that undergirded opposition to Roe. Libertarian-minded donors didn’t particularly care about curbing abortion access and David Koch personally supported abortion rights. That having been said, Freedom Partners, a Koch-driven industry group, donated almost $1 million to anti-abortion efforts, which could be paired on election day with tax cuts and lower regulation.

Said differently, fetuses weren’t the only reasons large checks were being cut to the Federalist Society, or that constitutional originalism had become the civic religion of the right. FDR’s legacy has to be gutted. Social security may no longer be so secure.

Leonard Leo, the driving force behind the Federalist Society, receives particular attention.

“Who’s this little fucking midget?” Donald Trump once said of Leo, a close friend of Justice Clarence Thomas.

Short answer: Leo helped get each of Trump’s Supreme Court nominees across the finish line. Think of him as the straw that stirs the drink.

“After Alito was confirmed to the court, Leo connected him with ideologically aligned businessmen, some of whom had cases before the court,” Dias and Lerer write.

They add that Leo “spent time with Thomas at… a private lakeside resort owned by a major Republican donor, Harlan Crow. Their visits were memorialized in a painting, hanging inside the lodge.”

Thanks to ProPublica’s Pulitzer-winning reporting, the painting is now well known. The group is shown thoughtfully smoking cigars.

Leo’s connections also helped found a nonprofit, the Judicial Crisis Network (JCN), “on the same hallway in a downtown office building as the Federalist Society.”

Which all brings us back to Brown v. Board of Education and where the right goes next.

In Justice on Trial, an examination of Brett Kavanaugh’s elevation to the Supreme Court, conservative talking heads Carrie Severino, of JCN, and Mollie Hemingway, of the Federalist, trashed Brown.

According to Severino and Hemingway, social science wrongly played a role in the court’s calculus. They declared that such decisions “may have been correct in their result but were decided on the basis of sociological studies rather than legal principles.”

Notice the word “may.”

Fast forward to May 2024, when Thomas—who joined Alito’s opinion in Dobbs—turned his fire on Brown.

“Such extravagant uses of judicial power are at odds with the history and tradition of the equity power and the Framers’ design,” he wrote in a concurrence, sustaining a South Carolina congressional map in the face of voting rights challenge.

As another election looms, abortion and contraception have emerged as campaign issues, to the horror of Trump. On the stump, the presumptive Republican nominee has vacillated over possible restrictions on contraception. Then again, Stormy Daniels testified that Trump did not wear a condom during an encounter Trump still denies, notwithstanding 34 guilty verdicts in the case arising.

As for meting out punishment to women who have abortions, Trump would leave that to the states.

“The states are going to make that decision,” he told Time. “The states are going to have to be comfortable or uncomfortable, not me.”

He also declined to say “no” to states monitoring women, to identify those who terminate pregnancies. Think The Handmaid’s Tale.

In the 2022 midterms, Dobbs cost the Republicans their “red wave.” In 2024, it may lead to another Trump loss and Democrats retaking the House. Right now, things are that close.

[mybeautifulchristianjourney]

The leader of Billy Graham's alma mater, the Evangelical higher education institution Wheaton College in Illinois, is pushing back on allegations in a recent Fox News op-ed that his school has gone "woke."

In a statement published last Wednesday, Wheaton College President Philip Ryken responded to an op-ed written by freelance writer Tim Scheiderer published by Fox News that same day titled: "When the 'Harvard of Christian Schools' goes woke."

Ryken insisted that the piece made...

[wutbju]

Did you catch this kerfuffle?

BJU Class of 1999, Timothy Scheiderer wrote an op-ed on Fox News trashing Wheaton as guilty of the crimes of teaching critical race theory and gender fluidity. He says:

But recently, the school in the leafy suburb west of Chicago has begun to mimic Harvard’s wokeness. Banning biblical words, teaching critical race theory, and psychologizing gender identity issues may not seem extreme in modern academia. But for a school which houses the works of Rev. Graham, C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien, it is adrift from its orthodox, Christian moorings. But this isn’t a recent drift. In the 2000s, the education department commended the teachings of Marxists. In 2016, 78 faculty members voiced support for a fellow professor who stated Christians and Muslims worship the same God. And five years later, the school held its first ceremony recognizing graduating minority students sans White students. And currently, Wheaton permits its professors to teach critical race theory. 

Good grief.

He ends with a real winner:

In light of these shifts away from the Bible, would Billy Graham, the most influential 20th-century evangelical, endorse his alma mater? In the 19th century, Harvard was slowly, and permanently, transformed from a Christian university into a secular one. Belief in a trinitarian God was eventually toppled by in vogue philosophies. At Wheaton, the biblical belief in only two sexes is being tainted. With this and the other shifts mentioned, it may seem like a slow drift. But a gentle tide can carry a boat far from its dock.

Slippery slope anyone?

[mourning-again-in-america]

it's surprising to me just how strongly democratized the presidency was in the period after wwii before the collapse of the soviet union, when going based on alma maters

looking at https://blog.tradeschool.com/alma-maters-of-us-presidents, before FDR, the Presidents who didn't go to 1. a military school 2. a small private in massachusetts or 3. an ivy league, but still went to college, can be lumped into two major categories: ohio and the hudson (Rutherford B. Hayes, Benjamin Harrison, and Warren Harding are in the first, Martin Van Buren, Chester A. Arthur, and William McKinley are the latter)

exceptions to this rule are: - William Henry Harrison (went to some school in Virginia, I'd round it off to "like William and Mary" but idk Virginia politics enough) - James K Polk (University of North Carolina) - James Buchanan (Dickinson College; I'm sort of tempted to lump it with UPenn, a la W. H. Harrison, but the case for this seems weaker) - Herbert Hoover (Stanford) however, from the post-war period we have: - Harry Truman, UMiss KC School of Law (did not graduate) - Lyndon Johnson, Southwest Texas State Teacher’s College - Richard Nixon, Whittier College, Duke Law - Gerald Ford went to UMich for bachelor's, tempted to leave him off this list for doing law at Yale - Ronald Reagan, Eureka College (tiny weird Prot college in IL, I assume kind of like Wheaton)

[projectorstv1]

Heaven: A New Message from Billy Graham

Heaven: A New Message from Billy Graham

  Awards and honors Graham was frequently honored by surveys, including “Greatest Living American” and consistently ranked among the most admired persons in the United States and the world. He appeared most frequently on Gallup‘s list of most admired people.  Since 1955, Graham was recognized by Gallup a record 55 times (49 times…

[fromchaostocosmos]

There is trend going on of smearing Jews. 

