Marriage & Family

Media revelation: Two-parent homes are good for children. Religion questions, anyone?

Media revelation: Two-parent homes are good for children. Religion questions, anyone?

The past two weeks have produced a boomlet in scholarly and journalistic revelations of facts that establish heavy disadvantages afflicting children not raised by two parents, who are more prevalent in the United States than any other nation.

This is a controversial topic and has all kinds of links to debates about religion, morality and culture.

Consider this from a lengthy New York Times op-ed Sept. 20, with this explosive headline: “The Explosive Rise of Single-Parent Families Is Not a Good Thing.”

The evidence is overwhelming: Children from single-parent homes have more behavioral problems, are more likely to get in trouble in school or with the law, achieve lower levels of education and tend to earn lower incomes in adulthood. Boys from homes without dads present are particularly prone to getting in trouble. …

This article, by University of Maryland economist Melissa S. Kearney, was based on her new book “The Two-Parent Privilege: How Americans Stopped Getting Married and Started Falling Behind” (University of Chicago Press). The Religion Guy has yet to read this book, which has won media praise as “important,” “compelling” and “a great service,” with a “top scholar” offering “reams of evidence.”

By coincidence, the same day the book was released, University of Virginia sociologist W. Bradford Wilcox and three Institute for Family Studies colleagues posted a piece (.pdf here) headlined “Do Two Parents Matter More Than Ever?” Their answer: Yes. It’s the latest such documentation from the Institute and the university’s National Marriage Project, which Wilcox directs. (Note: these social scientists are not saying spouses should remain in physically or emotionally dangerous marriages.)

These writings do not center on religious arguments or sources, but Christian, Jewish, Muslim and other clergy, and members of their congregations, will respond: “Duh!”


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Journalists need to ask: Are emerging Catholic synod fights about 'ideology' or 'doctrine'?

Journalists need to ask: Are emerging Catholic synod fights about 'ideology' or 'doctrine'?

The Synod on Synodality is here and there are many, many angles for journalists to pursue.

Let’s put it this way (with much, much more to come), I don’t think Clemente Lisi will have lots of time for soccer (he is an internationally known reporter on all things futbol) in the days ahead. For starters, readers can dig into these Lisi features at Religion Unplugged, where he is editor: “Everything You Need To Know About The Synod On Synodality” and “Pope Francis Open To Church Blessing Of Same-Sex Unions.”

The same-sex blessing story is huge and, frankly, leaders in some mainstream newsrooms (scan this Google News search file) seem to be waiting for a clear signal from their usual Catholic sources on the degree to which it is appropriate to celebrate.

I would like to back off and examine an important word in recent statements by Pope Francis and, thus, the elite press. That word is “ideology.” You can see what is going on in the Associated Press report with this headline: “Ideological rifts among U.S. bishops are in the spotlight ahead of momentous Vatican meeting.”

The subject, of course, is the Synod on Synodality. Read this carefully:

The synod is intended to be a collegial, collaborative event, though the agenda includes divisive issues such as the role of women in the church and the inclusion of LGBTQ Catholics.

If there’s Exhibit A for how elusive consensus might be, it’s the United States’ participation. In effect, there are two high-level U.S. delegations widely viewed as ideological rivals — six clerics appointed by Pope Francis who support his aspirations for a more inclusive, welcoming church; five clerics chosen by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops who reflect a more conservative outlook and more skepticism of Francis’ priorities.

The assumption, of course, is that the divisions among U.S. representatives and, one can assume others around the world, are essentially political.

As always: Politics is real. Religion? Not so much.

Let’s keep reading, before we return to that loaded word — “ideological.”


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: God knows, there's more to rising tensions in country music than politics

Podcast: God knows, there's more to rising tensions in country music than politics

Gentle readers, here is the GetReligion question for this week.

Here we go: Who would you trust to know more about the complex cultural, moral, religious and, yes, political world of country music — the editors of Rolling Stone magazine or the late, great Johnny Cash?

I asked this question during this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (CLICK HERE to tune that in), which focused on a Rolling Stone feature with this headline: “The Culture Wars Are Tearing the Close-Knit Country Music Community Apart.”

