Fundamentalism

Christian nationalism? Try discussing that serious topic in crisp, punchy Twitter terms

Christian nationalism? Try discussing that serious topic in crisp, punchy Twitter terms

Every now and then, I envy Bobby Ross, Jr.

Why? He has such a knack for writing short, crisp introductions to punchy posts.

You know, posts that open with a few blunt sentences.

Then they jump to a headline and a URL, like this: “Poll: A third of Americans are Christian nationalists and most are white evangelicals.

Then Ross is off and running.

What comes next? Frequently, he embeds several relevant tweets on the topic. That’s helpful, since it shows readers who is saying what.

That’s that.

So let’s try that with a very complicated Twitter storm linked to that Religion News Service headline mentioned earlier. This report is built on the results of a survey from the Public Religion Research Institute and the Brookings Institution: “A Christian Nation? Understanding the Threat of Christian Nationalism to American Democracy and Culture.”

This story led to some fascinating discussions on Twitter — including links to information about the funding for the RNS project to expose Christian nationalism.

Try to write something short and punchy about that. Ah, but I can point to the Twitter sources.

First, here is the top of that RNS story:

(RNS) — A new survey finds that fewer than a third of Americans, or 29%, qualify as Christian nationalists, and of those, two-thirds define themselves as white evangelicals.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

A modern, urban pastor comes to terms with his backwoods mountain family roots

A modern, urban pastor comes to terms with his backwoods mountain family roots

Growing up in West Virginia, the Rev. Michael Clary always wondered about some of the archaic language his elders used, words like "yonder" and "reckon."

Then he learned that his grandfather -- a steel-mill worker and country preacher -- had memorized the classic King James Bible by listening to tapes during his long drives to the factory. He had a sixth-grade education and, if he couldn't spell something, he could still quote a verse that contained the word and then find it in his Bible.

All that scripture soaked in -- deep. Thus, "I reckon" wasn't just another way to say "probably." It was New Testament language, such as: "For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us."

These Appalachian roots caused pangs of shame during graduate school, said Clary, who leads Christ the King Church, a Southern Baptist congregation in Cincinnati.

Soon after that, "I was pastoring a fast growing church in an urban environment, and a spirit of elitism had infected us," he wrote, in a Twitter stream that went viral. "The people we felt free to mock were conservative, uneducated, backwoods fundies. … They lacked the theological sophistication and cultural insight I had acquired while doing campus ministry and studying at seminary."

The bottom line: "I had moved on. I was better than them. I was more learned and cultured. I had 'seen the world' and they hadn't."

Clary said he wrote those "words with tears in my eyes." Reached by telephone, he explained that he was facing the kinds of church tensions that arise while defending traditional doctrines in a flock located a few blocks from the University of Cincinnati. It's hard to be "winsome" -- a buzz word today -- while trying to remain faithful in a bitterly divided culture.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

OK, we get it: That whole 'Christian nationalism' thing is hot, right now. But what is it?

OK, we get it: That whole 'Christian nationalism' thing is hot, right now. But what is it?

By all indications, urgent warnings against “Christian nationalism” (CN) will continue as a major media theme through Election Day 2024.

Journalists will need to be careful with a tricky label that’s mostly shunned by supposed participants in the CN movement and employed by opponents (as with “fundamentalist” or “ultra-“ or “cult”). How complex is the fighting about this term? Click here to tune in some of the YouTube debates.

Critics’ typical definition comes from attorney Amanda Tyler, who leads Christians Against Christian Nationalism (with a large “N”) and the proudly progressive Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty. She says CN “seeks to merge American and Christian identities, distorting both the Christian faith and America’s constitutional democracy.” Its “mythological” view of founding of a “Christian nation” means America is singled out “to fulfill God’s purposes on earth.” Further, CN “demands a privileged place for Christianity in public life, buttressed by the active support of government at all levels.”

Writers could pursue this sort of theme sideways by reviewing or collecting pro and con reactions to “How to Be a Patriotic Christian: Love of Country as Love of Neighbor,” the latest book by middle-roading evangelical Richard Mouw of Calvin University, formerly president of Fuller Theological Seminary.