I saw an article that whole premise of it was that Bernie Sanders in conformation hearing for deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget was making it hard for him because he was christian.

Now this wasn’t in some far right online thing or some over the top christian blog.

No this was in an Atlantic article.   

And I read it and then read it again to make sure I understood what I read.

See what actually happened was Bernie Sander, a Jewish man, was making sure that the nominee was going to do his job for all the people and not just some.

You might wonder why Bernie Sanders was concerned here is why:

Sanders took issue with a piece Vought wrote in January 2016 about a fight at the nominee’s alma mater, Wheaton College. The Christian school had fired a political-science professor, Larycia Hawkins, for a Facebook post intended to express solidarity with Muslims. Vought disagreed with Hawkins’s post and defended the school in an article for the conservative website The Resurgent. During the hearing, Sanders repeatedly quoted one passage that he found particularly objectionable:

Muslims do not simply have a deficient theology. They do not know God because they have rejected Jesus Christ his Son, and they stand condemned.

“In my view, the statement made by Mr. Vought is indefensible, it is hateful, it is Islamophobic, and it is an insult to over a billion Muslims throughout the world,” Sanders told the committee during his introductory remarks. “This country, since its inception, has struggled, sometimes with great pain, to overcome discrimination of all forms … we must not go backwards.”

Yeah I am concerned too, Bernie.

Later, during the question-and-answer portion of the hearing, Sanders brought this up again. “Do you believe that statement is Islamophobic?” he asked Vought.

“Absolutely not, Senator,” Vought replied. “I’m a Christian, and I believe in a Christian set of principles based on my faith.”

As Russell Moore, the head of the political arm of the Southern Baptist Convention, said in a statement, “Even if one were to excuse Senator Sanders for not realizing that all Christians of every age have insisted that faith in Jesus Christ is the only pathway to salvation, it is inconceivable that Senator Sanders would cite religious beliefs as disqualifying an individual for public office.”

The exchange shows just how tense the political environment under Trump has become. But it’s also evidence of the danger of using religion to deem someone unfit to serve in government.

Bernie didn’t take issue with this guy being christian. Bernie was rightly concerned that the nominee may not do his job for all the citizens.

Sanders: I don’t know how many Muslims there are in America, I really don’t know, probably a couple million. Are you suggesting that all of those people stand condemned? What about Jews? Do they stand condemned too?

Vought: Senator, I am a Christian—

Sanders: I understand that you are a Christian. But this country is made up of people who are not just—I understand that Christianity is the majority religion. But there are other people who have different religions in this country and around the world. In your judgment, do you think that people who are not Christians are going to be condemned?

I don’t know I gotta agree with Bernie here.

[heyteenbookshey]

Here Lies Daniel Tate by Cristin Terrill: Author Interview

Abridged Goodreads Summary:

When ten-year-old Daniel Tate went missing from one of California's most elite communities, he left no trace. He simply vanished.

Six years later, when he resurfaces on a snowy street in Vancouver, he's no longer the same boy. His sandy hair is darker, the freckles are gone, and he's initially too traumatized to speak, but he's alive. ... It's perfect. A miracle. Except for one thing. He isn't Daniel Tate.

He's a petty con artist who accidentally stumbled into the scam of a lifetime, and he soon learns he's not the only one in the Tate household with something to hide. The family has as many secrets as they have millions in the bank, and one of them might be ready to kill to keep the worst one buried.

Hey Teen Books Hey: Your book “Here Lies Daniel Tate” is coming out on June 6th! Is the week before a book comes out as glamorous/anxiety-ridden as I think is? (Very on both counts)

Cristin Terrill: There’s definitely more anxiety than glamour! Having a book come out is a very weird feeling, at least for me, because it feels quite distant and not entirely real. You wait and wait and wait for the day but then… nothing really changes. Presumably some people are buying and reading your book, which is awesome, but also feels very abstract most of the time. And the worrying never stops!

HTBH: Was any of the book inspired by real events?   

CT: Yes! The book was inspired by the true story of a man named Frederic Bourdin who impersonated a boy named Nicholas Barclay who had disappeared many years before. The true story is so wild that I had to tone down several aspects of it or no one would have bought it in novel form.

HTBH: What challenges did you face when writing from this narrator’s point of view? 

CT: The narrator was definitely tricky for me. He keeps a lot of secrets, both from others and from himself, which made for a difficult balancing act on my part, figuring out how and when to parse out certain pieces of information. He’s also callous and manipulative and very closed off to others, which is a hard mindset to get into and to write from. I wanted him to be relatable enough that you’d want to follow him through an entire novel but not so sympathetic that he lost his bite. My natural inclination is to make characters too kind and give them too many opportunities to justify or redeem themselves, so fighting against that was tough for me.

HTBH: The narrator repeatedly tells the reader that he is a liar, so there are infinite ways to read the book depending on what you believe. Do you know when he's telling the truth? 

CT: Yes. I don’t think I could have written him without knowing what the truth really was. But if it’s ambiguous to readers, great. I love it when a book leaves something up to me to decide and so I try to leave those spaces for readers of my books.

HTBH: While thrilling and almost fantastical at times, Here Lies Daniel Tate is pretty firmly realistic fiction. Did you approach writing Daniel Tate differently than writing All Our Yesterdays, which was science fiction? 

CT: Not really. The universe of Daniel Tate is realistic but very heightened; it takes place in our world but is definitely not an everyday experience. The bulk of All Our Yesterdays, and almost everything else I’ve ever written, is the same. Genre-wise, my writing is all over the map. The common threads for me are more to do with theme and tone.

HTBH: Are you more of a methodical outliner or fly by the seat of your pants writer? 

