, , , , , , , , , , ,

To cover Qatar World Cup, journalists will have to understand both soccer and Islam

, , , , , , , , , , ,
To cover Qatar World Cup, journalists will have to understand both soccer and Islam

The World Cup in Qatar kicks off in less than a week. It is likely to be the most controversial soccer tournament in FIFA’s history, something that has dogged the host nation since being awarded the tournament in 2010.

The controversy is largely tied to the Muslim country’s beliefs and mores. It’s about human rights, welcoming LGBTQ fans, drinking alcohol and modest dress. It’s as much a cultural and societal issue as it is a sporting one. It is also, of course, a religion-news story.

The focus of the news coverage so far has been around what could happen on the field as much as off of it.

Qatari officials have labeled much of the negative coverage either racist or Islamophobic. Either way, this could be the first global sporting event in history where religion, and understanding it, will be a major part of the overall context of this competition. Even the World Cup’s official mascot is an homage to Islamic garb. And did you notice the Pride logo for the 2022 team USA kit?

I explore many of these themes and issues in my new book on the history of the World Cup. With over a billion followers, Islam is the second-largest religion in the world after Christianity. Muslims are forbidden from drinking alcohol since the Prophet Muhammad, to whom Muslims believe the word of God was revealed in the Quran, spoke against it. This is key for sports editors and journalists to understand when it comes to Qatar 2022 coverage.

For example, Qatari officials have said beer will be sold inside the venues and drinking will be allowed inside designated areas, such as fan zones, hotels and restaurants. I was asked that very question months ago when I was booking my trip to Doha. At the same time, billboards have been put up across the country with quotes from the Prophet Muhammed.

The Associated Press, with bureaus across the globe, put together a great explainer under the headline, “Islam in Qatar explained ahead of FIFA World Cup.” This is a must-read for editors and reporters as well as fans and visitors. Here is how it opens:

Qatar is a Muslim nation, with laws, customs and practices rooted in Islam. The country is neither as liberal as Dubai in the United Arab Emirates nor as conservative as parts of Saudi Arabia. Most of its citizens are Sunni Muslim.


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

A reporting nightmare: Hellish tragedy linked to one of those 'nondenominational' flocks

, , , , , , ,
A reporting nightmare: Hellish tragedy linked to one of those 'nondenominational' flocks

If you have followed GetReligion for nearly two decades and, of course, the omnipresent Ryan Burge’s Twitter feed, you know the rise of nondenominational Christianity is one of the most important trends in the religion marketplace — in America and around the world.

Ancient churches and Protestant denominations are very, very complicated and require journalists to sweat lots of details about doctrine, traditions, polity, etc. But, with a nod to Gertrude Stein, we can note that there IS a there there when journalists dig into “organized religion.”

With nondenominational flocks, it is often impossible to find the kinds of structures and shared, on-the-record beliefs, policies and laws that bring some coherence to the wild world of religion news.

With that in mind, let’s look at a tragic USA TODAY story — “California megachurch leader, grandparents charged with murder, torture in death of 11-year-old daughter” — that demonstrates some of these challenges. Let me stress that I am not trying to poke holes in it. After all, reporter Natalie Neysa Alund was one of my Milligan College reporting students in the late 1990s. I’m trying to note some of the challenges in this kind of short story about life in nondenominational churches.

Note, for example, the problematic word “leader” in that headline. I kept looking for some specifics there and I have NO IDEA what short, accurate, “better” word I would have used to improve that headline or the lede. Hold that thought.

The bottom line: At some point, editors need to give reporters a few extra inches of space to include the kinds of details that help readers understand just how independent most of these churches are, in terms of supervision and accountability. Here is the overture:

A California megachurch leader and her parents have been arrested on charges including murder and torture in the death of the woman's 11-year-old daughter.

Leticia McCormack, a leader at Rock Church in San Diego, founded and led by former NFL player Miles McPherson, was booked in jail … on a charge of murder, three counts of torture, and three counts of willful cruelty to a child in the death of Arabella McCormack, the San Diego County Sheriff's Office reported.

What do we know about this church?


