WASHINGTON (RNS)—The former U.S. religious freedom ambassador told a congressional subcommittee leaked language of a proposed presidential executive order on religious liberty could cause “constitutional problems.”

“I think it raises very serious equal protection issues,” said David Saperstein, who recently ended his tenure at the U.S. State Department.

Would ‘legalize discrimination’

According to The Nation, a leaked draft of a proposed executive order titled “Establishing a Government-Wide Initiative to Respect Religious Freedom” shows that on issues such as same-sex marriage, abortion, gender identity and premarital sex, the Trump administration would allow exemptions for people with religious objections so broad it would “legalize discrimination.”

The language in that document says, “Americans and their religious organizations will not be coerced by the Federal Government into participating in activities that violate their conscience.”

Answering a question from Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., at a hearing, Saperstein said he was concerned the order could give government contractors discretion to refuse services based on their religious beliefs.

“I think it raises significant constitutional problems,” Saperstein told members of a subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee.

Not ‘impose your religious belief’ on others

Nadler, who along with Saperstein has been instrumental in the passage of religious liberty legislation, said laws such as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act are designed to shield people from government imposition of religious beliefs.

“However, it should not be used as a sword to enable you to impose your religious belief on someone else,” said the congressman, who raised examples of interracial or same-sex couples being refused at a restaurant by proprietors with religious objections.

‘Misguided’ examples

Kim Colby, director of the Christian Legal Society’s Center for Law and Religious Freedom, said after the hearing that Nadler’s examples are “misguided” because civil rights laws regarding restaurant discrimination were set more than 50 years ago.

“An executive order can’t change a law that Congress has passed,” said Colby, who also testified before the Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice. “So a lot of those hypotheticals just can’t happen.”

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops sent a letter to President Trump urging him to sign the draft executive order, calling it a “positive step toward allowing all Americans to be able to practice their faith without severe penalties from the federal government.”

WASHINGTON (RNS)—President Trump reportedly is considering naming former Baylor University President Ken Starr to head the State Department’s Commission on International Religious Freedom.

The ambassador-at-large for international religious freedom monitors religious persecution and discrimination worldwide and develops programs to promote religious freedom, according to the State Department website.

The reports about possible picks for the position emerged a week after more than 700 religious leaders, scholars and human rights advocates signed a letter to President Trump, coordinated by the 21st Century Wilberforce Initiative, that urges him to name an ambassador-at-large in the first 100 days of his presidency.

“By nominating an ambassador-at-large for international religious freedom in your first 100 days, you can signal your commitment to people of faith and freedom of conscience in a way that requires no new taxes and no new legislation while strengthening highly effective offices,” it said.

Others rounding out the short list for the position include Nina Shea and Johnnie Moore, according to Foreign Policy, which first reported the picks Feb. 9. David Saperstein had served as ambassador for the last two years.

Starr removed as Baylor president after Pepper Hamilton investigation

Starr is best known nationally for his work investigating President Bill Clinton’s extramarital relationship with Monica Lewinsky that led to Clinton’s impeachment.

Baylor’s board of regents removed Starr as president last year after an investigation into his mishandling of reports of sexual assault at the private Baptist university in Waco. He and the university later announced a mutual separation.

Not long afterward, he told the student newspaper, the Baylor Lariat: “I’m working very hard around the globe on issues of religious liberty for all persons. That was a high priority when I was privileged to serve at Baylor University.”

Starr did not return requests for comment by The Dallas Morning News.

Other potential candidates

Shea is a human rights lawyer at the conservative Hudson Institute. She told Foreign Policy that she was not interested in the position and that, from her discussions, the Trump administration likely will break with the Obama administration on religious freedom issues.

Moore is a member of Trump’s evangelical advisory board and author of Defying ISIS: Preserving Christianity in the Place of Its Birth and in Your Own Backyard.

“I’m very, very engaged on the issue, and a lot of people have prodded me to be more involved. Almost as quickly as the election happened, a couple people asked me if I would ever be interested in that” appointment to the commission, he said.

He, too, suspects the Trump administration will approach international religious freedom differently than his predecessor.

“My experience as an advocate for persecuted religious people around the world over the course of the last administration is that the Obama State Department was not very interested in defending those who were persecuted for their religion. They wanted to frame it in different terms,” Moore said.

