Political power often changes the church more than the church changes those in power—the most glaring example is the damage Trump has done to the credibility of the white evangelical world.
Wehner completely discounts that a good many of us he considers "on the left" come from a religious background and are entirely familiar with the virulent but quiet persistent racism, bigotry, and prejudice in Southern White churches. Religion, for the most part, is an exclusionary and tribal "thing," embodied in the if-you're-not-with-us-you're-against-us psyche. No, Peter, we understand very well the religious mind and goals, which is why -- to the religious -- the pushback looks like contempt.
I really enjoyed this discussion. A question that occurred to me when listening: “Would today’s religious right have convicted Jesus in ~AD30?”. My suspicion is the answer is Yes. Why? Because they stand for tradition, what is ‘right and proper’ (in their minds), and are unsympathetic to challenges from the more vulnerable - black, gay, immigrant etc. But those are who Jesus would have been standing up for, so they would be among those resenting (or worse) him for it.....
For us Orthodox Christians, this is Holy Week, so I'm spending a lot of time in church this week. At tonight's service, I was struck by this passage from John 12:
"Nevertheless many even of the authorities believed in [Jesus], but for fear of the Pharisees they did not confess it, lest they should be put out of the synagogue: for they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God."
Tim, you have been seriously crushing the daily podcast. I was worried at first because I really liked Charlie’s daily pod but you have exceeded all my expectations. Well done.
By the way, you had me laughing hysterically on love it or leave it. Especially when the las vegas Benihana’s was discussed.
As Pete states astutely - the religious right and most of the religious right wing movements (ex: moral majority) had more to do with civil rights, racism and control than it did with…anything else.
It’s a watered down version of southern whites using the Bible as a way to justify chattel slavery. Jesus would be flipping tables on these people.
As for how can we co-exist with people on the religious right who may hold hostile views about gay marriage, abortion, etc. You can’t use your rights/beliefs as reason to trample my rights. Gay people should be allowed to exist, but you don’t have to invite them to your church. Abortion should be between a woman and her doctor, but you don’t have to get one. My issue with many Christians (as an ex Catholic) is they wish to force their views on others. If my gay friends existing and medical providers being able to provide a procedure to women who are often only getting it due to horrible circumstances makes you feel like I’m harming your rights - then you belong in the same category as the Taliban.
I applaud Tim for asking the question of how we can create a space for the religiously inclined, even if I share your general concerns. It’s nearly impossible to determine what is a “genuinely held belief” and even then, what gives that person the right to tell people who don’t share their faith to live their lives.
Very true. I guess I struggle with religious people (also an ex catholic) is that they a r complete hypocrites. It’s all about controlling some other persons rights as they scream “my freedom and my liberty” when it comes to something society cares about (vaccines, guns, etc).
Similar to JVL’s Triad regarding partisanship, Bill Barr is beating the usual Republican drum of “Everything liberal is downstream of Communism.” The Republican Party essentially lossed its way after the Commie strawman for everything they didn’t like went away in the 90s, and all their left with is their terrible, unpopular policies and softcore bigotry.
The policies have been abandoned and the Commie-hating was repackaged as the bigotry.
He even makes the “worse than McCarthy” utter nonsense. Really? Joe Biden is worse than an entire government (and country, frankly) paralyzed from fear of being accused of being a Communist?? Seriously? Unbelievable.
Bill Barr is a Swamp Creature who peaked during the the Reagan era when we dug up the corpse of Commie fear and beat that drum again.
Bill, is the Commie in the room now? Show me on doll where the Commies touched you?
The irony is the flip side of “everything downstream from conservatism is fascism” seems to have people rapidly accelerating to the “natural endpoint”. Unfortunately, this constant fear of the both superhuman and infantile enemies (see: the left) is part of that terrifying orthodoxy.
I am not a Christian, not a conservative, but I really like Peter Wehner. He is so thoughtful, generous, and sensitive. And, I agree with him about the most important issue of our day - defeating trump. He wrote an article in the Atlantic a few months ago about the Tracy Chapman / Luke Combs duet at the Grammys which was one of the most moving things I've read in years. On top of everything, Peter is a great writer.
One thing I do not hear people talk about enough is the underlying fear of the conservative voters and elites that whites will soon be the minority and so to preserve white privilege, they must act now before its is too late. This is what fuels the talk of dictatorship, of doing away with the constitution, rigged elections etc. To save white privilege, individual rights must be ended. This is how to make sense of the actions of the Supreme Court and Christian Nationalists, Bill Barr, and all the rest.