Otherwise, here's a rundown to guide journalists on some of the notable CN chatter since The Guy took a whack at the definition issue last year year at GetReligion.

Hang on, because this gets complex. For starters, ambiguity abounded in an October Pew Research survey.

Some 60% of adults think -- yes -- the founders intended the U.S. to be a “Christian nation,” and 45% think it actually “should be” such, though for many that means only generalized moral guidance while only 18% think the phrase indicates Christian-based governance. Importantly, a 54% majority had never even heard of CN.

That belief the U.S. “should be” a Christian nation was favored by fully 65% of Black Protestants (compared with e.g. only 47% of Catholics). Yet University of Texas political scientist Eric McDaniel wrote for TheConversation.com that CN believes the only “true” Americans are “white, Christian and U.S.-born and whose families have European roots.”


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Thinking about those sad, old Vatican II 'fundamentalists' -- such as Pope Benedict XVI?

Thinking about those sad, old Vatican II 'fundamentalists' -- such as Pope Benedict XVI?

If religion-beat journalists looked carefully enough, they could see an interesting question lurking inside the rhetoric of the current Latin Mass wars.

That question: What does it mean to be “pro-Vatican II”? If reporters flip that question around it turns into this: What does one need to do to be “anti-Vatican II”?

For example, see this language at the top of a Catholic News Agency report this past summer with this headline: “Pope Francis: There are many ‘restorers’ in the US who do not accept Vatican II.

There are many “restorers” in the United States who do not accept the Second Vatican Council, Pope Francis said. …

Speaking to the editors of Jesuit journals, he criticized what he called “restorationism” in the Church, which he defined as the failure to accept Vatican II, the ecumenical council held from 1962 to 1965. He said: “Restorationism has come to gag the Council. …”

Note the tension between “accept the Council” and “gag the Council.” What, precisely, does it mean to “gag” the Second Vatican Council? Let’s keep reading:

“The problem is precisely this: in some contexts, the Council has not yet been accepted. It is also true that it takes a century for a Council to take root. We still have 40 years to make it take root, then!”

Pope Francis cited opposition to Vatican II when he issued the motu proprio Traditionis custodes in July 2021, limiting celebrations of the Traditional Latin Mass.

This leads to a logical question: What ARE the teachings of Vatican II? Are they the actual contents of the Council documents or are these teachings an evolving body of work with current and future Catholic leaders deciding what the Council meant to say? Yes, note how these questions echo decades of academic warfare about, well, everything from the U.S. Constitution to the New Testament.

This is a timely subject, in light of the recent death of Pope Benedict XVI — one of few remaining Vatican intellectuals who, as an advisor to a cardinal in the Vatican II sessions, had direct exposure to the debates that led to its final documents. Benedict stressed a strict reading of the contents of Council’s teachings on a host of subjects — such as liturgy and the future role of Catholic tradition.

That leads us to a Religion News Service think piece written before shortly before the death of Benedict XVI. The author, Jesuit Thomas Reese, is a priest who for decades has been one of the most powerful voices (think “usual suspects”) shaping news coverage of American Catholicism.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Final 2022 podcast: What parts of the Roe v. Wade story deserved additional coverage?

Final 2022 podcast: What parts of the Roe v. Wade story deserved additional coverage?

Everyone had to know that the fall of Roe v. Wade would be the top pick in the Religion News Association’s annual poll to determine the Top 10 religion-beat stories of 2022. That would have been the case, even if the RNA hadn’t created two lists this year, one for U.S. stories and one for international stories.

Why? I’ve been following this poll closely since the late 1970s and once interviewed the legendary George Cornell of the Associated Press about his observations on mainstream religion-news coverage trends during his decades on the beat.

Let’s briefly review some of the factors that shape this list year after year, since this topic was discussed during the final 2022 “Crossroads” podcast (CLICK HERE to tune that in). This episode was recorded while we wrestled with rolling power blackouts here in the frigid hills of East Tennessee. See if you can guess where we had to do a patch and start again!

First of all, the RNA top story will almost always be a hot political event or trend — with a religion angle. Politics, after all, is REAL news. Think White Evangelicals and Bad Man Orange. Second, it helps if stories feature clashes between religion and sex, usually in one of the progressive Mainline Protestant churches or, ideally, Roman Catholicism. Think Joe Biden, Catholic bishops and just about anything (especially if Pope Francis is involved). After that, you have slots for wars, natural disasters and newsy papal tours.

