The sobering final phrases of the Hail Mary prayer have recently taken on a unique relevancy: “Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death. Amen.”

A month ago, the conservative Catholic writer challenged readers of the American Papist website to join him in praying one Hail Mary a day on behalf of the iconoclastic atheist Christopher Hitchens, who has been stricken with esophageal cancer, a disease which leaves few survivors.

“I am going to begin praying … for the salvation of his eternal soul,” wrote Peters, “that God will be with him ‘at the hour of his death,’ that God will help his unbelief in this life, and that those he has led away from God will come back to His infinite love and mercy. I am in no way praying for him to die, I am praying for him to live eternally.”

Peters is not alone and Hitchens knows it. While some believers hope that he suffers and dies, post haste, the author of “God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything” told CNN that he has been surprised that others — who are “much more numerous, I must say, and nicer” — are praying for his healing, both body and soul.

This has been one of the strangest side effects of Hitchens’ journey across the “stark frontier that marks off the land of malady.” This is a zone in which almost everyone is politely encouraging, the jokes are feeble, sex talk is nonexistent and the “cuisine is the worst of any destination I have ever visited,” wrote Hitchens, in a blunt Vanity Fair essay. The native tongue in “Tumorville” is built around terms such as “metastasized,” phases such as “tissue is the issue” and quotes from the writings of Elizabeth Kubler-Ross.

Most of the inhabitants also do quite a bit of praying — for themselves, for their loved ones and even for suffering people they have never met.

Hitchens told evangelical broadcaster Hugh Hewitt that he remains convinced these prayers “don’t do any good, but they don’t necessarily do any harm. It’s touching to be thought of in that way.”

The bottom line, explained Peters, is that his faith asks him to “pray for everyone, even those who hate us. … Hitch just happens to be a famous public enemy of the faith, so more people know what is happening in this life, so more people are talking about why it’s good to pray for him.”

While it is “absolutely horrible” that anyone would pray for Hitchens to suffer and die, he added, many believers may find it hard to do more than pray for “God’s will to be done.” That is the “safe prayer” that is always appropriate.

Meanwhile, a quick Internet scan reveals that some believers are, predictably enough, praying for Hitchens to be converted to Christianity for the sake of his own soul. Others are specifically praying that the scribe who — with Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett and Richard Dawkins — is called one of the “four horsemen” of the New Atheism will not only convert, but also become an apologist for faith. That happened decades ago with an atheist named C.S. Lewis, after all.

“Ultimately, I simply will pray that Hitch has a good and holy death,” said Peters. “I really do not care if he has a public conversion. I care that he, somehow, has a private conversion and that he will be reconciled to God.”

As much as believers love these kinds of “foxhole conversion” stories, Hitchens is convinced he will not surrender. However, should rumors spread that he has “hedged his bets,” the writer has made several public statements warning his admirers that if such cry to the Almighty were to take place, they should ignore it.

“If that comes it will be when I’m very ill, when I am half demented, either by drugs or by pain and I won’t have control over what I say,” he told CNN. “I can’t say that the entity that by then would be me wouldn’t do such a pathetic thing. But I can tell you that — not while I am lucid. No, I could be quite sure of that.”

   Send article as PDF to

The cast of “It’s a Wonderful Life 2” reassembled on stage at Celebration Covenant Church, a suburban megachurch north of Dallas. There were characters from a Victorian tableau, along with Frosty the Snowman, young ballerinas and children dressed as penguins. Mary, Joseph and the baby Jesus were there, too.

Then, entering from stage right, came “an adult Christ stripped down to his loincloth and smeared with Dracula blood, dragging a cross to center stage while being whipped by two centurion guards,” writes Stuever, in “Tinsel,” his open-a-vein study of Christmas in the American marketplace. “Here is where the Nativity, Dickens and Burl Ives collide head-on with Good Friday, as Jesus is crucified while everyone sings ‘Hark the Herald Angels Sing,’ ending on a long, noisy note: ‘newborn kiiiiiiiiiiiiiiing.’

“Then they freeze.

“Hold it for applause.”