Oh conservatism is a fear of the other and change. The reason that conservatives tell you they want to slow change is because change will affect them negatively. It’s a sad truth.
The R's play a long game and have long memories. I think R's like Bill Barr don't want to be left behind, and left out, of the Leonard Leo money wagon which is being used to promote the 2025 project in the next R presidency, which may not be Trump. They also do not want their 'lack of support' for Trump to be the reason for his loss, if he loses.
"power is a trap' for religion in politics. Thank you Pete Wehner.
Heather Cox Richardson's Letters from an American this morning, focuses on Bill Barr et al and makes a compelling argument in support of the above quote:
I would just add that Leonard Leo's billion dollars has created a honey trap for R politicians to jump onboard the Christian nationalism train or get left behind.
Biden doesn't deserve much blame for the border's condition. It's been out of control for decades. The failure - no, the refusal - of both parties to do anything effective about it certainly gives reason to suspect they are for, their own reasons, deliberately keeping the issue alive, just as Trump recently admitted.
To economists, inflation is under control. Sort of. Problem is, people are not trained economists, carefully checking prices for a defined basket of goods and calculating percent changes to three decimal places, then insisting the current 3%, half again as much as the Fed's target, is fine. What people know are the prices they paid last Saturday for gas and eggs and coffee and what they saw on the sirloin, much less New York strip steak, and how much they remember paying not too long ago.
People don't care about national crime statistics and how they have improved. They care about crime in their neighborhood, perhaps the city. And they largely go on impressions and hearsay, not validated, confirmed reports.
It may be my niche issue, but the Biden campaign owes the mainstream press its gratitude for the blackout on the Department of Education's plans for compelling schools to allow natal males into the girls' restrooms and locker rooms as well as allow their participation in girls' athletics. I dread the possibility that the Trump campaign is holding its fire until later in the year.
Don't get me wrong. I'm solidly in the anti-Trump coalition. Better a President within the normal range of being wrong on policy than an out of control psycho. Still, I'm disgusted with having to vote for the less bad candidate. Three times in a row is way too many to be happy about.
"They care about crime in their neighborhood, perhaps the city." Unfortunately, it seems like they care about crime in far-flung areas across the US, having been taught to be afraid that it will spread to their city/neighborhood. And that therefore, Trumpist authoritarianism is the only thing stopping the dark-skinned criminals from raiding their pristine communities.
This is my in-laws in Missouri. They live waaaaaay out in the boonies and they’re just terrified of St. Louis and Kansas City and the “horrible crime” there. They’re also so scared for me in the Bay Area cause San Francisco exists…
Yes, cities have crime. Those two cities in Missouri have more crime than SF, but media outlets need the fear mongering for the views.
The worst part of course is “cities have crime” for these people is not so subtle code for black Americans. Authoritarianism thrives on fear, especially fear of the other. However, when you give up your freedoms for security you have neither freedom nor security.
Ha my parents live in San Jose and I live in sf and my dad will periodically ask me about crime. I’m like dad “I took you to warriors game last week. Did it seem like I was bathing in crime?”
Ditto - my midwestern relatives are terrified to visit SF and then they stay at a swanky hotel in mission bay and they’re so enamored with how gorgeous it is. My brain hurts :/
Hahaha. At least yours are from the Midwest. Mine are from an hour south.
What is even more maddening is that we came up here all the time for niners, giants and warriors game (big family with a lot of boys and loved sports). I NEVER heard about drug use in the ‘loin or gangs in otown in the 90s. It was 10x worse than it is now!!!!
Fox fried my dad’s brain. My mom is normal. She just ignores him. He is an architect for huge single family homes in Atherton, Menlo, Oakland hills, etc. somehow he has been hostile too immigration forever even though he has never lost his job to an immigrant and loves hiring illegals because they are cheaper. It’s maddening.
A lot of people who lived in the Jim Crow American South might beg to differ with Barr’s belief that right-wing autocracy just doesn’t happen in the “Anglosphere.”
The irony is that the Solid South, which gave the Democrats their power in Congress for decades, was the Solid 𝘴𝘦𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 South. Southern representatives in Congress, elected under Jim Crow regimes, were among the strongest supporters of FDR. Even as late as 1964, every Representative and every Senator from the former Confederacy including such Democratic lights as William Fulbright voted against the Civil Rights Act with the sole exception of Sen. Ralph Yarborough of Texas. In fact, the filibuster LBJ had to overcome in that fight was conducted by Democrats and was finally ended only thanks to GOP votes under leadership of Everett Dirksen.
