Vatican

Plug-In: Amid Tennessee tornado wreckage, one man's faith offers a huge measure of hope

COOKEVILLE, Tenn. — Heartbreak and hope.

It’s a combination I’ve witnessed repeatedly when covering catastrophes, from the Oklahoma City bombing to Hurricane Katrina to, most recently, the March 3 Tennessee tornadoes that killed 25 people and injured hundreds.

In a ravaged neighborhood of this community 80 miles east of Nashville, I met a survivor slammed into his basement by the EF-4 twister that destroyed his home.

But rather than lament what he had lost, the man, Gary Flatt, thanked God for fellow Christians who had come to his aid.

“Someone looked at the house and said, ‘It’s unbelievable what a tornado can do,’” Flatt told me, standing amid the scattered debris. “And I told them, ‘No, it’s unbelievable what a bunch of loving Christians can do.’”

Yes, it’s true: People of faith do more than pray after a disaster such as this.

Here’s how religion writer Holly Meyer of The Tennessean described the religious community’s response to the tornadoes:

They transformed their houses of worship into de facto relief centers, organized droves of volunteers for cleanup, raised money and met the basic needs of storm survivors.

These belief-driven helpers have been at it for days.

In 2018, I enjoyed writing a feature (“18 wheels and a heart to serve”) about a faith-based disaster relief truck driver’s all-night drive from Nashville, Tenn., to Panama City, Fla., after Hurricane Michael.

The theme: Heartbreak and hope.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Farewell to a familiar news story angle? Argentina shows that pope's policy clout is fading

Past popes have exerted an enormous amount of influence on politics around the world. A pope’s influential reach — and the large number of Catholics around the world — has often been vital in the shaping of laws and policy.

The best example is Saint Pope John Paul II. The Polish-born pontiff was instrumental in the fall of communism some three decades ago. His successor, Pope Benedict XVI, had a different approach. Not a media star like JPII, Benedict focused his efforts on Africa. With help from humanitarian aid organizations, the Vatican exerted a great amount of influence in many African nations where the church matters. The church continues to grow there.

This has helped shape how journalists cover the papacy and, thus, the Catholicism. Shaping world politics? That’s news. Shaping doctrines and how people worship? That’s news— maybe. It depends. Do the doctrines have anything to do with gender or sex?

This brings us to Pope Francis.

A progressive star to some, Francis has made immigration and climate change the cornerstones of his foreign policy priorities. Although he is considered a man of great influence, his papacy has also coincided with the rise of both secularism and populism. That has given the Vatican strange bedfellows on some issues — like aligning itself with left-wing parties in Italy. His initiatives have been ineffective with others.

Francis’ papacy — aside from dividing Catholics, predominantly in the United States — has been a disappointment on a great many issues. While the pope’s position is within traditional Catholic teaching (on climate change and immigration), it has polarized many and been widely dismissed by the same populist governments that have also been appealing to doctrinally conservative-minded voters. Francis is not a forceful diplomat like John Paul II nor a prominent theologian like Benedict.

In terms of his strengths, Francis is seen as both humble and simple — traits that don’t get the job done when it comes to international diplomacy.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Click-bait headlines about Pope Francis and coronavirus nothing to sneeze at

The coronavirus has brought with it concern and panic across the world, especially after cases were detected outside of China the past two weeks. Aside from China, the other country severely impacted by the outbreak has been Italy.

During his weekly general audience that coincided with Ash Wednesday, the pope reduced his contact with pilgrims in St. Peter's Square, shaking hands with only a few people. The pope then circled the square in the popemobile, blessing them from a distance.

At the end of his audience, the pope assured all those affected by the coronavirus of his closeness and prayers. He said his prayers were also with the health care professionals and public officials who were working hard to help patients and stop the spread of the disease.

This is where the coronavirus, also known as COVID-19, stops being solely a health story and crosses into religion reporting, especially when you throw in the Vatican, Pope Francis and the Lenten season. Paramount here on the part of journalists is not to incite fear — but to report the facts.

Here’s a fact: Pope Francis, a day after shaking hands with the faithful on Ash Wednesday, did not get coronavirus, something the Vatican confirmed on Tuesday. The latest is that he is recovering from what the Vatican is calling a cold, forcing him to bail on a prescheduled week-long Lenten retreat.

You wouldn’t necessarily know all this from reading Twitter or Reddit, forums where conspiracy theories run amok.

People posted all kinds of misinformation the following day once the Vatican announced the pope had a cold and was altering his public schedule.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Making the impossible possible: Can Catholics now eat plant-based 'meat' during Lent?

Ash Wednesday ushers the start of Lent, a six-week period where Christians prepare for Easter through prayer and reflection. For Catholics, the season also involves fasting on certain days and abstaining from meat on Fridays. The tradition, which started in the early church, is something that Catholics, and many Christians in general, have prescribed to for centuries.

