World Religions News

null / Credit: Puwadon Sang/Shutterstock

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Jun 30, 2025 / 16:18 pm (CNA).

New polling from the Associated Press (AP) NORC Center for Public Affairs Research has found that U.S. adults hold “nuanced views about the role of religion in public schools.”

While the majority of adults, about 58%, say they support religious chaplains providing services in public schools, only 40% say they believe teachers should be allowed to lead a class in prayer, according to data from the survey conducted June 5–9.

The survey contained polling of 1,158 U.S. adults in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

“More people oppose than support policies that would allow religious schools to become tax-funded public charter schools, but there is about equal support and opposition for a policy that would allow school vouchers to be used at private or religious schools,” the survey found.

Results for the AP-NORC polling come after Pew Research Center found that 52% of U.S. adults support allowing Chrisian prayer in public schools as debates about the issue continue across the country.

Though the majority supports designated religious chaplains serving in public schools, 55% of U.S. adults in the AP survey said they did not believe teachers should be allowed to lead a public school class in prayer. 

Sixty percent said public schools should not be allowed to hold mandatory private prayer and religious reading. 

The survey found that regardless of partisan alignment, “attitudes about the role of religion in school are often shared across religious groups, especially white evangelical Christians and non-white Protestants.” 

“White evangelical Christians, non-white Protestants, and Catholics are all more likely than those who are not affiliated with a religion to approve of religious chaplains providing support services, teachers leading prayer in class, and mandatory periods for private prayer and religious reading at public schools,” the report stated, noting that mainline Protestants responded similarly to those without religious affiliation about prayer periods and religious chaplains in public schools. 

Overall, the survey said that “roughly a quarter to a third of the public lack firm opinions” about additional issues regarding religion and public education, including taxpayer-funded vouchers and vaccines.

While polling was less conclusive on these matters because nearly one-third of polled Americans had no opinion, of those who expressed opinions, more respondents said they oppose religious exemptions for childhood vaccines required for public schools. More respondents also said they oppose allowing religious schools to become taxpayer-funded charter schools. 

“People are roughly split on their support or opposition to tax-funded vouchers that help parents pay for tuition for their children to attend private or religious schools instead of public schools,” the report said, noting that Catholics are among the religious groups that were more likely to support taxpayer-funded vouchers, religious exemptions, and religious charter schools.

(RNS) — The executive committee of North Carolina’s Democratic Party passed a strongly worded resolution Saturday (June 28), calling for an end to military aid, weapons shipments and logistical support to Israel, angering many North Carolina Jews.

The resolution is believed to be among the first state chapters of the Democratic Party to pass similar measures seeking to restrict weapons to Israel. Wisconsin and Washington state Democratic parties passed similar measures. The vote in North Carolina passed by a slim margin, 161-151.

The resolution refers to what human rights groups have called an “apartheid” (or state-sponsored segregation) against Palestinians and credible evidence of a genocide in Gaza, as documented by the International Court of Justice. Israel denies those accusations. 

It also cites polling showing that 62% of young Democrats support an arms embargo against Israel. The resolution suggests military funding to Israel would be better used to address the needs of Americans in the United States.

Rabbis across the state said they felt the resolution, which has been years in the making, is one-sided. It makes no mention of the Hamas attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, that killed about 1,200 people or the 251 hostages taken to Gaza or the violence directed toward pro-Israel Jews in the United States since the war began. On Monday, Colorado prosecutors said an 82-year-old Jewish woman died from wounds sustained in a firebombing attack against Jewish protesters in Boulder, Colorado, earlier this month.

“For many in the Jewish community, this framing is not only inaccurate, but also deeply painful because it overlooks the trauma of Oct. 7, because it overlooks the ongoing threats to Israeli and Jewish civilians here in the United States, because it disregards so much of the emotional historical connection that many Jews feel towards Israel even as they support Palestinian rights and mourn the loss of life in Gaza,” said Rabbi Asher Knight of Temple Beth El in Charlotte, North Carolina’s largest synagogue.

Rabbis also said they had not yet had a chance to figure out a concerted response, since the resolution was adopted by the Democratic Party’s executive committee on Shabbat, and most were unaware of it until Sunday.