Not to mention Hungary, the rising neo-fascist right in Italy, France, Poland, Sweden, Germany, etc... Or the numerous right-wing authoritarian regimes in Europe that existed well into the late 20th century.
I don't think any "Anglosphere" country has ever turned into a leftist dictatorship.
I love reading Peter's writings in The Atlantic and agreed with everything he said here in today's conversation. The one place I'd push back a little as an atheist lefty is that even though a lot of us aren't familiar with the evangelical world from a personal standpoint--outside of those who have left that community and became atheists as a result--I'd still say that it is often easier to see what is wrong with a community from the outside as opposed to those inside of it who can become oblivious to their community's downward trajectories. Outside of the obvious example of the Bulwark hosts themselves who couldn't see the rot forming within the GOP until it was too late and Trump was their nominee, I've had my own personal experiences with this in taking a look back at the progressive movement that I used to be knee-deep inside of. It wasn't until stuff like the Gaza protests we're seeing on campuses today that I can now look back at Charlie's warning about the antisemitism on the left--well before the 10/7 attacks I should note--with the greater alarm I should have had back then. Like I said, normally it's easier for people on the outside of these in-groups to see the rot than it is for those on the inside. What I do know is that lots of what hard lefties have long said about the religious nationalism in the evangelical movement turned out to be quite right when you look at things like the rise of church militias, pushing Christianity harder into schools/politics, and the post-Dobbs state-level actions around abortion/IVF.
I'll add a final funny thing I always here from those who leave the Evangelical/Southern Baptist churches and find atheism afterwards, and it's that they find their atheism after reading the bible themselves without a preacher in the middle. It's like Isaac Asimov used to say (paraphrasing): "the fastest way to make an atheist is to have them read the bible."
Reading the Bible for oneself without proper guidance is the source of most heresies. Most people who read the Bible don't become atheists; rather, they pick out their favorite parts and build their own versions of Christianity based on stupid interpretations of peculiar verses taken out of context.
The same could be said of reading it with "proper guidance," since there are so many sects/variations of Christianity whose priests all have different interpretations themselves. They can't all be right, but they *can* all be wrong. "Cafeteria Christianity" comes directly from the preachers, priests, and pastors of all the different sects, not just from unguided followers.
Among biblical scholars, there is not all that much conflict these days. Biblical scholarship is a Judeo-Christian collaborative effort that crosses denominational lines. And it is always advancing, as we gain more access to ancient texts and reconstruct the ancient worldview(s) behind the scriptural texts. If there is disagreement over scripture these days, it comes mostly from people who can't keep up with the scholarship and therefore teach the out-of-date stuff they learned in seminary. But even that is a minor source of conflict.
Most religious conflict comes not from actual interpretation of scripture, but from would-be teachers who put their worldly concerns above scripture. That is, essentially, what fundamentalism is.
"Most religious conflict comes not from actual interpretation of scripture, but from would-be teachers who put their worldly concerns above scripture."
So when people find "guidance"--even in the churches, it ain't always the right sort of guidance.
"Among biblical scholars, there is not all that much conflict these days."
So Catholicism and Protestantism have finally squared that circle? I'm doubtful.
You are showing why it is difficult for an outsider to offer valid critiques of religious practice. You seem to be under the impression that churches use the Bible - and their interpretations thereof - as the actual basis of everything they believe and do. Only a few Protestants even claim to do that, and even they don't actually do it.
Moreover, we live in a neo-Protestant culture where Christians - often including Catholics - have been reading and interpreting the Bible for themselves for a few centuries. They do not always look for any guidance at all, let along scholarly guidance or official denominational guidance. Do-it-yourself American religion did not start with New Agers. Christians have been doing it since colonial times, and continually inventing new heresies. That is, historically, what happens when people interpret scripture for themselves.
The remaining conflicts between Catholics and Protestants have little to do with interpretation of Scripture.
"Do-it-yourself American religion did not start with New Agers. Christians have been doing it since colonial times, and continually inventing new heresies."
Wehner completely discounts that a good many of us he considers "on the left" come from a religious background and are entirely familiar with the virulent but quiet persistent racism, bigotry, and prejudice in Southern White churches. Religion, for the most part, is an exclusionary and tribal "thing," embodied in the if-you're-not-with-us-you're-against-us psyche. No, Peter, we understand very well the religious mind and goals, which is why -- to the religious -- the pushback looks like contempt.
