Tag Archives: conservative evangelicals

#NeverTrump Evangelicals & Trendy Anti-Racism

The year was 2000 A.D., the Year of our Lord, and the very first November I would be eligible to vote for U.S. President and local elections, but most importantly, VOTING FOR PRESIDENT! The 2000 presidential campaign is a memorable for some people because of all of the dangling chads left in Florida and one candidate winning the popular vote while the other candidate “earning” the most votes from the electoral college. For me, the 2000 Presidential election was one of my first theological lessons on race. In Charisma Magazine, there was a survey taken where the results showed a split between White Christians and Black Christians. White Christians were claiming then Texas governor George W. Bush was “God’s man” as they readied up America for a “revival.” Black Christians, according to the survey didn’t really have a notion of “God’s man” but they did prefer to vote for former Vice President Al Gore.

What was wrong? Were these two groups reading different Bibles? What could have been the difference? One disturbing story out of Texas during W’s tenure as governor was his appalling silence about the lynching of James Byrd in 1998. Black communities were the lone group that decried this silence. Bush’s only response was that his administration pushed for the death penalty but is human sacrifice necessary to restore order? Capital punishment did not take away the hatred and racist practices of groups like the Sons of Confederate Veterans, who mobilized during Bush’s predecessors’ three terms to get the Confederate flag on TX license plates. John William King, one of Byrd’s murderers, was in fact, a card-carrying member of a Neo-Confederate White Supremacist gang. A governor failed to listen to the cries of a marginalized people group, the people then continue to suffer. This isn’t a question about whether or not George W. Bush is racist. The question is, what did he do when confronted with the problem of systemic racism, and the victims of racial injustice? Nothing.

Fast forward to 2016. The world is a different place, it has changed, some for the better, and some for the not-so-good. Evangelical Christians in the post-Bush/Cheney era are more cautious with their words, after all of the negative representation from movies like Saved! And Easy A, they care deeply about their image as not seeming too odd. Although he was from a mainline protestant Episcopalian family, Evangelicals accepted George W. Bush as their very own, but as the markets crashed in 2008, discontent and buyer’s remorse was real in White evangelicalism. Who wants to be associated with an unpopular President anyhow? Not only that, but Black Christians and other religious adherents have found newer voices in the fight over white supremacy in places such as the Southern Baptist Convention. A few weeks ago The SBC has denounced the Confederate flag. My high-school self would have done ten back flips. Last week, the Presbyterian Church of America made an apology for racism, both new and old. , repenting for its failure to ‘ lovingly confront our brothers and sisters concerning racial sins and personal bigotry.” ‘
Another fascinating development among evangelicals in the field of politics has been the loud and resounding “NO!” of the #NeverTrump movement . Alan Noble of The Atlantic put it this way,

“Suppose you believe the presidential frontrunners are unfit for office — so unfit, in fact, that they are a threat to the moral, political, and social fabric of our nation. For the past three decades, conservative evangelical Christians in America have felt this way about Democratic nominees, particularly because of their stances on abortion and, more recently, religious liberty.”

Donald Trump, you see, on positions such as abortion and traditional marriage is just as bad as a Democratic candidate, and what’s worse, is that Trump is opposed to traditional conservative orthodoxy beliefs such as free market capitalism. Drumpf’s political solutions are authoritarian, and his speeches, tweets, and campaign contain overtly racist ideas. The impetus of the #NeverTrump movement is two-fold: one is many evangelicals principled stands for traditional family values, and the other is the objection to Trump’s shock-jock ways, saying racist and sexist things and then back-tracking on them the next day. It’s not really about Trump’s inexperience or his lack of grasp of any and every issue. Whenever they get a chance, #NeverTrump evangelicals take the opportunity whenever they can to differentiate themselves from Trump’s “authenticity.” It’s a new anti-racism, “Trump’s a Bigot!” “Trump is racist. #NeverTrump.”