CT: I’m a very big outliner! I don’t start writing until I have a very comprehensive outline and I rarely deviate much from it while writing. To me, idea generating and word generating are really different and I work better when I separate them. Plus the books I write tend to have some pretty complex plot elements that I’m definitely not smart enough to wing!

HTBH: Did you listen to music while you wrote this?

CT: Nope! I wish I could but I get far too easily distracted. I do most of my writing in a silent study room at the library with my noise cancelling headphones on for good measure.

HTBH: In keeping with the Hey Teen Books Hey brand, what is favorite library of all time? 

CT: TOUGH ONE. I usually write in libraries, so there are many that have a special place in my heart, like the Holborn Library, where I wrote the book that got me my agent, the White Oak Library, where I wrote All Our Yesterdays, or the Wheaton Library, where I wrote Here Lies Daniel Tate. I also love the British Library, because it’s super difficult to get access to on account of all the priceless stuff they have in there and I actually managed it once, which was beyond cool. But for both sentimental and aesthetic reasons, I have to go with the library at Vassar College, my alma mater. I had actually crossed Vassar off of my list of potential schools until I got a brochure with the most beautiful photo of the library on the front and then decided I should reconsider.

Here Lies Daniel Tate debuts on June 6th. You can find Cristin on tumblr and twitter and her website

An advanced copy was provided to me in exchange for an honest review and I read the whole thing in 3 hours and liked it way a lot and haven’t reviewed it yet but my endorsement is obvi A+

[stopkingobama]

Bernie Sanders Shows the Left’s Refusal to Coexist With Traditional Believers

Photo Credit: Pixabay, PublicDomainPictures, CC0 Public Domain, https://pixabay.com/en/anger-angry-bad-burn-dangerous-18658/

Religious tests for holding public office are banned in the Constitution and go against the very core of the American tradition.

But you wouldn’t have learned that listening Wednesday to Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., as he questioned Russ Vought, the nominee for deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget.

His questioning of Vought was nothing less than theological interrogation, and in the end, excoriation.

Here’s what unfolded when Sanders took the mic.

In a disjointed line of questioning that had nothing to do with budgetary issues, Sanders veered into the theology of salvation, singling out an article Vought had written for a conservative publication in 2015 that outlined basic Christian doctrine about God in contrast to the Islamic view.

Here’s the heart of the exchange (transcript courtesy David French of National Review):

Sanders: You wrote, “Muslims do not simply have a deficient theology. They do not know God because they have rejected Jesus Christ, His Son, and they stand condemned.” Do you believe that that statement is Islamophobic?

Vought: Absolutely not, senator. I’m a Christian, and I believe in a Christian set of principles based on my faith. That post, as I stated in the questionnaire to this committee, was to defend my alma mater, Wheaton College, a Christian school that has a statement of faith that includes the centrality of Jesus Christ for salvation, and—

Sanders: I apologize. Forgive me, we just don’t have a lot of time. Do you believe people in the Muslim religion stand condemned? Is that your view?

Vought: Again, senator, I’m a Christian, and I wrote that piece in accordance with the statement of faith at Wheaton College.

Sanders: I understand that. I don’t know how many Muslims there are in America. Maybe a couple million. Are you suggesting that all those people stand condemned? What about Jews? Do they stand condemned too?

Vought: Senator, I’m a Christian—

Sanders (shouting): I understand you are a Christian, but this country are made of people who are not just—I understand that Christianity is the majority religion, but there are other people of different religions in this country and around the world. In your judgment, do you think that people who are not Christians are going to be condemned?

Vought: Thank you for probing on that question. As a Christian, I believe that all individuals are made in the image of God and are worthy of dignity and respect regardless of their religious beliefs. I believe that as a Christian that’s how I should treat all individuals—

Sanders: You think your statement that you put into that publication, they do not know God because they rejected Jesus Christ, His Son, and they stand condemned, do you think that’s respectful of other religions?

Vought: Senator, I wrote a post based on being a Christian and attending a Christian school that has a statement of faith that speaks clearly in regard to the centrality of Jesus Christ in salvation.

Sanders: I would simply say, Mr. Chairman, that this nominee is really not someone who this country is supposed to be about.

This exchange spotlights comprehensive ignorance on the part of Sanders—ignorance of the American tradition, of religious toleration, and even of what religion is.

It’s unlikely that Sanders doesn’t realize religious tests for public office are banned in the Constitution. I suspect he would applaud that ban as much as the next person, at least in the abstract.

Yet his line of questioning seems to show an ignorance of Article VI of the Constitution, which states that “No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

Traditional Believers Need Not Apply

The implications of Sanders’ questioning are far-reaching.

If taken to its logical conclusion, Sanders’ view would exclude all orthodox followers of an Abrahamic faith from holding public office.

Every Abrahamic religion—Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, in their historic forms—believes that some people either will, or may be, condemned in eternity. This is Abrahamic Religion 101.

But for Sanders, such mainstream beliefs demonstrate bigotry and racism. Just read the statement his office released after his exchange with Vought:

In a democratic society, founded on the principle of religious freedom, we can all disagree over issues, but racism and bigotry—condemning an entire group of people because of their faith—cannot be part of any public policy.

This statement crystalizes the problem. Sanders wants public officials to have religious freedom, except when their religious views contain something he might consider bigoted, such as a view of hell or condemnation.

What Sanders is really pushing for, whether he knows it or not, is a “Universalists Only” policy for those who would serve in public office. You can believe what you want, as long as your theology doesn’t teach that others might one day be judged.

And with that brush stroke, Sanders excludes historic Christianity, Judaism, and Islam from the public square. Ironically, his view of religion makes little room for some of the most devout followers of religion.

What’s at stake here is meaningful diversity in the public square. As Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., noted in a statement:

We have diverse political perspectives, we can also have diverse faith perspectives. Many faith traditions have complex and exclusive theological beliefs, and whether we agree with them or not, those diverse beliefs are protected by the Constitution.

Such beliefs have always been part of the fabric of American public life.