The scene was achingly sincere and painfully bizarre, with holy images jammed into a pop framework next to crass materialism. For millions of Americans, this is the real Christmas.

“I wrote it in my notes, right there in that church,” said Stuever. “I wrote, ‘It’s Picasso.’ … I just couldn’t believe it.”

There is nothing new about a journalist “embedding” himself to experience life on the front lines. Rather than heading to Iraq, Stuever moved to the Bible Belt. He lived in Frisco, Texas, for six months in 2006, then made 12 short follow-up trips during the next two years.

The veteran Washington Post reporter convinced three families to let him see Christmas through their eyes, from the Back Friday craziness to the somber trashing of mountains of ripped wrapping paper. The book’s credo is voiced by Tammie Parnell, a 40-something business dynamo who decorates McMansions for women who are too busy to prepare for a Texas-sized Christmas.

“Fake is okay here,” she tells Stuever. “Diamond earrings. Christmas trees. If you want me to prove that fake is okay here, let’s you and I go to the Stonebriar Country Club pool one day and check everyone out.”

The bottom line? Most Americans say they want Bethlehem and the North Pole, but the truth is that they invest more time, energy and money at the North Pole. That’s fine with Stuever, who is openly gay and calls himself a “Christmas loser” — while wrestling with the lessons of his Jesuit education and the loss of his Catholic faith.

“A dip into even the most reverent inquiries by Bible scholars,” he argues, “easily leads to the conclusion that there was no actual manger scene in Bethlehem, no shepherds dropping by to see the baby, no star in the east, no Magi, no frankincense, no myrrh. … Many scholars have concluded, some more gently than others, that the Christmas story is intentionally fictive, written by the earliest, first-century evangelists to beef up Jesus’ street cred as a believable Jewish Messiah. Like any superhero, Christ needed an origin story rife with the drama, metaphors and the meaningful symbols of the era.”

Thus, “Tinsel” seeks the meaning of Christmas in the material world itself, in the blitz of shopping, in houses draped in high-voltage lights, in the complex joys and tensions of family life. Stuever argues that the binges of shopping and feasting are as ancient — and more significant today — than the rites of praying and believing.

For Stuever, Christmas is fake, but that’s fine because fake is all there is. He argues that millions of Americans struggle to find the “total moments” of nostalgia and joy that they seek at Christmas because they are not being honest about why they do what they do during the all-consuming dash to Dec. 25.

“It’s so easy to see all of the craziness on TV and say, ‘Oh, those poor, stupid people,’ ” he said. “But when you get down there in the middle of it with them and listen to what people are saying and try to feel what they are feeling, you realize that all of that wildness is not just about buying the new Wii at Best Buy. …

“It’s a religious experience for them, even though it couldn’t be more secular. They’re out there searching for transcendence, trying to find what they think is the magic of Christmas.”

   Send article as PDF to

This formula worked in weeklong revivals and, when tried, it started working in regular Sunday services. Big preachers drew big crowds and created bigger and bigger churches. Then along came the big media, which helped create a youth culture that exploded out of the 1950s and into the cultural apocalypse that followed. Church leaders tagged along.

“In the ’60s and ’70s, we started drinking deep at the well of pop culture and we’ve been doing it ever since,” said church historian John Mark Yeats of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Tex. “The goal was to use all of that to reach the young. Evangelicals ended up with own youth subculture.”

Big churches created bigger stand-alone youth programs and then children’s programs wired to please these media-trained consumers. Youth programs developed their own music, education and preaching, all driven by the style and content of entertainment culture.

Then these young people became adults and began to build and operate their own churches, argue Yeats and his seminary colleague Thomas White, in their sobering book, “Franchising McChurch.” For churches that want to grow, the evolving approach to faith that White and Yeats call “theotainment” seems like the only game in town.

“Think of countless children’s ministries across the United States. … Most children’s Sunday schools quit reading and studying the Bible long ago. Instead, children view cartoon adaptations of the text along with numerous activities that keep them entertained while Mom and Dad worship without distraction,” argue White and Yeats, who have worked in local churches, as well as classrooms.

