Christian nationalism? Try discussing that serious topic in crisp, punchy Twitter terms

Christian nationalism? Try discussing that serious topic in crisp, punchy Twitter terms

Every now and then, I envy Bobby Ross, Jr.

Why? He has such a knack for writing short, crisp introductions to punchy posts.

You know, posts that open with a few blunt sentences.

Then they jump to a headline and a URL, like this: “Poll: A third of Americans are Christian nationalists and most are white evangelicals.

Then Ross is off and running.

What comes next? Frequently, he embeds several relevant tweets on the topic. That’s helpful, since it shows readers who is saying what.

That’s that.

So let’s try that with a very complicated Twitter storm linked to that Religion News Service headline mentioned earlier. This report is built on the results of a survey from the Public Religion Research Institute and the Brookings Institution: “A Christian Nation? Understanding the Threat of Christian Nationalism to American Democracy and Culture.”

This story led to some fascinating discussions on Twitter — including links to information about the funding for the RNS project to expose Christian nationalism.

Try to write something short and punchy about that. Ah, but I can point to the Twitter sources.

First, here is the top of that RNS story:

(RNS) — A new survey finds that fewer than a third of Americans, or 29%, qualify as Christian nationalists, and of those, two-thirds define themselves as white evangelicals.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

The Associated Press turns crisis pregnancy centers into 'anti-abortion' sites and that's that

The Associated Press turns crisis pregnancy centers into 'anti-abortion' sites and that's that

There comes a time when some journalists feel they must dissent from the prevailing winds of their occupation, and I’ve finally reached that point.

My concern comes from a piece in the National Catholic Register on how new terms describing abortion handed down by the Associated Press –- the standard bearer for American journalism –- have made this new normal something I can no longer follow.

The Associated Press or AP, for those of you not employed by news organizations, sets the correct titles and grammar for work in American journalism. Everyone follows whatever AP decides something should be called, using the evolving standards of the Associated Press Stylebook.

Until now. Typically, AP leaders have tried to avoid taking sides in the abortion and gender debates. However, their most recent rules makes it quite impossible for some journalists — including myself — to cover this complicated topic the way AP insists that we cover it.

In the past, for example, journalists argued about calling activists on one side “anti-abortion,” as opposed to “pro-life,” while those on the other side were given a label they welcomed, as in “pro-choice.” That second label evolved into “pro-abortion rights.” We will come back to that.

Now this. From the Register:

The Associated Press (AP) issued new guidelines advising reporters not to use the terms “crisis pregnancy center” or “pregnancy resource center” but to instead refer to centers that offer pro-life counseling and support as “anti-abortion centers.”

Reporters should “avoid potentially misleading terms such as pregnancy resource centers or pregnancy counseling centers,” because “these terms don’t convey that the centers’ general aim is to prevent abortions,” according to the AP’s Abortion Topical Guide.

The changes were made last November but are just getting publicized now.  And these centers –- PRCs --aren’t just there to prevent abortions, which anyone who walks into one soon discovers.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Washington Post looks at 'school choice' bills, and (#surprise) omits 'equal access' info

Washington Post looks at 'school choice' bills, and (#surprise) omits 'equal access' info

For a minute or two, I thought that the Washington Post was going to publish a fair-minded news feature about the complex issues involved in “school choice” legislation.

Alas, it soon became clear that this was another business-as-usual piece that was, for the most part, committed to featuring the voices of activists on one side of the story. The story also avoided a key church-state legal term that is shaping recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings on this subject.

Thus, it’s time — once again — for readers to grab some highlighter pens. Hold that thought.

You can sense what’s going on in the headline: “More states are paying to send children to private and religious schools.”

Ah, but private schools are private schools, too. Some are secular, some are openly religious. Some of the religious schools are on the left, in terms of doctrine, and some are on the right. But they are all “private” schools. Are all private schools created equal? Did the Post team “get” this angle of the story and include some diversity in the sourcing?

The bottom line: What we have here is another one of those “highlighter pen” stories that GetReligion digs into every now and then. What readers need to do is print a copy of the story and then grab three pens with different colors — maybe red, blue and some variation on purple. The goal is to mark quotes representing voices on the cultural left, right and, maybe, even in the middle.

But first, here is how the story opens:

For years, school-choice advocates toted up small victories in their drive to give parents taxpayer money to pay for private school. Now, Republican-led states across the country are leaving the limitations of the past behind them as they consider sweeping new voucher laws that would let every family use public funds to pay for private school.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Plug-In: Around 100 Million Super Bowl viewers saw new commercials -- about Jesus?

Plug-In: Around 100 Million Super Bowl viewers saw new commercials -- about Jesus?

Good morning!

After a week on the road that took me from Oklahoma to Texas to Arkansas to Tennessee, I’m back in the driver’s seat at Weekend Plug-in.

The Big Game was this weekend and it included some prominent religion-news stories. With that in mind, let’s kick off our scrimmage of the top headlines and best reads in the world of faith.

What To Know: The Big Story

‘He Gets Us’: Jesus is coming to the Super Bowl — to the commercials, that is.

