Godbeat

, , , , , , , , , ,

Catholic doctrine has always rejected abortion: But what about Catholics in pews today?

, , , , , , , , , ,
Catholic doctrine has always rejected abortion: But what about Catholics in pews today?

It may be the most important U.S. Supreme Court decision of the last fifty years.

A leaked draft of a majority opinion, written by Justice Samuel Alito, would effectively dismantle the legal framework around abortion that was established in the 1973 decision Roe v. Wade. In its wake, states would have almost complete freedom to regulate abortion however they saw fit, including enacting a total prohibition.

Among those who study American religion and politics, it’s long been established that the earliest political voices seeking to restrict access to an abortion were members of the Catholic Church. For centuries, the catechism has taught that life should be protected at all stages — from conception to natural death. Thus, the tens of millions of American Catholics should be the standard bearers for the pro-life movement in the United States.

But here is an important question for journalists: Will most Catholics applaud the end of Roe? The data tells a nuanced story about how the average Catholic thinks about the issue of abortion access. As always, it’s important to note if polls pay any attention to how often Catholics attend Mass.

Looking back to the time period immediately after the Roe v Wade decision in 1973, it’s clear that the vast majority of Catholics were not comfortable with the concept of a woman obtaining an abortion for any reason, which not was out of step with how the average American felt.

For instance, in 1985 about 35% of Catholics were in favor of abortion demand. It was 39% of the general public. In the 1990s and 2000s, abortion opinion was relatively stable, but then things began to shift in 2010. From that point forward, the share of Catholics who supported abortion began to rise, which paralleled a shift in the overall opinion of the American public.

By 2021, fifty-three percent of Americans supported abortion on demand along with forty-five percent of Catholics. But, it’s worth noting that the contours of the two lines run in almost perfect unison. As the country moved left on abortion, so did the average Catholic.


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

No way around it: Bombshell Roe v. Wade leak was the religion story of the week

, , , , , , , , , ,
No way around it: Bombshell Roe v. Wade leak was the religion story of the week

News that the U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative majority might overturn Roe v. Wade is not overly shocking. We’ve known that for months.

But the timing — and manner — of this week’s leak of Justice Samuel Alito’s draft majority opinion that would strike down the landmark 1973 decision, which legalized abortion nationwide? That counts as a bombshell.

To discuss the big scoop by Politico’s Josh Gerstein and Alexander Ward, ReligionUnplugged.com convened a panel of top religion journalists who have written extensively about the abortion debate. Click here to watch the discussion.

Clemente Lisi and I moderated the panel. Lisi, who teaches journalism at The King’s College in New York, is a ReligionUnplugged.com senior editor and a veteran GetReligion writer who focuses on Catholic news for both websites. The panelists were:

• Adelle Banks, Religion News Service production editor and national reporter (see “If Roe goes, Black church leaders expect renewed energy for elections”).

• Kelsey Dallas, Deseret News religion reporter and associate national editor (see “As some rallied over Roe v. Wade, these Christians prayed”).

• BeLynn Hollers, Dallas Morning News reporter who covers women’s health, politics and religion (see her coverage of Texas’ restrictive abortion law).

• And Kate Shellnutt, Christianity Today senior news editor (see “This is and isn’t the moment pro-life evangelicals have waited for”).

Among the tantalizing questions the panel explored: Is the abortion debate a religion story?

Yes and no, Hollers said.

Yes, Dallas said. “But maybe not for the reasons people might assume,” she quickly added.


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

Podcast: About post-Roe politics and Biden's evolving doctrines on choosing to 'abort a child'

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Podcast: About post-Roe politics and Biden's evolving doctrines on choosing to 'abort a child'

Once upon a time, Sen. Joe Biden was almost a pro-life Catholic Democrat.

This may be the reason — as journalists frequently note — that he seems uncomfortable saying “abortion” in public remarks. Then again, he may also have private polling numbers on the muddled state of public opinion in which millions of Americans, including lots of Democrats, (a) oppose the U.S. Supreme Court overturning Roe vs. Wade, yet (b) are also in favor of European-style restrictions on abortion that have been blocked by U.S. courts because of legal logic built on Roe.