This strategy is cranked up another notch in youth ministries. In many communities, the “religiously oriented youth, savvy shoppers that they are, simply attend the church that has the greatest concentration of entertaining events. … If they buy into Christianity through entertainment, the show must go on to keep them engaged.”

This has been going on for decades, noted Yeats. The “Jesus rock” of the ’70s moved out of music festivals and into Sunday services. This created a “Contemporary Christian Music” industry that helped churches hip-hop from one cultural style to the next, while striving to find their stylistic niches — like stations on an FM radio dial. Sanctuaries turned into auditoriums and, finally, into theaters with semi-professional sound systems and the video screens preachers needed to display all of those DVD clips that connected with modern audiences.

That was the ’90s. Today’s megachurches offer members new options.

Grandmother may attend a service with hymns or — as Baby Boomers turn 60something — folk music or soft rock. Pre-teens will bop to Hanna-Montana-esque praise songs in their services, while the young people get harder rock. Over in the “video cafe,” evangelical Moms and Dads can sip their lattes while musicians build the right mood until its time for the sermon. That’s when the super-skilled preacher’s face appears on video monitors in all of the niche services at the same time.

This trend — multiple, niche services on one campus — requires changing the traditional meaning of words such as “worship,” “church” and “pastor.”

But it is one thing for a single megachurch to offer its members a “have it your way” approach to church life at one location, said Yeats. The next step is for the “McChurch” model to evolve into “McDenomination,” with the birth of national and even global chains of church franchises united, not by centuries of history and doctrine, but by the voice, face, beliefs and talents of a single preacher, backed by a team of multimedia professionals.

This trend is “very free market” and “also very American,” he said.

“In these franchise operations, you don’t say you’re a Southern Baptist or a Methodist or a Presbyterian or whatever,” Yeats explained. “No, you say you attend the local branch of so-and-so’s church. The whole thing is held together by one man. That’s the brand name, right there. …

“If your church joins one of these operations you get the video feed, you get the media, you get the music and, ultimately, you get to listen to the dynamic man himself, instead of your own sub-standard preacher. It’s a whole new way of doing church.”

   Send article as PDF to

Take comfort in this: The items on the following “to do” list do not apply to all teens today.

Lie to your parents about those wild weekend plans — check.

Steal that scarf you want at the mall — check.

Download that term paper off the Internet and add a few mistakes to confuse the teacher — check.

Inflate your volunteer hours at your church’s soup kitchen to pump up that college application — check.

The problem with the Josephson Institute’s latest survey — the 2008 Report Card on the Ethics of American Youth — is that it contained so many bad numbers that many depressing readers were tempted to pin an “all of the above” verdict on most teens.

Consider the numbers on stealing. Nearly of third of the students surveyed — 29,760 in 100 randomly selected public and private high schools — admitted stealing from a store during the previous year. Also, 23 percent said they stole from a parent or relative. The numbers were lower for honors students and those who attended religious schools, but around 20 percent of them stole something from someone.

It’s easy to criticize the young, but it’s also important to know that they’re learning these behaviors from the adults around them, said Michael Josephson, founder of the Los Angeles-based ethics center.

“Did you lie about your child’s age to save money? Did you provide your child with a false excuse for missing school? Did you lie about your address to get your child into a better school?”, he asked, in a commentary about the survey. “Most of us stray from our highest ethical ambitions from time to time, but we usually do so selectively, convincing ourselves that we’re justified and that occasional departures from our ethical principles are inconsequential when it comes to our overall character.

“Most of us judge ourselves by our best actions and intentions, but the children who watch everything we do may be learning from our worst.”

The sobering numbers leapt into headlines nationwide, while the researchers said the truth was almost certainly worse — since 26 percent of the participants admitted that they lied on at least one or two of the prickly questions. Students took part in the survey during class sessions, with guarantees of anonymity.

Other results noted by the institute included:

* More then eight in 10 students — 83 percent — admitted that they lied to a parent about an issue of some importance, while 43 percent of the students in public and private schools said that they have lied to save money.

