Europe

Plug-In: Coronation Of King Charles III -- looking at faith in a changing Great Britain

Plug-In: Coronation Of King Charles III -- looking at faith in a changing Great Britain

Almost eight months ago, Queen Elizabeth II’s death at age 96 ended her remarkable 70 years on the British throne.

Now all eyes — billions of them anyway — turned to the coronation of her son, King Charles III.

Since this post was written late last week, consider this a pre-event round up the top headlines and best reads in the world of faith. GetReligion folks will be looking at the coverage of the event itself — if there are mainstream stories about the faith component in the rites.

What To Know: The Big Story

Protecting all faiths: “Prayer and contemplation will accompany pomp and celebration on Saturday when King Charles III is anointed with vegan holy oil consecrated in Jerusalem and the Archbishop of Canterbury places the St. Edward’s Crown on his head for the first time,” the Washington Times Mark A. Kellner notes.

Saturday’s coronation “will not be the ‘woke’ mash-up some conservatives feared but will be unprecedented in its inclusivity,” the Washington Post’s William Booth reports from London.

“The new king wants to present himself not only as the ‘Defender of the Faith,’ meaning the Church of England, but all faiths, here and across the realm,” the Post adds.

Emphasis on diversity: “Religious leaders representing the Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, Muslim and Sikh traditions will for the first time play an active role in the ceremonies,” according to The Associated Press’ Danica Kirka.

More from AP:

At a time when religion is fueling tensions around the world — from Hindu nationalists in India to Jewish settlers in the West Bank and fundamentalist Christians in the United States — Charles is trying to bridge the differences between the faith groups that make up Britain’s increasingly diverse society.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Global South Anglicans make big effort to start cutting Canterbury ties that bind (Part I)

Global South Anglicans make big effort to start cutting Canterbury ties that bind (Part I)

After a half-century of decline, the U.S. Episcopal Church has 1.5 million members, and its average weekly attendance was just above 500,000 before COVID-19 and 300,000 afterwards.

After decades of explosive growth, the Anglican Church of Nigeria claims about 18 million members (others say 8 million), and the Center for Global Christianity near Boston estimates it has 22 million active participants in worship.

Caught in the middle of these two trends is the Most Reverend Justin Welby, by Divine Providence the 105th Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, Primate of All England and the "first among equals" among bishops in the 42 churches in the Anglican Communion. While his own flock claims 26 million baptized members, about 600,000 attend weekly services.

Now, Global South church leaders -- representing about 75% of Anglicans who frequent pews -- have decided that it's time to start cutting ties between the "Canterbury Communion" and the rest of the Anglican Communion.

“We have no confidence that the Archbishop of Canterbury nor the other Instruments of Communion led by him … are able to provide a godly way forward that will be acceptable to those who are committed to the truthfulness, clarity, sufficiency and authority of Scripture," warned the Global Anglican Future Conference, which met April 17-21 in Kigali, Rwanda. GAFCON IV drew 1,302 delegates from 52 nations, including 315 bishops.

Meeting together, leaders of GAFCON and the Global South Fellowship of Anglican Churches said they "can no longer recognize the Archbishop of Canterbury as an Instrument of Communion, the 'first among equals' of the Primates. The Church of England has chosen to impair her relationship with the orthodox provinces in the Communion."

While this gathering in Africa drew little or no coverage from Western news organizations, Lambeth Palace released a brief response, noting that the Kigali Commitment statement echoed many previous claims about Anglican governance.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Pascha in Ukraine, 2023: That's a subject journalists view through a totally Western lens

Pascha in Ukraine, 2023: That's a subject journalists view through a totally Western lens

Ask faithful members of Eastern Orthodox churches to name the most important day of the Christian year and about 99.9% of them will say this — “Pascha.”

This is the ancient Orthodox term for the feast of the Resurrection of Jesus. As the OrthodoxWiki.org website notes, “Pascha” is “a transliteration of the Greek word, which is itself a transliteration of the Aramaic pascha, from the Hebrew pesach meaning Passover.”

Pascha rites around the world began just before midnight on Saturday and proceeded into the early hours of Sunday, followed by festivities to break the long, intense fast of Great Lent. Folks get home about 4 a.m.