As is so often the case, Americans want it both ways and it’s rare for the mainstream press to note the tensions in that stance, since that would require balanced coverage of debates about Roe.

Back to Biden and a must-read Washington Post political feature that served as the hook for this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (CLICK HERE to tune that in). After spending much of his career somewhere in the middle on abortion, Biden now leads a Democratic Party that has veered so far to the cultural left that it champions third-trimester abortion (and even efforts to save the life of a baby born during a botched abortion).

That stance is hard to square with the Catechism of the Catholic Church, as well as lots of opinion polls, especially in states that will — if what appears to be a 5-3-1 SCOTUS verdict against Roe survives a blitz of elite media scorn — face debates about centrist laws to restrict, but not ban, abortion on demand.

Here is the top of the Post report, and readers are urged to spot a major abortion-talk stumble from Biden:

Joe Biden became a senator in 1973, just 17 days before the Supreme Court decided the landmark abortion rights case Roe v. Wade. Soon after, the young senator, a practicing Catholic, told an interviewer that he disagreed with the decision and that he had views on such matters that made him “about as liberal as your grandmother.”

“I don’t like the Supreme Court decision on abortion. I think it went too far,” he concluded in 1974. “I don’t think that a woman has the sole right to say what should happen to her body.”

Nearly a half-century later, with Biden evolving along with his party on the issue of abortion rights, he again declared the court was moving too far — this time, he argued, in the opposite direction.

“The idea that we’re going to make a judgment that is going to say that no one can make the judgment to choose to abort a child, based on a decision by the Supreme Court, I think, goes way overboard,” Biden said on Tuesday in reaction to a leaked Supreme Court draft opinion proposing to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Note that the Post editors, as opposed to some other elite media sources, used that quote in which Biden spoke words — “abort a child,” as opposed to a “fetus” — long banned in public-relations efforts for a pro-abortion-rights stance. I took that as a sign to keep reading.


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

When assisted suicide becomes 'a crossing over' church rite and a mere 'procedure'

, , , , , , , ,
When assisted suicide becomes 'a crossing over' church rite and a mere 'procedure'

Writer Emily Standfield drew a challenging assignment recently for Broadview magazine: write about Betty Sanguin, who chose to hasten her death as part of a religious rite performed inside the church she loved for many years, amid a diagnosis of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

Here’s the full headline: “Manitoba’s first medically assisted death in a church was an ‘intimate’ ceremony — Betty Sanguin spent her last day with family and friends at Churchill Park United.” And this is the overture:

At around noon on March 9, Betty Sanguin arrived at her church, Churchill Park United in Winnipeg, on a stretcher.

“The moment we rolled her in … and sat her up in her recliner, she lit up like a Christmas tree,” Lynda Sanguin-Colpitts, one of Sanguin’s daughters, recalls. “I hadn’t seen that much life in her eyes, so much joy [in a long time]. And honestly I think part of it was just being in the church.”

But this was no ordinary church service. Sanguin chose to die in the sanctuary that day.

Let’s stipulate some points up front:

First of all, Standfield is an editorial intern. Also, it’s crucial that Broadview, a publication affiliated with the United Church of Canada, has many ideological commitments and states them explicitly on its website. Here are some quotes:

— “Broadview’s values include LGBTQ2 inclusion, environmental sustainability and ethical investing, as well as increasing the presence of diverse contributors.”

— “In October 2020, we pledged to have one-third BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Colour) staff and freelance contributors by 2025, and we’ll check in on our progress annually. Our governing board has also committed to achieving a similar target among its 11 members.”

— “In our writing, we refer to diverse communities with their preferred cases and spellings. For example, we capitalize ‘B’ in ‘Black’ and ‘I’ in ‘Indigenous,’ and use our Indigenous writers’ and subjects’ preferred spellings for Indigenous nations.”