* In a 2006 survey, 60 percent of the students said they cheated on at least one test and 35 percent cheated two or more times. This year, the numbers rose to 64 percent and 38 percent on the same issues.

* The Internet makes plagiarism easy, with 36 percent of the students confessing that vice — up from 33 percent in 2004.

* Self-esteem is not a problem, since 93 percent of the students reported that their ethics and character were satisfactory and, in a popular quote from the survey, 77 percent said, “when it comes to doing what is right, I am better than most people I know.”

Buried deep in the survey form was another question that would be of special interest to clergy and other religious leaders who work with the young. When asked if they had done “things in violation of my religious beliefs” during the past year, 48 percent of those polled affirmed a simple answer — never. Another 15 percent confessed to one violation of their personal religious beliefs.

This survey is more proof that something has gone wrong with the way Americans are teaching their young people the meaning of right and wrong, said evangelical activist Charles Colson.

“Instead of being rooted in an objective moral order that exists independently of ourselves, right and wrong are subjective — they’re the product of the person’s ‘values.’ In that case, it makes perfect sense that people can lie, cheat, and steal and still be ‘satisfied’ with their ethics,” he said, in a radio commentary.

“After all, they are not answerable to God or the community, only to themselves. The question isn’t, ‘How shall we live?’ but, ‘How do I feel about it?’ “

NEXT: The theological content of “whatever.”

   Send article as PDF to

Carols drifted out of the village church as they searched its graveyard for the resting place of Lily and James Potter, who were murdered by the dark Lord Voldemort. First, they found the headstone honoring the family of Albus Dumbledore, the late headmaster of the Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. The inscription said: “Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.”

Then the Potter headstone proclaimed: “The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.” Harry was mystified. Was this about defeating the evil Death Eaters?

“It doesn’t mean defeating death in the way the Death Eaters mean it, Harry,” said Hermione, gently. “It means … you know … living beyond death. Living after death.”

For millions of religious believers who embrace Harry Potter, this pivotal scene in “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows” — book seven in J.K. Rowling’s giant fantasy puzzle — offers new evidence that the author is, in fact, a Church of Scotland communicant whose faith has helped shape her work.

The first inscription is from St. Matthew’s Gospel and the second — stating the book’s theme — is a passage in St. Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians about the meaning of Christ’s resurrection. Is this part of what Dumbledore had called an all-powerful “deep magic” built on sacrificial love?

Nevertheless, for millions of Rowling critics the presence of scripture in this final book will not cancel a decade’s worth of wizardry, magic and what they believe is vague, New Age spirituality. And besides, Potter clearly didn’t recognize the unattributed Bible verses. Right?

Religious battles commenced soon after Rowling released “Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone.” It didn’t help that “Philosopher’s Stone” — a term from medieval alchemy — was replaced with “Sorcerer’s Stone” in U.S. editions. After the sale of 325 million-plus books worldwide, there are now at least three camps of Potter critics in these theological debates and three prominent camps of Potter defenders. The critics include:

* Some who insist these books are secular or subtly anti-religious. Writing in Time, Lev Grossman has argued that Rowling shares more in common with atheists like Christopher Hitchens than with J.R.R. Tolkien or C.S. Lewis, whose books were rooted in Christian faith.

“Look at Rowling’s books,” says Grossman. “What’s missing? If you want to know who dies in Harry Potter, the answer is easy: God. Harry Potter lives in a world free of any religion or spirituality of any kind. He lives surrounded by ghosts but has no one to pray to, even if he were so inclined, which he isn’t.”

* Conservatives who think Potter-mania can lead to the occult. Some even oppose fantasy novels by Lewis and Tolkien — which contain references to wizards, magic and demonic powers. The key is a Deuteronomy passage: “There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or daughter pass through fire, or one who practices witchcraft, or a soothsayer, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, or one who conjures spells. …”

Focus on the Family’s James Dobson responded to “Deathly Hallows” by saying: “Magical characters — witches, wizards, ghosts, goblins, werewolves, poltergeists and so on — fill the Harry Potter stories, and given the trend toward witchcraft and New Age ideology … it’s difficult to ignore the effects such stories (albeit imaginary) might have on young, impressionable minds.”