Never-Trump Evangelicals are not the only persons joining the fight against racism. Bernie Sanders’ supporters love to remind Black people that Bernie Sanders “walked” with Martin Luther King, Jr. Bernie Sanders is against mass incarceration (who isn’t nowadays?), and that the 50 states locking up thousands of Black and Latinx people is the fault of their favorite scapegoat, Hillary Rodham Clinton. Yes, you guys, the Clintons were in charge of all 50 state prison systems [ enter sarcasm here]. One BernieBro in a “conversation” this week even had the gall to call me “a Super Predator” as a reminder of something Hillary already apologized for; another BernieBro provided a survey from the Berner circle jerk as “evidence” that Bernie supporters are way less racist than any other voters. That’s exactly why Bernie had all-white volunteer groups recruiting Black voters and held all white rallies at Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Even white Hillary Clinton supporters see themselves as forces of anti-racism. If Black people and other People of Color vote overwhelmingly for your candidate, you are now the defender of multiculturalism. Place a picture of Barack Obama as your AVI on Twitter, and now you, too, can be a Social Justice Warrior!

Don’t get me wrong. It is good that people are not only recognizing that racism still exists in the U.S., but also that they are getting bold it in calling it out. I want to go back to the basic premise of Noble’s piece for a moment, the idea that Donald Trump, like Democrats past and present are threats to the “moral, political, and social” fabric of our nation in the mind of White evangelicalism. Probably from a majority culture perspective, the U.S.’s social fabric may have been at one point stable and perhaps picturesque, perhaps a time before legalized abortions and the LGBTQIA movement. As a racial realist and a Christian realist informed by history, the nation’s fabric was sewn by enslaved blacks laboring in plantation fields and built on death of children and the destruction of families of African and First Nations descent. No social or religious construction of social cohesion that glosses over histories of oppressions can have any integrity. The failure of a more honest perspective from #NeverTrump Evangelicals is part of the reason why their denunciations of Drumpf ring hollow.

On one hand, conservativism blames “individualism” “the sovereign individual” (right?) for today’s problems and various groups requesting their individual rights, but on the other hand, conservatives address the issue of race and racism as an individual sin. The PCA is repenting for individuals who had racial prejudice; the SBC is protesting the Confederate flag now in the year 2016 because one individual, Dylan Roof murdered nine Black persons in a historic black church. The conservative camp stresses individual, interpersonal acts of addressing racism because racism is more about personal bias because of conservative institutions’ and thinkers’ commitment to rugged individualism.

I’ve made the case elsewhere that White Supremacy is a social disease, it’s an institution that involves practices and systems and is not easily explained as simply individual prejudices. Donald Trump is more than just a demagogue, the rise of Trump is a symptom. Donald Trump simply took advantage of antiBlackness, racial animosity, and xenophobia that was already being pandered to within Conservative institutions. Drumpf is the crazy uncle that conservatives don’t want at the dinner table. Conservatives brought him to the table, now they are upset because they have to be responsible for him.

Like I said in one of the previous paragraphs, conservatives, like any other group, are more concerned with optics. It looks awkward when there are #allwhitepanels discussing race or #allmalepanels discussing gender at evangelical events. Some younger evangelicals may have hope that if conservatives avoid this awful news site, or we keep all the crazy uncles like Donald Trump or a Douglas Wilson away, sprinkle a few token minorities, they can make conservativism more appealing to outsiders. That may be a temporary solution, but it does nothing to solve the real issues of social inequality. Did it ever occur to conservatives that perhaps it’s not extremists that’s the problem, but maybe it’s just the ideology and institutions themselves?

Progressives from the majority culture also seem to have a difficult time understanding how systemic racism works. There’s a local seminary that sees itself as progressive and forward thinking and it even had a chapel service dedicated to Black Lives Matter. However, semester after semester, the school’s population gets more and more culturally homogenous. Green Party Candidate, Dr. Jill Stein, who some people have claimed is an anti-racist, “more peaceful” (not pacifist, I mind you) alternative to the Democratic Party, celebrated Brexit while Green parties in the U.K opposed it, she and her followers patted themselves on the back for attending an all white Juneteenth celebration, and now blames “Clintonism” for the rise of Trump. Stein, who markets herself on social media as a “white anti-racist ally” is just really showing her real cards, as someone co-opting the labor of People of Color all the while, in her actual praxis, promoting color-blind racism.

A leading socialist magazine Jacobin, like Stein, continues to promote a narrative of white saviorism, contending that anything but racism is responsible for Brexit and Trump. Forums such as Jacobin have been known downplay the importance of identity politics, preferring to make class as the one marker that counts and thus making them just as susceptible to White Supremacy as their conservative counterparts. For white progressives, socioeconomic status operates as a substitute for the conservative’s “social fabric” or the “natural law” of the land, an all-encompassing concept meant to promote cultural hegemony and a suppression of difference.