I really enjoyed this discussion. A question that occurred to me when listening: “Would today’s religious right have convicted Jesus in ~AD30?”. My suspicion is the answer is Yes. Why? Because they stand for tradition, what is ‘right and proper’ (in their minds), and are unsympathetic to challenges from the more vulnerable - black, gay, immigrant etc. But those are who Jesus would have been standing up for, so they would be among those resenting (or worse) him for it.....
For us Orthodox Christians, this is Holy Week, so I'm spending a lot of time in church this week. At tonight's service, I was struck by this passage from John 12:
"Nevertheless many even of the authorities believed in [Jesus], but for fear of the Pharisees they did not confess it, lest they should be put out of the synagogue: for they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God."
Some things never change.
Tim, you have been seriously crushing the daily podcast. I was worried at first because I really liked Charlie’s daily pod but you have exceeded all my expectations. Well done.
By the way, you had me laughing hysterically on love it or leave it. Especially when the las vegas Benihana’s was discussed.
Yeah, Tim's got mad skills for this.
Bill Barr is just ridiculous! When these dinosaurs are gone the world will be a better place!
As Pete states astutely - the religious right and most of the religious right wing movements (ex: moral majority) had more to do with civil rights, racism and control than it did with…anything else.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/05/religious-right-real-origins-107133/
It’s a watered down version of southern whites using the Bible as a way to justify chattel slavery. Jesus would be flipping tables on these people.
As for how can we co-exist with people on the religious right who may hold hostile views about gay marriage, abortion, etc. You can’t use your rights/beliefs as reason to trample my rights. Gay people should be allowed to exist, but you don’t have to invite them to your church. Abortion should be between a woman and her doctor, but you don’t have to get one. My issue with many Christians (as an ex Catholic) is they wish to force their views on others. If my gay friends existing and medical providers being able to provide a procedure to women who are often only getting it due to horrible circumstances makes you feel like I’m harming your rights - then you belong in the same category as the Taliban.
I applaud Tim for asking the question of how we can create a space for the religiously inclined, even if I share your general concerns. It’s nearly impossible to determine what is a “genuinely held belief” and even then, what gives that person the right to tell people who don’t share their faith to live their lives.
Very true. I guess I struggle with religious people (also an ex catholic) is that they a r complete hypocrites. It’s all about controlling some other persons rights as they scream “my freedom and my liberty” when it comes to something society cares about (vaccines, guns, etc).
Similar to JVL’s Triad regarding partisanship, Bill Barr is beating the usual Republican drum of “Everything liberal is downstream of Communism.” The Republican Party essentially lossed its way after the Commie strawman for everything they didn’t like went away in the 90s, and all their left with is their terrible, unpopular policies and softcore bigotry.
The policies have been abandoned and the Commie-hating was repackaged as the bigotry.
He even makes the “worse than McCarthy” utter nonsense. Really? Joe Biden is worse than an entire government (and country, frankly) paralyzed from fear of being accused of being a Communist?? Seriously? Unbelievable.
Bill Barr is a Swamp Creature who peaked during the the Reagan era when we dug up the corpse of Commie fear and beat that drum again.
Bill, is the Commie in the room now? Show me on doll where the Commies touched you?
Jesus, man, get a grip. It’s embarrassing.
The irony is the flip side of “everything downstream from conservatism is fascism” seems to have people rapidly accelerating to the “natural endpoint”. Unfortunately, this constant fear of the both superhuman and infantile enemies (see: the left) is part of that terrifying orthodoxy.
Just a non-political note to say how grateful I am for the Bulwark podcasts and the quality content you all create.
Tim, you need to revive the Depolorables of the Week. Bill Barr makes a great candidate!
I am not a Christian, not a conservative, but I really like Peter Wehner. He is so thoughtful, generous, and sensitive. And, I agree with him about the most important issue of our day - defeating trump. He wrote an article in the Atlantic a few months ago about the Tracy Chapman / Luke Combs duet at the Grammys which was one of the most moving things I've read in years. On top of everything, Peter is a great writer.
One thing I do not hear people talk about enough is the underlying fear of the conservative voters and elites that whites will soon be the minority and so to preserve white privilege, they must act now before its is too late. This is what fuels the talk of dictatorship, of doing away with the constitution, rigged elections etc. To save white privilege, individual rights must be ended. This is how to make sense of the actions of the Supreme Court and Christian Nationalists, Bill Barr, and all the rest.