Two ads. Ninety seconds. A $20 million price tag.

The Associated Press’ Holly Meyer, Religion News Service’s Bob Smietana and the Washington Times’ Mark Kellner delve into the pricey campaign and its backers.

The bottom line, as AP explains:

They hope to counter the notion that religion is used to divide people, spending about $20 million to reach more than 100 million viewers at a time when the nation’s Christian population — and religious affiliation of any kind — are in decline.

Because religion is a touchy subject and prime-time advertising is so expensive, it is rare for faith to be promoted alongside the Super Bowl ’s perennially buzzed about beer and fast-food commercials. But the backers of the “He Gets Us” campaign see it as a great opportunity to reach so many people at once.

Faith and football: For the first time, two Black quarterbacks — Jalen Hurts of the Philadelphia Eagles and Patrick Mahomes of the Kansas City Chiefs — will face each other during a Super Bowl.

Hurts and Mahomes have something else in common: They’re both “practicing Christians not afraid to publicly talk about their faith and how it helps them succeed at the highest levels,” as Clemente Lisi explains at ReligionUnplugged.

‘God of Sod’: George Toma is preparing the field for the Super Bowl for the 57th straight year. “When I’m in heaven, I’ll be looking at your beautiful field,” the 94-year-old Toma tells the New York Times, “or I’ll be in hell looking up what kind of root system you have.”

A final football note: Lifeway Research’s Aaron Earls provides four guidelines to keep your church Super Bowl party legal.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

A modern, urban pastor comes to terms with his backwoods mountain family roots

A modern, urban pastor comes to terms with his backwoods mountain family roots

Growing up in West Virginia, the Rev. Michael Clary always wondered about some of the archaic language his elders used, words like "yonder" and "reckon."

Then he learned that his grandfather -- a steel-mill worker and country preacher -- had memorized the classic King James Bible by listening to tapes during his long drives to the factory. He had a sixth-grade education and, if he couldn't spell something, he could still quote a verse that contained the word and then find it in his Bible.

All that scripture soaked in -- deep. Thus, "I reckon" wasn't just another way to say "probably." It was New Testament language, such as: "For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us."

These Appalachian roots caused pangs of shame during graduate school, said Clary, who leads Christ the King Church, a Southern Baptist congregation in Cincinnati.

Soon after that, "I was pastoring a fast growing church in an urban environment, and a spirit of elitism had infected us," he wrote, in a Twitter stream that went viral. "The people we felt free to mock were conservative, uneducated, backwoods fundies. … They lacked the theological sophistication and cultural insight I had acquired while doing campus ministry and studying at seminary."

The bottom line: "I had moved on. I was better than them. I was more learned and cultured. I had 'seen the world' and they hadn't."

Clary said he wrote those "words with tears in my eyes." Reached by telephone, he explained that he was facing the kinds of church tensions that arise while defending traditional doctrines in a flock located a few blocks from the University of Cincinnati. It's hard to be "winsome" -- a buzz word today -- while trying to remain faithful in a bitterly divided culture.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

This keeps making news: Why do images of Prophet Muhammad so deeply offend Muslims?

This keeps making news: Why do images of Prophet Muhammad so deeply offend Muslims?

THE QUESTION:

Why do images of the Prophet Muhammad so deeply offend Muslims?

THE RELIGION GUY’S ANSWER:

This issue has erupted unexpectedly at Methodist-related Hamline University in Minnesota. Last October, adjunct art teacher Erika Lopez Prater showed an online class two medieval paintings in which pious Muslims had portrayed the Prophet Muhammad receiving Quran revelations from the angel Gabriel.

Lopez Prater warned Muslim students in advance so they could avert thir eyes. Nonetheless, the president of the Muslim Students Association (MSA) complained that Lopez Prater’s “trigger warning” itself showed she had committed an offense against Islam. Hamline’s President Fayneese Miller called Lopez Prater’s deed “Islamophobic” (she later apologized for that word) and the school decided not to renew the teacher’s contract.

The faculty, alarmed over academic freedom, called January 24 for Miller’s resignation in a lopsided 71 – 12 vote of no confidence. Then in response to that response, 13 leaders from campus groups like the MSA, Student Congress, and diversity committee endorsed Miller’s leadership and accused the faculty of betraying students.

Meanwhile, Lopez Prater is suing the university for defamation and religious discrimination.

Christiane Gruber, a well-known professor of Islamic art at the University of Michigan, entered the fray to defend and explain her Hamline colleague’s classroom behavior in this article at TheConversation.com.

Whatever current scruples, Gruber said, Muslim artists centuries ago did in fact depict Muhammad and both Muslim and non-Muslim art historians regularly teach about this. Paintings of Muhammad are collected at Istanbul’s renowned Topkapi Palace Library, among other places.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: It's just good business? The growing debate about America's news-silo culture

Podcast: It's just good business? The growing debate about America's news-silo culture

Yes, this is another post about my new essay at the Religion & Liberty journal published by the Acton Institute. The headline: “The Evolving Religion of Journalism.

Part of me wants to apologize for yet another GetReligion look at this topic. But I’m not going to do that, for at least three reasons.

