The Five Worst Things of POTUS 47’s First 100 Days

April 12 was the 80^th anniversary of the death of Pres. Roosevelt, who first referred to “the first 100 days” of a president’s term. Yesterday, April 29, was the 100^th day of Pres. Trump’s second term. What a difference between those first 100 days of one of the best U.S. presidents and the first 100 days of one of the worst!*¹ 

The U.S. was in terrible shape when Roosevelt was inaugurated on March 4, 1933. The first 100 days of his presidency were pivotal in turning the nation toward recovery and saving the country, which was “in the throes of an unmatched calamity” and “on the brink of collapse”.*²

In March 1933, almost 25% of the civilian labor force (15,500,000 people!) were unemployed. And on his inauguration day, the most immediate challenge facing the new president was the imminent collapse of the US banking system. 

Jonathan Alter is an American journalist and best-selling author. One of his significant books is The Defining Moment: FDR’s Hundred Days and the Triumph of Hope (2006). On the first page of his book, Alter avers that in March 1933 the U.S. was experiencing “its greatest crisis since the Civil War.”

The U.S. was in relatively good shape when Trump was inaugurated on January 20, 2025. Of course, there were problems, but the recovery from the debilitating COVID-19 pandemic was better than that of the world’s other industrialized countries. The unemployment rate was low (4%), and the inflation rate was down to 3% from the pandemic peak of over 9% in 2022.

In the very first paragraph of his inaugural address, Trump said that “the golden age of America begins right now.” He vowed that every single day he would put America first and that his top priority would be “to create a nation that is proud, prosperous, and free.” He emphasized how bad things were currently and declared that “from this moment on, America’s decline is over.”

To a large extent, his promise to “make America great again” meant going back to the way things were before Roosevelt. That had long been the strong desire of right-wing politicians and a large segment of U.S. citizens who had long listened to easily accessible conservative “talk radio” programs and Fox News telecasts. Trump’s campaign rhetoric exploited that desire.

In the early 2010s, I was teaching a night class at Rockhurst University in Kansas City, and on the way home I would listen to a local AM station. That meant I often heard the rantings of Mark Levin.*³ He often said the U.S. needed to go back to the way it was 80 years ago, and I finally realized he meant going back to the way things were before FDR.

So, what are the five most harmful things Trump has done during these first 100 days of his second term? The following is my tentative list with only brief comments about each—and I could be persuaded to revise my list by readers who suggest something they see as worse or who think these “worse five’ should be ordered differently.

1) Harm to world peace. Because of Trump’s rhetoric and actions, the likelihood of warfare with the use of tactical or even strategic nuclear weapons has become greater in the last 100 days. His coziness with Putin, his negative views of NATO, and the current tariff war with China are troublesome signs of what might possibly happen in the not-so-distant future. 

2) Harm to the global environment. On inauguration day, Trump signed an executive order directing the U.S. to again withdraw from the landmark Paris climate agreement. Then here in the U.S., he has made multiple moves to do away with environmental programs designed to slow global warming and ecological collapse.

3) Harm to needy people at home and abroad. In February, the Trump administration said it is eliminating more than 90% of USAID’s foreign aid contracts and $60 billion in overall U.S. assistance, which eliminates the majority of U.S. development and humanitarian help abroad. Other cuts remove funding designed to help the neediest people in the U.S.

4) Harm to the worldwide economy. As CNN posted on April 28, “Trump took the US economy to the brink of a crisis in just 100 days.” On the same day, Reuters wrote, “Risks are high that the global economy will slip into recession this year, according to … a Reuters poll, in which scores [of economists] said U.S. President Donald Trump's tariffs have damaged business sentiment.”

5) Harm to the rule of law. Domestically, Trump’s furor over migrants in the U.S. has led to the repeated rejection of “due process,” which is the bedrock foundation of the rule of law. According to CBS on April 23, Trump “is now arguing undocumented migrants should not be given a trial where they could challenge being removed from the country.”

