, , , , , , , ,

Pop quiz: Can you answer seven questions about exit of Jerry Falwell Jr. at Liberty?

, , , , , , , ,

Was it just three weeks ago that we were talking about a “racy picture” of Liberty University’s then-president, Jerry Falwell Jr., sparking curiosity and controversy?

Given the allegations that surfaced this week, that infamous deleted photo of Falwell with his pants unzipped, belly button showing and arm around a woman (not his wife) suddenly seems tame.

So does the news — reported earlier this month by Religion News Service’s Emily McFarlan Miller — that Falwell “liked” a handful of Instagram images showing young women in swimsuits.

For anyone who spent the week taking a long nap in a cave without TV or internet (I envy you, friend), here is a Reader’s Digest version of what occurred: On Sunday night, the Washington Examiner’s Paul Bedard broke the news that Falwell said he had “suffered depression caused by a former family friend who had an affair with his wife and who has been threatening to expose it.”

Then on Monday, Reuters dropped a bombshell that seemed to explain why Falwell had sought friendly coverage with a conservative publication the previous day.

“Giancarlo Granda says his sexual relationship with the Falwells began when he was 20,” journalist Aram Roston reported. “He says he had sex with Becki Falwell while Jerry Falwell Jr., head of Liberty University and a staunch supporter of President Trump, looked on.” (In an interview with Washington Post religion reporter Sarah Pulliam Bailey, the Falwells denied the accusation that Jerry was involved in his wife’s affair.)

After Reuters’ story was published, developments happened fast. Falwell, already on an indefinite leave of absence as president of the world’s largest evangelical university, reportedly resigned. Then he insisted he hadn’t resigned. Then he really did resign.

But the headlines didn’t stop: On Thursday night, Politico published an exclusive story by Brandon Ambrosino about a claim, denied by the Falwells, that Becki initiated a sexual act with a student. And in the wake of Falwell’s departure, Liberty alumni are demanding change and action by the university’s board, report Religion Unplugged’s own Meagan Clark and Paul Glader.

How well did you pay attention to the Falwell news? Let’s try another pop quiz and see. I’ll share the answers at the bottom of this column.


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

Words or deeds? Catholics will be discussing Joe Biden's actions during fall campaign

, , , , , , , , , , , ,
Words or deeds? Catholics will be discussing Joe Biden's actions during fall campaign

In the summer of 2016, two White House staffers -- Brian Mosteller and Joe Mahshie -- tied the knot in a rite led by one of America's most prominent Catholics.

The officiant was Vice President Joe Biden, who later proclaimed on Twitter: "Proud to marry Brian and Joe at my house. Couldn't be happier … two great guys."

Leaders of familiar Catholic armies then debated whether Biden's actions attacked this Catholic Catechism teaching: "The marriage covenant, by which a man and a woman form with each other an intimate communion of life and love, has been founded and endowed with its own special laws by the Creator. … Christ the Lord raised marriage between the baptized to the dignity of a sacrament."

Conflicts between bishops, clergy and laity will loom in the background as Biden seeks to become America's second Catholic president. Combatants will be returning to territory explored in a famous 1984 address by the late Gov. Mario Cuomo of New York, entitled "Religious Belief and Public Morality."

Speaking at the University of Notre Dame, he said: "As a Catholic, I have accepted certain answers as the right ones for myself and my family, and because I have, they have influenced me in special ways, as Matilda's husband, as a father of five children, as a son who stood next to his own father's death bed trying to decide if the tubes and needles no longer served a purpose.

"As a governor, however, I am involved in defining policies that determine other people's rights in these same areas of life and death. Abortion is one of these issues, and while it is one issue among many, it is one of the most controversial and affects me in a special way as a Catholic public official."

It would be wrong to make abortion policies the "exclusive litmus test of Catholic loyalty," he said. After all, the "Catholic church has come of age in America" and it's time for bishops to recognize that Catholic politicians have to be realistic negotiators in a pluralistic land.

Cuomo also noted polls indicating that American Catholics "support the right to abortion in equal proportion to the rest of the population. … We Catholics apparently believe -- and perhaps act -- little differently from those who don't share our commitment. Are we asking government to make criminal what we believe to be sinful because we ourselves can't stop committing the sin?"


