Academia

Time to step up the mainstream coverage of transgender debates within U.S. religion

Time to step up the mainstream coverage of transgender debates within U.S. religion

News about transgender issues tends to deal with women’s athletic competitions and shelters, pronouns, girls’ locker rooms, public school sex education, competing rights claims (with parents on both sides of the dates) and resulting political and legal disputes.

There’s been less coverage of medical morality, especially concerning under-aged youths, and hardly any about how various religious groups understand gender and why.

Journalists should take notice when four vigorous arguments on the religious aspect appear in the space of just six days, as follows.

March 20: The leaders of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops authorized publication (.pdf here) of an important but little-reported transgender policy. It declares that Catholic health-care agencies “must not” perform or help develop chemical or surgical procedures to transform a person’s bodily characteristics into those of the opposite sex.

The stated reasons are theological and moral. Key quotes: “We did not create human nature; it is a gift from a loving Creator,” so human dignity requires “genuine respect for this created order.” Sexual differentiation is a reality “willed by God” and a “ fundamental aspect of existence as a human being.”

Therefore, surgical and chemical techniques to switch a patient’s sexual characteristics, or puberty blockers to halt youths’ natural development, “are not morally justified.” To the bishops, such interventions are “injurious to the true flourishing of the human person” and violate doctors’ basic moral maxim to “do no harm.”


Please respect our Commenting Policy

New probe of origins of Islam's Quran resembles 200 years of New Testament conflict

New probe of origins of Islam's Quran resembles 200 years of New Testament conflict

Muslims -- and religion writers -- will want to ponder these quotations:

“There is not much reason to place a great deal of confidence in the Islamic tradition’s account of the Quran’s origins” in light of “the bewildering confusion and complexity” of early Muslim memories about this. Yes, “at least some, and perhaps much” of the holy book does have roots in the Prophet Muhammad’s actual preaching career in Arabia.

However, the book as Muslims know it is a “composite and composed text” that was “altered significantly” and “reimagined, rewritten, and augmented” during a half-century or so after the Prophet’s lifetime and finally standardized under Damascus-based Caliph Abd al-Malik (685–705 CE).

What Muslim tradition tells us about Muhammad’s career may contain factual “nuggets” but much of it is “little more than pious fiction” with “no basis in any genuine historical memories.”

There could be trouble. All that will certainly offend believers in the orthodox view that between 610 and his death in 632, Muhammad, guided by the angel Gabriel, received God’s verbatim words, memorized them, dictated them to scribes, and confirmed the entirety of the Quran’s revelations as they exist today.

This sort of dispute will be familiar to educated Christians, since similar western “historical criticism” or “higher criticism” has been aimed at their New Testament for 200 years.

Now that outlook is being applied to Islam’s holy book in “Creating the Quran.” Author Stephen J. Shoemaker, a prolific scholar of Christian and Muslim origins at the University of Oregon, asserts that experts have been too timid or reverential in promoting a revisionist viewpoint.

“Creating” was published last July but languished in academic obscurity until Baylor University historian Philip Jenkins boosted it as an eye-opener in a recent Patheos.com article. The University of Chicago’s Fred Donner blurbs that this is “a milestone in Quranic studies” and “the most comprehensive and convincing examination” of the issues currently available.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Yes, this is personal: Concerning the New York Times report on The King's College crisis

Yes, this is personal: Concerning the New York Times report on The King's College crisis

I have been on the road for about 12 days now, visiting family in Kansas after speaking at a journalism conference in Washington, D.C. During that time, I have received quite a few emails asking me to comment on the New York Times story about the crisis at The King’s College in lower Manhattan.

As longtime GetReligion readers know, I taught seminars at The King’s College for five years after the semester-length Washington Journalism Center program moved there in 2014. I have friends and former colleagues at TKC and, thus, writing about this topic is quite personal.

Thus, let me stress that the following is a GetReligion commentary about the Times report — which is an important story and, frankly, quite good. It’s crucial — here’s that GetReligion theme, again — that it was assigned to a religion-desk reporter. However, the story, in my opinion, does have an important “ghost” in it, one that could be spotted by anyone who has dug into the details of recent academic and financial trends in Christian higher education.

Hold that thought. First, here is the double-decker headline on this news feature:

The Second Life of a Christian College in Manhattan Nears Its End

The King’s College, which draws students from around the country to Manhattan, has not been able to recover from enrollment and financial losses.

As is the case with MANY private colleges, before and after the coronavirus pandemic, this small college has fundraising issues, enrollment issues and then budget issues that are directly linked to enrollment issues.

To be blunt, many excellent private educational institutions are overly dependent on tuition dollars and lack the endowment funds to survive severe drops in recruiting numbers. For two decades Christian college leaders have known that they would face severe challenges after the passing of a giant wave of students from the giant Millennial generation.