_____

*¹ According to the conclusions of the 2024 Presidential Greatness Project (see here), Roosevelt ranked number two, following Abraham Lincoln, and Trump was 45^th, dead last—and there is ample reason to think that Trump’s second term so far is worse than his first. 

*² The words cited are those of Naftali Bendavid, the senior national political correspondent of the Washington Post. “Trump claims mantle of FDR’s first 100 days, but differences are stark” was the title of his April 28 post.

*³ As I learned on Wikipedia, “A 2016 study which sought to measure incendiary discourse on talk radio and TV found that Levin scored highest on its measure of ‘outrage’." He also “helped to legitimate the use of uncivil discourse.” Earlier this month, Trump appointed Levin to become a member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council. It is not hard to understand why Trump appreciates what Levin has been saying on talk radio for so long and more recently on Fox News.

Note: To those of you who like statistics, I encourage you to take a look at "How Low Can Trump Go" a Substack post made yesterday by Rachel Bitecofer​ regarding Trump's polling numbers (click here--and let me know if you have trouble accessing Rachel's Substack post).

"Good Friday," Easter, and Spiritual Warfare

Today, April 18, is what Christians often call Good Friday, and two days from now is Easter Sunday. These are two of the most significant days for Christians, but they are not usually linked to what is often referred to as spiritual warfare, which is largely based on Ephesians 6:10~17 in the New Testament. 

Spiritual warfare is not interpreted the same by all Christians. As might be expected, the understanding and emphasis of moderates/progressives tend to be quite different from that of conservatives/traditionalists.

The decisive verse regarding spiritual warfare is found in Ephesians 6:

… we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places (v. 12, KJ21).

Conservative evangelical Christians tend to interpret these words as referring to personal struggles of individual Christians. For example, John Mark Comer, a well-known evangelical pastor and author, writes about spiritual warfare in his book Live No Lies.

Comer (b. 1980) interprets spiritual warfare primarily as the struggle of individual Christians against the lies that rob them of the enjoyment of personal peace and freedom.

Shane Claiborne (b. 1975), a progressive “evangelical,” interprets spiritual warfare quite differently:

This [2024] election was about principalities and powers – racism, patriarchy, xenophobia. This is not just about Trump. Certainly he has unleashed some of our worst demons. But this is bigger than one man. It is about spiritual and systemic powers that seek to harm some of our most vulnerable neighbors.*¹

The best interpretation of spiritual warfare I know of is by William Stringfellow, a lawyer and lay theologian. I wrote about him and his understanding of “principalities and powers” in my Jan. 5, 2018, blog article, and I encourage you to (re)read that post (see here).*2

In that article, I cited these words from one of Stringfellow’s most important books, An Ethic for Christians and Other Aliens in a Strange Land (1977). He wrote there that “principalities and powers” are not some esoteric spiritual forces of evil in a nonvisible realm.

Rather, Stringfellow explained, they are “all authorities, corporations, institutions, traditions, processes, structures, bureaucracies, ideologies, systems” and the like (p. 27).

That blog post made seven years ago was about the spiritual warfare evidenced by Herod’s “slaughter of the innocents” soon after Jesus’ birth. But even more, Jesus’ crucifixion on “Good Friday,” and his resurrection on that first Easter Sunday, are also prime examples of spiritual warfare.

Jesus, the light of the world, combats Satan, the “prince of this world,” according to the New Testament (see John 8:12, 14:30, NIV). In Paradise Lost, John Milton refers to Satan as “the prince of darkness,” the embodiment of evil.

The Lord’s Prayer points to an ongoing cosmic conflict between God’s kingdom of light and the devil’s temporary kingdom of darkness (Rev. 12:7~10). Through Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection, the Triune God won the decisive battle against the formidable force of evil (= “Satan” or the devil).

The good news of Easter is not primarily about the hope of future life in a far-off heaven by those who believe in Jesus. Rather, it is about the kingdom (kindom) of God becoming victorious here and now, God’s will being done on earth as it is in heaven.

