Death & dying

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Elite American super-cities are bleeding people: Any religion ghosts in this big story?

, , , , , , , , , , ,
Elite American super-cities are bleeding people: Any religion ghosts in this big story?

It’s hard to imagine any corner of American life that has not been touched by the coronavirus pandemic.

Obviously, there have been plenty of religion stories — along with the obvious angles linked to politics, business and technology.

Then you have stories that combine all of these elements. That is, they combine all of these themes if reporters are willing to look at the numbers and trends through multiple lens. However, as any GetReligion reader knows, not all lens are created equal.

One of the most important stories has been the impact of COVID-19 realities on some of the most important zip codes — “important” from an elite-news perspective — on the blue coasts. That brings us to that massive headline the other day in The New York Times, a paper that has, for the most part, treated evidence of New York City woes as part of a vast a right-wing conspiracy theory. Here’s that double-decker headline:

Cities Lost Population in 2021, Leading to the Slowest Year of Growth in U.S. History

Although some of the fastest growing regions in the country continued to grow, the gains were nearly erased by stark losses in New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco.

This is, of course, an almost totally religion-free story. I was pleased to notice that the Times team took demographic issues — including birth-rate slumps — rather seriously, even if the editors didn’t (as usual) connect the dots and see the religious, cultural and moral elements of that important angle (please see this earlier GetReligion piece — “New York Times asks this faith-free question: Why are young Americans having fewer babies?” — for background).

Am I arguing that the flight from several important American super-cities is essentially a religion story? Of course not. Am I saying that issues linked to faith, family and culture are playing a role in this very, very important story? Yes, I am.


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

Texas couple survives journey through COVID hell, apparently without clergy help of any kind

, , , , , , , , , ,
Texas couple survives journey through COVID hell, apparently without clergy help of any kind

One of my closest friends is a veteran doctor in a town deep in the Bible Belt. I’ve had lots of conversations with him about this experiences during the coronavirus pandemic. He has had COVID and so have I.

One common theme in our conversations has been a sense of mystery that medical professionals, from the beginning, have had about this evolving disease. They understand why COVID hits some people hard, especially older patients and people who, for various reasons, have respiratory problems. The mystery is why this disease strikes with deadly force in some cases — but clearly not all — involving young, healthy adults. And why does COVID attack some hearts and not others?

Readers will collide with some of these mysteries while reading a stunning Washington Post story about a family’s 139-day hospital drama that has received quite a bit of attention in social media and the mainstream press. The headline: “Chris Crouch was anti-vaccine. Now his pregnant wife had covid, and he faced a terrible choice.” Here is the overture:

KINGWOOD, Tex. — Chris Crouch had had low expectations for online dating. He was a police officer in his 30s, almost a year out from a painful divorce, and, he said, the women he had met had been “playing games” in ways that left him dispirited.

Then he met her.

Diana Garcia Martinez was 24 and a busy single mom whose sister had set up her profile without her knowing. She was intelligent, empathetic and upfront, and by the third date, he was in love. “It was just a feeling. … I felt like I knew her my whole life,” he recalled explaining to his cousin Gilbert, knowing it was a cliche but also true.

What role does religious faith play in this story? That’s a complex question.

I mean, we are talking about people in Texas. No one should be surprised by frequent Godtalk and references to prayer.

However, as the son of a Texas Baptist pastor (who spend the last decade of his ministry as a hospital chaplain), I was very surprised that the word “church” is missing. Did this couple really go through this medical hell alone, without a pastor or friends who share a pew with them? Maybe this couple is in the “Nothing in particular” demographic, but I have my doubts.


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

Entering a religion-beat minefield: What is the proper definition of the word 'cult'?

, , , , , , ,
Entering a religion-beat minefield: What is the proper definition of the word 'cult'?

THE QUESTION:

What is a religious "cult"

THE RELIGION GUY'S ANSWER:

On this somewhat delicate terrain, trusty Merriam-Webster offers us three definitions of "cult."

(1) A small religious group "not part of a larger and more accepted religion" with beliefs many regard as "extreme or dangerous."