The resolution comes at a time when the Democratic Party’s stance on Israel is evolving, with younger generations increasingly critical of Israel and its prolonged war in Gaza, which has killed upwards of 56,000 Palestinians and leveled the coastal strip. Just last week, a vocal critic of Israel and supporter of Palestinian rights won New York City’s Democratic mayoral primary. 

RELATED: Zohran Mamdani’s Muslim faith quickly targeted after his victory in NYC mayoral primary

Many Democrats feel the United States is complicit in Israel’s war. The country has long been the leading recipient of U.S. military aid, which, since the start of the Israel-Hamas war in October 2023, has amounted to about $18 billion dollars, according to October 2024 data.

“This resolution is the foundation of a movement within the Party,” said Reem Subei, chair of the North Carolina Democratic Party’s Arab Caucus and vice chair of the Progressive Caucus, in a statement. “We’re building something durable, rooted in compassion for all people and a refusal to be silent in the face of injustice. We aspire toward a future where taxpayer dollars are invested in the needs of our own communities: healthcare, education, infrastructure, and safety here in North Carolina.”

Rabbi Fred Guttman, a retired rabbi of Temple Emanuel in Greensboro, North Carolina, who served on the executive committee of the state’s Democratic Party until May, said the committee has long held anti-Israel views. When it tried to adopt a similar resolution a few years ago, Jews on the committee responded by forming a Jewish caucus. As soon as they did, Muslim and Arab caucuses were also formed.

“This resolution does nothing to help elect Democrats in our state,” Guttman said. “It’s just a way to try to bash Israel for propaganda purposes and to do so in a very extreme and one-sided way.”

Some NC Jews added that the resolution’s demands seemed unrealistic . It calls for the embargo to continue “until Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and B’tselem certify that Israel is no longer engaged in apartheid rule.”

“That’s unusual and arguably a pretty pretty unserious threshold that feels very performative rather than actually constructive,” said Knight.

The chairperson of the state Democratic Party’s Jewish Caucus declined to be interviewed Monday.

“It’s a premature resolution,” said Rabbi Lucy Dinner, retired rabbi of Raleigh’s Temple Beth Or. “It is indicative of what we’ve seen from the Democratic Party over the last several years, and it is not a surprise.”

RELATED: JVP Chicago members attempt indefinite fast to draw attention to Gaza starvation crisis

Credit: anonymous/Shutterstock

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Jun 30, 2025 / 15:47 pm (CNA).

A coalition of 20 American Catholic bishops and religious leaders from other faiths has signed on to a letter urging lawmakers to vote against a proposed budget bill because of provisions to increase funding for immigration enforcement.

“From our various faith perspectives, the moral test of a nation is how it treats those most in need of support,” the letter read. “In our view, this legislation will harm the poor and vulnerable in our nation, to the detriment of the common good.”

The letter’s signatories included Cardinal Robert McElroy of the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C., and Cardinal Joseph Tobin of the Archdiocese of Newark, New Jersey. Phoenix Bishop John Dolan, Seattle Archbishop Paul Etienne, St. Louis Archbishop Mitchell Rozanski, and Sacramento, California, Bishop Jaime Soto were also among those who signed.

In addition to the bishops, other signatories to the letter included the leadership team of the Sisters of Mercy of the Americas. Some Lutheran, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Muslim, and Jewish faith leaders also signed the letter.

“Our faith organizations have long favored the creation of legal avenues for migration and a legalization program for immigrants who have lived in the U.S. for years and contributed their hard work to our economy,” the letter stated. “We believe the adoption of these policies, instead of the implementation of a mass deportation campaign, would not only benefit immigrant workers and their families but be in the best interest of our nation.”

The budget reconciliation bill, called the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” includes a funding hike for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection. The proposal includes money earmarked for deportations, hiring more ICE and border patrol agents, the construction of a border wall, and various other immigration enforcement measures.

An earlier version of the bill would have penalized states for offering Medicaid benefits to immigrants who are in the country illegally, but this was removed from the current Senate version under consideration. Other proposed Medicaid changes, including work requirements for able-bodied recipients, remain in the proposal.