To cut to the chase, these country music fights are all about politics — of course. And also, it’s totally new (#NOT) for country stars to speak out on issues of culture, morality, family, politics, economics, race, etc. Forget that Hank Williams guy, Jimmie Rodgers, Merle Haggard, Loretta Lynn and lots of other superstars.

People like Cash. It helps to read this next quote slowly and imagine the Man in Black’s voice-of-God singing and speaking tones

:… When asked to describe his musical values, Cash preached country gospel: "I love songs about horses, railroads, land, judgment day, family, hard times, whiskey, courtship, marriage, adultery, separation, murder, war, prison, rambling, damnation, home, salvation, death, pride, humor, piety, rebellion, patriotism, larceny, determination, tragedy, rowdiness, heartbreak and love. And mother. And God."

Yes. there’s some politics in there — along with some other important topics.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Reuters should correct a correction? Polish rite to beatify family of nine killed by Nazis

Reuters should correct a correction? Polish rite to beatify family of nine killed by Nazis

Does anyone remember newspaper “corrections”?

Let me explain the concept to younger GetReligion readers. Back in the days of ink-on-paper news, if a news organization made a mistake, the editors used to print an actual correction, noting the error and providing the correct information. Then, early in the online era, they would add a “correction” blurb at the top of a story and then insert a detailed correction at the end (or some variation on these items).

Then some, not all, news organizations simply started correcting mistakes — in the never-ending flow of online copy — without admitting that they made these mistakes in the first place. Thus, savvy news readers began making screenshots of errors they spotted, knowing that this was the only definitive way to prove the error ever existed.

Now, we have something really strange going on in the following Reuters news report: “Catholic Church to beatify Polish family, including new-born baby, killed by Nazis.”

If you follow Catholic Twitter, it appears that there were errors in an earlier version of this story.

Maybe. It’s hard to tell.

Then again, the current version of the story (as I wrote this) appears to contain a clash between two different accounts of this beatification story.

Start here: Note the “including new-born baby” reference in the headline.Then, let’s work through this, starting with the lede from several days ago:

VATICAN CITY, Sept 5 (Reuters) — The Catholic Church is to beatify a Polish family of nine including a new-born baby who died at the hands of the Nazis during World War Two, the Vatican's saint-making department said.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

New take on culture wars? American Muslims clash with the Sexual Revolution

New take on culture wars? American Muslims clash with the Sexual Revolution

In terms of Islamic doctrine, alcohol is "haram," or forbidden, and the Quran is blunt: "O ye who believe! Strong drink and games of chance and idols and divining arrows are only an infamy of Satan's handiwork."

But it isn't hard to find Muslims that never boarded that bandwagon.

"There are Muslims who drink and get drunk. That's a fact, but that doesn't mean they can change what Islam teaches," said Yasir Qadhi, dean of the Islamic Seminary of America, near Dallas. "That's a sin. We all sin. But we cannot change our faith to fit the new norms in society."

Under normal circumstances, it wouldn't be controversial for Islamic leaders to affirm that their faith teaches absolute, unchanging truths about moral issues -- including subjects linked to sexuality, marriage and family life.

But Muslims in America never expected to be called "ignorant and intolerant" because they want public-school leaders to allow children to opt out of academic work that clashes with their faith. But that's what is happening in Montgomery County, Maryland, and a few other parts of the U.S. and Canada, where Muslim parents have been accused of cooperating with the cultural right, said Qadhi.

"That is so painful. … Truth is, we are not aligning with the political left or right," he added. "You cannot put Islam into a two-party world, where you have to choose the Democrats or the Republicans and that is that."

On the legal front, a Maryland district court recently ruled that parents do not have "a fundamental right" to avoid school activities that challenge their faith. The legal team for a coalition of Muslims, Jews, Orthodox Christians, evangelicals and others quickly asked the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider the Mahmoud v. McKnight decision.