But that doesn’t deter Sanders. Religion that is pure and undefiled in the eyes of Bernie Sanders is progressive, nonjudgmental—in a word, unorthodox.

Instead of a government that is truly of and by the people, Sanders’ logic would give us government of and by the unorthodox—a kind of theocracy of the heretical.

Have an Imagination, Bernie

But what is perhaps most tragic here is Sanders’ complete lack of imagination for how people with deep differences in worldview can coexist with each other.

In Sanders’ view, if you think others will be condemned in eternity, you cannot possibly love or respect them, let alone live in peace with them. Your belief that they might be condemned is proof enough that you hate them.

But how is that logical? That’s as absurd as saying Joe sees a man in the street who is going to get hit by a bus, and therefore, Joe hates him.

Perhaps Sanders has only encountered hateful examples of religion in his 75 years of life. Perhaps the reason he can’t fathom true religious coexistence in the midst of deep disagreement is that he’s never seen it happen.

Yet it does happen, all the time.

To see a beautiful picture of this, Sanders need look no further than the conservative movement.

Conservatives are a diverse smattering of evangelicals, Roman Catholics, Mormons, Jews, and secular Americans. We believe all kinds of things about each other’s eternal fate that Sanders would probably find abhorrent—yet here we are, arm in arm, working for a common political cause.

Sanders’ total lack of imagination here is tragic at a time when America’s ideological center is splintering. We’ve reached a critical time of polarization in which coexistence in the midst of profound disagreement is becoming more necessary than ever.

Yet it seems that only conservatives are prepared to deliver that kind of tolerance. The American left pays lip service to diversity, yet in practice routinely shuns the most important kind of diversity: diversity of viewpoint.

The left is very good at respecting diversity at the level of externals: skin color, religious tradition, ethnicity, etc. But when it comes to actual viewpoints, the left is a seamless monolith and wishes to stay that way.

Sanders is proof of this. He seemingly couldn’t care less whether Vought identified as Protestant, Catholic, Muslim, or Hindu. Those are just externals.

What he really cares about is the substance of Vought’s views. That’s the deep level of disagreement that the American left has not learned to coexist with.

Learning to Practice Actual Tolerance

Sanders’ line of questioning shows an alarming disregard for the Constitution’s ban on religious tests, but it also highlights the deeper problem of our cultural moment.

Chiefly, it shows that the left needs to develop a greater imagination for how people with stark differences in worldview—including about other people’s eternal fate—might actually respect one another and live in harmony.

Until the secular left soaks this in, its lip service to diversity and tolerance will remain hollow and vacuous, constantly undermined by its own actions. Commentary by Daniel Davis. Originally published at The Daily Signal.

[thisbrilliantsky]

i’m working on a speech about the lack of diversity in u.s. colleges and so this stuff is on my mind

so here at wheaton there is a p substantial asian population for a White™ school (about 10% asian, 80% white........) and there’s a student organization for asian students?? and it’s really cool?? it seems a large number of kids are involved (both int’l and asian-american students) and they have dinners and events together and seem to have a great time and it’s awesome and i’m just?? really jealous tbh

there is a similar organization for latinx & hispanic students but?? there aren’t nearly as many students of that background so it’s just?? not as visible and not as popular among students. (not even getting into my own insecurities about joining as a non-spanish-speaking, mixed race latina.......) IT’S JUST. i feel kind edged out of wheaton’s White™ culture  both bc that’s just not me and not my experience and bc it just takes up so much cultural room but i would like?? to have a place that’s mine?? i would like to find “my people” you know. idek if i can have that (culturally at least) as, again, a mixed race american monolingual latina (don’t get me wrong, i have really good friends here and i love it here, bUT )

MY GUY. WE NEED MORE DIVERSITY IN COLLEGES!! PARTICULARLY SMALL/PRIVATE COLLEGES which statistically speaking are The Most White™ (i have the receipts, y’all) and at wheaton, though we talk a lot about diversity and racism and i honestly believe the Folks in Charge of Things want to be better about this........80% is a large percentage. and the legacy thing?? i dont know how to feel about that. i mean. it’s great for kids to go to their parents’ and/or grandparents’ alma mater but??? if that is actually giving alumni’s kids a leg up in admissions?? in this historically white as heck school?? which now professes to be pursuing “racial reconciliation” in every area?? Yikes.

im just real :\\ about this tonight

[blackchristiannation]

How Billy Graham Defeated Communism Preaching Behind the Iron Curtain

[caption id="attachment_421850" align="aligncenter" width="800"] Image processed by CodeCarvings Piczard ### FREE Community Edition ### on 2018-02-21 15:58:45Z | http://piczard.com | http://codecarvings.comüÿÿ#ùô[/caption]

The Billy Graham of the 1950s reflected the political mood of the United States of that era. His visceral anticommunism expressed itself during the Greater Los Angeles crusade of 1949 in his assessment of the looming Soviet threat.

“Sleek Russian bombers,” he said, were poised to strike America. “Do you know,” he thundered at wide-eyed listeners, “that the Fifth Columnists, called Communists, are more rampant in Los Angeles than any other city in America?” Communism, he said, “is a religion that is inspired, directed, and motivated by the devil himself who has declared war against Almighty God.”

For years, Graham stayed true to that course as a fire-breathing patriotic American orator. But by 1992, he was paying a respectful visit to one of the most tyrannical communist regimes on earth: North Korea. He made comments about the North Korean dictator that made many people roll their eyes in wonder. Kim Il-sung, Graham observed, was “a gentle and logical thinker. There are statues of him all over the place. The people there really do love him.”

Well, the people probably “really did” love Joseph Stalin, and Mao Zedong, and other communist tyrants of the 20th century. To demonstrate anything less might have secured a lifetime pass to their country's labor camp system. So Graham's views changed over time. How did this happen? And why?

Change in Strategy

The answer is not that Graham actually changed his view of what communism was. Until his dying day, he believed that communism was a malevolent attempt to usurp the sovereignty of God on earth.