But the fight between light and darkness, good and evil, is by no means over. Spiritual warfare continues. That is why God-believers are admonished to put on “the whole armor of God” so that they may be able to “stand against the wiles of the devil” (Eph. 6:11, KJ21).

It is with great sadness that we see spiritual warfare apparent now even between Good Friday- and Easter-celebrating Christians aligned with decidedly different understandings of the Gospel of Jesus.

One side is composed to a large degree by MAGA Christians who see Trump’s assassination attempt as linked to spiritual warfare and also interprets that warfare as being primarily against abortion and LGBT people.*3

On the other side are those of us who see the force of evil working through the destructive power structures elucidated by Stringfellow. Those structures, unfortunately, include the current Trump Administration.

I encourage you to click on this link and read Thinking Friend Jarrett Banks’s Palm Sunday prayer at First Christian Church in Lynchburg, Virginia. He expressed so well the side I want to identify with. What about you?

_____

*¹ These words are cited in a Nov. 8, 2024, post by John Fea (see here).

*² The Wikipedia article about Stringfellow (1928~85) correctly mentions that his work has been advanced by New Testament scholar/professor Walter Wink (1935~2012), who wrote a trilogy on “the powers.” It also notes his influence on “evangelical social activists” such as Jim Wallis and Shane Claiborne.

*3 About three weeks ago, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said, “I certainly believe in spiritual warfare. And I think I saw it firsthand, especially throughout the campaign trail with President Trump. And I think there certainly were evil forces. And I think that the president was saved by the grace of God on July 13 in Butler, Pennsylvania, and he's in this moment for a reason."

On March 22 a Catholic priest speaking at a conference in California emphasized “the reality of spiritual warfare in the fight against abortion, the demonic attacks against the family and life issues, and the connection between abortion, the culture, and the spiritual forces of darkness.”

And then this on April 2: “Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and two of her fellow GOP congresswomen discussed her bill banning transgender medical services for children and the ‘spiritual warfare’ surrounding gender ideology” (see here). 

Anne Lamott: A Humorous “Theologian”

This year, I have read four of Anne Lamott’s books. Some of you have also read some of her many books, but others may not know much, if anything, about her or her writings. In this post, I will briefly introduce her and share a few of her “theological” ideas and statements.  

Anne Lamott was born in San Francisco on April 10, 1954, so tomorrow will be her 71^st birthday. As a girl, she grew up in a lower-income neighborhood of Marin City, Calif., a few miles northwest of the San Francisco Bay Area.

Marin City was originally built as housing for shipyard workers during WWII and later became home to a predominantly Black community. Lamott described it as "the ghetto in this luscious, affluent county," noted for government housing, drugs, and crime as well as strong families.

For several years, she also lived in a small houseboat in Sausalito, a more eclectic and artistic environment, where she struggled with addiction and financial instability before finding her footing as a writer.

Most people try to present themselves as better than they are, but in her self-deprecating writing style, it seems that Lamott probably presents herself as worse than she actually is. Still, until she was in her early 30s, her lifestyle was characterized by alcoholism, drug abuse, and promiscuous sex.

Things began to change for the better when she started attending what became St. Andrews Presbyterian Church, an interracial congregation that met for years in borrowed/rented facilities. She was baptized there in 1986, and she wrote that “one year later I got sober” (TM, 51).

For many years, Lamott’s pastor was Veronica Goines, a wise Black woman from whom Anne learned much. It will soon be 40 years since Lamott was baptized, and she has been a faithful member and lay-leader of that church up to the present.