Thus, Christian college administrations have been asking hard questions about recruiting and fundraising. Here is one way to look at it: The concerns of donors, church leaders and parents are not (#DUH) always the concerns of potential students. However, a Christian college cannot survive without loyal donors, church leaders and parents willing to send their children — the ultimate investment — to a specific college.

The raises a painful question: Should small Christian private schools case a “wide net,” seeking as many students as possible (period), or focus on “mission fit,” seeking students from homes and pews that strongly support a school’s core values and programs?


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Thinking (again) about God and sports: Was the Lord of Hosts cheering for Duke?

Thinking (again) about God and sports: Was the Lord of Hosts cheering for Duke?

What we have here is one of those evergreen feature ideas that surfaces whenever there is a global or national sporting event that inspires religious-level fervor in fans.

Now, it’s March Madness and hoops believers — especially sort-of Methodists — will need to interpret the theological implications of Duke University (think Methodist House of Studies at the divinity school) smashing Oral Roberts University 74-51 in the first round in a tournament game that some folks though might have upset potential. Oh, the late faith healer and televangelist Oral Roberts was also (#HONEST) a United Methodist minister.

So, did God ignore the prayers of evangelical-Pentecostal hoops fanatics and favor those of the theologically hip, fluid, progressive believers at Duke? Does this score mean that God (pronouns are controversial) was pro-Duke?

With that in mind, here is a breezy pre-game think piece on this topic that ran at Religion News Service. It was written by two self-avowed Duke dudes, veteran religion-beat pro Mark Pinsky (frequently plugged here at GetReligion) and media consultant Rusty Wright. Here’s the double-decker headline:

Divine dilemma: Who gets God’s nod in March Madness?

If two Christian schools’ fans pray for victory, which one gets God’s favor?

Yes, there are passages that make this an interesting read — even after a Duke throwdown.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: Is 'post-truth America' a right-wing or a left-wing term? Please discuss

Podcast: Is 'post-truth America' a right-wing or a left-wing term? Please discuss

Please ponder this pair of true or false questions.

When religious, cultural and political liberals complained about Donald Trump promoting his own “alternative facts” for use in the mainstream press, did they have a valid point? Was it fair game for them to apply the academic term “post-truth” in this case?

When religious, cultural and political conservatives complained about Democrats and their Big Tech-Big Media allies burying coverage of the Hunter Biden laptop scandal, funders of Antifa, origin debates about COVID-19 and Jane’s Revenge attacks on churches and crisis-pregnancy centers, did they have a valid point? Was it fair game for them to apply the academic term “post-truth” in this case?

I would argue that the correct answer is “yes,” in both cases.

Debates about the meaning of the term “post-truth” were at the heart of this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in). There was a logical reason for that, since Clemente Lisi and I were speakers in a March 10-11 conference in Washington, D.C., with this title: “Journalism in a Post-Truth World.” The conference was sponsored by Franciscan University of Steubenville and the Eternal Word Television Network.

The Franciscan University press release afterwards noted that the participants included journalists from the “National Catholic Register, The Washington Post, OSV News, Fox News, CNN, RealClearPolitics, The Catholic Herald, The Spectator, Washington Examiner, National Review, The Daily Signal, Catholic News Agency, The Daily Caller, and GetReligion.” Well, I had requested that I be identified as a columnist with the Universal press syndicate, but I wear several hats.

That’s a list that clearly leans to newsrooms on the cultural right, but with some solid mainstream voices as well. For example, I was on a panel about Catholic news coverage with the (in my eyes) legendary religion-beat pro Ann Rodgers, best known for several decades with the Pittsburgh Press and Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Also, click here for a Lisi post at Religion Unplugged about his presentation.

It’s safe to say that someone was there from the National Catholic Reporter, because of this headline in that progressive Catholic publication: “EWTN-sponsored conference on journalism embraces right-wing 'post-truth' narrative.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Do the Math: Reporters use labels all the time, but religious life is more complex than that

Do the Math: Reporters use labels all the time, but religious life is more complex than that

Everything I do on social media is a trade-off.

That’s the nature of data visualization. You have to take an incredibly complex and often messy social world and distill it into a rather straightforward graph that the average person scrolling Twitter can understand in five seconds or less. Not an easy task.

One of the ways in which social scientists have tried to make the concept of age more palatable is through the use of generations — Boomers, Gen X, Millennials, etc. There have been several pieces published in the last few years that have exhorted social scientists to stop using these concepts because they mean very little from an empirical perspective.

One reason is that they are completely arbitrary. Born in December of 1979 — you are a Gen X. Born just one month later — you’re a Millennial. And consider the fact that you can be born in 1981 or 1995 and are part of the same generation. That’s just nonsensical the more you think about it.

One way around is to use five-year birth cohorts.

Instead of 15 or 20 year spans for generations, a birth cohort can be just those born between 1940 and 1945. This helps to further isolate the impact of age on religious trends. I’ve been making graphs using this cohort strategy for a while now and they can provide a lot of illumination about American religion and politics.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

With alarming new reports on American youth, what should religious leaders be doing?