(2) A situation with something or someone cared about "very much or too much," as in "a cult of personality."

(3) A small group of "very devoted supporters."

Note that the word can also depict well-recognized mainstream devotion, as when Catholics speak of the "cult of the Virgin."

he Guy proposes this definition: A marginal religious group we’re not supposed to like much or at all, which deviates from accepted practices or long-familiar beliefs, typically controlled by a dictatorial leader or leaders and often isolated from mainstream society.

Similarly from J. Gordon Melton of Baylor University, author of the essential "Encyclopedia of American Religions," who is not just an expert but highly tolerant toward America's countless offbeat religions. He has remarked that a cult is "a group that somebody doesn't like. It is a derogatory term"

Indeed it is derogatory. Undoubtedly some -- but not all -- groups considered to be cults have sinister track records; deceive outsiders; abuse their followers physically, psychologically, sexually, and/or financially; damage family and other relationships; and even resort to violence. The Guy says such allegations should be fairly pursued on the basis of secular criminal or civil law without judging whether a group's teachings measure up to some cultural standard. After all, the Constitution's Bill of Rights enshrines a religious freedom guarantee.


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

Once again, why avoid religious questions in the 2017 Sutherland Springs church massacre?

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Once again, why avoid religious questions in the 2017 Sutherland Springs church massacre?

Consider, for a moment, a hypothetical case in which an angry anti-abortion activist massacres worshippers gathered at a liberal church known for its advocacy of abortion rights.

What about a radicalized Muslim attacking a synagogue? A gunman decked out in Make America Great Again clothing attacking a mosque?

Would facts about the identities of these shooters, as well as their previous statements and actions, be considered relevant in follow-up stories? We are, of course, wrestling — again — with the “Why?” component in the journalism mantra, "Who," "What," "When," "Where," "Why" and "How."

In this case, we are dealing with background materials in media coverage of a development in the 2017 massacre at the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas. Here’s the New York Times headline: “Air Force Ordered to Pay $230 Million to Victims of 2017 Church Shooting.” The overture states:

A federal judge ordered the U.S. Air Force … to pay more than $230 million to the survivors and the families of the victims of a 2017 shooting at a Texas church because the Air Force had failed to report the gunman’s criminal history.

In his ruling, Judge Xavier Rodriguez of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas wrote that the Air Force could have blocked the gunman, Devin P. Kelley, who had served on an Air Force base in New Mexico, from buying the rifle he used to kill 26 people on Nov. 5, 2017, at the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas.

For its failure to report Mr. Kelley’s 2012 conviction for domestic assault, the Air Force must pay damages to the victims for their “pain and suffering, mental anguish, disfigurement, impairment and loss of companionship,” the judge wrote. He added that the case was “unprecedented in kind and scope.”

After previous commentary on this massacre, some readers noted that — reacting to detailed coverage in European newspapers — it wasn’t automatically relevant that Kelley was an outspoken atheist.

That is a valid point. However, my question is whether it is worthy of discussion (perhaps one or two sentences in news reports) that he had, in arguments on social media, expressed virulently anti-Christian beliefs and made remarks that suggested he was unstable.


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

Was the life of Dorothy Day too Catholic for the New York Times to grasp?

, , , , , , , , , ,
Was the life of Dorothy Day too Catholic for the New York Times to grasp?

The New York Times veers close to self-parody in publishing “Was Dorothy Day Too Left-Wing to Be a Catholic Saint?”

The very deck beneath the headline undercuts it: “The Archdiocese of New York has asked the Vatican to consider the social activist for sainthood. But church leaders are not entirely comfortable with her politics.”

Actually, Day has always made Catholics on the right and left uncomfortable. The key is making sure that readers know why this is true.

What Liam Stack has to report is pretty straightforward.

Martha Hennessy was upset with what Cardinal Timothy Dolan preached during a Mass in Day’s honor:

“He has reduced her to ‘she lived a life of sexual promiscuity and she dabbled in communism,’” she said. “What worse enemy could we have, saying those things about her?” Ms. Hennessy is active in the [canonization] movement and did a reading at the Mass. “We have got to focus on her policies, we have got to focus on her practices.”