In 1989, her son Sam was born, and in her books she repeatedly writes about her dear son, whom she raised as a single mother.*¹

Lamott’s books are a mixture of humor, ordinariness, and profundity—at least that is my impression from her books that I have read:

Traveling Mercies: Some Thoughts on Faith (1999, TM)

 Plan B: Further Thoughts on Faith (2005, PB)

Grace (Eventually): Thoughts on Faith (2007, GE*²)

Hallelujah Anyway: Rediscovering Mercy (2017, HA)

As one who spent considerable time in graduate school studying Søren Kierkegaard, I was surprised that early in TM, she wrote that reading SK’s Fear and Trembling changed her life " forever.” Then, she wrote words directly related to last month’s blog posts about certainty and faith.

She realized that “since this side of the grave you could never know for sure if there was a God, you had to make a leap of faith, if you could, leaping across the abyss of doubt with fear and trembling” (27). Because of reading SK, she “actively made, if not exactly a leap of faith, a lurch of faith” (28).

I was surprised to find such theological statements embedded in her humor-laden writing. Further, her theological understanding of Christianity, as was also true of Kierkegaard’s, is not about “pie in the sky by and by.”

In Plan B, she states that her faith tells her that “God has skills, ploys, and grace adequate to bring light into the present darkness, into families, prisons, governments.” In that regard, she quotes Pastor Veronica: “Nobody gets into heaven without a letter of reference from the poor” (citing James Forbes*³.)

Here are some insightful “theological” nuggets from Lamott’s books:

* We “are not punished for the sin but by the sin” (TM, 128)

* “… not forgiving is like drinking rat poison and then waiting for the rat to die” (TM, 134)

* “God loves us exactly the way we are, and God loves us too much to let us stay like this” (TM, 135)

* Forgiveness means it finally becomes unimportant that you hit back” (PB, 47).

* Fr. Tom told her that “the opposite of faith is not doubt, but certainty” (PB, 256).

* “… we’re punished not for our hatred … but by it” (GA, 129-130).

* “Mercy means compassion, empathy, a heart for someone’s troubles” (HA, 51).

* “God doesn’t give us answers. God gives us grace and mercy” (HA, 104)

_____

*¹ Lamott’s memoir about the first year of motherhood as a single parent, Operating Instructions, was published in 1993. I have not read it, but according to CoPilot (Bing’s AI tool), that book, written in journal format, “captures her joys, fears, and struggles raising her son.” Further, it “was widely praised for its raw honesty, humor, and heartfelt portrayal of single motherhood.”

*² You can hear Lamott talk about her faith in this 2016 interview regarding her book Grace Eventually.

*³ Forbes (b. 1935) served as pastor of historic Riverside Church in NYC from 1989 to 2007, the first African American minister to hold that position.

Faith is Better than Doubt

There was considerable interest in and comments/questions about my March 8 blog post titled “Doubt is Better than Certainty.” This post is also about doubt, but it is mainly about faith in God rather than certainty or doubt about beliefs. 

“The Shock of Faith” is the title of David Brooks’s opinion column published by the New York Times last December 19. It is a long, thoughtful, heartfelt article that is well worth reading and contemplating. (You can access it here [with a different title]).

Brooks (b. 1961) is a nationally known newspaper journalist and author as well as a regular on PBS NewsHour every Friday evening. He was raised Jewish, but he attended an Episcopal grade school as a boy. He says in his Dec. 19 post, he grew up “religious but not spiritual.”

When I first began to hear about Brooks, I thought he was too politically conservative and paid little attention to him. But his new book, The Road to Character, was the subject of a study meeting at Central Baptist Seminary in Kansas City in September 2015. It was led by then-president Molly Marshall.

Attending that discussion gave me new appreciation for Brooks, and his political views, which continued to move toward a center-left position. The point of this article, though, is about Brooks’s ideas about faith, not politics.

Faith is “like falling in love.” This is one of Brooks’s thought-provoking statements. While there are problems with the widespread claim that people fall in love, that expression implies that romantic love is usually far more a matter of the heart (emotional) rather than of the head (cerebral).

Brooks’s article begins with his acknowledgement that he long “thought faith was primarily about belief.” But when faith finally “tiptoed into” his life, as he put it, it was “through numinous “experiences,” that is, through “scattered moments of awe and wonder” which hit him “with the force of joy.”