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

Thinking with Ryan Burge about Twitter Democrats, nones and people who sit in pews

, , , , , , , , , , ,

As researchers have been noting for several decades now, the active practice of a religious faith — especially traditional forms of faith — is one of the easiest ways to draw a line between political and cultural conservatives and people who consider themselves liberals or progressives.

This has obvious implications for clashes between Democrats and Republicans, no matter what the insiders and activists say and do while on camera at national political conventions.

If you want to review some “pew gap” basics, click here for a file of GetReligion material on the topic or head over here for a recent post — “Concerning Republicans, Democrats and gaps in pews“ — by political scientist Ryan Burge of the Religion in Public blog (and a contributor here at GetReligion).

Religious “nones” and other skeptics skew liberal and, thus, favor the Democratic party. Meanwhile, religious believers — especially white Christians who attend worship once a week or more — have increasingly flocked to the other side of the political aisle.

So what else could researchers do to chart this fault line in American political life?

Well, if you spend much time in the Twitter-verse, you know that lots of people in blue and red zip codes have radically different takes on the whole religion thing. This leads us to a fascinating think piece Burge wrote the other day for Religion News Service entitled, “By their tweets you will know them: The Democrats' continuing God gap.” Here is some material drawn from the overture:

Despite being a party that includes Black Protestants, who are some of the most religious Americans, and Hispanic Catholics, one of the few religious groups in the U.S. to be growing, Democrats still have troubles when it comes to talking about faith.

They have struggled to mobilize the religious left into a voting block and have troubles connecting with white Christian voters, the majority of whom supported President Trump in the last election.

And while Democrats do have the support of the so-called “Nones" — the growing group of Americans who have no religious affiliation — that group does not include particularly enthusiastic voters. …


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

Steamy Jerry Falwell Jr., story will get lots of ink: But what happens now at Liberty University?

, , , , , , , , , ,
Steamy Jerry Falwell Jr., story will get lots of ink: But what happens now at Liberty University?

It will not surprise readers that this week’s “Crossroads” podcast is about the Jerry Falwell Jr., scandal at Liberty University (click here to tune that in). However, I hope that this podcast focuses on a different angle of the crisis than what most news consumers are seeing in print and on television.

From my perspective, there are two important stories unfolding here — not one scandal. How journalists cover these stories will, in large part, be based on whether they only care about Falwell the celebrity (and Donald Trump, of course), as opposed to what went wrong at Liberty University and what the school could become in the future.

So what happens next? What happens with the scandals surrounding Falwell and his wife Becki? This is where I see so many parallels to the Jim and Tammy Bakker PTL scandal in the 1980s. All week long I’ve been having flashbacks to the many telephone calls I received at The Charlotte News (RIP) from alleged insiders wanting to share dirt about the Bakker’s financial and sexual misadventures.

As it turned out, one anonymous caller was telling the truth, or a small part of it. That caller was the bisexual Rev. John Wesley Fletcher, who was doing his best to crash the Bakker empire. Fletcher was telling part of the truth about Jim Bakker, while conveniently editing out his own sins in that torrid melodrama.

What did I learn from the PTL scandal that is relevant here?

The accusers on both siders were hiding crucial information, while sharing some information that was accurate. I think that’s true with the Falwell scandal, as well. Meanwhile, it helps to remember that Falwell is a lawyer, not a minister. I suspect that he knows most of the evidence that accuser Giancarlo Granda has in hand. So reporters need to watch carefully: Do either of these men actually want a day in court? Who wants to testify under oath and endure the rigors of the legal discover process?

The other crucial question, of course, is this: What did leaders of the Liberty board of trustees know and when did they know it?

This is a stunningly complex set of stories. It’s interesting that, in the mainstream coverage, the Washington Post pointed to almost all of the crucial issues on Monday night in an understated and solid early story.

By the way, please note that the Post has religion-beat pros and a higher-education specialist working on this mega-story. Attention managers of other elite newsrooms: Go thou and do likewise.

Here are two crucial passages, in terms of tone and content:


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

'Catholics are under attack': Is it a valid news story if a U.S. senator claims this is true?

