Death & dying

, , , , , , , , ,

Fire at will, in a circle: What does 'pro-life' mean in the context of the COVID-19 era?

, , , , , , , , ,

The assertion of certain conservative politicians that abortion should not be considered “essential” surgery in a time of medical shortages is the latest twist in the ever-active “pro-life” news agenda. But different sorts of life debates lie ahead.

Writers on religion and ethics went to work when Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick suggested on Fox News that it’s OK if senior citizens like himself need to die in this epidemic to ensure that their children and grandchildren have decent economic livelihoods. Radio talker Glenn Beck, a Latter-day Saint, agreed that he’d “rather die than kill the country.”

Even liberals who favor fully free choice for abortion and mercy-killing abhorred suggestions that incomes should count more than the sacredness of human life. Harvard’s Ashish Jha told The Washington Post’s Sarah Pulliam Bailey that Patrick set up “a false dichotomy” between economics and public health, which is “possibly the dumbest debate we’re having.”

A related topic could be around the corner that journalists should be preparing to cover. In a word: Triage.

Here’s the Merriam-Webster definition: “The sorting of and allocation of treatment to patients and especially battle and disaster victims according to a system of priorities designed to maximize the number of survivors.”

That is, in a crunch who gets life-saving treatment and who doesn’t? In the current crisis, what if intensive care units in a city’s hospitals run short of ventilators necessary to sustain life, as worst-case projections indicate could happen? Should advanced age be a criterion for withholding treatments? This is a nation that next January will inaugurate a president of age 74 (Donald Trump) or 78 (Joe Biden) or 79 (Bernie Sanders), alongside a likely House Speaker who is 80.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , ,

Medical ethics or religion? Killing Grandma and other questions during the COVID-19 cris

, , , , , ,

I bring this column to you, once again, from my news organization’s hastily configured satellite bureau.

That’s correct: I’m writing from home, where I’m properly socially isolated in the time of coronavirus. (Right, Ted Olsen?)

I launched the “Weekend Plug-In” column in January with big dreams of bringing readers new and exciting topics each week. Lately, though, it’s all coronavirus all the time, and guess what? That doesn't appear likely to change anytime soon.

Amid the COVID-19 horror stories, I’m stressed. I’ll admit that much. How about you? As a person of faith, I’m trying my best to trust in God. But it’s a crazy, crazy time to be alive. Can I get an amen?

Once again this week, I’ll forgo our normal format. Let’s focus on key coronavirus-related questions making religion headlines.

Power Up: The Week’s Big Questions

1. Should we kill Grandma to boost the economy?: Apparently, that’s not a rhetorical question.

Here’s how Washington Post religion writer Sarah Pulliam Bailey described the issue on Twitter: “Today I watched a miserable debate unfold: should we let older Americans die or save the economy.” As Bailey’s Post story noted, Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick suggested that “he and other older Americans should be willing to sacrifice their lives for the sake of the economy, which he said was in mortal jeopardy because of shutdowns related to the coronavirus pandemic.”


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Many patients and not enough ventilators: Is religion part of this coronavirus debate?

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Let’s state this coronavirus question bluntly: Is the emerging “let Granny die” puzzle a political story, an economics story or a religion story? Based on the coverage I am seeing, it appears that the safe route is to call this a “medical ethics” story.

Something tells me — based on his fierce writings about materialism, greed and modernity — that Pope Francis would insist that centuries of traditions in multiple faiths are relevant during debates about this equation.

But I understand that news organizations only have so much space and time. However, I believe this is a case where some editors are editing religious questions and voices out of stories that — for millions of people in America and around the world — are “haunted” by religion. This is, of course, what GetReligion is all about.

So here are the bare bones of the story, as covered in faith-free USA Today story with this headline: “ ‘Who lives and who dies': In worst-case coronavirus scenario, ethics guide choices on who gets care.” The overture states:

In a worst-case scenario of ventilator shortages, physicians may have to decide “who lives and who dies,” said Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, an oncologist and chairman of the University of Pennsylvania’s department of medical ethics and health policy.

“It’s horrible,” Emanuel said. “It’s the worst thing you can have to do.”

Respiratory therapists, who take care of patients who struggle to breathe, are aware of the pressures that comes from a swift, sudden need for ventilators

This story contains tons of valid information. However, it’s clear that the team that produced it didn’t include anyone with a background in religion reporting or debates about “whole life” doctrines in moral theology.

The only mention of faith may have been an accident — through an interview with a prominent scientist who also happens to be an articulate Christian.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Prayers in the news: Five saints Catholics are calling on to help fight coronavirus pandemic

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The coronavirus outbreak has led millions upon millions of Christians around the world — and other faith traditions as well — to prayer. Pope Francis prayed the rosary last Thursday with Catholics around the world via internet to ask God to end the COVID-19 pandemic, which has killed more people in Italy than anywhere else.

The Vatican also announced that Holy Week and Easter services would go on without any public participation for the first time ever. Churches around the world have closed to help stop the spread of the deadly virus. As a result, people are worshiping from home, following worship services streamed on the Internet.