“I think the present administration will take the role of faith in foreign policy, faith in human rights very seriously.”

WASHINGTON—In his first appearance at a National Prayer Breakfast, President Donald Trump promised to repeal a law that bars churches and many other charitable organizations from supporting political candidates without risking their tax-exempt status.

“I will get rid of, totally destroy, the Johnson Amendment and allow our representatives of faith to speak freely and without fear,” Trump told the Feb. 2 gathering. “I will do that. Remember.”

Baptists in attendance at the prayer breakfast included former Southern Baptist Convention Presidents Jack Graham, pastor of Prestonwood Baptist Church in Plano, and Ronnie Floyd, pastor of Cross Church in Arkansas, and former Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission President Richard Land—all members of Trump’s evangelical advisory board.

Congress passed the Johnson Amendment, named for Sen. Lyndon Johnson, in 1954. The law prohibits 501(c)(3) nonprofit organizations—including religious congregations—from endorsing or opposing candidates or political parties without risking their tax-exempt status.

“Freedom of religion is a sacred right, but it also a right under threat all around us,” Trump said. He pledged to “fix” that perceived assault on religious liberty, saying: “That’s what I do. I fix things.”

Pastors already free to voice political views

However, some advocates of church-state separation challenged why something should be fixed they don’t consider broken.

“Pastors are free now to express their views on political issues, but they cannot endorse political candidates as a function of the church if the church wants to be free from paying taxes,” said Kathryn Freeman, public policy director for the Texas Baptist Christian Life Commission.

Freeman called the Johnson Amendment “a centerpiece of church-state separation in the United States,” adding it has “clearly protected the tax-exempt status of churches as nonpolitical entities dedicated to the common good of our communities, states and nation.”

“The Constitution prohibits the federal government from establishing any religion, and it equally guarantees the free exercise of religion,” she said. “The Johnson Amendment in no way hinders these constitutional requirements.

“From a church perspective, this proposal is even more devastating. When churches get caught up in partisan politics, it undermines their message of Christ’s good news for all people.”

‘Politicizing churches does them no favors’

Amanda Tyler, executive director of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, called the proposed repeal “an attack on the integrity of both our charitable organizations and campaign finance system.”

“Politicizing churches does them no favors,” Tyler said, insisting involvement of churches in political campaigns would “fundamentally change” their character.

“It would usher our partisan divisions into the pews and harm the church’s ability to provide refuge,” she said. “To change the law would hinder the church’s prophetic witness, threatening to turn pulpit prophets into political puppets.”

Trump addressed the Johnson Amendment one day after Sen. James Lankford, R-Oklahoma, and Rep. Jody Hice, R-Ga., introduced the Free Speech Fairness Bill. Both are Southern Baptists. Although the bill does not repeal the Johnson Amendment outright, it does protect political speech—including endorsement of candidates—by pastors and others “in the ordinary course of the organization’s regular and customary activities.”

In a 2015 poll by LifeWay Research, eight out of 10 American adults (79 percent) said pastors should not endorse candidates in church, and three-fourths said churches should steer clear of endorsements. 

WASHINGTON (RNS)—A week after the inauguration of President Donald Trump, throngs of anti-abortion marchers gathered near the White House to applaud his administration’s actions and his plans to support their cause.

They also cheered top officials of the new administration who spoke at the march. Their presence represented a break from previous years in which the White House was not represented in person at the rally.

Vice president addresses rally

“Life is winning in America, and today is a celebration of that progress,” said Vice President Mike Pence, who was joined by his wife, Karen, and daughter, Charlotte, on the stage in the shadow of the Washington Monument.

He, along with members of the crowd before the rally, highlighted Trump’s signing of a memo that re-established the so-called “Mexico City Policy,” which halts government funding of groups that support or conduct abortions overseas.

“President Donald Trump will announce his Supreme Court nominee who will uphold the God-given liberties enshrined in our Constitution in the tradition of the late and great Justice Antonin Scalia,” Pence pledged. Trump subsequently nominated Neil Gorsuch, a conservative appellate court justice from Colorado. Gorsuch is an Episcopalian who attended Catholic schools.

Pence also called on the crowd to foster a movement of “love, not anger.”

“I believe we will continue to win the hearts and minds of the rising generation if our hearts first break for young mothers and their unborn children and if we, each of us, do all we can to meet them where they are with generosity, not judgment,” he said.

