, , , , , , ,

About that RNS/AP series on women leaders: Aren't most religions 'male-led'?

, , , , , , ,
About that RNS/AP series on women leaders: Aren't most religions 'male-led'?

Unless your local media runs articles by the Associated Press or Religion News Service, you might not be aware of their current series on “women’s roles in male-led religions.”

Most religions are pretty patriarchal, aren’t they, unless you count numerous female deities as making Hinduism women-friendly. But wait — there was that whole thing about female temple prostitutes — so maybe even Hinduism favors the guys as well.

So let’s look some news about issues linked to this.

In 2018, the Lilly Endowment Inc. put together a $4.9 million grant to fund 13 new positions at The Associated Press, Religion News Service and The Conversation in an effort known as the Global Religion Journalism Initiative.

Since then, evidence of this collaboration have been sparse, so this new series that premiered last week is one of the first major efforts on that front.

First out of the blocks was a Dec. 8 piece in The Conversation by Deborah Whitehead of Religion News Service giving a summation of womens’ efforts –- over a broad swath of denominations and religions -- to either be ordained or attain more power in their congregations. The main holdouts, she said, were Orthodox Jews, Latter-day Saints, Roman Catholics and Southern Baptists.

I’m not sure why she didn’t mention Eastern Orthodox Christians, who likewise don’t ordain women but once had a tradition — in the distant past – of female deacons. See here for a debate among two Orthodox scholars about the matter.

The way Whitehead’s piece –- and indeed the entire series that I’ve seen to date — is that women’s ordination is the logical, progressive next step. The sub-headlines that describe the opposing point of view include “Opposition to change” and “Other forms of discrimination,” so it’s not hard to see where this series is headed. This is advocacy journalism, especially when it comes to changing the priesthood in ancient churches


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

United Methodist pastor who joined drag queen show? Now it's more than an RNS story

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,
United Methodist pastor who joined drag queen show? Now it's more than an RNS story

Remember the United Methodist pastor who decided to strut his stuff as a drag queen on HBO?

Well, that story is now bigger than the original Religion News Service coverage, which I discussed in this GetReligion post: “United Methodist pastor dives into HBO drag-queen culture, drawing joyful RNS applause.”

That pastor is out of a job, a plot twist that drew coverage from both the Associated Press and USA Today. We will come back to those stories later in this post — especially a jaw-dropping display of slanted language in the AP report, of all places.

But this has been an archetypal RNS mainline Protestant story from the get-go and the wire service’s update contains, well, about half of the essential information that readers needed to know.

What’s missing? The same thing as the first time around — any attempt to accurately reflect the views of conservative United Methodists in the pews of this pastor’s church. It was crucial, of course, to interview United Methodists and LGBTQ activists who backed this progressive pastor. At the same time, it would have helped to interview people on the other side of the debate. Maybe?

Here is the overture of the new RNS report: “Pastor who appeared in drag on HBO’s ‘We’re Here’ forced to leave his church.”

When Pastor Craig Duke appeared in drag on the HBO reality show “We’re Here,” he knew that some members of his United Methodist congregation would appreciate the episode and that others wouldn’t even watch it.

He also knew some members of his congregation support the full inclusion of LGBTQ Christians in the church and others don’t, and that would make his performance on the show a “challenging experience.”

But he didn’t think it would cost him his job.


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

Tops in religion for 2021: Gallup spotlights America's downward Church Lurch

, , , , , , , , , ,
Tops in religion for 2021: Gallup spotlights America's downward Church Lurch

As Religion News Association colleagues vote on the top stories of 2021, here's The Guy's own pick for first place: Gallup spotlights the great downward Church Lurch in 21st Century America.

The polling organization, which is unmatched for data on trends that span decades — including a steady barrage of questions about religion — marked the Easter and Passover seasons by announcing that only a minority of Americans report membership in a religious congregation any longer.