That’s what caused him to fall in faith. Even though he had been religious without being spiritual, Brooks says that position “felt empty” to him. On the other hand, he also found that being spiritual without being religious didn’t work for him. Religions, he says, “enmesh your life in a sacred story.”*¹

In that regard, Brooks cites important, instructive words of Rabbi David Wolpe: “Spirituality is an emotion. Religion is an obligation. Spirituality soothes. Religion mobilizes. Spirituality is satisfied with itself. Religion is dissatisfied with the world.”*²

“Have mercy on those who doubt” (CEB) are words in the New Testament book of Jude, verse 22. The issue there is not about doubt rather than certainty regarding beliefs, but doubt about one’s foundational faith.

If people who have fallen in love begin to have serious doubts about that love being “real” and reciprocal, the relationship has become precarious. That is what causes couples to “break up” or spouses to divorce. Just as doubt about love is a serious matter, so is doubt about faith.

Doubt is better than certainty concerning ideas or beliefs, for that doubt nudges the doubter to seek to learn more and to examine his/her beliefs. But faith in God (by whatever name is used for the Ultimate) is not basically about ideas or beliefs. It is about a relationship that can be destroyed by doubt.

Rachel Held Evans, the widely respected Christian author whose untimely death is still mourned by many, once said, “I recognize that faith is always a risk. No matter what we believe, there is always a chance we might be wrong. But the story of Jesus is just the story I’m willing to risk being wrong about.”*³

Evans’s faith was not primarily in the veracity of Christian beliefs. Rather, her faith was heartfelt commitment to Jesus Christ. She had doubts about many traditional Christian doctrines, but her faith/trust in Christ was stronger, and better, than her doubts about the certainty of those stated beliefs.

Since robust Christian faith is commitment to Christ, that faith becomes apparent not by what we say or give intellectual assent to. Rather, faith is expressed by how we live and what we do.

As Bill Tammeus says on the last page of his book on doubt, faith keeps “us focused on the goal of demonstrating what a world of peace, harmony, mercy, justice, and love might look like.”

Doubt can’t do that, so clearly (undoubtedly?), faith is better than doubt.

_____

*¹ Two of the short “chapters” in Bill Tammeus’s book The Value of Doubt (2016) are about whether one can be spiritual but not religious or religious but not spiritual. In the Comment section of my 3/8 blog post, Bill (who is on my Thinking Friends mailing list) referred to his book, and I had to admit that I knew about it but had not yet read it. Since then, I have been able to check out a copy of it from the local (MCPL) library, and I have been profiting from reading that delightful book. I highly recommend it.

*² David J. Wolpe (b. 1958) is a Conservative Jewish rabbi and now Emeritus Rabbi of the prestigious Sinai Temple in Los Angeles. In 2012, Newsweek magazine named him the most influential rabbi in America.

*³ Rachel Held Evans was born in 1981 and died a few weeks before her 39^th birthday. My June 5, 2021, blog article was about her (see here). The words cited above were part of her discussion about faith with a pastor in 2014. It can be found on YouTube (here); that video has had more than 17,000 views. 

Not All Laws are Good Laws

Perhaps you don’t know (or remember) anything about the Butler Act, a new Tennessee law signed in 1925, but you are likely aware of the well-known trial that resulted from that law.

John Washington Butler (1925)

The Butler Act was signed one hundred years ago on March 21, 1925 (which happened to be my father’s tenth birthday), by Tennessee Governor Austin Peay.

John Washington Butler (1875~1952) was a corn and tobacco farmer northeast of Nashville, Tennessee, and a member of that state’s House of Representatives from 1923 to 1927. The bill that bears his name was passed by a lopsided vote of 71-5 without hearings or debate, and then also passed by the state Senate.