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

Alongside abortion, don't neglect the Supreme Court's big school prayer ruling

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Alongside abortion, don't neglect the Supreme Court's big school prayer ruling

Vastly overshadowed by the uproar over Politico's bombshell report that the Supreme Court may be poised to overturn past abortion rulings, the court actually released religious-liberty ruling written by retiring Justice Stephen Breyer. His Shurtleff v. City of Boston opinion (.pdf here) reasoned that since Boston had permitted 284 city hall flag displays by varied groups, it violated freedom of speech to forbid a Christian flag for fear of violating church-state separation.

Harvard Divinity student Hannah Santos, writing for Americans United, said Christian flag displays would be "disturbing and demoralizing" and evoke the Puritan founders' "cruel" intolerance. But Breyer and the other two liberal justices joined six conservatives in this unanimous — repeat unanimous — decision.

There's likely to be less Court concord on another First Amendment ruling reporters need to prepare for in coming weeks. This dispute crisply demonstrates the culture-war split among American religious groups and between most Democrats and Republicans.

Kennedy v, Bremerton School District [Docket #21-418] involves the firing of Joseph Kennedy, an assistant high school football coach in Washington state. He violated the school's order against his kneeling to utter brief prayers on the 50-yard line after games, with students who wished joining him.

Here, too, Kennedy's freedoms of speech and religion ran up against school fears about violating the Constitution's clause barring government "establishment of religion." Click here for a recent Julia Duin post looking at some of the media coverage of this debate.

In preparing coverage to interpret the forthcoming ruling, keep in mind possible ramifications beyond the gridiron. As Christianity Today reported, hypothetical situations the justices discussed during the two-hour oral argument included teachers or coaches praying silently or aloud or reading the Bible before class, coaches praying on the sidelines perhaps with specific notice that students weren't required to pray or that they cannot pray or a player simply making the sign of the cross.

Also this. A court filing from the Jewish Coalition for Religious Liberty and the Islam team at the Religious Freedom Institute informed the justices that observant Jewish teachers and coaches need to speak brief public blessings before eating or drinking, and that Muslims must join daily prayer times during public school hours or while chaperoning a field trip.


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

The pope, Cardinal Becciu and bad real estate deals: Concerning the Vatican 'Trial of the Century'

, , , , , , , , , , , ,
The pope, Cardinal Becciu and bad real estate deals: Concerning the Vatican 'Trial of the Century'

The news media loves the term “Trial of the Century.”

This phrase gained widespread acceptance and use during the 1935 trial that stemmed from the kidnapping of Charles Lindbergh’s son three year earlier. That was in an era when newspapers and sensationalism went hand in hand.

The moniker came back in a more modern context when O.J. Simpson went on trial for double homicide in 1995 — a salute to the power of celebrity in American life, as well as debates about race. This era included both newspapers and TV (the trial was televised live), along with a nascent Internet that would eventually come to dominate the news landscape a few decades later.

Something akin to a Catholic “Trial of the Century” has gotten underway in Rome and there’s plenty of palace intrigue to go around. The trial involving corruption, bad real estate deals and financial wrongdoing has placed Pope Francis in the center of a controversy that for the first time doesn’t involve doctrine or theology.

Familiar journalism questions leap to mind: What did the pope know and when did he know it? What if a witness implicates Francis? Hold that thought.

Pope Francis may not be on trial, but he might as well be, as news coverage of this trial attempts to cut through all the noise and get readers what’s most important. Catholic media has done a very good job covering the trial, although I expect coverage to expand in the mainstream press should Francis become a central figure during testimony.

It’s moments such as this trial, delayed over the past year by preliminary hearings and COVID-19, that highlight the Vatican as both a religious institution as well as a political one, with all the headaches that come with managing a city state with immense wealth and properties. News coverage of this trial and its lead up has been interesting to dissect — depending on whether you read mainstream media or the Catholic press — and exactly what this latest scandal means for the church.