Needless to say, this was not a normal Pascha in Ukraine. I was curious to see how mainstream newsrooms would cover the rites in the Ukraine, where two competing Orthodox bodies are united in their opposition to the Russian invasion of their land, but separated by decades of competing claims of which church represents the future of the faith in Ukraine (see this earlier post-podcast on that topic).

I was curious, as an Orthodox layman (this Pascha marked the 25th anniversary of my family’s conversion), how mainstream news organizations would cover Pascha 2023 in Ukraine — so I ran an online search for the terms Ukraine and “Pascha.” The result — zero 2023 news reports containing “Pascha.”

Ah, but what if journalists ignored Orthodox history, tradition and theology and only referred to this feast day as “Easter,” the Western Christian term?

What if your stories contained zero references to “Pascha” and only said “Easter”? That online search yielded some mainstream reports, which often mentioned “Orthodox Easter,” thus viewing the most important day in Eastern Orthodoxy through a totally Western lens. Try to imagine doing this with any other global faith group of 260 million members, Christianity’s second largest Communion. Imagine changing the name of “Passover,” “Ramadan” or even “Easter” (when covering Rome and Protestantism).

Of course, readers need to be told that “Pascha” is the ancient Christian term for the season that, in the dominant West, is known by the somewhat controversial (for some outsiders) term “Easter.” But shouldn’t coverage of Pascha at least include, you know, the word “Pascha”?

It’s hard to imagine a more fitting metaphor to describe most, if not all, of the warped mainstream press coverage of the role that Orthodox history and faith is playing in Ukraine. I have already written about this several times and I’m about to board an airplane to head to Los Angeles. So let me be as quick as possible.

If reporters had the slightest interest in the historic Ukrainian Orthodox Church — with 1,000 years of shared history with Slavic cultures — they would be paying attention to this church’s (a) ongoing attempts to sever, within the limits of Orthodox canon law, it’s remaining ties to the Russian Orthodox Church, (b) its leaders’ opposition, since Day 1, to the Russian invasion and (c) the criticisms of this church by leaders of the new, competing Orthodox Church of Ukraine, which is supported by the United States, the European Union, the current Ukrainian government and the tiny, but symbolic, Ecumenical Orthodox Patriarchate in Turkey. These criticisms have escalated into a full-tilt government attempt to crush the older Orthodox body.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Debates in England about free speech and religion veer into 'thoughtcrimes' zone

Debates in England about free speech and religion veer into 'thoughtcrimes' zone

Wherever he goes, Father Sean Gough prays for the people he encounters -- sometimes out loud and often silently.

This isn't unusual, since he is a priest in the Catholic Archdiocese of Birmingham, England. Gough was praying silently when he was arrested near an abortion facility in a Public Spaces Protection Order protected zone, while holding a "Praying for free speech" sign. His car was parked nearby, with a small "unborn lives matter" bumper sticker.

The priest was charged with "intimidating service users," although the facility was closed at the time. The charges were later dropped.

Officers also raised questions about his clothing.

"When interrogated by police for silently praying in the censorship zone, they challenged me for wearing a cassock," said Gough, on Twitter. "When do I normally wear one? Don't I realize it'll be perceived as intimidating? These are not questions a person should be asked under caution in a democracy!"

Clause 11 of a recent Public Order Bill -- waiting to be signed into law -- would criminalize all forms of "influence" inside a 15-meter "buffer zone" around every abortion facility in England and Wales. An amendment to permit silent prayer and consensual conversations failed by a 116-299 vote in Parliament.

After years of debates about religious liberty and freedom of speech, recent events in England have veered into what activists and politicos have described as "thoughtcrimes," a term used in George Orwell's dystopian novel "1984" to describe thoughts that violate ruling-party dogmas.

In the U.S. House of Representatives, eight Republicans circulated a letter claiming it's "imperative that the U.S. speak boldly and clearly to its friend when the U.K. has failed to protect unalienable rights." The document condemned policies that "persecute Christians and other pro-life citizens for thoughtcrimes."


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: Painful fighting inside Ukrainian Orthodoxy? Schism began long before the war

Podcast: Painful fighting inside Ukrainian Orthodoxy? Schism began long before the war

Nearly 15 years ago, I traveled to Kiev to speak during a forum with Ukrainian journalists, and a few activists, focusing on religion coverage in that already tense nation. I was there as a representative of the Oxford Centre for Religion & Public Life.