Yes, yet again we confront those religiously unaffiliated "nones,” “nothing in particulars” and the long-emerging flock often called “spiritual, but not religious.”

The much-buzzed-about poll report, full details here, said membership rates held remarkably steady from the 73% in Depression-era 1937, when the question was first asked, through 70% in 2000. But now, self-reported affiliation has plummeted to 47% -- and a mere 36% for younger Americans in the Millennial generation. Equally significant, a three-year aggregate of 6,000 respondents in 2018-2020 also gave membership minority status at 49%.

This slump drew attention from media that rarely mention much less cover religion substantively. Assessing the many reactions, GetReligion boss Mattingly's post back in April — “Thinking with two key Southern Baptists: Concerning those scary Gallup Poll numbers” — astutely focused on two pieces by Baylor historian Thomas Kidd and the Rev. Russell Moore, who was soon to quit as president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission. They analyzed Protestantism with little specific to Catholicism or other faiths. Links to both articles are included in Mattingly's post.

Note that responses in 2000 would not capture the potential negative impact of COVID-19 — which was hurting attendance and donations — on future membership counts.

So, what's happening?


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

Why the press loves Santa Claus and the case for more news about St. Nicholas of Myra

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Why the press loves Santa Claus and the case for more news about St. Nicholas of Myra

We are currently in “the most wonderful time of the year,” as the popular Christmas song by Andy Williams goes. For many Christians, however, the four weeks leading up to Christmas Day are marked by Advent, a time of prayer in preparation for the birth of Jesus. In Eastern churches, this season is called Nativity Lent.

Advent is one of those religious customs largely ignored by the mainstream press. Many newspapers and TV networks are more preoccupied with the economics around the season — Black Friday marks the beginning of the shopping-mall season for them — and things like trendy Advent calendars (which these days are largely devoid of any religiosity) and Santa Claus, the hero previously known as St. Nicholas.

In fact, the things the mainstream media value this time of year are starkly different from the message worshippers in ancient Christian traditions get in church during Sunday liturgies in the weeks preceding December 25th.

This is not something that’s entirely new. Even as a child, I could sense a disconnect between the materialism around me growing up in New York and the Christmas I celebrated at home featuring a Nativity crèche and Advent wreath. The Peanuts Christmas special had Charlie Brown bemoaning commercialization of the season — and that aired in 1965 (and network executives worried that it was too religious, even back then).

Where are we in 2021? Amid talk of supply-chain issues, inflation, the ongoing pandemic and political bickering in Washington (with politicians posing with guns on their Christmas cards), it looks pretty bleak out there.

This time of year is yet another reminder of what mainstream media values and the divide over what most Americans think and believe. This is where the Catholic press is of great value to help frame not just what’s important, but also what is more connected to the traditions and reality of this time of year.

In particular, it’s interesting to look for coverage of the backstory of Santa Claus. Hold that thought.

Let’s start here. Scanning various news sites the last two weeks led me to notice a larger trend.


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

About that Southern Baptist 'binder' story: What do Black biblical 'inerrantists' say about CRT?

, , , , , , , , ,
About that Southern Baptist 'binder' story: What do Black biblical 'inerrantists' say about CRT?

Reporters receive all kinds of bizarre things in the mail (analog or digital). Religion-beat reporters have been known to have some really, really bizarre items come out of nowhere.

My all-time “favorite” (I am using that term loosely) was a 35-page, handwritten manifesto detailing why — using lots of biblical references — Barbra Streisand was the Antichrist. I filed that one away. That wasn’t the case, however, with the typed, unsigned note in a plain white envelope that pointed to public documents detailing the arrest of a prominent clergyman for a sex crime committed in a public bathroom.

Journalists offered hot documents have to ask two questions:

(1) Can this information be verified as accurate?

(2) What are the motives of the person sharing the information? That question leads to another: How can those motives be explained to readers without identifying the person who provided the documents?