Stack’s report does not link to the cardinal’s homily, which is available on YouTube and embedded in this post (the homily begins at one hour and 15 minutes).

Viewers will note that there is no indication in Cardinal Dolan’s remarks that he is anything other than an admirer. He calls Day “one of our greats,” and mentions that he asked Pope Francis to declare her venerable: one major step toward becoming a saint.

While Dolan’s brief homily did not dwell on Day’s political life, he referred to the significant detail of her being on assignment by a Catholic magazine to report on a Hunger March in 1932 in the nation’s capital. Dolan added a detail omitted by the Times: after observing this march, Day prayed in the Basilica of the Immaculate Conception and took another step toward integrating her politics and her emerging faith.


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

'Final solution' logic: Was there more to the Wannsee Conference than mere bureaucracy?

, , , , , , ,
'Final solution' logic: Was there more to the Wannsee Conference than mere bureaucracy?

It’s a blunt New York Times headline about a story that — here is the horror of it all — focused on German bureaucrats doing what governments pay bureaucrats to do, which is plan things.

Read this headline without shuddering: “80 Years Ago the Nazis Planned the ‘Final Solution.’ It Took 90 Minutes.”

Actually, the death squads of the Third Reich were already at work. The following summary material makes that clear:

The host on that January day in 1942 was Reinhard Heydrich, the powerful chief of the security service and the SS, who had been put in charge by Hermann Göring, Hitler’s right-hand man, of a “final solution” and coordinating it with other government departments and ministries.

The men Heydrich invited were senior civil servants and party officials. Most of them were in their 30s, nine of them had law degrees, more than half had Ph.D.s.

When they convened around a table overlooking Lake Wannsee, the genocide was already underway. The deportations of Jews and mass killings in eastern territories had begun the previous fall but the meeting that day laid the groundwork for a machinery of mass murder that would involve the entire state apparatus and ultimately millions of Germans in different roles.

Here is my question and, I will admit, that there is more to it than mere journalism. Is it possible to write about this subject in a way that does not discuss evil with a Big E?

I’ve been thinking about that question ever since I read historian John Toland’s “Adolf Hitler: The Definitive Biography.” That’s a 1,000-page classic that will earn you some stares as you read it, day after day, on mass transit. The key was that Toland interviewed many, many people who knew Hitler at different stages of his life. Thus, as the 1976Times review put it, the author allowed readers to “draw their own conclusions about what made Hitler as he was, ‘a warped archangel, a hybrid of Prometheus and Lucifer.’ “

In the end, however, Toland was forced to contemplate how a symbolic element of the Holocaust rulebook — “the choice” — was an offense to German efficiency.


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

Talking to Jesus? This is big New York Times news when a Hollywood spiritualist is involved

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Talking to Jesus? This is big New York Times news when a Hollywood spiritualist is involved

Let’s see. If you were going to write a New York Times article in which someone claimed to be channeling the Buddha, would you, at some point, talk to Buddhists? Maybe even a scholar whose work is rooted in Buddhist thought?

What about Judaism? If someone was claiming to channel Moses, would you talk to a rabbi or two about that? Maybe a scholar who has studied Jewish mysticism?

How about Islam? How would a reporter approach the claims of someone who says she is channeling Mohammad? And what would Islamic believers think of this process?

With these questions in mind, let’s look at that chatty first-person piece that ran more than a month ago at the Times with this headline: “In Good Spirits — Carissa Schumacher channels the dead for her A-list celebrity clients. But most days, she’s in the forest.”

The headline omits the big reveal: Schumacher claims to channel the spirits of the dead, including her most famous connection — Jesus. This is tricky territory, as demonstrated in the wild correction at the end of this long feature:

Correction: Nov. 29, 2021

An earlier version of this article described incorrectly the biblical name Yeshua. The name refers to multiple people, including Joshua; it does not refer solely to Jesus Christ. The article also referred incorrectly to the Old Testament; while the name Yeshua appears in it, Jesus Christ does not.

Ready for the overture?