But he changed in how he thought Christians should behave towards Communists—the people, not the ideology—and in how he thought the gospel should be presented to regimes that officially rejected Christianity. Graham came to believe that direct confrontation with wicked regimes would not work. His new approach to dealing with communist regimes was an extension of his approach to working for the propagation of the gospel with people whose Christian theology differed sharply from his own—and to the fundamentalists was sheer anathema.

Graham aroused the ire of fundamentalist Bob Jones, founder of Bob Jones University, during the 1954 Harringay crusade in the UK and the 1957 crusade in New York by associating with liberal clergymen. Years later, in the 1980s, Graham agreed to attend a Soviet-sponsored Christian “peace” conference. On these occasions, he provoked immense displeasure among American Cold War Soviet-watchers.

During the 1960s, when America was tormented by its experience in Vietnam, Graham gave the impression of leaving the conduct of diplomacy, war, and peace exclusively to the White House, indicating few misgivings about this massive war in a distant part of the world.

But by the late 1970s, his worldview likely underwent significant change. In 1975, Graham seemed pessimistic about Christian freedom around the world. He speculated openly about the possibility that Christians in the West might experience persecution for their faith. Two years later, Graham was less alarmed by communism than by the rising threat of nuclear war.

What apparently contributed to a major shift in Graham's view was a private briefing he received in the late 1970s from a senior official in the Defense Department. The official had come all the way to the Graham home in Montreat, North Carolina, to spell out to the Grahams the very dire consequences for America of a real nuclear war. It obviously was not a classified briefing because Graham did not have any government security clearances. But the facts seemed utterly grim. The Grahams were “appalled” on learning what would happen if a nuclear war were to occur, according to Graham biographer John Pollock. In light of those grim realities, the brittle verities of anti-communism may no longer have seemed so attractive.

In fact, complex negotiations for his first preaching visit to a communist country, Hungary, had been in process five years before Graham actually arrived there in the fall of 1977. When he announced his forthcoming visit earlier that year, Hungarian exiles living in the US sharply criticized Graham. His reply to them was almost identical to what he had said to the fundamentalists when they took him to task for his dalliances with liberal Protestants during the New York crusade of 1957. “I intend to go anywhere, sponsored by anybody,” he said, “to preach the gospel of Christ if there are no strings attached to my message.”

In the event, the preaching tour—the word “crusade” was not used, out of deference to the feelings of Hungary's communist rulers—was a dramatic success, with thousands of Protestant Christians attending the final, open-air camp meeting, many of them pilgrims from other parts of the Soviet empire, including the Soviet Union.

“I have not joined the Communist Party since coming to Hungary, nor have I been asked to. But I think the world is changing,” he said at the conclusion of the Hungarian visit. “There is religious liberty in Hungary. … The church is alive in Hungary.”

Soon other countries in Eastern Europe opened their doors. In 1978, he visited Poland, preaching in a church near Krakow just four days before the resident cardinal, Karol Wojtyła, was elected Pope John Paul II.

His visit to the second communist state in a year seemed to have further intensified his antinuclear leanings. On his return, he supported a petition of liberal Protestants urging the US to sign the Salt 2 arms control agreement with the Soviet Union. “Why can't we have peace?” he asked rhetorically, adding that he favored the complete abolition of nuclear weapons. To underline how far his thinking had evolved, he said that he now thought that President Truman had “made a mistake in dropping that first atomic bomb” on Japan.

“I wish we had never developed it,” he said of the bomb. “I have seen that we must seek the good of the whole human race, and not just the good of any one nation or race.”

The Soviets must have been listening to this carefully, for in 1982 they obviously thought they had scored a major propaganda coup by persuading Graham to attend a conference that had all the markings of a typical Soviet “peace” propaganda campaign. The conference was called “World Conference of Religious Workers for Saving the Sacred Gift of Life from Nuclear Catastrophe.” Could Billy Graham not know that he was being totally manipulated by Moscow? Both from TV commentators and from prominent figures in the foreign policy establishment, Graham received vigorous criticism.

It wasn't his first trip to the Soviet Union. He had visited the country as a tourist in 1959. But it was far more controversial, primarily because while Graham was enjoying the caviar laid on by his Soviet hosts (“I've had caviar with almost every meal I've eaten”), seven Siberian Pentecostals—“the Siberian Seven”—were holed up in a crowded basement apartment in the US embassy in Moscow. Graham duly visited them, but he was stung by their frosty attitude toward him and their refusal to pray with him. Further comments he made on freedom of religion in the Soviet Union (“I have not personally seen persecution”) caused students even at his alma mater, Wheaton College, to carry placards reading “Billy Graham Has Been Duped by the Soviets.”

But 19 years later, at least one major journalistic critic of that day had changed his tune. “Graham's efforts contributed to the fall of communism, and in no small way,” said Dan Rather in a 2001 interview. “He was right; I was wrong, big time.”

What Graham's Moscow visit achieved was the overcoming of the last reservations about having Graham preach on the part of the harsher communist regimes of Eastern Europe.

Between 1982 and 1985, Graham conducted preaching tours in East Germany, Czechoslovakia, and Romania. When Graham arrived in Romania in September 1985, he quite gratuitously thanked the regime for giving “full and genuine freedom to all religious denominations.” If he had been awake during his pre-visit briefings, he would surely have heard somewhere or other that Romania was one of the most unpleasantly repressive states in the entire Communist bloc, especially toward religious dissidents.

Events during his trip certainly reinforced that message. The authorities sabotaged his preaching repeatedly through cutting wires to loudspeakers or severely limiting attendance. But at the climax of his visit, a sermon preached at the Orthodox Cathedral in the city of Timisoara, a city of predominantly Hungarian ethnic composition, a crowd estimated at 150,000 was so overwhelmingly enthusiastic that the country's dictator canceled a scheduled meeting with Graham out of irritation. Nicolae Ceaușescu may have had a premonition of how his regime would end. It was protests by Protestants in Timisoara that started the cascade of events that led to the dictator's arrest and execution at the end of 1989.

Click here to read more. Source: Christianity Today

[jswdmb1]

New Kid In Town

“There's talk on the street; it sounds so familiar. Great expectations, everybody's watching you.”