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Is it news if a sitting United States senator pens a letter to the U.S. Justice Department?

It depends on a number of factors. Let’s also say that the letter in question is made public by the senator’s communications department via the Internet and on social media. Is it a news story then?

This depends, of course, on what the letter says and whether it is connected to facts that journalists can seek out and report — if they are willing to do so.

Is the story linked to nasty political partisanship? Does it involve President Donald Trump? Does it involve religion, sex and maybe even money?

This post isn’t some esoteric exercise in press freedom or news judgement. It’s about something real that is plaguing the national press in this country at this very critical moment in time.

A letter of this very kind was written and made public on August 11 by Louisiana Sen. John Kennedy (no relation to the Kennedy’s of JFK and Massachusetts fame). The letter in question had nothing to do with Russian election interference or the disappearance of mail boxes. Those topics would have been covered immediately and extensively.

Instead, the letter was about the surge in vandalism targeting Catholic churches and statues, a story that the vast majority of pros in the national press (as I have noted in this space before) have ignored. The reasons for that vary greatly, but my best hypothesis is that it just doesn’t resonate among secular newsroom editors and reporters who don’t have a high regard for Catholics or religion in general in the importance in the lives of everyday Americans.


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

Washington Post ponders the future of Sen. Tim Scott (all but avoiding the word 'Christian')

, , , , , , , , ,

Let’s see, am I at liberty — after a week of big-time PTL scandal flashbacks — to discuss a completely different kind of religion story?

I have not been watching the major-party political conventions (for mental-health reasons, let’s say), but I have been spending a few moments watching reactions on Twitter. I tend to prefer baseball over the live visuals of advocacy media slugfests.

I saved a few links to materials about the interfaith strategies of the Democrats. I also looked for signs of the role that issues of religion and culture could play in the post-Donald Trump GOP. And in that context, I looked at some of the quotes from the short speech by U.S. Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina.

It’s obvious why this man once considered going to seminary. He’s a fine orator and has a knack for making references to Christianity in ways that are more graceful than, well, posing with a Bible for news cameras. It’s impossible to dig into Scott’s career without paying serious attention to his faith.

However, a recent lengthy Washington Post Magazine profile of Scott came close to doing just that. Here’s the epic double-decker headline:

The Burden of Tim Scott

As the only Black GOP senator, he has walked a delicate line between schooling his colleagues — and the president — on matters of race and remaining silent. Has that helped his political future?

I understand that this was a political piece and that Scott is tiptoeing through the Trump-Twitter era. The long opening anecdote in about Scott asking the president to take down the infamous “white power” tweet is totally justified.

However, to be blunt, I think that the word “Christian” should have been just as important in this long, long story as the word “token.” Read it all and see what you think. I think this story would have been completely different, if a religion-beat pro had been asked to take part in the reporting or editing.

So here is the political angle that is at the heart of this story:


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , ,

Freethought Caucus in U.S. House reflects the rise, and political potential, of the 'nones'

, , , , , ,

Rashida Tlaib of liberal “squad” fame on Capitol Hill, the first Palestinian-American and one of two Muslim women in the U.S. House, won this month’s primary against the president of Detroit’s City Council and is guaranteed re-election in a heavily Democratic district.

Now the “Friendly Atheist” blog on patheos.com revealed that Tlaib has quietly joined the Congressional Freethought Caucus. Aysha Khan, Religion News Service’s Muslim specialist, quickly grabbed the report.

Lest there be misunderstanding, this doesn’t mean Tlaib is spurning Islam like, say, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, celebrated author of “Infidel.” In theory, a religious believer can back such Freethought Caucus goals as “public policy based on reason and science,” protection of government’s “secular nature” and opposition to “discrimination against atheists, agnostics, and religious seekers.”

There are dozens of these special-interest caucuses in the House (.pdf here), covering anything from Cannabis to International Religious Freedom to LGBT Equality to rugby. One of the largest is the Prayer Caucus, chaired by North Carolina Baptist Mark Walker. The House members who lead the Ahmadiyya Muslim and American Sikh Caucuses are not adherents of those faiths, only interested friends.