My goal for this essay as an intellectual exercise was to push for the idea that anti-racism just isn’t some fad; it’s a long-term labor of love that requires us to act and maybe react on a daily basis. In addition, as one of my friends has suggested, anti-White Supremacist praxis and an ideology can operate within contrasting systems of power, which I would include religious communities, established institutions and publications on the Right and Left, and even institutions of higher learning. Anti-racism efforts are at least three centuries old so the key is to have one eye on the past, and one eye on the present. Ask yourself, “where did the idea that this culture or that culture is inferior to mine own? Where did this cultural norm come from?” If your predominantly White institution is seeking to be more “inclusive,” think of which barriers in that place make it less hospitable to People of Color. Whether you see yourself as radical left or traditionalist right, there is anti-racist work for you to do. As for the fascist threat that is Donald Drumpf , for me, there is one viable #NeverTrump movement left, and it’s #ImWithHer.

Conservative Ecumenism and Dominionist Politics

In the May 2015 issue of the Atlantic, Ross Douthat asked “will Pope Francis break the Church?” By this he meant, will the current Pope’s activities push conservative out of Roman Catholicism or cause deep controversy. Douthat asked many important questions, but his analysis breaks down within the North American context. Though very informative on papal politics and it’s relation to progressivism, Douthat misses that, within this context, conservativism often leads to denominational de-evolution. A proper amount of progressive utopianism is needed to keep any religion alive.

A common talking point of more conservative minded individuals is that the “creeping liberalism” of mainline Protestant denominations is a source of evangelical revival and mainline diminishment; thereforethe remedy to the decline of membership within mainline protestant denominations is for them to increase their political conservativism, for example regarding issues surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and homosexuality.There is some truth to this, mainline denominations are indeed losing large portions of their membership to conservative evangelical churches, but it does beg deeper examination. This analysis forgets to include the opposite variable into the equation. Namely, the influence of political conservativism on denominations.

Why is it relatively easy for many conservative non-denominationalists to change their home church in the blink of an eye? Many denominations have lost their doctrinal specifics in favor of appealing to the evangelical subculture, canonizing the Benham Brothers and Tim Tebow as examples of true Christian character and upholding the Duggar family as the ideal Christian household. Effectively, when many individuals leave their old mainline denomination for an overwhelmingly Republican evangelical congregation they have already been de-denominationalized. The novel doctrines of their old faith have already been put onto the backburners and conservative political culture has already been made the vehicle by which faith is expressed.

Consider the Holiness-Wesleyan tradition. Despite having a history well entrenched into the Midwestern landscape, the Methodist context of the Holiness-Wesleyan tradition is slowly eroding. A 2012 study by the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate that revealed that Holiness-Wesleyans have some of the lowest retention rates in the entire country rang alarms at my mother’s church; to the point that the pastor preached about it on Sunday. He was concerned that other Christian faiths, according to the study, were more successful in sustaining their existence, so he chastised the entire congregation for not reciting the Nicene Creed enough during services.

From personal experience, one of the leading causes of this are that many are de-denominationalized by their own denomination’s culture; then they jump ship and join evangelical churches dominated by conservative politics. Functionally speaking, there is already little difference between the two; most Wesleyans treat novel doctrines such as Entire Sanctification with a passing glance and there is no hope of reconstructing the Methodist-Episcopal approach to faith. In aesthetic, theology, and daily life, the shared culture of the Religious Right allows individuals to chuck the Holiness-Wesleyan tradition and other Christian traditions for the seemingly more ecumenical evangelical churches that attract members from multiple denominational backgrounds, including that of the Catholic Church. When denominational specifics are disregarded, often the Religious Right replace what is missing.

We must realize that the North American Religious Right serves as an ecumenical movement between conservatives within numerous denominations. The very notion of traditionalist Roman Catholics getting along with Southern Baptists or historically black denominations with socially conservative leanings co-operating with denominations with a history of white supremacy is living proof of this. The success of individuals such as Jerry Farwell and Paul Weyrich is that they surpassed previous denominational feuds to create a new voting bloc, one centered on getting social conservatives into public offices. Weyrich, a Byzantine Catholic, Republican strategist, and founder of ALEC, was successful in helping the Republican Party appeal social conservatives across denominational lines and thereby creating a new identity; one that put the culture war in the middle of the conservative identity. To quote his 1990 speech to the University Club of DC, “our agenda will effectively polarize the political debate and expose the left-wing agenda as the product of a fringe element hostile to our culture and our civilization.”