It goes without saying that documents from an on-the-record source will be trusted — by informed readers and “stockholders” in the story — more than those from a source demanding anonymity. The key is to give as much information as possible about the source of the information as possible, including why anonymity was acceptable in this case.

This leads us to the Nashville Tennessean story that rocked the world of Southern Baptist Convention social media, the one with this headline: “Inside the Southern Baptist Convention's battle over race and what it says about the denomination.”

The entire story pivots on documents linked to a former SBC president, the Rev. James Merritt, and the Rev. J.D. Greear, the convention’s leader at the time of the events described in the story. It also helps to know that Merritt was the chair of the national convention resolutions committee in 2021.

All of this focuses on efforts to pass a 2021 SBC resolution that condemned “critical race theory” outright — by name and with no qualifications, as desired by leaders of the SBC’s most conservative churches. Here is a key passage:


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

Plug-In: Americans favor religious exemptions for COVID-19 vaccine mandates — sort of

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Plug-In: Americans favor religious exemptions for COVID-19 vaccine mandates — sort of

What a difference a year makes.

Or not.

Fifty-two weeks ago, this news topped Weekend Plug-in.

Sound familiar?

Trump calls COVID-19 vaccine ‘a medical miracle,’ but many religious people are skeptical

Guess what? Many religious people remain highly skeptical of the vaccines, despite their strong effectiveness at preventing serious illness, hospitalization and death from COVID-19.

Which leads us to this week’s news: a new public opinion poll on religious exemptions to the vaccines.

Religion News Service’s Jack Jenkins reports:

WASHINGTON (RNS) — A new poll reveals most Americans are in favor of offering religious exemptions for the COVID-19 vaccines, yet express concern that too many people are seeking such exemptions. In the same survey, more than half of those who refuse to get vaccinated say getting the shot goes against their personal faith.

The poll, conducted by the Public Religion Research Institute and Interfaith Youth Core and released Thursday (Dec. 9), investigated ongoing debates about COVID-19 vaccines as well as emerging divisions over whether religious exemptions to the shots should even exist.

According to the survey, a small majority (51%) of Americans favor allowing individuals who would otherwise be required to receive a COVID-19 vaccine to opt out if it violates their religious beliefs, compared with 47% who oppose such religious exemptions.

See additional coverage of the poll by the Washington Times’ Mark A. Kellner, a former contributor at GetReligion, and NPR’s Megan Myscofski.


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

Lessons learned from black-and-white visions of Christmas past -- movies from 1940s

, , , , , , , , , ,
Lessons learned from black-and-white visions of Christmas past -- movies from 1940s

It's a black-and-white movie Christmas, with snow falling as joyful families mingle on city sidewalks while window-shopping -- buying food, presents, decorations and fresh-cut trees for festivities that are only two days away.

For Americans, this scene represents the ghost of Christmas past, long before suburban malls, big-box scrums and Amazon.com. And as "The Bishop's Wife" opens, an angel -- a graceful Cary Grant -- enters this 1947 tableau, smiling at carolers and children and helping the needy and lost.

"Christmas is always in danger in Christmas movies -- we'd have no reason to make such movies otherwise," wrote critic Titus Techera, executive director of the American Cinema Foundation. In this classic movie, "we have a remarkable concentration of problems in one household: A man's faith, his family, community and church … are all tied together."

It isn't unusual to find miracles, tight-knit communities, glowing churches and parables about human choices, temptation, sin and redemption in old Christmas films, said Techera, contacted by Zoom while visiting Bucharest.

That's why Techera -- a native of Romania, before his work brought him to America -- has written four online essays about the lessons learned from watching '40s movies that were remade in the '90s. The other films in this Acton Institute series are "The Shop Around the Corner," "Miracle on 34th Street" and "Christmas in Connecticut."

There's a reason many modern Americans keep watching these movies, he said. Some yearn for a time before most Americans became so isolated, separated by jobs far from extended families, sprawling suburban neighborhoods and all the paradoxes built into digital networks that were supposed to keep people connected.