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

Plug-In: Who were the religion-politics winners and who were the losers in '22 midterms?

, , , , , , , , ,
Plug-In: Who were the religion-politics winners and who were the losers in '22 midterms?

America voted.

But you knew that already, so we’ll make this quick.

Big winners included abortion rights proponents and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a potential 2024 GOP presidential contender.

Among the notable losers: a predicted red wave and former President Donald Trump. Alas, Trump is not one to acknowledge electoral defeat. The question becomes: Will the Republicans who’ve enabled him finally do so and move on?

Still to be decided: Georgia’s crucial U.S. Senate race, which is headed to a Dec. 6 runoff between Democratic incumbent Raphael Warnock and Republican challenger Herschel Walker. In the general election campaign, the two offered clashing religious messages, as noted by The Associated Press’ Bill Barrow.

For more insight on Tuesday’s voting, check out these religion stories:

• Abortion rights scored the biggest midterm victory (by Yonat Shimron and Jack Jenkins, Religion News Service)

• Republicans win on inflation but lose on abortion (by Daniel Silliman, Christianity Today)

• After wins at the ballot, abortion rights groups want to ‘put this to the people’ (by Sarah McCammon, NPR)

• Catholic leaders say abortion referendum results ‘does not bode well for the future’ (by John Lavenburg, Crux)


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

What kind of believers want to sit in pews surrounded by their political allies?

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,
What kind of believers want to sit in pews surrounded by their political allies?

Just over half of churchgoing American Protestants went into the tense midterm elections believing that the people in the pews around them would vote the same way they did.

A Lifeway Research online survey in September found that 50% of those in its national panel agreed with the statement, "I prefer to attend a church where people share my political beliefs, while 55% agreed that "My political views match those of most people at my church." At the same time, 10% were not sure about the first question and 22% the second.

"What we are seeing is a pretty complex situation," said Scott McConnell, executive director at Lifeway Research. While churchgoers are divided on the need for political uniformity in their pews, there are enough believers who take that stance to prove that "this is not one or two people that pastors need to talk to and try to understand. This is a GROUP of people in most of our churches and that's something pastors have to deal with now."

This new survey began with questions used in 2017, he noted, and while the results are similar some new trends are clear. In the earlier survey, 51% of the respondents felt their church was politically homogenous, with only 11% "strongly" agreeing. Now, 21% strongly agree. Also, a rising number of believers assume they can predict the politics of others in their churches. In 2017, 30% were unsure if they shared the views of others in their congregations, but that number dropped to 22% this time.

In a survey result clashing with a popular stereotype, those with evangelical beliefs (44%) were less likely than non-evangelicals (54%) to say they wanted a church in which believers shared their political views. The survey defined "evangelical" in doctrinal terms, stressing beliefs such as, "The Bible is the highest authority for what I believe" and "Only those who trust in Jesus Christ alone as their Savior receive God's free gift of eternal salvation." Other significant results included:


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

Topic that's back in the news: What do world religions teach on polygamy, pro and con?

, , , , , , , , , , ,
Topic that's back in the news: What do world religions teach on polygamy, pro and con?

THE QUESTION:

What do world religions believe on polygamy, pro and con?

THE RELIGION GUY’S ANSWER:

With religion, age-old issues such as polygamy vs. monogamy never disappear, and a recent Jerusalem Post article discussed Jewish practices, which we’ll examine below.

First, some terminology: What’s called “polygamy” occurs in two ways. “Polyandry” means one woman with more than one husband, a rare form found among, for instance, some Buddhists in Tibet where the husbands are commonly brothers. The familiar form technically named “polygyny” is one man with more than one wife. “Bigamy” applies when civil law makes plural marriages a crime.

All of that needs to be distinguished from modern “polyamory,” namely multiple and consensual sexual ties with various gender configurations minus marriage (see this recent GetReligion podcast and post). These range from “free love” to “open” relationships to formalized temporary or permanent sexual groupings. Notably, this movement is now acceptable within one U.S. religion. Unitarian Universalists for Polyamory Awareness is officially recognized as a “related” organization of that denomination serving members who support and promote such a sexual identity.