‘A new dawn for life’

People jumped and sang along to music and chanted “life” after March for Life President Jeanne Mancini prompted them with the word “pro.” When people held their babies high in the air, others around them cheered.

Pence was one of two administration officials who addressed the crowd, gathered for the 44th year for the annual protest of the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion.

“This is a new day, a new dawn for life,” said Kellyanne Conway, who drew screams of delight when she identified herself as a Catholic, along with her titles of wife, mother and a “pro-life” counselor to the new president. “We hear you. We see you. We respect you, and we look forward to working with you.”

Even as the Trump administration made plans to restrict abortion services in the United States and abroad, members of the crowd set their goals even higher.

“We’re here to show our elected officials the overwhelming support for repeal of Roe v. Wade and the subsequent holocaust of the murder of innocents,” said Mark Doherty, a cancer surgeon from Arlington, Va., who wore the white coat of the Catholic Medical Association and stood in the front row of the crowd before the rally began.

From Indiana to Kansas to Florida, senior citizens and students filled the monument grounds to hear speeches from religious, sports and political celebrities before marching to the Supreme Court.

Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York opened the event in prayer, while Church of God in Christ Bishop Vincent Mathews Jr. gave the benediction. Christian author Eric Metaxas prayed for Madonna’s conversion and Baltimore Ravens tight end Benjamin Watson spoke of supporting life for everyone—the unborn, the poor, the sexually trafficked as well as the elite.

Referring to the large, mostly pro-abortion-rights throngs at the recent Women’s March on Washington, Mancini said it was more important to focus on the numbers of lives lost to abortion than on the size of the crowd.

“We stand here for them today,” she said. “We stand for the little innocent children who have lost their lives, and we stand for their mothers who regret being involved in this sin, abortion. … Pro-life is pro-woman.”

WASHINGTON—President Donald Trump signed an executive order Jan. 27 that temporarily halts the refugee resettlement program and suspends visas from several Muslim-majority countries, drawing immediate reaction from religious leaders.

The measure blocks visa applicants from Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen until what Trump called an “extreme vetting” process is implemented, and it indefinitely bars refugees from Syria.

The ban on refugee resettlement includes a narrow exception for individuals who face religious persecution and are members of religious minority groups in their countries of origin.

‘Back-door bar on Muslim refugees’

“Today’s action is a back-door bar on Muslim refugees, telling an entire faith group that they are not welcome on our shores,” said Amanda Tyler, executive director of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty. “Any attempt to ban Muslim refugees based on their religion betrays our values and sends the un-American message that there are second-class faiths. 

“Our country, founded by immigrants who established religious freedom as a bedrock principle, is better than this. A threat to anyone’s religious liberty is a threat to everyone’s religious liberty, and we as Baptists stand with those facing religious persecution around the world, regardless of their faith.”

John McCullough, president of Church World Service, called the executive action “not only morally reprehensible but entirely misguided, downright dangerous and in direct opposition to the values we espouse as a nation.”

“Make no mistake––by restricting access to resettlement for refugees from Syria and other countries and simultaneously preferencing religious minorities, President Trump is manifesting the ‘Muslim ban’ that he threatened on the campaign trail,” he said. “This is a clear case of religious discrimination and must be decried as such.”

David Bernstein, president of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs criticized Trump for “the callous decision to take such action on International Holocaust Remembrance Day.”

“These pronouncements not only severely restrict immigration; they instill fear among existing immigrant populations that they are not welcome and may be at risk,” Bernstein, said.

Cheryl Fishbein, chair of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, added, “As the daughter of refugees, I take this very personally.”

The United States already has “one of the most stringent vetting policies in the world,” and the process already in place serves the nation well, she noted.

“We are facing a severe international refugee crisis and cannot let our concerns about radical Islam undermine a core national purpose—providing a home for immigrants,” Fishbein said. “The American immigrant experience is one of the country’s greatest sources of strength.”

Religious leaders react to early draft of order

The Los Angeles Times posted a draft copy of the order Jan. 25 that suspends the U.S. Refugee Admission Program for 120 days. Even before Trump signed the order, religious leaders responded to that document.

“Christians and churches have been welcoming refugees for 2,000 years, and evangelicals are committed to continue this biblical mission,” said Leith Anderson, president of the National Association of Evangelicals. “Thousands of U.S. evangelicals and their churches have welcomed hundreds of thousands of refugees over the past 40 years through World Relief and other federally approved resettlement agencies. We don’t want to stop now.”