Catholics avoid meat during Lent to show respect for the death of Jesus. There have been exceptions in the past, like dispensations when St. Patrick’s Day falls on a Friday during the Lenten season.

Fish, on the other hand, is permitted. It’s the reason why fast food chains like McDonald’s have for decades aggressively advertised the Filet-O-Fish, a sandwich invented in 1962 to cater to Catholics looking to avoid meat on Fridays and to make up for sagging burger sales. (Now Arby’s has jumped into this market.)

Thanks to products like the Impossible Burger or Beyond Meat, the dietary restrictions that come with Lent have been turned on their head. Plant-based imitation meat alternatives look and taste like meat — but isn’t. That has unleashed a meaty debate in pews and on message boards over whether plant-based patties can or cannot be eaten during Lent and whether doing so is a sin.

“As someone who eats and craves meat, I see not eating meat as a sacrifice,” wrote one Reddit user. “Though it may be OK to eat, it is a small sacrifice compared to Jesus dying for our sins. I will try the burger, but not on a Friday or Ash Wednesday in Lent.”

Others disagree, saying if it isn’t meat then it’s fair game.

“I would think that it is against the spirit of the requirement, but it wouldn’t be a sin because it is not a violation of the church law,” wrote another user.

The debate isn’t limited to Roman Catholics. Orthodox Christians who belong to Eastern Rite churches also fast and abstain from meat (and dairy) throughout Great Lent and at other times of the year. Jews who keep kosher have also had to face the religious predicaments that these foods now present.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Catholic news budget: (1) Again, Pius and the Jews (2) Despite Francis' dodge,  celibacy debate persists

The good news: After years of agitation among prelates, historians and Jewish leaders, on March 2 the Vatican will fully open its covert archives that cover Pope Pius XII’s performance during the Nazi era.

The bad news for journalists: It will take months, even years, for expert researchers to draw coherent conclusions from the estimated 16 million pages of documents. Neverthelessl, retrospectives on the Pius debate since the 1960s will be timely just now, drawing upon the massive material in newsroom morgues and online.

The issues surrounding this pontiff — a long-pending and controversial candidate for sainthood — are huge for Jewish relations. Beginning in 1920, Pius was the Vatican’s envoy to Germany, and during his years as secretary of state its top strategist on Nazism. Then his 1939 election as pope coincided with war and the Holocaust.

The big historic question: Did he say and do enough as Hitler’s regime oppressed Jews and eventually slaughtered them by the millions?

The Vatican completed a partial release of historical texts on Pius in 1981 but the new, complete batch is expected to be more enlightening. The Holy See is offering assurances that scholars are welcome to apply for access to the collection regardless of religious views or ideologies. What historians are in line, and what journalists will be on the list?

Sources to note from Nicole Winfield’s Associated Press scene-setter include Brown University historian David Kertzer and Rabbi David Rosen, the American Jewish Committee’s international interreligious director (based in Jerusalem but reachable via AJC publicist Kenneth Bandler, bandlerk@ajc.org or 212-891-6771).

Now, here is a second subject for this week’s Memo package.

The news media are pondering Pope Francis’ February decision to dodge proposals from South America that the church experiment with ordaining married men as priests in places with severe need.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Mainstream press misses backstory of why Francis has (for now) vetoed married clergy

Pope Francis — a week after the dust settled from his decision not to create an Amazonian rite that would have allowed married men to serve as priests and women as deacons — continues to garner news coverage as Catholic progressives and traditionalists debate what it all means.

The mainstream press, often too concerned with propping up Francis’ progressive bona fides, has largely not reported on why the pope decided to go the way he did. The factors that resulted in the pope’s decision came from a variety of camps inside the church. And what about this question: Did conservatives in the Vatican hierarchy, led by Cardinal Robert Sarah (helped by the recent intervention of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI), raise enough concerns to tip the decision in their favor?

The Amazonian rite, however, was never only just about South America. The pope’s decision could have had global ramifications. The tug-of-war mostly involves German bishops pushing the pope to allow all clergy to marry (along with other changes in discipline and doctrine), while on the other is conservative prelates warning against doing away with the 1,000-year church tradition.

Once again, much of the backstory behind Francis’ decision can be learned from reading the religious press, both Catholics on the doctrinal left and right.

The mainstream press largely missed these angles, meaning readers had to delve really deep into internet news sources (with help from social media) to get analysis of how Francis reached his decision and whether the issue of married clergy/women deacons will rage on.

In the end, much to the chagrin of the mainstream press, Francis decided in favor of Catholic orthodoxy and tradition. What the mainstream press saw, but failed to report, was the Francis defies typical contemporary political categories.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Concerning married Catholic priests: Do reporters know they are common in parts of the world?

For years — unto ages of ages, amen — I have hit the same roadblock when reading mainstream news stories about the Catholic church and mandatory celibacy for priests. You know: We’re talking about statements that the Catholic church does not allow the ordination of married men to the priesthood.