Of course, Farwell and Weyrich drew upon many sources to construct their worldview. They merely mainlined already existing notions within Christian dominionism. Christian dominionism is the belief that God desires Christians rise to power in civil systems so that the nations will be governed by biblical law. The people who adhere to its ideas are particular groups of conservative, politically active Christians who believed in having dominion, which meant a takeover, in the social civic and governmental spheres.  It starts off with emphasis of being Christians first and then live out the political implications of that. The most influential form of dominionism is Christian reconstructionism.

Christian reconstructionism arose out of conservative Presbyterianism (Reformed and Orthodox), to proposes that contemporary application of the laws of Old Testament Israel, or “Biblical Law,” is the basis for reconstructing society toward the Kingdom of God on earth. Dominionism, specifically reconstructionism, started out as a view being primarily held by small group of theologically conservative scholars and pastors, at the level of being of a sub culture. It also supports the idea of theocracy and social hierarchies. Its potent ideas about having dominion over social, civil and governmental spheres, having the Bible being the governing text for all aspects of life, and constructing a revisionist Christian and world history that explaining that history is predestined from creation until kingdom of God in on earth became very attractive to far right Christians that need a framework for their worldviews. Being a decentralized, covert movement of ideas led to a creation of networks and coalitions of churches across various denominations that are influenced by dominionism and its framework as well as various networks of Christian think tanks such as the Christian Coalition, and Operation Rescue.

What makes dominionism powerful and attractive to those Christians who are the on right was it gave some form of internal logic and narrative to how can their politics be a means to manifest Kingdom of God on Earth. It can also gave of a type of rationale and framework to justify the belief that they can control the principalities and powers to stop whatever is considered ‘evil’ or ‘ungodly’ if they are in the position of political and social leadership on their terms without examining the inherent merit of their politics. For instance, Frances Schaffer and his theological work advocated on how to do social action informed by a Christian worldview when the issue of Roe vs. Wade came about. His theological work from the 60s to the 80s was deeply influenced by Christian dominionism. His work sparked a renewed interest in political activism among various conservative evangelicals and fundamentalists. In spite of Schaffer’sintelligence and cultural engagement,  some of his work plays on the reinforcing the problematic dichotomy between the secular and the religious, the implicit assumption of some political views being more “Christian” than others by default without examining the merits, and very limited understanding of sociopolitical and economic thought and theory. Through Christian dominionism, the Christian right got the intellectual and theological framework to mobilize. It also indirectly catalyzes other Christians from other denominations who are distraught the changes within their denominations to participate in the culture wars.

 

Despite how sincere we may be, ecumenism is a two edged sword. Many join politically conservative evangelical churches precisely because they view it as a means of getting around denominational in-fighting. Douthat is right that Pope Francis is a test to the Roman Catholic Church as a whole, but let’s not forget that conservativism in the States has been breaking mainline denominations ever since the rise of the Religious Right due to its ecumenical character, cutting across worlds by creating a common conservative political discourse.

 

 

Xeres Villanueva wears many different hats between a budding entrepreneur, a comrade and a social activist for various social justice issues. She worked with InsideOut Community Arts as a mentor, an art education organization dedicated to empower middle school students. She was involved with various groups, past and present, such as Asian Pacific American Student Organization, Gay Christian Network, St. Monica Catholic Community Gay and Lesbian Outreach, Food Not Bombs and Stop the Traffik. Xeres is currently a part of network of social justice thinkers and practitioners called Asian American Pacific Islanders Christians for Social Justice and Jesus for Revolutionaries.
She also wrote an Oral Oratory speech “Living Miracle”, which won the 2005 Spirit of Hope Award. She takes delight in reading, cooking, and watching live music performances.

POLITICS Editor Nathan Lewis Lawrence is a biracial graduate student, world traveler, and jujitsu enthusiast from Lancaster, Ohio. He received his bachelor’s degree in Security studies from Tiffin University in Tiffin, Ohio and received a M.A. in Peace and Conflict studies at the Department of International Relations at Hacettepe University. Currently, he attends the School of Conflict Analysis and Resolution at George Mason University. Check out his personal blog Taming Cynicism.