Jack Moline, president of the Interfaith Alliance, called the executive order  “a de facto Muslim ban.”

“The United States has long prided itself as a safe bastion for refugees around the globe facing persecution and strife,” Moline said. “President Trump is poised to trample upon that great legacy in one of his first major acts in office.”

Jonah Pesner, director of the Union for Reform Judaism’s Religious Action Center, cited the exodus experience of the Hebrews who left bondage in ancient Egypt.

“Our Scripture teaches us we should treat the stranger among us as if he or she were native born, because we were strangers in the land of Egypt,” he said. “If they target Muslims, they target Christians and Jews, as well. We stand together.”

‘Not a biblical command’

However, evangelist Franklin Graham, president of Samaritan’s Purse, told the Huffington Post the United States must improve its vetting process and be cautious in its immigration policies. 

“It’s not a biblical command for the country to let everyone in who wants to come; that’s not a biblical issue,” he said. “We want to love people. We want to be kind to people. We want to be considerate. But we have a country, and a country should have order, and there are laws that relate to immigration, and I think we should follow those laws. Because of the dangers we see today in this world, we need to be very careful.”

Likewise, the American Center for Law and Justice posted an article on its website that stated: “While Scripture clearly supports caring for the victims of genocide and taking in refugees, it does not require the blind acceptance of all comers. Letting the wolves in with the sheep is clearly not a Christian principle.”

WASHINGTON (BP)—At least five Southern Baptist pastors—including three from Texas—participated in inaugural activities for President Donald Trump.

Robert Jeffress, pastor of First Baptist Church in Dallas, preached from the Old Testament book of Nehemiah on “When God Chooses a Leader” during a private Jan. 20 worship service for the families of Trump and Vice President Mike Pence at St. John’s Church, near the White House. The service is a pre-inauguration tradition dating back to the 1933 inauguration of Franklin Roosevelt, according to the U.S. Capitol Historical Society.

A Jan. 21 national prayer service at the National Cathedral in Washington included Jack Graham, pastor of Prestonwood Baptist Church in Plano, who led in prayer “for those who serve,” and Ramiro Peña, pastor of Christ the King Baptist Church in Waco, who led in reciting the Lord’s Prayer. Arkansas pastor Ronnie Floyd and California pastor David Jeremiah each read Scripture at the national prayer service.

Jeffress, Graham, Floyd and Jeremiah all serve on Trump’s 25-member Evangelical Executive Advisory Board.

The inauguration ceremony itself featured prayers, a Scripture reading by evangelist Franklin Graham, two Bibles used for Trump’s oath of office and a continuation of the tradition of presidents’ invoking God in their inaugural addresses.

Franklin Graham’s appearance was the sixth at a presidential inauguration by either Graham or his father, evangelist Billy Graham. Richard Nixon’s 1969 inauguration was the first time Billy Graham offered an inaugural prayer.

To take his oath of office, Trump placed his hand on two Bibles—one used by Abraham Lincoln in 1861 and again by President Obama at both of his inaugurations, as well as another given to Trump by his mother in 1955.

NASHVILLE (USA Today Network/RNS)—When President-elect Donald Trump takes his oath of office on Inauguration Day, his hand will rest on his family Bible and the Abraham Lincoln Bible.

Alex Stroman, the deputy director of communications for the 58th Inaugural Committee, confirmed the picks. The Lincoln Bible, used during the 16th president’s first inauguration, was most recently a part of President Obama’s first and second inauguration ceremonies and is a part of the Library of Congress’ collection.

Trump received his Bible, a Revised Standard Version, in 1955 from his mother upon graduation from Sunday Church Primary School in New York.

Trump showed off the Bible in an early 2016 campaign video, thanking evangelicals for their support. Exit polls showed four out of five white evangelicals voted for Trump.

“My mother gave me this Bible—this very Bible many years ago,” Trump said in the video. “In fact, it’s her writing, right here. She wrote the name and my address, and it’s just very special to me.”

Trump, a Presbyterian, has called the Bible his favorite book and referred to it often on the campaign trail. But his Bible literacy has been questioned, including when he cited “two Corinthians” rather than saying “Second Corinthians” while speaking at Liberty University.

Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts will administer the oath.

Longstanding presidential tradition

It’s not a requirement for the country’s commander in chief to take the oath of office using a Bible, but it’s a presidential inauguration tradition started by George Washington, said Allison Brown, an Oklahoma-based writer and editor for the Museum of the Bible.

The country’s first president took the oath of office on a Masonic lodge’s altar Bible. At least four other presidents have used that King James Version, now referred to as the Washington Bible, at their inaugurations.

“Washington was very aware that he was setting a precedent with everything he did,” Brown said.

Swearing an oath on a Bible or other object of importance is an ancient act, Brown said. It is symbolic of the oath taker’s authority, importance and truthfulness, she said.

The U.S. Constitution only says the president-elect must swear or affirm the presidential oath of office. It doesn’t mention the Bible or another book. So, some presidents have chosen something other than the Christian holy book, or went without.

The sixth president, John Quincy Adams, a lawyer, took the oath on a law book. Teddy Roosevelt didn’t use a book following William McKinley’s assassination, and Lyndon B. Johnson was sworn in on a Roman Catholic missal found aboard Air Force One in the aftermath of John F. Kennedy’s assassination.

For many of the country’s early presidents, historical records are thin on whether a Bible was used, Brown said. But nearly all of the presidents from Lincoln to Obama have used the Bible during their inaugurations, she said.

Opened or closed?

Many swore on a Bible opened to a specific verse, like Ronald Reagan who used 2 Chronicles 7:14 for both inaugurations. Some quoted Bible verses in their inaugural addresses, too.

“Most of the verses that presidents have chosen have been about government, have been about humility, about wisdom,” Brown said. “A lot of these verses are about how they’re going to govern a nation.”

A handful opened the Bibles at random, and others have kept the book closed. George W. Bush had hoped to use the Washington Bible like his father, but inclement weather prevented it, and he kept his family Bible closed during his first oath of office. Some presidents used more than one. Dwight Eisenhower swore on the Washington Bible and his own West Point Bible during his first inauguration.

Swear on a stack of Bibles

The Bibles will be closed and stacked on top of each other, while Trump takes the oath of office.

A few swore on the Bible provided by the clerk of the U.S. Supreme Court. Some used other presidential Bibles or made symbolic selections, like Obama, who swore his oaths on the Bibles of Lincoln and Martin Luther King Jr. And many used their family Bibles.

Trump’s Bible selection certainly will leave inauguration day with greater importance, said Mark Dimunation, the chief of the Library of Congress’ rare book and special collections division. The division houses some inauguration Bibles, including Lincoln’s.

“It’s a moment of such national significance that it imbues this otherwise modest—can be a modest—book with a level of importance that makes it forever a significant piece,” Dimunation said. “They actually do have a certain kind of electricity, a certain kind of meaning when you can hand somebody a Bible and say, ‘This is the Bible that Lincoln was sworn in on.’”

NASHVILLE (BP)—America has its problems and needs to talk, but few Americans agree on who best can lead a conversation about the nation’s woes, a new study reveals.

Less than a quarter (23 percent) would turn to the office of the U.S. president. About one in 10 would turn to the nation’s preachers (11 percent) or to college professors (10 percent), a survey by LifeWay Research shows.

“Almost no one would ask a musician or pro athlete, even though they often try to start public conversations,” said Scott McConnell, executive director of LifeWay Research. “Musicians or athletes get a great deal of attention for their public statements about the issues, but few Americans seem to look to them as thought leaders.”

Before the recent presidential election, LifeWay Research asked a representative sample of 1,000 Americans: “In America today, who is in the best position to generate a healthy conversation on challenges facing our society?”

Members of the media (8 percent) fared slightly better than business leaders (7 percent) or members of Congress (6 percent). Few Americans look to professional athletes (1 percent) or musicians (less than 1 percent) to lead healthy conversations about the nation’s challenges.

The most common response: “None of these” (33 percent).