In May 1925, John Scopes (1900~70), a high school football coach and part-time teacher, was arrested for teaching evolution in violation of the Butler Act. His trial was held in Dayton, Tennessee, from July 10 to 21, and he was supported by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

Dubbed at the time “the trial of the century,” the Scopes trial pitted the iconic Clarence Darrow as the defense lawyer and prominent politician William Jennings Bryan as the prosecuting attorney.*¹ As depicted superbly in the movie Inherit the Wind (1960), Scopes was judged guilty and fined $100.*²

In the trial’s aftermath, Tennessee disallowed the teaching of evolution in the classroom until the Butler Act was repealed in 1967. It was then determined that, after all, the 1925 law was a bad law, as it conflicted with modern science and also increasingly had lost the support of many (progressive) Christians.*³

Many “bad laws” have been opposed by civil disobedience. As stated in an online dictionary, civil disobedience means “the refusal to comply with certain laws … as a peaceful form of political protest.” That refusal is because of the perception that some laws are bad and should not be obeyed.

Here are just a few notable historical examples of such “disobedience”:

* Mohandas Gandhi’s protest against the salt tax in India. This month marks the 95^th anniversary of Gandhi’s historic “salt march” that began on March 12, 1930. It was in opposition to the salt tax levied by colonial Britain, which he saw as an oppressive, unjust law.

* Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s protest against the Nazi government in Germany. The Lutheran pastor was one of the best-known opponents of Adolph Hitler, who was democratically elected but soon gained totalitarian control over Germany in 1933 by means of his laws and the use of the Gestapo.

* Martin Luther King Jr.’s protest against the racial injustices in the U.S. According to Copilot (Microsoft’s AI “companion”) King “believed that moral principles were more important than unfair laws, so he “used civil disobedience not just to make a political statement but to really change society.” This included the march to Selma and “Bloody Sunday” 60 years ago in March 1965.

Civil disobedience to bad laws is often costly for the protesters.

* Gandhi was arrested on May 5, 1930, while on his salt march and sent to jail without trial where he remained until near the end of January 1931.

*Bonhoeffer was arrested in April 1943 and was imprisoned until his execution by hanging 80 years ago next month, on April 9, 1945.

* King was arrested 29 times and jailed, usually for rather short times, on many of those occasions. His most well-known incarceration was in April 1963 when he wrote Letter from a Birmingham Jail, during the week he was there.

Now, by contrast, the U.S. President seems to be a “scofflaw.” While the term originally meant disregard for minor laws, scofflaw now sometimes is used for a person who disregards court orders, thus directly challenging judicial authority.

This is the opposite of disregarding bad laws. It is harmful opposition to good laws, such as protecting people’s civil rights. Since his inauguration on Jan. 20, the 47^th POTUS seems to have made many executive actions harmful to women as well as to LGBTQ and non-White people.

For example, during the past few days, the Trump administration has deported three planeloads of Guatemalan immigrants to El Salvador in spite of a federal judge’s temporary restraining order questioning the legality of that action.

That conflict may be fomenting a constitutional crisis according to the news media, such as this detailed March 17 article on the website of Reuters.com.

_____

*¹ In 2023, Gregg Jarrett, a Fox News legal analyst and commentator, published The Trial of the Century, which, “calls upon our past to unite Americans in the defense of the free exchange of ideas, especially in this divided time.” The author describes it on YouTube here.

*² In recent years, it is often implied that $100 was just a token fine for John Scopes breaking the Butler Act in Tennessee. According to Wikipedia, however, his fine was equivalent to $1,793 in 2024.

*³ As I point out in my book Fed Up with Fundamentalism (2007, 2020), the Scopes Trial led to the weakening of Christian fundamentalism (2020, pp. 34~37).

Doubt is Better than Certainty

Last Sunday, the 97^th Academy Awards presentations were made at Dolby Theater in Hollywood. I didn’t watch the award ceremony, but early Monday morning, I read the results with interest. I was especially eager to know the results for Conclave, the only one of the Best Picture nominees I had seen. 