Oh conservatism is a fear of the other and change. The reason that conservatives tell you they want to slow change is because change will affect them negatively. It’s a sad truth.
The R's play a long game and have long memories. I think R's like Bill Barr don't want to be left behind, and left out, of the Leonard Leo money wagon which is being used to promote the 2025 project in the next R presidency, which may not be Trump. They also do not want their 'lack of support' for Trump to be the reason for his loss, if he loses.
Good show. Great guest, and host, offering sane and thoughtful commentary on some of the volatile political events and actors in the news.
"power is a trap' for religion in politics. Thank you Pete Wehner.
Heather Cox Richardson's Letters from an American this morning, focuses on Bill Barr et al and makes a compelling argument in support of the above quote:
https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/april-28-2024
I would just add that Leonard Leo's billion dollars has created a honey trap for R politicians to jump onboard the Christian nationalism train or get left behind.
Biden doesn't deserve much blame for the border's condition. It's been out of control for decades. The failure - no, the refusal - of both parties to do anything effective about it certainly gives reason to suspect they are for, their own reasons, deliberately keeping the issue alive, just as Trump recently admitted.
To economists, inflation is under control. Sort of. Problem is, people are not trained economists, carefully checking prices for a defined basket of goods and calculating percent changes to three decimal places, then insisting the current 3%, half again as much as the Fed's target, is fine. What people know are the prices they paid last Saturday for gas and eggs and coffee and what they saw on the sirloin, much less New York strip steak, and how much they remember paying not too long ago.
People don't care about national crime statistics and how they have improved. They care about crime in their neighborhood, perhaps the city. And they largely go on impressions and hearsay, not validated, confirmed reports.
It may be my niche issue, but the Biden campaign owes the mainstream press its gratitude for the blackout on the Department of Education's plans for compelling schools to allow natal males into the girls' restrooms and locker rooms as well as allow their participation in girls' athletics. I dread the possibility that the Trump campaign is holding its fire until later in the year.
Don't get me wrong. I'm solidly in the anti-Trump coalition. Better a President within the normal range of being wrong on policy than an out of control psycho. Still, I'm disgusted with having to vote for the less bad candidate. Three times in a row is way too many to be happy about.
"They care about crime in their neighborhood, perhaps the city." Unfortunately, it seems like they care about crime in far-flung areas across the US, having been taught to be afraid that it will spread to their city/neighborhood. And that therefore, Trumpist authoritarianism is the only thing stopping the dark-skinned criminals from raiding their pristine communities.
True, but they still don't care about the statistics. The fear isn't evidence based to begin with, so facts won't change that.
This is my in-laws in Missouri. They live waaaaaay out in the boonies and they’re just terrified of St. Louis and Kansas City and the “horrible crime” there. They’re also so scared for me in the Bay Area cause San Francisco exists…
Yes, cities have crime. Those two cities in Missouri have more crime than SF, but media outlets need the fear mongering for the views.
The worst part of course is “cities have crime” for these people is not so subtle code for black Americans. Authoritarianism thrives on fear, especially fear of the other. However, when you give up your freedoms for security you have neither freedom nor security.
Ha my parents live in San Jose and I live in sf and my dad will periodically ask me about crime. I’m like dad “I took you to warriors game last week. Did it seem like I was bathing in crime?”
Hello fellow San Franciscan!
Ditto - my midwestern relatives are terrified to visit SF and then they stay at a swanky hotel in mission bay and they’re so enamored with how gorgeous it is. My brain hurts :/
Hahaha. At least yours are from the Midwest. Mine are from an hour south.
What is even more maddening is that we came up here all the time for niners, giants and warriors game (big family with a lot of boys and loved sports). I NEVER heard about drug use in the ‘loin or gangs in otown in the 90s. It was 10x worse than it is now!!!!
Fox fried my dad’s brain. My mom is normal. She just ignores him. He is an architect for huge single family homes in Atherton, Menlo, Oakland hills, etc. somehow he has been hostile too immigration forever even though he has never lost his job to an immigrant and loves hiring illegals because they are cheaper. It’s maddening.
Tim, in terms of Gaza and campus protests, I’d love to see you and Mehdi Hasan debate.
me also
A lot of people who lived in the Jim Crow American South might beg to differ with Barr’s belief that right-wing autocracy just doesn’t happen in the “Anglosphere.”