But here is an interesting story for journalists and readers during this crisis.

As the need for for more respirators and protective masks grows to combat the pandemic, more and more people are urgently praying these days. So what does this look like, especially for Catholics and other members of churches with ancient liturgical roots?

Pope Francis called on the leaders of all Christian churches worldwide, as well Christians everywhere, to join together in praying the Our Father (that’s the Lord’s Prayer, for many other Christians) on Wednesdays to combat COVID-19.

At the same time, in both Catholic and Eastern church traditions, saints are venerated and given special ecclesiastical recognition. These exemplary heroes of the faith are looked upon for help through the power of prayer — what some Christians call intercession — especially in times of need.

The church’s 2,000-year history can give us a glimpse into how Christians reacted to past pandemics. Plagues, being quarantined and social distancing (a monastic life in religious terms) are nothing new to Christians. As a result, Catholics around the world have primarily called for the intercession of Mary and a number of saints whose prayers have helped defeat plagues and epidemics over the centuries.

There are scores of saints that be called upon in a time of illness, including a group called the 14 Holy Helpers. Many readers — even at mainstream news sites — might want to know more about them.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , ,

COVID-19 and our new 'normal' -- ancient prayers go online to reach the faithful

, , , , , , , , ,
COVID-19 and our new 'normal' -- ancient prayers go online to reach the faithful

For centuries, Eastern Orthodox Christians have shared prayers "for the sick, the suffering, the captive and for their safety and salvation" as well as petitions that "we may be delivered from all affliction, wrath and need."

The faithful respond: "Lord, have mercy."

This past Sunday, some worshipers heard modern phrases woven into the ancient cadences of the Divine Liturgy of St. Basil the Great.

During the Litany of Fervent Supplication, priests in the Orthodox Church in America added: "O Lord who lovest mankind, deliver us from the impending threat of the Corona Virus. Send thine angel to watch over us and protect us. Grant health and recovery to those suffering from this virus. Guide the hands of physicians and preserve those who are healthy. Enable us to continue to serve our suffering brothers and sisters in peace that together we may glorify thy most honorable and majestic name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, now and ever and unto ages of ages."

Following instructions from our bishop, most members of parishes in the Diocese of the South heard these words while gathered around home computers.

This was part of America's new normal as religious leaders -- some already tech-friendly, others veering into new territory -- worked to develop online forms of worship, education and fellowship. For Catholics, the Orthodox and others in liturgical traditions, all of this is happening at a highly symbolic time -- the penitential season of Lent. Easter is April 12 for Western churches. For the Orthodox, Pascha is April 19.

This is not the season of Great Lent we anticipated, but it is nonetheless a fitting Lenten effort, "explained Archbishop Alexander, OCA bishop of Dallas and the South. In his letter to priests and parishioners he urged believers -- using a monastic image -- to recognize "that this initial response to this pandemic will work for the greater good of our faithful and our neighbors. Use this time of 'social distancing' for prayer and to keep vigil 'in one's cell.' "

Across the nation, some religious congregations met, drawing smaller flocks, while many closed their doors.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

First Amendment and God's power: Press enters debate on believers gathering for worship

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I realize that I have said this many times at GetReligion through the years, but the coronavirus crisis makes this old Baylor University church-state seminar talking point relevant once again.

The First Amendment offers an amazing amount of protection, in terms of the freedom of religious belief and practice. If you want to understand the limits, remember these three factors that allow state officials to investigate whether religious practices are protected — profit, fraud and clear threat to life and health.

That third one is clearly in the news right now. Come to think of it, some old televangelists are yanking No. 2 into play, as well. Can you say “Jim Bakker”?

This brings me to key themes in a few recent stories linked to the impact of coronavirus concerns on religious worship and practice. How widespread are these concerns? This New York Times piece looked at the global picture: “In a Pandemic, Religion Can Be a Balm and a Risk.”

Believers worldwide are running afoul of public health authorities’ warnings that communal gatherings, the keystone of so much religious practice, must be limited to combat the virus’ spread. In some cases, religious fervor has led people toward cures that have no grounding in science; in others, it has drawn them to sacred places or rites that could increase the risk of infection.

In Myanmar, a prominent Buddhist monk announced that a dose of one lime and three palm seeds — no more, no less — would confer immunity. In Iran, a few pilgrims were filmed licking Shiite Muslim shrines to ward off infection. And in Texas, the preacher Kenneth Copeland braided televangelism with telemedicine, broadcasting himself, one trembling hand outstretched, as he claimed he could cure believers through their screens.

That’s the context for an important Associated Press report that ran the other day with this headline: “Coronavirus gathering bans raise religious freedom questions.” Here is the key summary paragraph:


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , ,

Question for reporters: Global coronavirus pandemic is a BIG story, but exactly how big?

, , , , , ,

In my 30-year journalism career, I’ve covered more major news than I can recall.