* Believers who see mixed signals. Evangelical activist Chuck Colson, for example, praised the books in 1999, noting that they contrasted good and evil, while the main characters displayed courage, loyalty and self-sacrifice. “Not bad lessons in a self-centered world,” said the founder of Prison Fellowship.

But Colson’s latest statement warned: “Personally, I don?t recommend the Potter books. I?d rather Christian kids not read them.”

Soon after that Colson commentary, however, current Prison Fellowship President Mark Earley gently praised Rowling’s books and, above all, the role fantasy novels can play for readers numbed by modern life.

“The popularity of these books — and, yes, even of the Harry Potter series — reminds us that the yearning for hope, for good to win and evil to be vanquished, is no infantile desire,” he said. “Rather, it is one of the deepest and most important parts of our nature, placed in us by the God of all truth.”

NEXT WEEK: Believers who embrace Harry Potter.

   Send article as PDF to

The host wants the guest to start “testifying,” a confessional process in which believers look for God’s healing hand in life’s hard lessons. Winfrey learned all about “testifying” as a girl back in the Faith United Mississippi Baptist Church, where jealous peers often called her “Miss Jesus.”

But here’s the irony, noted journalist Marcia Nelson, author of “The Gospel According to Oprah.” Winfrey has become a billionaire and one of world’s most powerful women by baring her soul and urging millions of others to follow her example, resulting in what some critics call the “Oprahfication” of America. However, it’s almost impossible to answer this simple question: What does Oprah believe?

“She sounds like a person who was raised in a Baptist church,” said Nelson, who spent months digging into Winfrey’s beliefs on suffering, gratitude, generosity, forgiveness and other spiritual topics.

“Still, it’s hard to put a label on Oprah because she refuses to let people do that to her. … You’d have to say that she looks a lot more like a Protestant than she does a Catholic, but what does that mean? It’s hard to say what a person needs to believe these days to be called a ‘Protestant.’ “

Winfrey retains the ability to slip smoothly into the “mother tongue” she learned as a child in black churches, noted Nelson. For a few years as an adult, she attended the Trinity United Church of Christ, a progressive congregation in Chicago known as Sen. Barack Obama’s home church. Then, during her “Remember Your Spirit” period in the 1990s, conservatives criticized her ties to Marianne Williamson (“A Return to Love”) and other “New Age” writers who blurred the lines between Christianity and other faiths.

The key is that Winfrey has been a trailblazer who symbolizes many contemporary religious trends.

* Many Americans, said Nelson, are drawn to a “practical, how-to, self-help, just-do-it” approach to faith and personal growth that meshes smoothly with the parade of counselors, doctors, writers and ministers — of every conceivable faith — featured on “The Oprah Winfrey Show.” It’s crucial that the host looks straight into the camera and says: “This works.”

Thus, noted Nelson, Winfrey has “been roundly criticized for making the spiritual too psychological, too therapeutic, too soft, too easy, too self-centered. The gospel according to Oprah doesn’t appear to require some kind of doctrinal commitment or a community to ensure that the life-changing ‘Aha!’ moment of decision is more than a new year’s resolution that is quickly made in isolation and broken two weeks later.”

* The public loves complex, conflicted celebrities and Winfrey is the spiritual superstar. She quietly supports humble projects near home, yet courts publicity by flying off to start gigantic projects around the world — such as the new $40-million Oprah Winfrey Leadership Academy near Johannesburg.

She tells women to love themselves the way they are, but keeps offering weight-loss tips. She urges viewers to give to others, but also pamper themselves. Winfrey says women should embrace their maturity, but shows them how to look 10 years younger. She advises women on private moral dilemmas, but fiercely guards her own privacy.

* One of the fastest growing segments of the population consists of people who call themselves “spiritual,” but not “religious,” noted Nelson. Winfrey clicks with media-driven, postmodern believers who stress the importance of personal experience and storytelling over the authority of religious institutions and doctrines. Meanwhile, many churches are trying to shed old names and labels, calling themselves “community churches” and adopting other post-denominational names.