Obviously, this meant talking about the fractured state of Eastern Orthodox Christianity in Ukraine, with bitter tensions between the historic (in many ways ancient) Ukrainian Orthodox Church and new rival churches — including leaders who had previously been excommunicated from canonical Orthodoxy.

Again, let me stress that this was in 2009, during a time when the Ukrainian government was, basically, content to let global Orthodox leaders work this out — oh so slowly — as an Orthodox canon-law issue.

These conflicts were truly byzantine (small “b”) and Ukrainian journalists said it was obvious that most journalists from Europe and America knew next to nothing about the Orthodox splits and, frankly, didn’t care to learn the details.

The Holy Dormition-Kiev Caves Lavra? That’s just a historic site. End of story.

Things have changed, sort of, but for all the wrong reasons.

With Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, journalists now care about the state of Orthodoxy in this war. The question discussed during this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in) is whether elite journalists have any interest in the centuries of facts behind the current Orthodox conflict. The church conflict is linked, of course, to the February 24, 2022, invasion — but also to earlier actions by leaders in the United States, the European Union, the current Ukrainian government and, last but not least, a strategic 2019 move by the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Istanbul.

Note: All of these events took place before the Russian invasion. The Orthodox schism in Ukraine predates the war — by decades.

Where to begin? Let’s start with some of what I learned, and described, 15 years ago, in a column with this title: “Religion ghosts in Ukraine.”


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Plug-In: At least six dead, plus unborn child, in Jehovah's Witnesses shooting In Germany

Plug-In: At least six dead, plus unborn child, in Jehovah's Witnesses shooting In Germany

Good morning, Weekend Plug-in readers!

Among the stories we’re following this week: A South Carolina church held a prayer vigil after two members of its community were abducted and killed by a Mexican drug cartel, as WPDE-TV’s Jenna Herazo reports.

Here in my home state of Oklahoma, voters trounced — somewhat surprisingly — a proposal to legalize recreational marijuana. Given the millions of dollars spent by the pro-marijuana side, a faith coalition leader who fought the initiative calls the outcome a “David beats Goliath” victory. I report that story at ReligionUnplugged.com.

Every weekend, Plug-in rounds up the best reads and top headlines in the world of faith.

We start this edition with tragic news out of Germany.

What to Know: The Big Story

Mass shooting at house of worship: “A former member of the Jehovah’s Witnesses shot dead six people at a hall belonging to the congregation in the German city of Hamburg before killing himself after police arrived, authorities said Friday. Police said an unborn baby also died, without clarifying whether the baby’s mother was among the dead. Eight people were wounded, four of them seriously.”

That’s the lede at this hour from The Associated Press’ Pietro de Cristofaro and Geir Moulson.

The shooting is “a rare kind of attack in a country where gun ownership is severely restricted,” the Wall Street Journal’s Georgi Kantchev notes.

More from the Journal:

The Jehovah’s Witnesses in Germany association said the community was “deeply saddened by the horrific attack on its members.” 

Jehovah’s Witnesses, a Christian denomination, have some 175,000 members in Germany, including 3,800 in the state of Hamburg, according to the organization. 

The attack took place around 9 p.m. on Thursday at a Jehovah’s Witnesses Kingdom Hall building in the northern part of the city after a service.

Motive emerging: Authorities are investigating the background of the shooting, according to news reports.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Got news? Concerning a boring AP story that ignored info about controversial cardinal

Got news? Concerning a boring AP story that ignored info about controversial cardinal

Want to read a really boring Associated Press news story?

You know, the kind of short hard-news, nothing-but-facts AP report in which an important person — Pope Francis, in this case — releases a list of appointees to some inside-baseball this or that, people who are either unknown or vaguely familiar to a dozen or so readers who are into that kind of thing?

In this case, one ends up with a boring headline — sure to appear in a few newspapers — that reads like this: “Pope renews cabinet of cardinal advisers, adds new members.” Here’s the riveting overture:

ROME (AP) — Pope Francis has renewed his cabinet of cardinal advisers from around the world, naming a handful of new members Tuesday and reconfirming others to help him run the Catholic Church.