With alarming new reports on American youth, what should religious leaders be doing?

Religion writers, like many other Americans, doubtless find a February report on the well-being of American teens from the federal Centers for Disease Control (.pdf here) nothing short of alarming.

There are religion-beat angles in these numbers. The question is whether religious leaders have figured that out yet. As we say here at GetReligion: Hold that thought.

Meanwhile, many news reports focused on the reported plight of teen-aged girls. The CDC survey in 2021 found that 57% persistently feel hopeless and sad, a 60% increase over the past decade and double the rate for boys, while 31% considered taking their own lives. The incidence of girls suffering sexual violence increased 20% in just the four years since 2017. Also, attempted suicide afflicted 22% of “LGBQ+” students.

Meanwhile, the media have lately put new emphasis on the troubled situation of boys and men.

Last August, Psychology Today said young and middle-aged men are more lonely than they’ve been in generations. A major consideration is that men are typically “happier and healthier” when married or “partnered.”

Internet dating is now a huge source of romantic connections, but 62% of users are men because “women are increasingly selective.” Men’s lack of “relationship skills” is said to produce less dating, more singleness, and thus less contentment.

That’s buttressed by a February 22 article from The Hill: “Most young men are single. Most young women are not.” New York University psychology professor Niobe Way’s view contrasts with the CDC, saying young adult men’s “social disconnect” means their suicide rate is quadruple that for women. And we all know distressed teen and young adult men are responsible for much of the national epidemic of mass shootings.

Young women, better-educated than men, “are getting more choosy” and are less likely to settle for problematic mates. Meanwhile, millions of young men have great relationship skills — with their digital screens.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Plug-In: No Separation Of Church And State? New York City Mayor Sparks A Furor

Plug-In: No Separation Of Church And State? New York City Mayor Sparks A Furor

Good morning, Weekend Plug-in readers!

Among the religion news happening now, Catholics in Los Angeles are remembering slain Auxiliary Bishop David G. O’Connell. See photos by Los Angeles Times staff photographer Francine Orr from Thursday’s vigil Mass, before the funeral Mass the next day.

As always, we have a bunch of best reads and top headlines in the world of faith to highlight. Let’s jump right in.

What To Know: The Big Story

Big Apple, big controversy: “Don’t tell me about no separation of church and state. State is the body. Church is the heart. You take the heart out of the body, the body dies.”

New York City Mayor Eric Adams said that at an interfaith breakfast this week — remarks called “unhinged and dangerous” by a rabbi quoted by the New York Times’ Dana Rubinstein.

More from the New York Times:

He went on to suggest that his path to the mayoralty was divinely ordained, saying that when he implements policies, he does so in a “godlike approach.”

At another point, Mr. Adams seemed to suggest that it was a mistake for the Supreme Court to ban mandated prayer in public schools, as it did in 1962. “When we took prayers out of schools, guns came into schools,” he said.

The phrase “separation of church and state” is not in the Constitution, but the First Amendment’s statement that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” has been widely interpreted to dictate such a separation.

‘God bless Mayor Adams’: But not everyone criticized the comments.

In fact, Adams won “a new group of fans: Orthodox Jews and evangelical Christians, whose leaders lauded the liberal Democrat,” according to the Washington Times’ Mark A. Kellner.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Plug-In: Latest Asbury revival is big news, from the New York Times to Christianity Today

Plug-In: Latest Asbury revival is big news, from the New York Times to Christianity Today

Good morning, Weekend Plug-in readers!

It’s the one-year anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

This week’s roundup features news about former President Jimmy Carter’s faith and Saddleback Church’s exit, for now, from the Southern Baptist Convention.

But we start with a story Plug-in already covered last week.

I explain why in 3, 2, 1 …

What To Know: The Big Story

Asbury revival, again: When the New York Times, Christianity Today and Terry Mattingly (IYKYK) all jump on the same story, it must be a big deal.

Such is the case with the spiritual phenomenon that drew thousands to a small Christian college in Kentucky.

The spontaneous, 16-day gathering that ended Thursday was like “‘Woodstock’ for Christians.” So declares Times religion writer Ruth Graham’s front-page story today.

Behind the scenes: “Chocolate chip cookies. ‘All the Chick-fil-A.’ Meetings in a storage closet. Flow charts.”

Christianity Today’s Daniel Silliman goes in depth to explore how Asbury University officials tried to “honor what is happening.”

‘Like deja vu all over again’: In his “On Religion” column for the Universal Syndicate, Mattingly delves into the history of past Asbury revivals.

They go all the way back to 1908, as alumnus and professor Stephen A. Seamands notes in Mattingly’s column:

“The wildness of these events is that they’re actually un-wild. The atmosphere is serene, deep and at times rather quiet,” he said. “It’s like a veil is pulled back and students see Jesus for the first time — Jesus manifested in a new and powerful way.”


Please respect our Commenting Policy