"What we see in these movies is a time when Christmas was a far less commercial celebration and there was quite a bit of continuity with traditions from the past. … For many, the church was part of that," he said. "Christmas was a family thing. It was a community thing. … Commerce was more subservient to ordinary life. Commerce had not taken over all of life, including Christmas."


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

In search of the elusive liberal evangelical: Is this tiny flock worthy of big news coverage?

, , , , , , , , , , ,
In search of the elusive liberal evangelical: Is this tiny flock worthy of big news coverage?

I was listening to a podcast the other day and the host asked a guest a question that I have heard way too many times over the last year — “Why did you decide to focus only on conservative evangelicals?”

I fully admit that a lot of my work does focus on conservative evangelicals. Why? Because, in the current political landscape, there’s not a more important force in American politics. The nones are too disorganized at this juncture to have a systemic impact. Catholics and Mainline Protestants are too politically divided to be considered anything close to a coherent voting bloc.

The fact is simply this: 13% of all American adults in 2020 were white evangelical Republicans.

No other group comes even close to that size. Nine percent of Americans are nothing in particular Democrats — but that’s not an easy group to wrap your arms around. There are twice as many white evangelical Republicans as there are white Catholic Republicans. For every Democratic atheist, there are 2.5 white evangelical Republicans.

But, I wanted to devote some time trying to look at the other side of the evangelical coin: those who describe themselves as politically liberal. Because the Cooperative Election Study is so large, even if that group is a relatively small percentage of the population, it’s still possible to do in-depth statistical analysis of liberal evangelicals.

Of all self-identified evangelicals, 58% describe themselves as conservative, 29% indicate they are moderate, while 13% say they are liberal. If that is restricted to just white evangelicals: 8% are liberal, 24% are moderate, and 68% say they are conservative.

That’s obviously much different than the general population. In 2020, 30% of all Americans said they were liberal, along with 28% of just white respondents.


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

New podcast: Are some SCOTUS justices asking, 'Are all religious schools equal in Maine?'

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
New podcast: Are some SCOTUS justices asking, 'Are all religious schools equal in Maine?'

Let’s say that, in the state of Maine, there are two very different “Lutheran” schools. You could, in this hypothetical case, also say “Episcopal,” or “Presbyterian” or “Congregational.”

Leaders at one of these schools insist that their school is in “the Lutheran tradition,” and it may retain ties to a doctrinally liberal flock. The school has a chapel, but attendance is optional since its students (it may be an elite boarding school) come from all kinds of religious faiths or have no stated faith at all. Classes on hot-button moral issues — sexuality, for example — stress this church’s progressive doctrines.

Academic life is very different at the other Lutheran school, which draws most of its students and financial support from a conservative Lutheran body. Chapel attendance is required and classes linked to moral theology are quite countercultural — defending 2,000 years of Christian tradition.

The question, in the latest church-state case at the U.S. Supreme Court, is whether the state of Maine has the power to say that the first school is eligible for tuition support — using tax dollars — because it’s policies do not clash with those in public schools. Students at the conservative school are not eligible, because its beliefs are “sectarian.”

This is tricky territory and church-state experts on the Religious Right would certainly disagree with experts from the Religious Left and secular think tanks. The question discussed in this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in) is whether journalists covering this case allowed readers a chance to understand the views of activists on both sides.

Let me state, right up front, that my dueling Lutherans illustration is based on “equal access” church-state principles that emerged from a left-right coalition during the Bill Clinton administration. The big idea: If state officials create policies that affect nonprofits, they cannot back secular groups while discriminating against religious organizations. States could, however, deny aid to both. In other words, religious faith is not a uniquely dangerous form of speech or activity.

Let me state this another way. Under the separation of church and state, officials are not supposed to use tax dollars to back state-approved forms of religion. Ah! But what if some religious groups have doctrines that are consistent with state policies, while others clash with the doctrines of the state?


Please respect our Commenting Policy