The fall of Roe v. Wade had it all, putting a core Sexual Revolution doctrine at risk, to one degree or another, depending on the blue, red or purple state involved.

I will not run through the contents of the whole RNA list. However, it’s interesting to note the wordings in some poll items, paying attention to what is included and what is NOT included therein. For example, here is No. 1 in the U.S. list:

The Supreme Court overturns the 1973 Roe v. Wade precedent and says there is no constitutional right to abortion, sparking battles in courts and state legislatures and driving voters to the November polls in high numbers. More than a dozen states enact abortion bans, while voters reject constitutional abortion restrictions in conservative Kansas and Kentucky and put abortion rights in three other states’ constitutions.

What is missing in that complex item?


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Escaping that 'comfort zone': Press keeps missing obvious religion news at '22 World Cup

Escaping that 'comfort zone': Press keeps missing obvious religion news at '22 World Cup

The World Cup in Qatar continues to roll along into the semifinals. So far, the premier soccer tournament — and arguably the planet’s biggest sporting event — has showcased skill, drama and even some upsets. 

What the tournament has also generated are plenty of different kinds of storylines for news reporters and sports writers to focus on. As is the case with sporting events in general there are lots of storylines connected to religion that have gone unnoticed. 

It should come as no surprise that sports writers, and very often their editors back in the newsroom, don’t “get” religion. Go-to websites such as Fox Sports and ESPN, for instance, have failed to cover obvious stories in the past. They’ve also failed to do it in regards to the 2022 World Cup. For starters, think location, location and location. Why? Click here.

There are a few faith storylines — on and off the field — that did get coverage. Some of that coverage was great; some not so great.  

An example of a very good piece came via The New York Times. The newspaper found a way to discuss Qatar’s use of migrant workers to build stadiums and other infrastructure projects related to the World Cup in a new way.

The feature, which ran on a Sunday during Advent, looked at Qatar’s only Catholic church, located on the outskirts of the capital city Doha — in an area in which the government sanctions eight houses of worship, from Anglican to Eastern Orthodox. This feature, written by John Branch, is one of the rare times when a sports writer left his or her “comfort zone” and ventured outside the bubble of stadiums and press conferences to cover a story. 

Here’s the key section, showing why this story matters

Qatar is a nation deeply rooted in Islam. Calls to prayer can be heard five times a day throughout Doha. World Cup stadiums have prayer rooms for fans, and some staff at the games will stop what they’re doing to kneel in prayer.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: Is Colorado Springs covered by a 'fundamentalist' blanket of hate?

Podcast: Is Colorado Springs covered by a 'fundamentalist' blanket of hate?

At this point, there are many, many crucial facts that journalists do not know about the horrible Club Q massacre in Colorado Springs.

This lack of facts has done little to shape the coverage. We do not, for example, know if Mx. Anderson Aldrich is sincere when claiming, in case documents, to be nonbinary. It will, in the meantime, be interesting to see if many mainstream newsrooms choose to deadname Aldrich in their coverage, perhaps by striving to avoid pronouns altogether.

We do know that the alleged shooter was raised in a broken home with multiple mental-health and violence issues. Consider, for example, the father — an ex-con MMA fighter turned porn star (and a Republican, of one form or another).

At this point, it does appear that some journalists — while searching for the “why” in the “who, what, when, where, why and how” formula — have decided to place the city of Colorado Springs on trial and, perhaps, the whole state of Colorado. This was the primary topic discussed in this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (CLICK HERE to tune that in).

The key: A return of that dreaded journalism F-word — “fundamentalist.” For more background on this religion-beat disease, please see this GetReligion post by Richard Ostling (“What is 'Fundamentalism'? Name 666 or so examples from recent news coverage”) and this On Religion column (“Define ‘fundamentalist,’ please”) that I wrote in 2011.

Here is the key material from a USA Today story that, in my opinion, goes completely over the top while claiming that, to be blunt, a kind of hate cloud covers Colorado Springs. The headline: “Colorado Springs worked to change its anti-gay image — then its sole LGBTQ nightclub was targeted.”