In most cases, I’ve experienced an adrenaline rush as I set about to do my job, which I consider as much a calling as a profession.

A few times, though, a particular story has felt absolutely overwhelming, like it dwarfed me and my ability to cover it adequately.

The first time came on April 19, 1995, when my colleagues at The Oklahoman and I suddenly found ourselves reporting on what was then the deadliest terrorist attack on U.S. soil — the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. In all, 168 of our friends and neighbors died that day.

The second time came six years later on Sept. 11, 2001, when terrorist-piloted planes crashed into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and a field near Shanksville, Pa. The death toll that day: 2,977.

Now, the world finds itself grappling with an invisible killer: COVID-19. As I type this, the global coronavirus pandemic has resulted in more than 10,000 deaths. The number of infections approaches 250,000.

In an interview with Poynter.org, NBC’s Lester Holt — whom I respect — said: “I always thought 9/11 would be the biggest story I would ever cover. But this is the biggest story we have ever seen.”

Wow. That’s an amazing statement from a journalist of Holt’s status.

Is he right? Is this “the biggest story we have ever seen?” I’d humbly suggest that we don’t know yet, as massive and, yes, as absolutely overwhelming as COVID-19 seems at this point.

I asked a few respected colleagues for their insights on that question as well as details on how their news organizations are covering this major, major news.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , ,

This is a story: Aging Catholic clergy risk health to comfort the faithful during COVID-19 crsis

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

Catholic priests are often called into action through tough times. Whether they work in a local parish or as a missionary, the main duties of a priest is to administer the church’s seven sacraments — which include baptism, confession and holy communion — while also visiting the sick, overseeing religious education programs and providing pastoral care to parishioners. Many nuns fill social-service roles, as well.

How does all that work during the COVID-19 pandemic? In Italy, where the coronavirus has led to the infection of some 35,000 residents and the deaths of nearly 3,000 people, priests have been among the group hardest hit during this epidemic. Ten priests have already died after contracting COVID-19, more than half of time in the city of Bergamo, just outside Milan. In Bergamo alone, more than 20 priests have been hospitalized, with six of them dead as a result of falling ill. They ranged in age from 59 to 70.

That members of the clergy are suffering in such high numbers isn’t a surprise given the advanced age of so many priests.

This is, after all, an emerging story that is linked to a much older, familiar news story that has been making headlines for several decades — the declining number of young priests in America and many other lands. With fewer young priests, the church depends heavily on the service and skills of aging priests, bishops and nuns.

Here in the United States, where fears about the deadly bug’s spread has grown over the past week, the average age of a priest is 63. The number puts priests in the high-risk bracket for people who can die from contracting COVID-19.

Priestly vocations has been trending downward for years, especially in Europe and the United States. These two places, where the need for clergy to comfort the sick is at its highest while officials call for social distancing, find themselves with no pastoral care. Instead, priests are relegated to streaming services via the Internet as part of social distancing in an effort to stem the outbreak’s growth.

How can priests around the world give pastoral care and comfort to the sick and panic-stricken without putting themselves at risk?


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Holy Week, Easter, Passover, Ramadan are coming: Will they vanish this year? #NoWay

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Holy Week, Easter, Passover, Ramadan are coming: Will they vanish this year? #NoWay

Forget the cancellation of the Easter Egg Roll at the White House.

Right now, many journalists need to focus, instead, on what the coronavirus crisis is about to do the Easter, Passover and Ramadan observances around the world. That’s the story, right now — even if we don’t know the precise details of that story, right now. There are really three options for what is ahead.

First, there is always the chance that something stunning could happen — some major breakthrough in COVID-19 treatments — that would let these tremendously important religious seasons proceed, if not in a normal manner, in a way that is something close to normal. Hardly anyone thinks this is possible.

Second, almost everything could be cancelled and we are left with a few “virtual” events, with religious leaders and skeleton crews doing versions of rites that end up being carried online or in major broadcasts.

But there is another option, one that host Todd Wilken and I discussed at length in this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in). Most of our discussion focused on Holy Week and Easter, since these are the traditions that Wilken (a Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod pastor) and I best understand.

What if religious leaders found some new way to downscale and “re-symbolize” the events of Holy Week in some way that specifically connected their messages to the astonishing times in which we are living right now? It’s also possible — let’s take the Vatican, for example — that testing may take a leap forward and make it possible for congregations (much smaller for sure) of priests and believers to gather who have tested negative or who have never shown any symptoms at all.

What if they took part in rites — perhaps outdoors — in which it was easier to keep people at a distance?

So why am I speculating about this? In part because of of this recent headline on a Crux report: “Vatican backtracks on Holy Week coronavirus statement; situation still ‘being studied’.” Perhaps you missed this development?

ROME — After a Vatican office announced … that all Holy Week liturgies would be livestreamed rather that celebrated publicly amid Italy’s coronavirus crackdown, a day later their communications department walked part of that back, saying the method for celebrating Holy Week is still being studied.


Please respect our Commenting Policy