- Eagles

I know that I have been way over the top with this Loyola in the Final Four business.  I’ll be the first to admit it.  And while I’m very proud of them and all the attention my alma mater is getting, the pure joy of the situation is what has really overwhelmed me.  Not just for me, but it seems like everywhere I go people are really happy about this. It seems to have restored faith that there can be a positive story in this world with no strings attached.  

That all being said, we have a basketball game to play tomorrow night and a lot of new fans joining in on the fun.  This is truly a team for all, so I do not want anyone thinking they are bandwagon jumpers.  Quite the contrary as I’ve been begging for this attention all season long.  Despite our welcoming stance, you should still be aware of some basic facts about the school before you head out to your Final Four watch party.  Consider it like a guide to visiting a foreign country.  We love having you here, and want you to come back to visit, but you also want to feel like you fit in and don’t offend the locals.  I’m here to help you.  I have armed you with eight factoids that will make you look like you’ve been a Rambler all along:

The official name of the school is Loyola University Chicago, but no one calls it that.  Using that name would be akin to a friend calling you by your first, middle, and last name all of the time.  It’s simply Loyola.  You are in Illinois, so trust me that there will be no confusion with the schools in Maryland, New Orleans, or California.  As a matter of fact, I think the media can drop the “Loyola Chicago” moniker.  Again, if you hear Loyola at this point and are still asking “which one?” we’re not going to be able to help you.  And for heaven’s sake do not use Loyola (IL) or any version of Loyola combined with the State of Illinois.  It’s nowhere in our name and we like to downplay the whole Illinois thing as much as possible (who that lives here doesn’t?)

They keep saying we are a small school but our enrollment is over 16,000 on five campuses (in addition to the Lake Shore campus, there is one downtown, two in the suburbs and one in Rome).  Loyola is actually the largest Jesuit university in the United States.  That means we are bigger than “power” conference schools like Boston College, Butler, Georgetown, Creighton, Marquette, and Xavier as well as fellow mid-major Gonzaga.  We have over 130,000 alumni with 85,000 of them living in the Chicago area.  There probably isn’t one person in the Chicago area who hasn’t been to a least one doctor or dentist that got their degree from Loyola.  I know it’s a cute story to portray us as some tiny liberal arts college buried in an unknown part of town, but anyone from Chicago knows that is not true.

Speaking of our part of town, if you live in the Chicago area, or visited us here, and have never been to Rogers Park, you have missed out on the experience of the one neighborhood in the city that truly represents us all.  Rich live alongside the poor and people of different religions, races and ethnicities have coexisted as residents for decades.  I won’t pretend that the community is always in complete harmony, and it has its share of problems, but people who live there at least try to understand one another, which is something we should all consider in our own neighborhoods.

The easiest way to get to Rogers Park and the Lakeshore Campus is the L.  Get on the Red Line and stay on it until you get to the Loyola stop (easy, huh?).  Bring a book, though, as you have a lot of stops on the way up there (it’s the ninth stop after Addison!).  If you go back as far as I do you’ll remember that the “A” and “B” stops shortened the trip a bit, but those days  are long gone.  You’re just going to have to settle in for about a 30-45 minute ride if you are coming from the Loop.  This seems like unnecessary advice but avoid sleeping on the ride.  A lot can go wrong on the L while in an unconscious state (that is a separate post).  The nice thing is that if you do fall asleep on the ride up there, the train stops at Howard just three stops later.  You can just get off and walk across the platform to a southbound train for no charge (unlike Metra, as I found out once when I woke up in Wheaton).    

Once you get there, if you stop in Bar 63, don’t refer to it as that.  It is just a new fancy name for the same old Hamilton’s that was there when my parents went there.  It’s most redeeming quality was that it was the place with its famous free midnight buffet on Saturdays.  If you really want to show your stuff, recommend to your friends that you head up Sheridan Road to the Oasis when the other bars kick you out at 2:00 am. The O has a 5:00 am liquor license and a packaged goods store in front to take the party to go after that.  If  you really want to reminisce, wistfully recall your younger days at Cheers long before they paved paradise and put up a parking lot (actually, a Chipotle I believe).

No real Rambler fan recognizes the team mascot as anyone but Bo Rambler.  Sister Jean is NOT a mascot (see below), and at orientation we were never explained why a wolf is a good representation of our school (I have asked a number of people many times – no one knows).  The Rambler name actually came from the early days of the school when they had a football team with no home field.  They just rambled around the country playing a constant slate of road games.  Eventually, football was dropped and Bo was eventually adopted.  Bo was basically a hobo of some type with a very ragged and disheveled look.  Political correctness in the late 80’s made some question if that was appropriate (Loyola has a nasty liberal streak), so they moved to the lame wolf.  True fans long for brining Bo back, and some would even recommend heading across the street to find the next Bo sitting on one of the barstools at Bruno & Tim’s.  Any one of those guys could “play” the part masterfully.

Sister Jean has forgotten more basketball than you’ll ever know and has been an integral part of Loyola Athletics for decades.   She played the game as a young girl and taught and coached high school for twenty years after becoming a nun.  She arrived on campus in 1961 at the former Mundelein College (which merged with Loyola in 1991) and has served in literally dozens of roles in the past 57 years.  While I did not know Sister Jean personally when I was there, the presence of the nuns and  Jesuit priests on campus is a vital part of everyone’s experience at the University.  She would be the first to tell you that she is just doing her small part to serve other people, which is the predominant value of the Jesuits and those who serve alongside them as nuns and lay personnel.     By the way, if you are thinking boy Sister Jean is going to get  rich off of all of this, think again.  All nuns take a vow of poverty and rely on the community to provide for them.  The proceeds of any of her     merchandise will go back to her order into a fund that helps provide     scholarships for inner city youth.