Among other findings:

• Southerners are more likely to look to the president (25 percent) than those in the Midwest (18 percent).
• People in the Northeast choose the media (11 percent) more than those in the South (5 percent).
• Younger Americans—ages 18 to 34—look to the media (12 percent) more than those 65 and older (3 percent).
• African Americans are the most likely ethnic group to choose local pastors (21 percent) and the president (37 percent).
• Hispanic Americans are the least likely ethnic group to choose the media (3 percent).
• Christians are more likely to look to pastors (16 percent) than Americans from other faiths (1 percent) or Nones—those with no religious preference—(2 percent).
• Christians (7 percent) are less likely to look to professors than those from other faiths (18 percent) or Nones (15 percent).
• Americans with evangelical beliefs have faith in pastors (36 percent) but little faith in the media (3 percent) or professors (3 percent) to guide such conversations.

Overall, the survey reflects the reality that Americans are fractured and divided, McConnell said. Few leaders can draw a wide, diverse audience.

“There’s a vacuum of public leadership in America,” McConnell said. “We know we have problems and that we should talk about them. But there’s no one who can bring us all together.”

LifeWay Research conducted the study Sept. 27–Oct. 1, 2016, using the web-enabled KnowledgePanel, a probability-based platform designed to be representative of the U.S. population.

Initially, participants are chosen scientifically by a random selection of telephone numbers and residential addresses. People in selected households then are invited by telephone or by mail to participate in the KnowledgePanel online. A laptop and Internet connection are provided at no cost to those who agree to participate but who do not have online access.

Researchers use sample stratification and weights for gender, age, race/ethnicity, region, metro/non-metro, education and income to reflect the most recent U.S. Census data. The completed sample is 1,000 surveys, providing 95 percent confidence that the sampling error does not exceed plus or minus 3.1 percent. Margins of error are higher in subgroups.

WASHINGTON (RNS)—The United States Congress is about as Christian today as it was in the early 1960s, a new analysis by Pew Research Center revealed.

Nearly 91 percent of members of the 115th Congress describe themselves as Christian, compared to 95 percent of Congress members serving from 1961 to 1962, according to congressional data compiled by CQ Roll Call and analyzed by Pew.

That comes even as the share of Americans who describe themselves as Christian—now at 71 percent—has dropped in that time, Pew researchers noted.

Religiously unaffiliated hard to find in Congress

As a whole, Congress is far more religiously affiliated than the general public.

“Why have the ‘nones’ grown in the public, but not among Congress?” asked Greg Smith, associate director for research at Pew, referring to people who check “none” on surveys asking their religion. “One possible explanation is people tell us they would rather vote for an elected representative who is religious than for one who is not religious.”

Smith pointed to past Pew polls, including one in January 2016 that asked whether voters were more or less likely to vote for a presidential candidate who does not believe in God. More than half said they’d be less likely to vote for a nonbelieving candidate, 10 times the number who said they’d be more likely to vote for such a candidate.

In 2014, Smith said, 60 percent of adults in the U.S. told Pew it was important to them that members of Congress have strong religious beliefs.

“Being a nonbeliever really is a political liability,” he said.

Fewer Protestants

While the new 115th Congress mostly looks like the last, and the 87th that convened in 1961, the new Congress does include seven fewer Protestants, four more Catholics and six fewer Christians as a whole.

That mimics a shift in the general public, according to Aleksandra Sandstrom, lead author of the Pew report. Like the rest of the country, Congress has become less Protestant. The share of Protestants in Congress has dropped from 75 percent to 56 percent since the 1960s, while the share of Catholics has jumped from 19 percent to 31 percent.

And 13 percent of its new members affiliate with non-Christian faiths, nearly double the share of non-Christian incumbent members, Pew reported. More than half of those non-Christian freshmen are Jewish (8 percent), the largest share of Jews in any freshman class, researchers noted, although Sandstrom said that data only was available back to 2011-2012.

Christians, both Protestant and Catholic, aren’t the only demographic to outstrip the general population in Congress. There also is a larger share of Jewish members of Congress (9 percent) than there is of Jewish-Americans in the country as a whole (2 percent).

Representation by Buddhists, Mormons, Muslims and Orthodox Christians in Congress is roughly proportional to their population size.

But religiously unaffiliated Americans, who are growing in number, remain underrepresented. Nones make up 23 percent of all Americans, according to Pew, but just 0.2 percent of Congress. Only Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, a Democrat from Arizona, describes herself as religiously unaffiliated.

There are more atheist Americans (just over 3 percent) than Jewish (again, 2 percent) or Muslim, Hindu or Buddhist (each, less than 1 percent), according to Pew’s latest U.S. Religious Landscape Study.

