In the December 2009 issue of The Atlantic, Hanna Rosin added to the ongoing debate over the causes of the current economic downturn by casting light on the role played by the prosperity gospel—a strain of Christian teaching tens of millions of believers strong, which proclaims that an unfaltering faith in God will lead to monetary and other material blessings in this lifetime. In light of the questions raised and conclusions put forth in Rosin’s article, we asked a group of esteemed scholars and journalists about the relationship between contemporary Christianity and Americans’ economic attitudes, behaviors, and notions of responsibility. We are pleased to offer their responses below.

Following the November 26, 2008 terror attacks in Mumbai, and in the midst of a flurry of international media coverage, the editors of The Immanent Frame invited several scholars to post their own reflections on and analyses of both the event and its wider context. This week, we have invited some of these contributors, along with a range of others, to consider the enduring political and cultural repercussions of last November’s attacks.

This post has been updated to include contributions from Arvind Rajagopal and Anupama Rao.—ed.

When the Dalai Lama visited Washington, D.C. last week, he didn’t stop at the White House, making this the first time since 1991 that the Tibetan leader has visited the capital without meeting with a sitting U.S. president. Aware of his departure from established precedent, President Obama nonetheless made the decision to postpone meeting with the Dalai Lama until after his November summit with Chinese head of state Hu Jintao. What does Obama’s decision say about his strategy regarding the protection of human rights and the competing demands of geopolitical gamesmanship? What do the decision and the strong reactions it has provoked say about the Dalai Lama’s authority as both a religious and a political leader? How does the intrinsic duality of his position play out on the international stage? “Off the cuff” responses from Robbie Barnett, Carole McGranahan, Edward Friedman, and Cameron David Warner.

As the fall semester gets underway, our off the cuff question this week has asked a variety of contributors to The Immanent Frame to look back and reflect on what they read this summer. Today’s responses are from Nancy Levene, James K.A. Smith, Rudy Busto, Jason Bivins, Webb Keane, Omar M. McRoberts, Justin Neuman, and Stathis Gourgouris.

Off the cuff is a new feature at The Immanent Frame, in which we pose a question to a handful of leading thinkers and ask for a brief response. As the fall semester gets underway, our question this week asks contributors to look back and reflect on what they read this summer. Today’s responses are from Omri Elisha, David Kyuman Kim, Tomoko Masuzawa, Patrick Lee Miller, John Lardas Modern, and John Schmalzbauer.

Off the cuff is a new feature at The Immanent Frame, in which we pose a question to a handful of leading thinkers and ask for a brief response. As the fall semester gets underway, our question this week asks contributors to look back and reflect on what they read this summer. We will be posting responses throughout the week, beginning today with responses from Colin Jager, Simon During, John Bowen, Kathryn Lofton, and Winnifred Fallers Sullivan.

Off the cuff is a new feature at The Immanent Frame, in which we pose a question to a handful of leading thinkers and ask for a brief response. Our question today concerns the issue of homosexuality in debates about the Anglican Communion, with responses from Mary Anne Case, Eric Fassin, Siobhán Garrigan, Jimmy Casas Klausen, Mary-Jane Rubenstein and Emilie M. Townes.