There are now 13 House members in the Freethought Caucus, all of them Democrats, while 18 representatives decline to list a religious identity. Another 80 label themselves generic “Protestant” without specifying any particular church affiliation. See rundown on all Congress members here (.pdf).

These facts echo the increase of religiously unaffiliated “nones,” now 26 percent of the over-all U.S. population in Pew Research surveys. If effectively organized, they should exercise growing influence in the Democratic Party — though churchgoing Catholic Joe Biden’s nominating convention featured the customary God-talk.

Three Freethought members are among those who specify no religious identity: Representatives Sean Casten of Illinois, Pramila Jayapal of Washington and Mark Pocan of Wisconsin.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , ,

Happy birthday to Ganesh? How 'present' is Kamala's Hindu past?

, , ,

I’m not sure a presidential and vice-presidential candidate have ever observed the birthday of a Hindu god that’s half boy and half elephant, but this being 2020 — there’s a time for everything.

Ganesh is one of the most popular out of a huge pantheon of Hindu gods and you see his human body with an elephant head all over India. On his birthday, which was Aug. 22, Biden made a tweet, which was re-tweeted by his vice presidential nominee, as a greeting to his followers.

This from the India-based Economic Times:

Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden and his Indian-origin running mate Kamala Harris on Saturday greeted the Hindu community in the US, India and around the world on the occasion of Ganesh Chaturthi.

"To everyone celebrating the Hindu festival of Ganesh Chaturthi in the US, India, and around the world, may you overcome all obstacles, be blessed with wisdom, and find a path toward new beginnings," Biden said in a tweet.

So why did Biden tweet this? Was this a nod to his vice presidential pick’s heritage? A move to win America’s tiny Hindu vote? A salute to India? You tell me.

The key, here at GetReligion, is where this side of the Democratic Party’s interfaith campaign is getting the news coverage that it deserves.

We’ve written about the whole Hindu angle before. For the record, Kamala Harris attends a Baptist church; her husband is Jewish and her mom was Hindu and she’s named after the Hindu goddess Lakshmi.

So … want some interesting reads on the heritage hook in the Kamala candidacy? Readers will want to search out media from India.


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

Did Falwell try to 'hang a lantern' before hotter problems surfaced at Liberty University?

, , , , , , , , , , ,

So the “cabana boy” story is back, only with a plot twist. I am referring, of course, to the neo-tabloid New York Times report last year that ran with this headline: “The Evangelical, the ‘Pool Boy,’ the Comedian and Michael Cohen.”

Now, expect lots of mainstream digital ink (#DUH) to be spilled in the hours ahead about this Washington Examiner “Secrets” column headline: “Exclusive: Falwell says ‘Fatal Attraction’ threat led to depression.”

This article by Paul Bedard was based on a 1,200-word document from Jerry Falwell, Jr. — currently on an indefinite leave of absence as president of Liberty University — and a follow-up telephone interview. Thus, journalists are starting off with on-the-record material they can quote.

The key: Falwell says that he has struggled with depression in the wake of an affair by his wife Becki, which then led to threats of blackmail.

In a statement exclusively to Secrets, Falwell revealed his wife Becki’s affair for the first time, said it was short lived and that the two reconciled quickly. But, they claimed, her former lover has threatened them over the past several years and they are done with it hanging over their heads.

“I’m just tired of it,” said Falwell of the anxiety he’s felt about the affair becoming public and embarrassing his family and Liberty. “It’s just got to end,” he added.

This may have been part of the subtext for recent statements by Liberty’s board about secrets and problems swirling around their digitally unzipped leader.

When I read this remarkable document, the first person I thought of was pundit Chris Matthews, and not because of the details of his resignation from his MSNBC show. No, I was thinking about something he shared long ago in his political playbook “Hardball.”

I am referring to this Beltway battlefield strategy: “Hang a lantern on your problem.”

What does that mean? You can see various definitions online, including: “When politicians recognize their problems and presents them outright, it takes them away from their opponents and puts them in control of how they are viewed.” I like this short version: “It’s always better to bear your own bad news.”

Thus, journalists will need to pause and ask if this remarkable Falwell memo is the whole truth or part of the truth that helps Liberty’s leader during his current problems? The answer, of course, could be “yes,” to both.


Please respect our Commenting Policy