Variance between House and Senate and between parties

Religious affiliation differs in the House of Representatives and the Senate, as well as by political party.

“Of the non-Christian members of Congress, most of them are in the House and most of them are Democrats,” Sandstrom said. “There are only two non-Christian Republicans in Congress, and one of them is a new member of Congress. So, the non-Christian contingent doubled between the last Congress and this Congress.”

All but two of the 293 Republicans in the new Congress are Christians. Those are Rep. Lee Zeldin of New York and Rep. David Kustoff of Tennessee, both Jewish.

The 242 Democrats in Congress also overwhelmingly are Christian (80 percent).  But Democrats also include 28 Jews; three Buddhists; three Hindus; two Muslims; one Unitarian Universalist; Sinema, the one religiously unaffiliated member of Congress; and 10 members who declined to state their religious affiliation, according to Pew.

“It’s also of note that the majority of the non-Christians in Congress are Jewish,” Sandstrom said. “In all the years we’ve analyzed, all of the Republicans in Congress who have not been Christian have been Jewish.”

Both the House (91 percent) and Senate (88 percent) are majority Christian – specifically, Protestant (55 and 58 percent, respectively). One-third of the House is Catholic, compared with one-quarter of the Senate, and all five Orthodox Christians in Congress are members of the House.

The Senate includes just nine members of non-Christian faiths: Eight are Jewish, and Sen. Mazie K. Hirono, a Democrat from Hawaii, is Buddhist.

CQ Roll Call compiled its data through questionnaires and follow-up phone calls to Congress members’ and candidates’ offices, according to Pew.

WASHINGTON (RNS)—The election of Donald Trump, a man who suggested banning Muslim immigration to the United States and attracted overwhelming evangelical support, was the top religion story of the year, according to members of the Religion News Association.

But Trump came in as runner-up for the top religion newsmaker of the year, behind Gold Star parents and Muslims Khizr and Ghazala Khan, who described the death of their son, U.S. Army Capt. Humayun Khan, in Iraq to a spellbound Democratic National Convention audience in July.

RNA is an international organization of journalists who write about religion. It has polled its 500 members on the top 10 religion stories of the year for four decades.

While Trump was not the most religious candidate in what started out as a broad field, his election can be credited to his appeal to white evangelicals, who voted for him by a margin of 4 to 1.

Evangelical support of Trump—who has been married three times, owns multiple casinos and has spoken disrespectfully of women—was such a surprise it took its own category, coming in as the No. 9 story in the RNA poll.

Also high on the list of RNA’s most important religion news stories were:

• Attacks on Muslims and other minorities following the election.
• Standing Rock Sioux’s demonstration against a proposed pipeline on tribal lands.
• Several stories involving Pope Francis, including his denouncement of Trump’s proposed wall along the U.S.-Mexico border as “not Christian” and his welcome to divorced Catholics.

Francis topped the list of religion newsmakers the last three years. This year, he dipped to fourth place, behind the Khans, Trump and the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe.

The full list of winning stories and newsmakers can be found here.

WASHINGTON—President Obama signed into law the Frank Wolf International Religious Freedom Act of 2016—an action that drew praise from groups ranging from Baptist agencies to the American Humanist Association.

The bill enhances the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 by requiring the ambassador-at-large for international religious freedom at the U.S. State Department to report directly to the secretary of state.

It also requires international religious freedom training for all foreign services officers, strengthens the role of the special adviser for religious freedom at the National Security Council and creates a list of religious prisoners of conscience.

In addition to the “countries of special concern”—a classification the State Department has used for two decades to identify nations that violate human rights and religious liberty—the bill adds the “entity of special concern” category for nongovernmental terrorist groups.

It also includes a “designated persons list” for individuals who commit egregious violations of religious liberty, and it authorizes the president to sanction them by executive action.

Honors contributions of veteran religious liberty champion

The bipartisan bill provides the U.S. State Department “new tools, resources and training to help counter extremism and the growing persecution of religious minorities globally,” said Randel Everett, president of the 21st Century Wilberforce Initiativest Century Wilberforce Initiative. 

The legislation bears the name of the former Republican congressman from Virginia who was instrumental in passage of the 1998 version of the bill and who now holds the Jerry and Susie Wilson Chair in Religious Freedom at Baylor University and serves as senior fellow with the 21st Century Wilberforce Initiative. 