The bottom line, said Nelson, is that for generations Americans were able to rally around a kind of tame, “nominal” Judeo-Christian faith that let them affirm a few common traditions and many old-fashioned values. But this has become harder after waves of immigration from the Middle East, Asia, Africa and elsewhere.

American is becoming more pluralistic on faith issues and that has always been just fine with Winfrey. She is all about spirituality, not doctrine. If she has a creed she keeps it hidden.

“Oprah’s clothes may bear labels, but her faith does not,” noted Nelson. “I don’t know what her personal beliefs are.”

   Send article as PDF to

The family tradition is that he reads the entire book out loud to his wife and two daughters. Then, when the final page has been turned, they start debating what will happen next.

Things will be different this time. However, the Eastern Orthodox priest knows how he hopes the last act plays out. Unlike many other ministers, Tobias doesn’t want Potter to renounce magic or to lose his adolescent flaws. It would be awkward, he said, for the young wizard to “fall to his knees and make the sign of the cross.” His suggestion is simpler than that.

Rowling should let Potter die, because that is what tragic heroes do.

“There is little decent tragedy around” in modern culture, said Tobias, at his “Second Terrace” weblog. “There is a lot of irony, where a non-heroic central character is pitched into the abyss of ambiguity. There is a lot of farce, where burlesque mummers traipse around in varying degrees of moral undress.

“But tragedy? No. … We do not see the sense of the pollution of evil, and its uncleanness. We have no immediate feeling of the necessity to fix or to cleanse. And we haven’t seen much of a fable where the story demanded, clearly, the surmounting and cleansing of evil — even at the cost of real, hard sacrifice.”

Tobias is one voice in a global digital chorus debating this issue at myriad websites with names like SwordOfGryffindor.com and The-Leaky-Cauldron.org. Potter fans have, after all, purchased more than 300 million copies of the six novels.

The faithful have been sweating ever since Jim Dale, the voice behind the U.S. audio-book editions, claimed that the author had told him Harry would die. Then Rowling stunned British television viewers by revealing that she had tweaked the finale (the last word is “scar”) so that “one character got a reprieve, but two die that I didn’t intend to die.” And Harry Potter? She answered, “I can completely understand the mentality of an author who thinks, ‘I’m going to kill him off because after I’m dead and gone they won’t be able to bring back the character.’ “

Podcasting guru Emerson Spartz of MuggleNet.com spoke for millions when he said he couldn’t believe that Rowling would build her series around a “kid whose life sucks and then he dies.”

Nevertheless, Tobias is convinced that Potter combines many characteristics seen in heroes through the ages. He was born to greatness, but suffered the tragic loss of loved ones. He has special gifts, glaring weaknesses and carries the burden of a haunting prophecy that hints at tragedy, triumph or both. Supernatural trials? Potter has seen it all.

“A hero is not perfect. In fact, his flaws are part of what make him great,” said Tobias, pastor of St. John the Baptist Orthodox Church outside Pittsburgh. “By the end of a story like this one, the hero has simply become too big to remain in this world. This kind of hero is born for a purpose and he dies for a purpose.”

Thus, it’s significant that Rowling — in an early interview with a Canadian newspaper — noted that she is, in fact, a Christian. “Every time I’ve been asked if I believe in God, I’ve said, ‘yes,’ because I do. But no one ever really has gone any more deeply into it than that and, I have to say that does suit me. … If I talk too freely about that, I think the intelligent reader — whether 10 or 60 — will be able to guess what is coming in the books.”

Also, Rowling has acknowledged the influence of beloved Christian works like the seven-volume “The Chronicles of Narnia” by C.S. Lewis and “The Lord of the Rings” cycle by J.R.R. Tolkien. Both of these fantasy classics, noted Tobias, feature endings that combine death and rebirth, along with the bittersweet passing of a magical age.

“Part of being a hero is to have a great love and to be willing to make a great sacrifice for that love,” he said. “It seems to me that Harry Potter has been walking down that same road. … It’s just hard to see him going home and settling down. He’s been through too much.”

   Send article as PDF to