Photo description: The image is of two flags, the American flag, red/white/blue and the Christian Nation/Dominionist flag, white with a blue square, and a red cross inside of it. Photo found on Flickr. 

Will ISIS Bring About Christian Unity?

 Nathan Lewis Lawrence is a biracial graduate student, world traveler, and jujitsu enthusiast from Lancaster, Ohio. He received his bachelor’s degree in Security studies from Tiffin University in Tiffin, Ohio and received a M.A. in Peace and Conflict studies at the Department of International Relations at Hacettepe University. Currently, he attends the School of Conflict Analysis and Resolution at George Mason University. Check out his personal blog Taming Cynicism.

There is no question that Christians around the world ought to pay attention to the suffering of our brothers and sisters in the Middle East due to their oppression by the Islamic State.  The Apostle Paul’s exhortation in 1st Corinthians 12 speaks to the universal solidarity that the Body of Christ possesses by the power of the Holy Spirit. Ideally, Christians should be united in their mourning of the recent martyrdom of 21 Coptic Christians in Libya and for the 100 Christians in Syria being kidnapped by the Islamic State. We ought to follow the example of Bishop Angaelos and pray for our brothers and sisters-in-Christ. They were a sacrifice to draw attention to the suffering of those oppressed by the Islamic State.

“I learned a long time ago that when one prays, one prays for the best outcome, not  knowing what that outcome would be. Of course, I prayed that they would be safe. But I also prayed that, when the moment came, they would have the peace and strength to be  able to get through it. It doesn’t change my view of God that these 21 men died in this        way. They were sacrificed, but so much has come out of it. They brought the imminent   dangers to marginalized peoples, not just Christians, but Yazidis and others in the Middle East, to the attention of the whole world.”

One can add that they are also a sacrifice to help generate a conversation on inter-church relations. This horrific event offers us an opportunity to discuss the large relational gap between liturgical forms of faith and free churchversions of the Christian faith.  Many American protestant denominations and non-denominational organizations in the United States have chimed in on the killings. Most notably, leaders within the Southern Baptist Convention expressed solidarity with the Coptic and wider Middle Eastern Christian community. This caused some controversy since shortly before the murders, the convention recognized the Coptic community as an “unreached” people group. “Unreached” is this context means any nation with not enough Christians to witness. Arguing against calling the Coptic faith Christian, the Baptist blog the Pulpit & Pen points out that “the SBC’s International Mission Board has scrubbed all articles relating to Coptic Christians and their status of being unreached, lost, or in need of evangelism.” In response to this, the Southern Baptist Convention’s Center for Great Commission Studies has issued an official response to the recent controversy:

“Southern Baptists have not suddenly changed our definition of what it takes to become a  Christian. However, it is indeed possible for a cultural group, a people group, to bear the name ‘Christian’ yet remain almost entirely unreached. It is also possible for individuals within an unreached people group to be genuine Christians. In such cases, we are dependent on what we can see of their individual witnesses.”

 

The Southern Baptist Convention is not the only organization to chime in on the murders. The website 21martyrs.com is the product of over one dozen American organizations and aims to honor the memory of the 21 martyrs by encouraging believers to pray every day for 40 days. Some notable organizations involved include Focus On the Family, Barna Group, the NHCLC, and The Justice Conference. Out of all of those involved, not one organization is Coptic or even from the wider Orthodox community. It only seems appropriate to recognize the special place the Coptic Church has. Basic civility seems to imply that there should be representatives from the community impacted by an atrocity.

From my personal experience, conservative evangelical sympathy for the Coptic community can be quite shallow. After I revealed that I liked liturgical worship, I received numerous concerns from evangelical friends for my soul. I had one tell me that iconography was demonic and harmful to my spiritual health. That same friend often talked about the violence the Coptic community faced during the Egyptian revolution. When I revealed to him that the Coptic community was theologically closer to myself than he, he replied “well I guess they died for nothing” and stopped sharing material regarding their plight.