It’s a classic, “Close, but no cigar” situation. The problem is that it is mostly true, but the statement simply is not accurate. Thus, news organizations should not publish or broadcast this kind of statement.

It is accurate to say that MOST Catholic priests are not married. It’s even better to say that MOST priests in Catholicism’s LATIN Rite are required to be celibate. You see, even in the Latin Rite there are some former Episcopal priests and a few Lutheran pastors who were allowed to make the transition to the Catholic priesthood — after they were married.

However, in terms of statistics, the main thing that reporters need to know is that married priests are the norm in the Eastern Rite bodies that are in communion with the Vatican. These churches exist in North America, but they are at the heart of Catholic life in the Middle East. Many readers, and apparently quite a few editors, get confused and assume that these churches are part of ancient Eastern Orthodox Christianity (where married priests are the norm, as well).

Every now and then, a news hook comes along that encourages journalists to remember that there are lots and lots married priests in the Christian East. That leads to helpful stories such as this think piece in The Washington Post: “Pope Francis won’t allow married priests in the Amazon. But in this part of the world, married priests are the norm.” Here is the rather standard-form overture:

ROME — After one-and-a-half years of feeling their bond deepen, after coffee meetups and French study sessions, Oleh Kindiy leaned in close to his girlfriend in a mostly quiet chapel and offered her a ring. She said yes. But asking for marriage was just his first question.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Is Europe 'Christian'? That depends on how, and when, someone asks that question

Is Europe 'Christian'? That depends on how, and when, someone asks that question

THE QUESTION:

Is Europe Christian?

THE RELIGION GUY’S ANSWER:

The intriguing question above is the title of a brief new book (from Oxford University Press) by prominent French social analyst Olivier Roy, a professor at the European University Institute in Florence, Italy, and critic of political Islam.

To Roy, the correct answer is that it all depends on what you mean by “Christian.”

The Religion Guy agrees. If the answer is no, that’s an epochal change. The continent has served as the faith’s heartland through much of history, symbolized by Catholicism’s headquarters in Rome and the World Council of Churches offices in Geneva, though thriving churches in the Global South are now taking the numerical lead.

Across the continent, the Christian heritage involves some cultural and moral influences, nostalgia, folkways, and a residuum of respect. But actual belief, practice, and church participation are weakening steadily. Is Shrove Tuesday February 25 merely about pancake recipes, or Christmas a season of street markets and consumer excess? Pope Benedict XVI and allies could not even win acknowledgment of the continent’s past Christian roots in the European Union’s constitution of 2004.

The Pew Research Center tells us Europe is the only sector of the world where the population labeled Christian in whatever way is shrinking by demography as deaths steadily outnumber births, resulting in a net loss of 5.6 million in just the years 2010 to 2015.

Before turning to Roy’s argument, let’s scan relevant data from Pew’s 2018 report on telephone interviews with 24,599 randomly selected adults conducted in 12 languages in 15 nations of Western Europe (post-Soviet Eastern Europe was not surveyed).

It’s striking that only 27 percent of West Europeans “believe in God as described in the Bible” any longer.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

That question I keep hearing: Why isn't slaughter of Nigerian Christians a news story?

GetReligion readers: It’s time for a poll about a subject that I keep hearing about over and over in emails and in social media. Raise your cyber hands if you have:

* Seen headlines such as this one — “Days Before Attack, Nigerian Bishop Warned of Poor Protection for Christians” — in religious-market publications.

* Seen the same kind of headlines in mainstream news publications that you read, either at the local or national levels.

* Wondered why these headlines rarely, if ever, appear in the news sources that drive most mainstream coverage.

* Sent GetReligion an email on this topic in the past year or two.

Here’s the basic question that I keep hearing from readers: Why would it take to get mainstream coverage of the slaughter of Christians in Nigeria? The assumption, of course, is that journalists are biased on this topic for some reason. Hold that thought.

Meanwhile, here are a few examples of the kinds of stories we are talking about, starting with that Catholic News Agency headline mentioned earlier. Here’s the overture there:

JOS, Nigeria — Just days before a suspected Islamist militant attack killed 30 people in Nigeria, a prominent bishop in the country lamented what he saw as a lack of adequate protection from the Nigerian government for the country’s nearly 100 million Christians.

Suspected Islamist militants set sleeping travelers on fire in Borno state, Nigeria, on Feb. 11, burning 18 vehicles filled with food supplies and killing at least 30, including a pregnant woman and her baby.

In a Feb. 7 interview with Aid to the Church in Need, Archbishop Augustine Obiora Akubeze of Benin City, president of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria, warned that “The current situation in Nigeria reflects an unnecessary, unwarranted and self-inflicted tension. A politically polarized nation.”


Please respect our Commenting Policy