“We believe that the changes made by the U.S. Senate to the legislation are insufficient and do not significantly mitigate its adverse effects,” the letter read.

The letter criticized funding for “a mass deportation campaign,” which they said “will separate U.S. families, harm U.S.-citizen and immigrant children, and sow chaos in local communities.” It warned of “immigration raids across the nation,” which authors said would harm “hardworking immigrant families essential to our economy.”

According to the letter, the funding boost could also harm faith communities. The authors noted that the government “has removed places of worship from its sensitive locations list, allowing ICE agents to enter them for enforcement purposes.”

“We have already witnessed a reduction in attendance at many of our religious services in our denominations, as the threat of enforcement has deterred many families from practicing their faith,” the letter attested.

Additionally, the letter expressed concerns about the proposed border wall between the United States and Mexico, which the authors wrote “will drive migrants into the most remote regions of the border and lead to an increase in migrant deaths. It also would hurt the local environment along the border and force desperate asylum-seekers seeking safety to increasingly rely on human smugglers.”

The authors of the letter also criticized proposed reforms to Medicaid and food assistance programs, saying they would harm “low-income citizens and legal residents, including asylum-seekers and refugees, driving them deeper into poverty.”

Andrew Arthur, a former immigration judge and current fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), criticized the interfaith letter in an interview with CNA. He said the letter supports “amnesty” for immigrants who are in the country illegally.

CIS labels itself as a “low-immigration, pro-immigrant” think tank. The group is aligned with many of President Donald Trump’s immigration policies.

“They don’t want any immigration enforcement because they want to legalize the status of everyone in the country illegally,” Arthur, who is Catholic, told CNA.

Arthur also balked at the suggestion of immigration raids at places of worship, saying: “They never actually reference any real enforcement actions taking place in any Catholic churches.” He said it’s possible that a dangerous criminal could be targeted for enforcement at a church but that “it’s not like they’re going to sweep through Sunday Mass looking for people.”

On the subject of the border wall, Arthur said a barrier would “deter people from coming into the United States illegally.” He noted the high rates of migrants who already hire smugglers, saying they “put their lives and safety in the hands of criminals” and that a border wall makes it “less likely that people are going to come” illegally with this method or any other method.

To prove his loyalty to his party, and no doubt to fend off challenges from Mamdani supporters (such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez), Sen. Schumer has chosen to join them rather than fight them.

The post Schumer Flips on Antisemitism appeared first on Jewish Journal.

(RNS) — Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that parents have a right to withdraw their children from public school classes when stories with LGBTQ+ themes are being discussed. 

Writing for the court’s 6-3 conservative supermajority, Justice Samuel Alito used as an example “Uncle Bobby’s Wedding,” a book that, according to Alito, “presents a specific, if subtle, message about marriage. It asserts that two people can get married, regardless of whether they are of the same or the opposite sex, so long as they ‘love each other.’ That view is now accepted by a great many Americans, but it is directly contrary to the religious principles that the parents in this case wish to instill in their children.”

In a dissent signed by the court’s three liberals, Justice Sonia Sotomayor pointed out that the decision would have the effect of permitting students to opt out of any school activity that violates their parents’ religious beliefs.

Here’s a quiz to gauge how you view the justices’ ruling: Answer Y if you believe public schoolchildren should be permitted to opt out of the following, N if not. Put your response in the comment section below as follows, e.g.: 1N, 2Y, 3N, 4Y, etc. Bases for religious grounds for opting out are in parentheses. Feel free to include explanations.