The most important thing to know, and this is spoken with experience, is that Lake Michigan is very cold in the Spring.  When you get to     campus in September, the nearby beach is a wonderful place and the waters have been warmed by a summer of heat and sunshine.  That lasts about four days until the first cold night and then you feel the other side of living right on the lake.  I have never been to the Arctic or the South Pole, but I can’t imagine a colder feeling than walking through campus in January with a twenty-mile-an-hour wind coming from the northeast right off the lake.  Then, right around finals time, the first really nice day comes     along in early May.  Maybe like 80 degrees.  And the first place you head to is the beach.  Great idea, but whatever you do, avoid the water.  If freezing is exactly 32.0 degrees, then at that point in the year it is like 32.1 degrees.  Just dipping your toes in the surf can cause them to seize up and be rendered immobile for 24 hours.  Going in all the way is only recommended for those suffering from cardiac arrest and need their heart restarted.  It’s a mistake you’ll only make once, but it’s an unnecessary lesson if you just listen to me here.

There are dozens more tips I can share, but these eight should be enough to at least make you look like a true Rambler when you are watching the game tomorrow.  It’s unbelievable to me that after walking around with this knowledge for the past 30 years or so that it’s potentially useful and maybe even necessary.  I’m glad to help, but let me leave you with one more tidbit.  This one may be the most important, even for Loyola grads.  It’s LOY-ola not LIE-ola.  Please, if you remember anything, that is the one that will make the most difference to any Rambler.  That, and not scratching your fingers on a blackboard.

Ramble on, my friends,

Jim

[pastorhogg]

Cover Story: Inside the Popular, Controversial Bethel Church

Some visitors claim to be healed. Others claim to receive direct words from God. Is it 'real'--or dangerous?

I have seen a man dance holding a translucent scarf, the fabric billowing around his spinning form like a garment made of stars. I have prayed for strangers’ healing from high-blood pressure and unspecified neurological disorders. I have wept with salt-faced abandon as four women prayed over me; I have walked through a “fire tunnel”; I have seen a woman bob in Hasidic fashion over the Bible app on her smartphone.

I experienced all this at the increasingly famous (and, to some, infamous) Bethel Church, and I did so as an evangelical Christian of Reformed persuasion. My parents named me for the Welsh pastor-theologian Martyn Lloyd-Jones. My father is a pastor in the Christian and Missionary Alliance, Jonathan Edwards is one of my guiding lights, Wheaton College is my alma mater, and I attend a Presbyterian church in Toronto where I have never heard anyone speak or pray in tongues.

Yet Bethel has been on my mind since a friend prayed for my healing at a campground in Wisconsin in 2010. She introduced me to the teachings of Bethel’s senior pastor, Bill Johnson, and gave me a few of his books. As Bethel grows, you might very well hear from a few people in your congregation who have traveled to Redding to find out if Bethel is “real”—and who come back proclaiming that revival is under way.

When I set out for Bethel Church—a hub of a global revival movement—I half-expected to discover a rogue organization of hucksters intent on subverting the faith. And I half-expected to discover a community of believers more earnest and devoted to God than anyone I’d ever met. In the end, what I discovered in Redding, California, didn’t fit either narrative neatly.

Bethel Church sits ...

Continue reading...

from Christianity Today Magazine http://ift.tt/2v7tcsM via IFTTT

[simondcox87]

Melvin Banks Had a Dream

An interview with the founder of the largest African American Christian publishing house.

His name may not be familiar to those outside Christian publishing, but few have impacted the church as much as Melvin E. Banks Sr., the founder and chairman of Urban Ministries Inc. (UMI). On May 2 in Colorado Springs at its annual Leadership Summit, the Evangelical Christian Publishers Association (ECPA) presented Banks with the Kenneth N. Taylor Lifetime Achievement Award for more than 50 years of excellence, innovation, integrity, and commitment to making the message of Christ more widely known.

Inspired by Hosea 4:6 where God says, “My people are destroyed from lack of knowledge,” he founded UMI in 1970 to create an African American Christian publishing house that would uniquely serve this audience. Today, UMI thrives as the largest African American Christian media and content provider, serving over 50,000 churches with curriculum, books, magazines, Bible studies, videos, teaching resources, and more.

Banks has been recognized with an honorary doctorate by his alma mater, Wheaton College, where he served as a trustee for many years. He has also been honored as a Moody Bible Institute Alumnus of the year and has been recognized for his achievements by many others, including the History Makers Foundation. His innovative use of video in Vacation Bible School has been widely duplicated, and his work has led to many companies becoming more ethnically and racially diverse in the reach and content of their publishing efforts.

Theon Hill, assistant professor of communication at Wheaton College, sat down with Banks at UMI’s headquarters to learn more about his pioneering vision.

What was your background in publishing and media prior to UMI?

I had very little publishing experience prior to my work with UMI. In high ...

Continue reading...

from http://feeds.christianitytoday.com/~r/christianitytoday/ctmag/~3/7a9K2rAO3LI/melvin-banks-had-dream.html

[americanlibertypac]

50,000 Ask Bernie Sanders to Apologize for Attack on Trump Nominee’s Faith

Over 50,000 individuals so far have signed an online petition asking Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., to apologize for his public attack on the Christian beliefs of President Donald Trump’s nominee for a post in the Office of Management and Budget.

Photo: Gage Skidmore/Flickr CC by SA 2.0

Sanders “responded in anger after Russell Vought, President Trump’s nominee to be deputy director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, answered a question about his belief that salvation is found alone through Jesus Christ,”  the petition drafted by the Family Research Council, a Washington-based conservative policy organization, reads.

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, told The Daily Signal in an interview Tuesday that Sanders’ comments during Vought’s hearing June 7 before the Senate Budget Committee showed intolerance to religious freedom.

“I think what we saw from Bernie Sanders last week was just a blatant display of religious bigotry and intolerance,” Perkins said.

Sanders’ behavior, he said, is offensive to Americans of all backgrounds.

“The American people, whether or not they are people of faith, should just say, ‘He absolutely crossed the line, it should not be tolerated, and someone in his position imposing such a reverse or religious test … should not be accepted,” Perkins said.

The online petition drive, launched June 8, asks Sanders to apologize for the comments he made to Vought about his belief in the Christian doctrine of salvation through Jesus Christ alone.

The petition continues:

By signing this petition, you are asking Senator Sanders to apologize for his bigotry and asking his Senate colleagues to immediately pledge that they will not oppose nominees on the basis of their religious views.