“No one has done more to advance the cause of international religious freedom than Frank Wolf during his 34 years serving in Congress and during these last two years with the 21st Century Wilberforce Initiative,” said Everett, former executive director of the Baptist General Convention of Texas.

“Congressman Wolf has worked with both parties in Congress, human rights organizations and faith communities to call attention to the religious persecution and oppression that is happening among three-fourths of the world’s populations. His willingness to work with both parties and all faiths is reflected in the bipartisan support this bill has received from Congress and the quick support of the president.”

Bipartisan support lauded

Russell Moore, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, called the bill “a vital step toward protecting conscience freedom for millions of the world’s most vulnerable, most oppressed people.” 

“The bipartisan nature of this passage shows us that religious freedom does not have to be a partisan issue but is rooted in our deepest commitments as Americans, and I hope that persecuted religious minorities around the globe will see that they have not been forgotten,” Moore said.

Brent Walker, executive director of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, echoed that sentiment. 

“We are pleased that religious liberty still finds broad bipartisan support,” Walker said. “Strengthening the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, including by protecting nontheistic beliefs and requiring increased religious freedom training for our foreign service officers, emphasizes our shared value of religious liberty for all people across the globe.”

Expanded to include nontheistic belief systems

Representatives from the American Humanist Association likewise praised the bill for including protections for nontheistic religion, as well as the right not to practice religion.

The bill states “freedom of thought, conscience and religion is understood to protect theistic and nontheistic beliefs as well as the right not to profess or practice any religion.”

“Religious freedom for all people, theists and nontheists, is an American value we must protect,” said Matthew Bulger, legislative director of the American Humanist Association.

The organization’s executive director, Ray Speckhardt, praised lawmakers for “finally recognizing the human dignity of humanists and granting the nontheistic community the same protections and respect that have been given to religious communities.”

Leaders of International Christian Concern—a human rights organization focused on the persecution of Christians—said they were “elated” Congress passed what they called “the most important religious freedom legislation in more a decade.”

“It is the responsibility of the international community to defend the basic human right of religious freedom, and this bill makes vital strides in ensuring that the United States continues to be at the forefront of protecting religious minorities around the world,” said Isaac Six, advocacy director for International Christian Concern.

FALLS CHURCH, Va.—The 21st Century Wilberforce Initiative is calling on President-elect Donald Trump to appoint an ambassador-at-large for international religious freedom in his first 100 days in office.

In an open letter, the human rights and religious liberty organization also urges Trump to maintain the position of special adviser for religious minorities in the Near East and South/Central Asia. 

The 21st Century Wilberforce Initiativest Century Wilberforce Initiative released the letter, dated Jan. 25, 2017, on Nov. 29 to allow people concerned about global religious liberty issues to endorse it online. 

Standing with religious minorities

“We stand in solidarity with the many religious and ethnic minorities around the world facing serve persecution for their deeply held religious beliefs or commitment to no belief,” says the letter from Randel Everett, president of the 21st Century Wilberforce Initiative and former executive director of the Baptist General Convention of Texas.

Everett cites a Pew Research Center finding that three-fourths of the world’s population live in places with high or very high persecution.

“People of all faiths—Christians, Muslims, Jews and Hindus included—face persecution that at times manifests itself both as heavy-handed government restrictions that try to control people and violent social hostilities that undermine the rule of law,” the letter continues.

Examples of persecution

The letter cites multiple examples of persecution, including the continued genocide of Christians and others in Syria by the Islamic State, increased anti-Semitism throughout Europe, blasphemy laws, tightened control over Tibetan Buddhists, attacks on secular bloggers in Bangladesh, Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar who are displaced and denied citizenship in their own country, and minorities in Nigeria who face famine created by Boko Haram. 

“By nominating a new ambassador-at-large for international religious freedom in your first 100 days and maintaining the position of special adviser for religious minorities in the Near East and South/Central Asia, you not only signal your commitment to people of faith and freedom of conscience, you also do so in a way that requires no new taxes and no new legislation while strengthening what has been a highly effective office,” the letter to Trump states.

“As the first nation to constitutionally guarantee religious freedom, the United States has a great history of standing for this ‘first freedom’ around the world, a right closely tied to other human rights, economics and security. Your swift action in this regard would extend American leadership in this most critical of issues at this most pressing of times.”