Polygamy has been opposed by Christianity throughout history but exists without dispute in lands dominated by the world’s second-largest religion, Islam. Most other nations make it a criminal offense. The United Nations Human Rights Commission expresses moral abhorrence and urges abolition, arguing that legal polygamy violates “the dignity of women.”

Indigenous religion that involves polygamy continues in some sectors of Africa. South Africa allows it not only for the Muslim minority but for those who maintain their traditional cultures, for example former President Jacob Zuma of the Zulu people, who has four wives. Modern India forbids polygamy even though it was part of Hindu tradition, but similarly allows it for Muslims.

In U.S. history, hostility was such that in 1856 the major pronouncement by the first convention of the newborn Republican Party declared that Congress must “prohibit in the territories those twin relics of barbarism, polygamy and slavery.”


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

Podcast: More ink about crazy churches sinking down (maybe) into partisan politics

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Podcast: More ink about crazy churches sinking down (maybe) into partisan politics

I’m hiding in a different set of mountains this week, but it’s my understanding that important political stuff has happened. Was that the midterm elections or something like that?

I also understand — based on reading stories on my smartphone — that those nasty evangelical churches had a bad week, in terms of getting “their candidates” elected. I know that because I wrote a post about that topic earlier this week, right before I fired up the electric car and rushed off to hide in the hills. That headline: “Crazy political stuff happening in churches right now, but which events get the elite ink?”

We revisited that topic in this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (CLICK HERE to tune that in), as a way of dipping a toe into the churning midterm waters. The key to the discussion was trying to discern whether political-beat reporters — religion-beat pros tend to do much better work — understand what religious leaders are allowed to do when talking about “political” topics and politicos who are running for office.

This happens on the Religious Right and (#triggerwarning) even more on the Religious Left (click here for more on that from Baptist progressive Ryan Burge). But most of the political-beat coverage is built on scary passages like this one from a piece at The Guardian that ran with the headline, “He was chosen’: the rightwing Christian roadshow spreading the gospel of Trump.” The coverage focus on the ReAwaken rallies that blend lots of Donald Trumpian talk with nondenominational evangelical-speak. That sounds like this:

Mark Trudo, who runs his own swimming pool construction company near St Louis, is more optimistic, saying: “Right now I’m hopeful, I think things are going to turn around, a great awakening is taking place.”

Like most of his ReAwaken peers, he sees the current politics in apocalyptic terms: “The country is being taken away from us from within. This is good versus evil.”

Actual evil? As in satanic evil?

“Is God real, is Satan real? Yes, I believe they are,” he says.

Is Biden satanic?


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , ,

Revenge-return by Bishop Gene Robinson, seen from two radically different viewpoints

, , , , , ,
Revenge-return by Bishop Gene Robinson, seen from two radically different viewpoints

It’s been a long time since I stepped into The Falls Church, a historic edifice in the middle of the northern Virginia city of Falls Church, where I lived for 12 years. It’s a spacious, lovely place, with a circular seating arrangement for a large congregation.

Next door is what they call the “historic church,” a much smaller brick building that dates back to 1769. At one time, George Washington was on the vestry. In Beltway culture, this is really important.

It was a major center for the conservative wing of the Diocese of Virginia, the nation’s largest Episcopal diocese back in the first decade of this century,. Then, in December 2006, 11 parishes or missions announced they were leaving for for orthodox theological pastures. The 2003 election of the Rt. Rev. Gene Robinson as the denomination’s first gay bishop was the beginning of the end for these folks, after decades of tensions on other doctrinal issues.

The legal battle over these historic properties lasted for years and the conservatives basically lost everything, including the crown jewel of them all — The Falls Church building. That is the background for Robinson’s recent visit to the church, which is kingdoms apart from what it once was. Whereas it was crowded to the gills on Sundays, the sanctuary is barely one-quarter full and rector (senior pastor) is a gay man, a possibility that would have horrified its former parishioners.