Most notably, in 1992, religious fundamentalists from Colorado Springs wrote Amendment 2, a measure seeking to amend Colorado's constitution by making it illegal to ban discrimination based on sexual orientation. The measure was approved by Colorado voters that November, earning Colorado the nickname of the "Hate State," according to the Colorado Springs Pioneer Museum. Amendment 2 was ultimately struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1996.

The city is also the headquarters of Focus on the Family, a fundamentalist Protestant organization whose founder James Dobson is known for his stances against gay and trans rights.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

In Islamic tradition, what is a fatwa? Why the demands to kill novelist Salman Rushdie?

In Islamic tradition, what is a fatwa? Why the demands to kill novelist Salman Rushdie?

THE QUESTION:

In Islam, what is a fatwa? Why the demand to kill novelist Salman Rushdie?

THE RELIGION GUY’S ANSWER:

In 1989, the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, Iran’s theocratic ruler, ordered the assassination “without delay” of novelist Salman Rushdie because of his novel “The Satanic Verses.” Remarkably, this official fatwa imposed the duty of freelance killing in the name of God upon masses of Muslim believers in all nations, and also demanded death for the editors and publishers involved with the book.

Three decades later, a Lebanese-American stands accused of attempting to murder Rushdie by repeated stabbings onstage at New York’s Chautauqua Institution. The author suffered severe injuries but survived. Though the Muslim Council of Britain condemned the attack, the Iranian regime’s Kayhan newspaper dispatched “a thousand bravos” to “the brave and dutiful” assailant while militants in other Muslim lands celebrated. We’ll see what prosecutors and defense attorneys finally say about links between Iran’s fatwa of death and the sensational bloodshed.

Rushdie’s complex fantasy had dream sequences in which depraved enemies of Islam — not the author himself — complain about moral absolutism and treatment of women and demean the Prophet Muhammad’s wives and closest Companions. They also challenge the divine inspiration of the Quran. A Wall Street Journal op-ed correctly noted that the far greater threat to the Quran is the revisionist theorizing on its origins by the late John Wansbrough at the University of London.

The Rushdie novel resulted in book-banning and riots in the Muslim world, and the famous fatwa sent Rushdie into hiding for years. In 1998, Iran’s president declared the case “finished” during diplomatic efforts, but the regime did not actually abolish the fatwa. It was reaffirmed by Khomeini’s successor as Supreme Leader in 2017, and re-published on a government Web site five days before the Chautauqua stabbing. During the past decade, Iranian groups have pledged to pay a $3.9 million bounty to anyone who slays Rushdie.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

What will American Protestantism look like after the wars inside the 'Seven Sisters' are done?

What will American Protestantism look like after the wars inside the 'Seven Sisters' are done?

Over decades, the map of U.S. Protestantism has been redrawn by splits over the authority and interpretation of the Bible that eventually focused on the LGBT dispute. Now we have a major case study that journalists will need to cover at the local, regional, national and global levels.

A balanced coalition of leaders in the large United Methodist Church (UMC) developed a treaty for mutually respectful separation — the Reconciliation and Grace Through Separation protocol — for that’s currently degenerating into a wasteful fight like other groups have suffered.

Reporters and concerned readers will want to dive into these commentaries and news stories:

* Look at a United Methodist timeline: Why are conservatives going nuclear with lawsuits?

* What happened to United Methodists’ proposal to split the denomination?

* Time is Running Out for Traditionalist United Methodists!

* For United Methodists, the center is not holding

* Special sessions of United Methodist annual conferences 2022

* United Methodist Church bishops mount defense amid conservative attacks (paywall protected)

* Liberal Bishops Have Redefined United Methodist Polity

The current maneuvers by the North American UMC establishment may well limit the number of dropouts joining the Global Methodist Church. Its vision has been to unite a million or more U.S. Methodist evangelicals with the growing Methodist churches in Africa and Asia, creating an effective and innovative international denomination dedicated to defending current Methodist doctrines. This could help counteract some U.S. conservatives’ drift into Christian nationalism. Is that still feasible?


Please respect our Commenting Policy