No doubts that there are non-Christians within the Coptic community. The Coptic Orthodox Church makes no claim that every single soul that passes through its door will be saved nor does the Coptic Orthodox Church claim that every single person born within the Coptic ethnicity will obtain salvation. Salvation is open to all of humankind. As an African-American convert to Eastern Orthodox Christianity, I find such a misunderstanding of the theology of the Oriental Orthodox community to be disgusting. In fact, it has been condemned as heresy to teach that one’s ethnicity can somehow gain someone salvation. For example, in regards to Eastern Orthodoxy, ethno-phyletism or the confusion of nation and church was specifically denounced as heretical by Pan-Orthodox Synod of Constantinople in 1872. Simply put, to claim that the Orthodox churches claim that there is a one-to-one relationship between any ethnicity and salvation is a serious distortion of doctrine.

Ultimately, what many Southern Baptists along with many well-meaning conservative evangelicals are claiming is not that there are absolutely no Christians in the Coptic community. Rather, they are claiming that there is a low percentage of “true Christians” in the Coptic community, enough to list their community as non-Christian. The problematic category of “unreached people group” in this instance borders on following a “No-True Scotsman” fallacy. The tragedy is that it seems to be that only under the circumstances of martyrdom that faith of people who practice liturgical worship is genuine. Such a line of thought is common among free church Protestants who insist that members of liturgical churches can only obtain salvation on accident when they unknowingly practice their Protestantism. We must admit the analysis from Pulpit & Pen is correct inthat, historically, many within the Baptist, Evangelical, and non-denominational traditions have denied that liturgical forms of faith are even valid. Simply affirming the divinity of Christ and Trinity are not enough for some to recognize the Christian character of Catholicism, Orthodoxy, and other liturgical forms of faith.

We must remember that, in the U.S. American context, free church refusal to recognize the legitimacy of liturgical forms of faith has had a cost. Historically, liturgical forms of worship were concentrated among old world immigrant groups that found it difficult to adjust to life in the United States and Latin-Americans. This made them easy targets for nativist organizations that distinguished between their “true” Christianity and the “cultural” Christianity of foreigners. Claims that President Obama is Muslim channel similar conservative protestant claims that JFK was a threat to the constitutional order since he was Catholic. Conflict and at times violent conflict between Christian denominations is real and must be acknowledged.

Conservative Republicans in the United States use the plight of the Coptic, Assyrian, and other Christian communities in the Middle East to argue for what can only be called total war and unrestrained support for the state of Israel, in direct opposition to the words of Bishop Angaelos’ words that we should be “very wary of them [the 21 martyrs] being used to make a political point.”These people did not shed a tear when several hundred thousand Christians left Iraq after the US invasion to flee the fighting between American troops and the insurgency. I am not suggesting moral equivalence, rather that protecting Middle Eastern Christians or their interests is clearly not the motiving factor in the foreign policy stances of conservative Republicans. The closest many Republican politicians have come to experiencing the ethos of Eastern Christianity is through far-right pundits such as Maronite Brigitte Gabriel (who openly sympathizes with Phalang fascist militias) and Greek Catholic Robert Spencer (who mass murderer Ander Breivik cites in his personal manifesto).

Some conservative concerns for Middle Eastern Christians are best understood as a reflection of their own persecution complex, hence why they sometimes make wild analogies that compare the culture war between themselves and liberals to oppression of Middle Eastern Christians. For example, Scott Walker’s recent comparison of union protestors to the Islamic State implies that conservatives are analogous to Middle Eastern Christians. Such comparisons are more akin to the ravings of a mad man than the words of a pious saint only concerned for the well-being of his brothers-in-Christ.

In all likelihood, the recent killings in Libya will not be the last time such a discussion will arise again, but we must resist conservative evangelical co-opting of the suffering of Christians in the Middle East and instead use it as an opportunity to discuss differences betweenChristian communities. The narrative that the 21 martyrs in Libya somehow fit into the American Culture War is just as dangerous and inaccurate as the claim that the Coptic faith does not fit into Christianity. It may be shocking to some, but Christianity is more than a praise and worship band playing reworded love songs to a crowd full of middle class Americans in a church located in an urban-sprawl. To use it as a point of reference for an instance of martyrdom on a different continent is the height of hubris. By reflecting on the theological consequences of the 21 martyrs as well as the Christian witness of the specific community in which they were a part of, we can create a space for mutual understanding.

Photo Description: (Found on Flickr, Tomasz Szustek photographer; Coptic orthodox Christians were protesting outside Irish Parliment against killing Copts in Egypt, on October 15, 2011. One protestor is holding up an Egyptian flag and a cross, another is carrying a bullhorn. One sign behind both men reads ‘Stop persecuting Christians in Egypt’)