Francis instituted the Council of Cardinals one month into his papacy, on April 13, 2013, with a primary goal of advising him on the reform of the Vatican bureaucracy. After nearly a decade of consultation, Francis issued a new blueprint for the Vatican bureaucracy last year.

Nevertheless, the Jesuit pope clearly appreciated the regular opportunities to consult with a small number of hand-picked cardinals representing the church on nearly every continent, and decided to keep the cabinet alive, albeit with some new members.

Now, would that story be a bit more interesting — “newsy” even — if it noted that one of the new members of this papal “inner ring” was a cardinal who, at this moment in time, may be the world’s most controversial prince of the church?

I mean, in this case we are talking about a cardinal who said the following, in an interview with KDA, a German news agency:

"The Church's positions on homosexual relationships as sinful are wrong. … I believe that the sociological and scientific foundation of this doctrine is no longer correct. It is time for a fundamental revision of Church teaching, and the way in which Pope Francis has spoken of homosexuality could lead to a change in doctrine. …


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: Zero elite press coverage of 'heresy' accusations against an American cardinal?

Podcast: Zero elite press coverage of 'heresy' accusations against an American cardinal?

The question at the heart of this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in) was not whether Springfield (Ill.) Bishop Thomas Paprocki was on target with his First Things essay that all but accused San Diego Cardinal Robert McElroy of heresy.

The question was not whether Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich of Luxembourg — a strategic leader in the Vatican’s Synod on Synodality — was right when he said the church's teaching on homosexuality are “no longer correct,” and added, “I think it is time for a fundamental revision of the doctrine."

The question was not whether Chicago Cardinal Blase Cupich was correct when he suggested, in print, that priests should absolve Catholics who come to Confession, allowing them to receive Holy Communion, even if these individuals refuse to repent of behaviors that Catholic doctrine insists are sin.

The question was not what Pope Francis meant when he told bishops in the Congo, “Always. Always forgive in the Sacrament of Reconciliation” — even if there is confusion about whether penitents are repenting of their sins or not.

No, the journalism question discussed during this podcast was this: Why are these developments — especially that stunning “Imagining a Heretical Cardinal” essay by Paprocki — receiving (as of this morning) zero coverage in the mainstream press?

By the way, it’s important that Bishop Paprocki is the chairman-elect of the Canonical Affairs and Church Governance Committee of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

It may also be relevant that, in 2017, Paprocki and McElroy clashed — in print — over the Springfield bishop’s decision not to allow Catholics to receive Holy Communion if they are openly living in same-sex marriages and, thus, rejecting centuries of Catholic doctrines on marriage and sex.

Why the lack of coverage? I have several theories.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Yo, journalists: It's time for a big update (or two) on the old, old Anglican wars timeline

Yo, journalists: It's time for a big update (or two) on the old, old Anglican wars timeline

Scribes who have been covering the Anglican Communion wars since, oh, the late 1970s or so (there are a few of us Jurassic journalists left) know that this has been a long, complicated road.

In most recent elite-press coverage, this timeline has been radically truncated, turning battles over a wide range of doctrines and church-history issues into a simple good vs. evil clash over LGBTQ rights. In this version of history, this global doctrinal war began in 2003 with the consecration of a non-celibate gay bishop in the tiny, shrinking Diocese of New Hampshire here in America.

Here at GetReligion, I have long referred to this fallacy as “Anglican timeline disease.” Hold that thought, because we will come back to it.

The key, right now, is that journalists need to radically update this timeline, in the wake of some major global developments that are receiving little elite coverage. Here is the dramatic double-decker headline for the major report in The Wall Street Journal:

Conservative Anglican Leaders Call for Break With Church of England Over Same-Sex Blessings

Archbishops from Africa and elsewhere repudiate the Archbishop of Canterbury’s historic role as spiritual leader of Anglicans worldwide

The overture for this solid story included several bites of information that are worth noting:

Conservative Anglican archbishops on Monday said the Church of England had forfeited its traditional leadership role in the worldwide Anglican Communion by approving the blessing of same-sex relationships earlier this month, opening a historic rift in one of the world’s biggest Christian denominations. 


Please respect our Commenting Policy