At the same time, Muslim leaders are debating a May 23 statement -- "Navigating Differences: Clarifying Sexual and Gender Ethics in Islam" -- signed by more than 200 Muslim leaders and scholars, representing a variety of Islamic traditions.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Religion News Service does a fine job of interviewing LGBTQ+ critics of BYU honor code

Religion News Service does a fine job of interviewing LGBTQ+ critics of BYU honor code

First things first: Religion News Service deserves praise for publishing a story about the doctrinal code at a private religious university that actually discusses the contents of said code.

Here is the shocking part. This long news feature about Brigham Young University even mentions, near the end, that students who disagree with the school’s teachings actually have their own reasons to choose to live and study on this campus. Is free will involved? This is a mystery. Hold that thought.

However, I would note that this recent RNS report — “BYU officially restores honor code ban on ‘same-sex romantic behavior’” — leaves a crucial, related question unanswered: Do students actually SIGN the doctrinal code as part of enrollment? In other words, do they pledge to follow, or not to openly oppose, the contents of the code?

That’s a logical question, since this story makes it clear that students living in a voluntary community defined by these doctrines are still free to oppose them in public media.

In fact, the RNS story does not include material from an interview with a single student, faculty member, parent or trustee who defends the doctrinal code. This could be a statement about RNS journalism doctrines (Why quote people who are wrong?) or it may reflect the reality that it is now more controversial to openly support the teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints than it is to oppose them. Here is the story’s overture:

LGBTQ students at Brigham Young University celebrated three years ago when The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints’ flagship school quietly deleted from the honor code a ban on “homosexual behavior.” For the first time, many students began holding hands or kissing in public. Others took the moment to come out as queer.

Then, a month later, the Church Educational System administrators who oversee BYU’s campuses issued a statement clarifying that despite the deleted language, “same-sex romantic behavior” wasn’t compatible with the honor code.

Last week, the Church Educational System restored language to the code explicitly prohibiting LGBTQ affection — now called “same-sex romantic behavior.”


Please respect our Commenting Policy

New York Times offers flashback to sacraments offered by the priest of the Parrotheads

New York Times offers flashback to sacraments offered by the priest of the Parrotheads

Although I have lived in West Palm Beach, and I once saw Jimmy Buffett riding his bike near the ocean on Palm Beach Island, I claim absolutely zero personal insights into the philosophy and lifestyle of Parrotheads.

However, I saw a tweet by Ross Douthat pointing readers to an excellent New York Times profile of Buffett linked to the 2018 success of the jukebox Broadway musical celebrating his life. The headline: “Jimmy Buffett Does Not Live the Jimmy Buffett Lifestyle.” In a way, this feature by Taffy Brodesser-Akner can be read — I think this is what Douthat had in mind — as a kind of meditation on the long, warm Buffett obituaries that are running wherever Baby Boomers get their news.

At first glance, there is next to zero religious content in this feature. Then I took off my journalism-commentary glasses and read this feature through the eyes of the Denver Seminary professor that I was, briefly, in the early 1990s. Hold that thought, because we will come back to it.

Now, read this large chunk of the Times feature and start looking for hints at the role that Buffett played in the lives of his, well, disciples.

One day he realized that even if you were the supply, you could also be the supply chain. “It’s up to you to figure out how to take advantage or to manage whatever you’re going to do,” he said. “Margaritaville” was a hit in 1977. But more important, on that day, Margaritaville® was born.

He established Mailboat Records, his record label, in 1999. He went from making $2.20 per album to making $6 an album, he told me. He built his own tour buses, because it costs five times more to rent equipment than to own it yourself. He then rented out that equipment to other acts. And he took charge of his merchandise. He didn’t do it because he was greedy. He did it because he could do it better than the people who were ripping him off with concert T-shirts that spelled his name as Buffet.