Conclave did not win the Best Picture Oscar, and Ralph Fiennes (pictured above) was not awarded the Best Actor Oscar for which he was nominated.*¹ Still, please think with me about the striking words of Cardinal Lawrence, who was in charge of the conclave to elect a new pope.

Lawrence, the Dean of the College of Cardinals so admirably played by Fiennes, speaks these striking words near the beginning of the film:

… over the course of many years, in the service of our mother the Church, let me tell you, there is one sin which I have come to fear above all others. Certainty. Certainty is the great enemy of unity. Certainty is the deadly enemy of tolerance.

He goes on to say,

Our faith is a living thing precisely because it walks hand in hand with doubt. If there was only certainty and no doubt, there would be no mystery. And therefore no need for faith. Let us pray that God will grant us a pope who doubts.

These were perplexing words to most of the Cardinals gathered for the conclave—and they are likely perplexing to many of you also, especially those of you who have grown up as (and still are) “traditional” Christians.

“The Appeal of Certainty” is a short subsection in my book Fed Up with Fundamentalism (2007, 2020). In the first paragraph, I write that “the claim to certainty is one of fundamentalism’s primary attractions.” That same claim is true for many, if not most, conservative evangelicals today.

Nearly 100 years ago, Reinhold Niebuhr, the eminent neo-orthodox theologian, declared, “Frantic orthodoxy [=fundamentalism] is a method for obscuring doubt.” The foundation of that method was an emphasis upon belief in the Bible, believed to be God’s infallible or inerrant Word.

In 1969, W.A. Criswell, the prominent pastor of the First Baptist Church of Dallas, stressed that the Bible is the literal, infallible Word of God, and then averred, ”If the Bible is the Word of God we have an absolutely trustworthy guide for all the answers our souls desire to know.”

That position is appealing to so many who desire the comforting presence of certainty.

God After Deconstruction by Thomas Jay Oord and Tripp Fuller is a new (2024) book, and one that I highly recommend. The second of the twelve chapters is titled “Certainty Crumbles.” At the end of a sub-section called “The Benefit of Doubt,” the authors write,

Rather than being an enemy of belief, we think doubt is essential. Believers aren’t ‘certainers,’ to coin a word. To believe means to be uncertain. The wise ones among us learn to resist the impulse to seek certain foundations of knowledge (31).*²

Then, in “Bible Conundrums,” their fifth chapter, Oord and Fuller deal directly with how many people leave Christianity when they realize that there are many problems related to belief in an infallible Bible as a sure foundation. They give much good advice on how to take the Bible seriously but not literally.

Throughout their insightful book, the authors insist that doubt is more conducive to a life of faith than certainty.

This is similar to what Anne Lamott (whom I plan to highlight in a blog article next month) wrote in her book Plan B: Further Thoughts on Faith (2005). One of her religious mentors is a Jesuit priest, whom she refers to as Father Tom. Near the end of her book, she writes,

I remembered something Father Tom had told me—that the opposite of faith is not doubt, but certainty. Certainty is missing the point entirely. (p. 256).

Retired pastor Martin Thielen recently wrote about the benefit of doubt. He said, “Religious doubt can lead to a more authentic and mature faith, including the embrace of divine mystery ….”*³

Yes, when carefully considered, doubt is better than certainty.

_____

*¹ This was in contrast to the British Academy of Film and Television Arts presentation ceremony held on February 16. Conclave and Fiennes both won the BAFTA awards. 

*² While they didn’t cite him, perhaps the authors had read the eminent agnostic Bertrand Russell, who in 1935 wrote, “The fundamental cause of the trouble in the modern world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.”

*³ In April 2014, I posted a blog article (see here) in which I introduced Thielen, who at that time was a Methodist pastor in Tennessee. After making that post, I found out that he had graduated with an M.Div. degree from The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in 1982 but left the Southern Baptists Convention in 1994. He now publishes articles regularly on his website that he calls “Doubter’s Parish.” The words cited above are from his March 1 post, “Faith, Doubt, and ‘Conclave’,” which I encourage you to read (here).