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

Great and Holy Pascha in Ukraine: Details matter when war crashes into holiest day of the year

, , , , , , , ,
Great and Holy Pascha in Ukraine: Details matter when war crashes into holiest day of the year

Once a copy-desk fanatic, always a copy-desk fanatic. If you ever get caught up in obscure debates about items in the Associated Press Stylebook, then you’re trapped. You see picky style issues all over the place.

This is certainly true on the religion beat. Readers may recall that the AP team recently updated and expanding some of the style bible’s references to religious terms, history, etc. See this recent post and podcast: “Can the AP Stylebook team slow down the creation of new Godbeat 'F-bombs'?”

This brings me to the most important holy day on the Eastern Orthodox Christian calendar — it’s called Pascha and you may have heard that the ancient churches of the East celebrate it according to the older Julian calendar. It’s complicated, but there are times when East is East and West is West.

Pascha is certainly one of those times. OrthodoxWiki notes:

Pascha is a transliteration of the Greek word, which is itself a transliteration of the Aramaic pascha, from the Hebrew pesach meaning Passover. A minority of English-speaking Orthodox prefer the English word "Pasch."

Here is the note that I’d like the AP style pros to think about. It is also accurate to say that this holy day is, in the West, called “Easter.” Thus, we frequently see the term “Orthodox Easter” in the mainstream press. In fact, that is pretty much the only language that we see in news reports about this holy day.

Here me say this: As a journalist who is an Orthodox Christian (and a former copy-desk guy). I get it. I know that “Orthodox Easter” is a quick way to save some ink that journalists would have to use to offer an explanation of, well, Pascha.

But the word “Pascha” is real and it’s ancient and it has great meaning to the second largest Christian communion on the Planet Earth. If you are writing about Orthodox believers at this time of the year, why not use both terms in the story? Why avoid THE WORD. (Oh, and the name of our eucharistic rite is the “Divine Liturgy,” not “Mass.”)

This is an important issue, at the moment, because you have a war going on (whatever Vladimir Putin wants to call it) in the season of Pascha between Russia and Ukraine — two lands with centuries of shared history rooted in Orthodox Christianity.


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

In terms of church history, should the United Methodist break-up be called a 'schism'?

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
In terms of church history, should the United Methodist break-up be called a 'schism'?

When I moved to Denver in 1984, Rocky Mountain News (RIP) my work plunged me into the ongoing United Methodist Church battles over creed-level doctrines, the Bible and, of course, homosexuality.

The region’s defining institution was the Iliff School of Theology, a UMC authorized seminary that a former professor there once told me was “the single most liberal school in America that still bothers to call itself ‘Christian.’ “ In the late ‘80s, an Iliff student said he had encountered one professor who believed that the resurrection of Jesus actually happened, as an event in real time. I would doubt this seminary has become more small-o “orthodox” in the past third of a century.

If you were in Denver back then it was clear that the United Methodists were in the midst of a very slow train wreck and that a parting of the ways was inevitable. The question: Who would leave and who would control the assets of this large, but shrinking, denomination?

This brings us to a recent story in The Nashville Tennessean with this dramatic double-decker headline (behind a fierce paywall):

Methodists focus on Easter amid denominational schism and the tough decisions ahead

A new, more conservative Methodist denomination is set to launch May 1 after a years-long debate centered largely over LGBTQ rights.

People have been using the word “schism” for decades, when describing this conflict. I would like to argue that this technical term is problematic, in this case, and that recent events — especially the proposed “Reconciliation and Grace Through Separation” protocol — have made it even more so. I propose using the word “divorce,” in this case. Hold that thought.

There is much to praise in this Tennessean story, especially the many quotes from regional church leaders on both sides of this battle. However, the “schism” lens is easy to see. I think that with two or three extra sentences, readers would have a better idea what is going on in this conflict. It’s also important to know that the Southeast is a crucial region in this conflict (along with the core Midwest), in which there are many doctrinally conservative churches paired with bishops who are more progressive.

But let’s start with the term “schism.” Here is a helpful Britannica reference:

schism, in Christianity, a break in the unity of the church.


Please respect our Commenting Policy