1. Biographies of famous female political leaders such as Margaret Thatcher, Indira Gandhi, Golda Meir, and Hillary Clinton for presenting a subtle message that it’s good for women to work outside the home. (Religious belief in traditional gender roles)

2. An American history textbook for presenting the subtle message that religious freedom is a good thing in its description of the Puritans coming to America in order to worship as they please. (Catholic Integralism)

3. John Milton’s “Paradise Lost” for portraying Satan as evil. (Satanism)

4. The Bible for conveying the overt message that the Judeo-Christian God is the one and only God. (Hinduism)

5. A biology textbook for teaching that life on Earth evolved over millions of years. (Fundamentalist Protestantism)

6. The Pledge of Allegiance for treating a country as an object of worship. (Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Truth)

7. A social studies textbook for presenting a non-subtle message that chattel slavery is a bad thing. (Christian Identity)

8. Shakespeare’s “The Merchant of Venice” for implying that Christians are better than Jews. (Judaism)

9. The “Song of Roland” for presenting the overt message that Muslims are bad. (Islam)

10. Mozart’s “Magic Flute” for presenting a subtle message of support for Freemasonry. (Catholicism, Greek Orthodoxy)

11. A world history textbook for containing a critical message about the Crusades. (Christianism)

12. A prayer led by a football coach for conveying a not-so-subtle endorsement of Christianity. (Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Sikhism, etc.)

Your correspondent will tally the answers and comment on the results in a subsequent column.

Pope Leo XIV meets with the delegation of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople on June 28, 2025, at the Vatican. / Credit: Vatican News

ACI Prensa Staff, Jun 30, 2025 / 14:12 pm (CNA).

Pope Leo XIV received members of a delegation from the Eastern Orthodox Ecumenical Patriarchate in a June 28 audience held at the Apostolic Palace of the Vatican in the context of the June 29 celebration of the solemnity of Sts. Peter and Paul.

The Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople is the seat of the Eastern Orthodox Church of Constantinople based in Istanbul, Turkey. The Ecumenical Patriarchate is considered “primus inter pares” (“first among equals”) among the patriarchs of the other churches of the Eastern Orthodox communion. 

The delegation was headed by Metropolitan Emmanuel of Chalcedon, president of the Synodal Commission of the Ecumenical Patriarchate for Relations with the Catholic Church, accompanied by the Most Reverend Fathers Aetios and Ieronymos.

Bartholomew has been the current archbishop of Constantinople and ecumenical patriarch since Nov. 2, 1991. Traditionally, a delegation from the Ecumenical Patriarchate visits the Vatican on the occasion of the feast of Sts. Peter and Paul.

Similarly, a Vatican delegation usually visits Istanbul, the capital of present-day Turkey, every Nov. 30 on the occasion of the celebration of the feast day of St. Andrew, the Ecumenical Patriarchate’s patron saint.

Goal of full visible communion between the two Churches

The Catholic Encyclopedia explains that in 1054, “the most deplorable quarrel,” known as the Eastern Schism, occurred, separating the vast majority of Eastern Christians from communion with the Catholic Church, thus giving rise to the Orthodox Church.

Leo XIV stated that his intention is to “persevere in the effort to reestablish full visible communion between our Churches,” a goal that, he said, can only be achieved “with God’s help, through a continued commitment to respectful listening and fraternal dialogue.”

“For this reason, I am open to any suggestions that you may offer in this regard, always in consultation with my brother bishops of the Catholic Church who, each in his own way, share with me the responsibility for the complete and visible unity of the Church,” the Holy Father said during the June 28 audience.

He also recalled that “after centuries of disagreements and misunderstanding,” authentic dialogue between the two Churches was only possible thanks to “the courageous and farsighted steps taken by Pope Paul VI and Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras.”

“Their venerable successors to the sees of Rome and Constantinople have pursued with conviction the same path of reconciliation, thus further strengthening our close relations,” the pope added.

Leo XIV highlighted the “witness of sincere closeness” that Patriarch Bartholomew has always expressed to the Catholic Church, demonstrated especially by participating in the funeral of Pope Francis and later in the inaugural Mass of the new bishop of Rome.

The Holy Father said the traditional exchange of delegations “is a sign of the profound communion already existing between us, and a reflection of the fraternal bond that united the Apostles Peter and Andrew.”

Leo XIV expressed his profound gratitude for their presence in Rome “on this solemn occasion.” He asked them to convey his cordial greetings to Patriarch Bartholomew and the members of the Holy Synod, along with his gratitude for having sent the delegation again this year.

“May Sts. Peter and Paul, St. Andrew and the holy Mother of God, who live eternally in the perfect communion of the saints, accompany and sustain us in our efforts in the service of the Gospel. Thank you!” Pope Leo said. 