 

Opposing the Death Penalty

When I was still a teenager, I became a pacifist, and I have remained so for nearly 70 years now. It was perhaps only a little later, and for some of the same reasons, that I became an opponent of the death penalty, and I ask you to consider that position as you read this post. 

The above meme was included in a blog post I made in December 2013. That article, which you can access here, is the only time I have dealt directly with the matter of the death penalty since I started this blog over 15 years ago. But this is an important matter that needs further consideration.

Support for the death penalty is at an all-time low among USAmericans, but still, accord­ing to a late 2024 Gallup poll, 53% of Americans say­ that they sup­port the death penal­ty. And in spite of decreasing public support, in 2024, the number of executions was the most since 2015 (with 2018 the same).

Of the 25 executions in 2024, 48% were non-White. Fifteen of those 25 were from only four states: Alabama (6), Texas (5), Oklahoma and Missouri (4). The average age of those executed was 52, but their average age at the time of offense was 27 (including four teenagers)—a 25-year gap!

Consider these prominent people’s opposition to the death penalty:

** Most prominent is Pope Francis, who changed the wording in the Catechism of the Catholic Church in 2018. It now reads,

… the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that “the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person”, and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide.

* Far earlier, Helen Prejean, a Catholic nun and the author of Dead Man Walking (1993), became a tireless advocate of abolishing the death penalty since first accompanying Elmo Patrick “Pat” Sonnier (b. 1950) to his execution by electrocution at Louisiana State Penitentiary on April 5, 1984.

From 1993 to 1995, Prejean served as the National Chairperson of the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, which was founded in 1976.*¹

* Recently, I learned that John Grisham, the noted novelist, is also an opponent of the death penalty. Last October, I read the three novellas in his 2022 book Sparring Partners. The second, “Strawberry Moon,” is a touching story of a woman who became pen pals with a man facing execution.

Grisham’s main concern, it seems, has been the execution of people who were apparently innocent, and his latest book is Framed: Astonishing True Stories of Wrongful Conviction.*²

 * Former President Biden also opposes(d) the death penalty. In 2021, his Administration placed a moratorium on federal executions, and on December 23, 2024, he commuted the sentences of 37 individuals on the federal death row to sentences of life in prison without the possibility of parole.*³

From 1972 to July 2020, there were only three federal executions. And even though there had been no federal executions since January 2021, during the last six months that Trump was in office as the 45^th President, there were thirteen federal prisoners executed, including the first woman in 67 years.

On inauguration day in 2025, the 47^th President rescinded Biden’s moratorium on federal executions. It is widely recognized that conservative White evangelicals favor the death penalty far more than do moderate/progressive Christians, so perhaps Pres. Trump was primarily pandering to his base.

If you would like to know more about why I oppose the death penalty, please read the last part of Chapter 9 in my book Fed Up with Fundamentalism (2007, 2020), even though the discussion there is also too brief.  

Or, please email me or post your questions/comments on the blogsite. I look forward to dialoguing with several of you on this important issue.

_____

*¹ At the invitation of Jesuits in Japan, Sister Prejean (b. 1939) visited Japan four times. In 2002, when she came to Fukuoka, June and I had the privilege of hearing her speak and then chatting with her. Last Sunday, we watched the 1995 movie Dead Man Walking and were impressed again by Sister Prejean. In the film, she was portrayed by Susan Sarandon, who won the 1996 Academy Award for Best Actress for that performance.

*² Grisham, who celebrated his 70^th birthday on February 8, was interviewed for an article in AARP Bulletin in October 2024. Twelve years ago, he was interviewed by Bill Moyers regarding Grisham’s first nonfiction novel, The Innocent Man. That interview, titled “John Grisham on Wrongful Death Penalty Convictions,” can be accessed here.

*³ Death penalties are usually carried out by state governments, but the federal government imposes and carries out a small minority of the death sentences in the U.S.