The irony is that the Solid South, which gave the Democrats their power in Congress for decades, was the Solid 𝘴𝘦𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 South. Southern representatives in Congress, elected under Jim Crow regimes, were among the strongest supporters of FDR. Even as late as 1964, every Representative and every Senator from the former Confederacy including such Democratic lights as William Fulbright voted against the Civil Rights Act with the sole exception of Sen. Ralph Yarborough of Texas. In fact, the filibuster LBJ had to overcome in that fight was conducted by Democrats and was finally ended only thanks to GOP votes under leadership of Everett Dirksen.
Yep and then republicans were like “I have a plan to win the south. The southern strategy!!!” Kind of amazing when you think about it
Not to mention Hungary, the rising neo-fascist right in Italy, France, Poland, Sweden, Germany, etc... Or the numerous right-wing authoritarian regimes in Europe that existed well into the late 20th century.
I don't think any "Anglosphere" country has ever turned into a leftist dictatorship.
I love reading Peter's writings in The Atlantic and agreed with everything he said here in today's conversation. The one place I'd push back a little as an atheist lefty is that even though a lot of us aren't familiar with the evangelical world from a personal standpoint--outside of those who have left that community and became atheists as a result--I'd still say that it is often easier to see what is wrong with a community from the outside as opposed to those inside of it who can become oblivious to their community's downward trajectories. Outside of the obvious example of the Bulwark hosts themselves who couldn't see the rot forming within the GOP until it was too late and Trump was their nominee, I've had my own personal experiences with this in taking a look back at the progressive movement that I used to be knee-deep inside of. It wasn't until stuff like the Gaza protests we're seeing on campuses today that I can now look back at Charlie's warning about the antisemitism on the left--well before the 10/7 attacks I should note--with the greater alarm I should have had back then. Like I said, normally it's easier for people on the outside of these in-groups to see the rot than it is for those on the inside. What I do know is that lots of what hard lefties have long said about the religious nationalism in the evangelical movement turned out to be quite right when you look at things like the rise of church militias, pushing Christianity harder into schools/politics, and the post-Dobbs state-level actions around abortion/IVF.
I'll add a final funny thing I always here from those who leave the Evangelical/Southern Baptist churches and find atheism afterwards, and it's that they find their atheism after reading the bible themselves without a preacher in the middle. It's like Isaac Asimov used to say (paraphrasing): "the fastest way to make an atheist is to have them read the bible."
Reading the Bible for oneself without proper guidance is the source of most heresies. Most people who read the Bible don't become atheists; rather, they pick out their favorite parts and build their own versions of Christianity based on stupid interpretations of peculiar verses taken out of context.
The same could be said of reading it with "proper guidance," since there are so many sects/variations of Christianity whose priests all have different interpretations themselves. They can't all be right, but they *can* all be wrong. "Cafeteria Christianity" comes directly from the preachers, priests, and pastors of all the different sects, not just from unguided followers.
Among biblical scholars, there is not all that much conflict these days. Biblical scholarship is a Judeo-Christian collaborative effort that crosses denominational lines. And it is always advancing, as we gain more access to ancient texts and reconstruct the ancient worldview(s) behind the scriptural texts. If there is disagreement over scripture these days, it comes mostly from people who can't keep up with the scholarship and therefore teach the out-of-date stuff they learned in seminary. But even that is a minor source of conflict.
Most religious conflict comes not from actual interpretation of scripture, but from would-be teachers who put their worldly concerns above scripture. That is, essentially, what fundamentalism is.
"Most religious conflict comes not from actual interpretation of scripture, but from would-be teachers who put their worldly concerns above scripture."
So when people find "guidance"--even in the churches, it ain't always the right sort of guidance.
"Among biblical scholars, there is not all that much conflict these days."
So Catholicism and Protestantism have finally squared that circle? I'm doubtful.
You are showing why it is difficult for an outsider to offer valid critiques of religious practice. You seem to be under the impression that churches use the Bible - and their interpretations thereof - as the actual basis of everything they believe and do. Only a few Protestants even claim to do that, and even they don't actually do it.
Moreover, we live in a neo-Protestant culture where Christians - often including Catholics - have been reading and interpreting the Bible for themselves for a few centuries. They do not always look for any guidance at all, let along scholarly guidance or official denominational guidance. Do-it-yourself American religion did not start with New Agers. Christians have been doing it since colonial times, and continually inventing new heresies. That is, historically, what happens when people interpret scripture for themselves.
The remaining conflicts between Catholics and Protestants have little to do with interpretation of Scripture.
"Do-it-yourself American religion did not start with New Agers. Christians have been doing it since colonial times, and continually inventing new heresies."
And who determines what is or isn't a heresy?