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

Yet another theodicy news story: Where was God in the Mayfield tornado disaster?

, , , , , , , , ,
Yet another theodicy news story: Where was God in the Mayfield tornado disaster?

Words fail to convey the emotions in Mayfield, Kentucky, after last weekend’s devastating tornado.

Let’s try anyway, directly from the mouths of those relying on their faith in the EF4 twister’s aftermath.

It’s another “theodicy” story: It would appear that God is on trial.

“My little girl asked me, ‘Why would God let this happen?’ … I had to look at my little 8-year-old girl, who looks to me for answers, and I had to say … ‘I don’t know. I don’t know.’” — the Rev. Wes Fowler, senior pastor of First Baptist Church in Mayfield (via Associated Press story by Holly Meyer)

"Thanks be to God the parts of the building that came down didn’t come down on us. I realized it might be the last few moments of my life on this earth. … All I care about is the fact that the most valuable possessions in my life, my wife’s life, my children, they’re all safe. Everything else is replaceable." — the Rev. Joey Reed, lead pastor of First United Methodist Church in Mayfield (via Louisville Courier-Journal story by Christopher Kuhagen)

"As a parent, it's like there's only so much you can say or do to take the fear out of your children. The girls' room was — I say 'was' because, obviously, if you come in here and look around, there's no walls anymore; there's no ceiling. I mean, they know how much of it's in our hands and how much of it's, you know, up to the storm and up to God. ... We lost everything, but we didn't lose everything. I mean, everything that we have that is worth anything was in that closet." — Joseph Tyler, Mayfield resident who survived with his family in the closet and worships at His House, a local church (via CNN story)

“God is not in the devastation. He’s not in the destruction. He was not in the storm. But he’s in the response, and that’s where we are. That’s what we’re trying to be. We’re trying to amplify the response that is happening from the survivors and victims of the tornado.” — Susan Montalvo-Gesser, director of Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Owensboro, Kentucky (via America magazine story by Michael J. O’Loughlin)

"It's awful. It's tragic. People who have lost loved ones, there is no way to take that pain away. I think you just have to embrace the pain and pray that God will guide you as you overcome it." — the Rev. Milton West, senior minister of First Christian Church in Mayfield (via WLKY story by Marvis Herring)


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

New podcast: Are news reports 'dunking' on the late religious broadcaster Marcus Lamb?

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,
New podcast: Are news reports 'dunking' on the late religious broadcaster Marcus Lamb?

If you search for the word “posterized” in up-to-date online dictionaries, this is what you find: “A slang term depicting a play in basketball. In said play, a player dunks the ball over top or in front of another player, making a play so picturesque that it may appear on a poster, hence the term, posterized.”

Clearly, this is linked to another term frequently used in the nasty verbal wars that are common on social-media sites, with Twitter — dominated by liberal and conservative voices in elite zip codes — being the best example.

That term is “dunking.”

“Dunking” is relevant to the main topic discussed in this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in) about media coverage of the death of religious broadcaster Marcus Lamb, who died of COVID-19 after using his Daystar Television Network to criticize vaccine mandates and other anti-pandemic rules and guidelines, while advocating alternative treatments.

“Dunking” is defined, sort of, in this Slate article: “ ‘Dunking’ Is Delicious Sport — But it might be making Twitter even more terrible.” Here is a relevant passage:

Since Twitter rolled out the feature a couple of years ago, the quote-tweet has evolved into something like a pair of magic high-tops dispensed to every user on the service: Anyone can botch a tweet, and anyone can leap over him or her to score a couple of points—or a couple thousand likes and retweets.

The basketball term is apt: In a Twitter dunking, someone has made his point or said her piece, and instead of responding to it with a direct reply, perhaps in the spirit of equal-footed debate, the dunker seizes it like an alley-oop on his or her way to the basket. Maybe another player gets the unwitting assist, but the point is yours to be liked and retweeted not just as a reply but as a worthier tweet in its own right.

What does this look like in practice? Consider this example from the blitz of tweets about Lamb’s death. This dunk comes from the creator of the “America’s Best Christian” brand:


Please respect our Commenting Policy