He sold his fans quality, spell-checked T-shirts. He played clubs all over the country, but it was the crowds in landlocked areas that seemed to love him most. In Pittsburgh, he and his Coral Reefer band mates noticed that fans had started wearing Hawaiian shirts, just like they did, to the shows. One night, in Cincinnati, his bass player Timothy B. Schmit (also of the Eagles) likened them to Deadheads, the way Grateful Dead fans would follow that band. And so they were christened Parrotheads, just as a joke, but then fans began to wear feathers and beak masks to shows. “In their minds they wanted to go to the ocean,” he said. He understood he was bringing the ocean to them. He was no longer just a singer. Now he was a guru.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Pope Francis and his Synod on Synodality (part one) looks like 2023's story of the year

Pope Francis and his Synod on Synodality (part one) looks like 2023's story of the year

Move aside, Southern Baptists and their drive to restrict women’s pastoral ministry in church. Women will be just one of many contested topics when Pope Francis presides October 4–29 over his Synod of Bishops at the Vatican, already in line to become the religion story of the year, even though final decisions await a second session in October, 2024.

Interest escalated with last week’s vigorous attack on the meeting from conservative Catholics, in the form of a 110-page booklet translated into eight languages, made available free online for journalists and parishioners. “The Synodal Process Is A Pandora’s Box” contends that planners have stacked the deck and this “watershed in Church history” constitutes an “imminent” threat to “demolish” the “Catholic Church as it has always existed.”

Hard to top the news possibilities that could amount to a Vatican II and a half: Marriage for priests, ordination of women as deacons (though not as priests) with more power otherwise, lay preachers, broader inclusion for “LGBTQ+” Catholics (yes the Vatican uses that fashionable term), blessing ceremonies (but not marriages) for same-sex couples as the Church of England authorized this year, openness to polygamy and Communion to divorced-and-remarried Catholics and restitution for victims of clergy sexual abuse.

Or not. Germany’s “Synodal Way” process has taken the lead in promoting such revisionist proposals. By contrast, some U.S, bishops downplayed participation in the pope’s synod project or publicly criticized it.

Raising the stakes, according to Rome's Civilta Cattolica on Monday, Francis told an August 5 meeting in Portugal that in the American church there is "a very strong reactionary attitude. It is organized and shapes the way people belong, even emotionally." The pope also said "there is an appropriate evolution in the understanding of matters of faith and morals" and that "backward-ism is useless."

News coverage understandably emphasizes the “Pandora’s Box” booklet’s foreword by American Cardinal Raymond Burke, the onetime archbishop of St. Louis who is now retired as head of the Apostolic Signatura at the Vatican, the church’s highest tribunal.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Religion News Service offers the poignant story of Amarillo's few good United Methodists

Religion News Service offers the poignant story of Amarillo's few good United Methodists

Here we go again. This time around, we are dealing with a completely valid news story linked to the local, regional, national and global divorce that’s unfolding in the United Methodist Church. While news headlines insist that this drama is about LGBTQ+ issues, alone, decades of debates show that it’s rooted in differences over core doctrines, such as biblical authority, salvation, the identity of Jesus, marriage, the Resurrection, etc.

At the local level, the divorce is causing pain in lots of pews, especially when local churches vote — either to defend the existing UMC Book of Discipline or to align with a church establishment that wants to change it — creating divided flocks.

When this happens, journalists will need to talk to people on both sides of the split to find out why they have made the decisions that they have made. Correct?

Well, apparently not, according to this Religion News Service feature: “Left behind by disaffiliations, Texas town’s United Methodists charter a new church.” In this case, it appears that there are “good,” evolving United Methodists and then there are “bad” Methodists, who want to leave church doctrines as they are.

The “good,” evolving believers are offered a chance to offer their views about the new realities in disunited Methodism — as they should. They are a crucial part of the story. However, what about those “bad” believers who disagree with efforts to change the denomination’s doctrines? Alas, there is no need to talk to the “bad” Methodists.

Let’s walk through this, starting with the overture:

AMARILLO, Texas (RNS) — Earlier this year, the seven United Methodist churches in this city in the Texas Panhandle voted to leave the country’s second-largest Protestant denomination over theological questions about homosexuality and gender identity.

This is, of course, the viewpoint of the UMC establishment here in the United States — that this divorce is about LGBTQ+ issues, period. There are millions of Methodists in America, Africa, Asia, etc., who say the tensions are more complex than that.

Oh well. Whatever. Nevermind.


Please respect our Commenting Policy