Robinson’s visit was covered by a conservative mainline Protestant website and by a Washington Post reporter. Guess which report had the most information and insights into the status of the current congregation? Juicy Ecumenism posted a piece by Jeffrey Walton, headlined “Gene Robinson Takes Victory Lap at Falls Church Episcopal” — filled with insider knowledge. I’ll begin with Robinson’s reactions.

He also highlighted gratitude for an invitation to speak at a parish that had prominently opposed his election and consecration.

“Words fail me when I try to describe to you what an honor it is to be here,” Robinson exclaimed. “When I got this invitation from [TFCE Rector] Burl [Salmon] I could hardly believe my ears and all day yesterday. When I was here, I just kept pinching myself: ‘you’re actually at the Falls Church in Virginia, oh my God.’”


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

Parental rights: What's up with the Christian school that baptized kids without permission?

, , , , , , , , ,
Parental rights: What's up with the Christian school that baptized kids without permission?

Readers who have been paying attention to the news know that parental rights is a hot-button topic these days in battles over education, especially with mandatory programs about sexual morality and marriage.

In some cases, public-school leaders have attempted to keep parents in the dark about what their children were reading and studying (and whether parents have supervision options in these matters). The brave new world in these disputes — see this case in Canada — is when school leaders attempt to hide student gender-change decisions from parents.

A reader recently sent me a story from The Hill that opened up a completely different kind of parental-rights case. Here is the headline: “More than 100 students baptized without parents’ permission at North Carolina school.”

The note that came with that URL pointed to an issue near the end of this news report:

Religion Ghosts? I think so. It would have been nice to know why the parents thought the 2nd baptism would undo the first — what sect of Christianity, how that would actually happen.

Let’s get into this. The key, in this story is that we are dealing with a private school, as opposed to a taxpayer-funded public school.

In other words, (a) parents have chosen to send their children to this school, but (b) it’s still crucial to ask if school leaders have kept in-print promises (if any were made) to parents about the nature of religious programs and even rites (sacraments for many, but not all Christians) that might take place in worship.

Thus, here is the overture, and the word “private” is used early on. (Note that I am using The Hill piece, rather than the local paper, for paywall reasons.)

FAYETTEVILLE, N.C. (WGHP) — A North Carolina school apologized after baptizing more than 100 children without their parent’s permission, according to the Fayetteville Observer.


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

Gazing into a niche-media future: How politicized might evangelical radio become?

, , , , , , , ,
Gazing into a niche-media future: How politicized might evangelical radio become?

During the heat of the election campaign, the Salem Media Group staged an 11-day “Battleground Talkers” tour that covered politically potent Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

Purpose: To boost conservative voter turnout and nudge undecided voters on what “may be the most important election in the history of our country. … The war for America’s soul is on the line.” The rallies’ Republican and conservative flavor was no surprise, since they featured Salem radio personalities Mike Gallagher, Sebastian Gorka, Hugh Hewitt, Charlie Kirk, Eric Metaxas, Dennis Prager and Brandon Tatum, among others.

Salem Media, a publicly traded firm founded and chaired by Edward G. Atsinger III (469-586-0080), is based in Irving, Texas. It boasts of being “America’s leading Christian media company” — in this context “Christian” means pretty much evangelical Protestant — with radio networks, local stations, syndicated programs, websites, podcasts, marketing services, event planning and Regnery, a major conservative book house.

The “Battleground” personalities appear on the company’s Salem Radio Network, which employs a “conservative news talk” format. Salem says market research indicates such programming “is highly complementary to our core format of Christian Teaching and Talk” heard on other Salem outlets because “both formats express conservative views and family values.”

A thoroughly-reported, 70-inch New York Times examination of the politics of the Salem “juggernaut” October 18 (paywalled here) said, among many other things, that the company consistently promotes “ballot fraud conspiracy theories.”

Such a mix of the sacred and the profane would have astonished the 20th Century founding preachers of conservative Protestant radio such as William Ward Ayer, Donald Grey Barnhouse, Percy Crawford, M.R. DeHaan, Charles Fuller, Aimee Semple MacPherson, Walter Maier or Paul Rader.

Though TV gets the glamour, radio has arguably been more important in building the U.S. evangelical subculture and shaping its substance since World War II.


Please respect our Commenting Policy