This story was first published by ACI Prensa, CNA’s Spanish-language news partner. It has been translated and adapted by CNA.

(RNS) — Around the world, we are “witnessing an alarming rise in attempts to discredit, politicize or suppress scientific knowledge,” the Vatican says in a new (June 16) Pontifical Academy of Sciences document defending the freedom of science.

“These developments not only endanger the integrity of science but also imperil the well-being of societies that depend on science to address their most pressing challenges, including poverty, pandemics, health care, climate change, and use of artificial intelligence,” the statement reads. 

Some might be surprised to hear the church defending science, since everyone remembers how Galileo got in trouble with church authorities. Fundamentalist Christians still cannot reconcile the creation story in Genesis with contemporary scientific explanations of cosmology and evolution.

This is no longer a problem for Catholic theologians. The Vatican has been involved in astronomy since at least 1582, when astronomers helped Pope Gregory XIII put the calendar in sync with the rotation of the earth around the sun. Thirty-five craters on the moon are named after Jesuit scientists and mathematicians.

Catholic priest scientists have played an important role in the advancement of science: Gregor Mendel (1822-1884), the father of modern genetics; Georges Lemaître (1894-1966), who first proposed the Big Bang theory; and Jean Picard (1620-1682), not of “Star Trek,” but the first person to accurately measure the size of the Earth.

Still, the myth that good Christians must be anti-science gets repeated.

Rather than attacking science, this new statement of concern from the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, “Protecting Freedom of Science and Preventing Distortion of Scientific Truth,” is a full-throated defense of science, which it believes is “fundamental to the development of humankind” and needs to be protected “from ideological or political interference.”

The sources of the attacks on science and truth are complex and interconnected, the Pontifical Academy argues.

“In many settings, scientific facts are manipulated or suppressed to serve short-term political goals,” the academy reports. “Leaders or interest groups may deny inconvenient truths to preserve power or economic interests, rather than address difficult realities with evidence-based policies.”

It bemoans the rejection of scientific consensus in favor of conspiracy theories.

“Science is sometimes portrayed as elitist or biased,” the academy said, “despite its self-correcting nature, that is, science moving forward often corrects established wisdom and always must be open to new insights.”

The document is especially timely in the United States, where government officials are giving more credence to conspiracy theories than scientific consensus. For example, American research universities like Harvard are under attack, and scientific research is being defunded for political reasons by the Trump administration-run National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health, which used to be big supporters of science.

The Vatican also worries that “(t)he commercialization of research and the capture of science by powerful industries can lead to conflicts of interest. Public trust is eroded when science appears to serve mainly private profits rather than public good.” And, it notes, “Social media and online platforms have accelerated the spread of pseudoscience and falsehoods.” As a result, “(s)ocial media companies must take stronger steps to limit the spread of disinformation and support authentic sources. Algorithmic transparency and responsibility are urgently needed.”

Sadly, “repressive governments have gone beyond neglecting science to actively punishing those who speak scientific truth to power. Scientific institutions have been shut down, and researchers have faced legal or physical threats,” the document says. 

What are the solutions? The academy calls on political leaders to “uphold the independence of scientific institutions and resist the politicization of research. Support for basic and applied science must be protected as an investment in the public good. Policy decisions should be guided by the best available evidence, not by ideology or misinformation.”

At the same time, it says, “Scientists must reaffirm their commitment to rigor, transparency, and ethical responsibility. They must actively engage with society, communicate their findings clearly, and listen respectfully to public concerns.”

The Pontifical Academy calls on faith communities to “recognize and promote the compatibility of science and spirituality.” It believes that “reason and faith can coexist in mutual enrichment. Religious leaders can play a powerful role in restoring public trust in science as a force for good,” it says. 

It also calls for a global coalition of stakeholders to defend the right to seek and speak scientific truth.

“In doing so,” it asserts, “we not only protect the integrity of science, but also uphold the dignity, justice, and sustainability of our common human future.”

Catholics need no longer hang their heads in shame because of Galileo. We can be proud that the Vatican wants to be a leader in the fight defending scientific inquiry.