The exchange between Sanders and Vought occurred when the senator questioned the OMB nominee about an article Vought wrote on Muslim theology.

>>> Bernie Sanders Shows the Left’s Refusal to Coexist With Traditional Believers

“You wrote, ‘Muslims do not simply have a deficient theology. They do not know God because they have rejected Jesus Christ, His Son, and they stand condemned.’ Do you believe that that statement is Islamophobic?” Sanders asked.

Vought, 41, responded:

Absolutely not, Senator. I’m a Christian, and I believe in a Christian set of principles based on my faith. That post, as I stated in the questionnaire to this committee, was to defend my alma mater, Wheaton College, a Christian school that has a statement of faith that includes the centrality of Jesus Christ for salvation.

Sanders, 75, cut off Vought at that point, and later said he “is really not someone who this country is supposed to be about.”

It is disturbing that Sanders’ behavior has not seen widespread coverage from long-established media outlets, Perkins told The Daily Signal:

If a conservative did such a thing, the mainstream media would be all over it. But because it is a conservative, evangelical Christian who is being targeted by Sanders, the mainstream media is basically ignoring it. And it shows Sanders’ comfortability, the fact that he felt he could do this in a public hearing in the United States Senate.

>>> Sanders’ Religious Test Goes Against Founders’ Vision

Sanders lost the Democratic nomination for president to Hillary Clinton but remains a leader of the party’s far-left wing. He was raised in the Jewish faith but has described himself as not particularly religious.

“The left has become so emboldened in their religious hostility in the wake of [President Barack] Obama’s administration, and they have the cover of the media,” Perkins said, adding:

This shows the American people how tenuous these freedoms are—our fundamental freedoms, religious freedom, freedom of speech—and that we absolutely must send a message that this will not be tolerated.

This is a guest post by Rachel del Guidice a reporter for The Daily Signal.

[stopkingobama]

50,000 Ask Bernie Sanders to Apologize for Attack on Trump Nominee’s Faith

Over 50,000 individuals so far have signed an online petition asking Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., to apologize for his public attack on the Christian beliefs of President Donald Trump’s nominee for a post in the Office of Management and Budget.

Photo: Gage Skidmore/Flickr CC by SA 2.0

Sanders “responded in anger after Russell Vought, President Trump’s nominee to be deputy director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, answered a question about his belief that salvation is found alone through Jesus Christ,”  the petition drafted by the Family Research Council, a Washington-based conservative policy organization, reads.

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, told The Daily Signal in an interview Tuesday that Sanders’ comments during Vought’s hearing June 7 before the Senate Budget Committee showed intolerance to religious freedom.

“I think what we saw from Bernie Sanders last week was just a blatant display of religious bigotry and intolerance,” Perkins said.

Sanders’ behavior, he said, is offensive to Americans of all backgrounds.

“The American people, whether or not they are people of faith, should just say, ‘He absolutely crossed the line, it should not be tolerated, and someone in his position imposing such a reverse or religious test … should not be accepted,” Perkins said.

The online petition drive, launched June 8, asks Sanders to apologize for the comments he made to Vought about his belief in the Christian doctrine of salvation through Jesus Christ alone.

The petition continues:

By signing this petition, you are asking Senator Sanders to apologize for his bigotry and asking his Senate colleagues to immediately pledge that they will not oppose nominees on the basis of their religious views.

The exchange between Sanders and Vought occurred when the senator questioned the OMB nominee about an article Vought wrote on Muslim theology.

>>> Bernie Sanders Shows the Left’s Refusal to Coexist With Traditional Believers

“You wrote, ‘Muslims do not simply have a deficient theology. They do not know God because they have rejected Jesus Christ, His Son, and they stand condemned.’ Do you believe that that statement is Islamophobic?” Sanders asked.

Vought, 41, responded:

Absolutely not, Senator. I’m a Christian, and I believe in a Christian set of principles based on my faith. That post, as I stated in the questionnaire to this committee, was to defend my alma mater, Wheaton College, a Christian school that has a statement of faith that includes the centrality of Jesus Christ for salvation.

Sanders, 75, cut off Vought at that point, and later said he “is really not someone who this country is supposed to be about.”

It is disturbing that Sanders’ behavior has not seen widespread coverage from long-established media outlets, Perkins told The Daily Signal:

If a conservative did such a thing, the mainstream media would be all over it. But because it is a conservative, evangelical Christian who is being targeted by Sanders, the mainstream media is basically ignoring it. And it shows Sanders’ comfortability, the fact that he felt he could do this in a public hearing in the United States Senate.

>>> Sanders’ Religious Test Goes Against Founders’ Vision

Sanders lost the Democratic nomination for president to Hillary Clinton but remains a leader of the party’s far-left wing. He was raised in the Jewish faith but has described himself as not particularly religious.

“The left has become so emboldened in their religious hostility in the wake of [President Barack] Obama’s administration, and they have the cover of the media,” Perkins said, adding:

This shows the American people how tenuous these freedoms are—our fundamental freedoms, religious freedom, freedom of speech—and that we absolutely must send a message that this will not be tolerated.

This is a guest post by Rachel del Guidice a reporter for The Daily Signal.

[tomperanteau]

New article has been published on The Daily Digest

New article has been published on http://www.thedailydigest.org/2017/06/11/trump-pick-berned-at-stake-for-standing-by-jesus/

Trump pick 'Berned' at stake for standing by Jesus

(BREITBART) — President Donald Trump’s pick for the Office of Management and Budget’s deputy director post was grilled not for his budgetary principles, but for his Christian faith by former Democrat presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders.

During a hearing of the Senate Committee on the budget this week, Sanders essentially told nominee Russell Vought that Christians are bigoted and, therefore, should not serve in public office.

Sanders pointed to an article Vought wrote in January 2016 about Dr. Larycia Hawkins, a political science professor at Wheaton College, Vought’s alma mater, who was placed on administrative leave after wearing a hijab to support Muslims. Hawkins had consulted with the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) prior to donning the hijab. In a Facebook post, she had also suggested that Christians and Muslims worship the same God.

[READ MORE HERE]