(1) For me, it’s most important thing I’ve written about journalism since my 1983 essay for The Quill — “The religion beat: Out of the ghetto, into the mainsheets,” which helped spark a national debate about religion-news coverage, including a Los Angeles Times series by the late, great media-beat specialist David Shaw.

(2) It demonstrates (think “technology shapes content”) that Internet culture and commerce have either killed the American Model of the Press or are poised to do so. That’s hard for me to say, since I have spent my career defending old-school American journalism from enemies on the right and, now, the illiberal left.

(3) The Acton piece (there’s no way we could have planned this) came out just as several other important articles raised similar issues about journalism’s future and the role of niche/advocacy journalism in splintering American public discourse.

Such as? Click here for a recent GetReligion podcast-post that includes discussion of “Newsrooms that move beyond ‘objectivity’ can build trust,” by former Washington Post editor Leonard Downie, Jr. Also, see this new Bret Stephens op-ed in the New York Times: “How to Destroy (What’s Left of) the Mainstream Media’s Credibility.

As a result, GetReligion readers will not be surprised that this week’s “Crossroads” podcast focused on these themes (CLICK HERE to tune that in).

The key: My essay is not another hot-take on media bias and religion-news coverage.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Do American evangelicals suffer 'second class' status among political conservatives?

Do American evangelicals suffer 'second class' status among political conservatives?

One reason the media often fail to “get” American Evangelical Protestantism is that it’s a complex mashup of elements, not simply an alliance of conventional church bodies.

This overlapping empire of nondenominational “parachurch” agencies, colleges, freelance personalities, seminaries, publishing houses and, often, independent congregations is important and over the decades it rallied prominently at trade shows for retailers and broadcasters and the annual National Prayer Breakfast.

The first Prayer Breakfast occurred when President Dwight D. Eisenhower spoke just after his 1953 inauguration. Every president has appeared each year since, joined by politicians and powerbrokers. The idea emerged from private prayer meetings for members of Congress organized by a Methodist minister, but the sponsoring organization evolved into the Evangelical-toned International Foundation, a.k.a. “the Family” or “the Fellowship.”

Though pious participants luxuriated in mingling with the Washington elite at the large prayer assemblage, in Evangelical movement work what mattered most was the networking and punditry at assorted workshops the foundation sponsored in and around the big draw of the Prayer Breakfast itself.

Last week that setup disappeared.

A new sponsoring foundation had President Joe Biden address a cozy gathering for bagel-munching members of Congress who were allowed only one guest apiece. Simultaneously, the older foundation mounted its glitzy gathering where 1,600 enjoyed a ballroom breakfast, watched Biden’s talk by streamed video, then attended the usual array of Evangelical breakout sessions. Here's some Religion News Service background on this awkward two-way split.

The new arrangement symbolizes efforts to limit Evangelical influence upon political leadership. By coincidence, the competing breakfasts occurred as new debate emerges on whether Evangelicals actually have the political impact endlessly attributed to them by fearful opponents.

Pundit Rod “Benedict Option” Dreher raised that newsworthy question in a January 30 post, and in doing so highlighted a highly debatable but significant 2021 article that most journalists missed, including The Guy.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Kansas City Star shows a curious lack of curiosity about pro-LGBTQ Christian school's closing

Kansas City Star shows a curious lack of curiosity about pro-LGBTQ Christian school's closing

All together now: Who. What. When. Where. Why. How.

Once upon a time, journalists were really curious people when it came to seeking basic, on-the-record answers to factual questions linked to the stories they were covering. That old “W5H” equation didn’t cover all the bases, of course, but it wasn’t a bad place to start.

When covering stories about a religious group, it really helps to know the specific religious tradition or larger organization (think “denomination”) to which it is linked. If it’s an ecumenical or interfaith group, that may require seeking the ties that band various groups of people who are involved in this project.

This brings us to a recent Kansas City Star report that ran with this headline: “KC Christian school lost donations after supporting LGBTQ rights. Now it’s closing.”

By definition, a “Christian school” is a religious organization. I have never heard of one that did not have ties of some kind — financial, theological, cultural or historical — to a specific religious tradition or to a group of churches that helped it get started. Think of this as the “Who” and “Why” factors.

Yes, in this nondenominational age a school may, in fact, have links to a number of congregations or religious networks. But that doesn’t mean there are no, to quote that old Gospel hymn, "ties that bind.” A nondenominational school will still have specific flocks of believersthat provide students, donations, training and other kinds of practical support.

The Urban Christian Academy certainly fits the nondenominational mold, or lack of a mold. Check out its online “manifesto” about it’s spiritual and intellectual commitments. However, that doesn’t mean that its leaders have zero practical or even personal links to institutional churches or other schools.

There was plenty of room to address questions of this kind in this 1,500-word feature. Was there a reason that the Kansas City Star included next to zero information about the institutional DNA of this urban school? I find the newsroom’s lack of curiosity to be be rather curious. Let’s look at a few pieces of this report and look for clues as to what is going on, starting with the overture:

In its nine years of existence, Urban Christian Academy steadily grew, adding a new grade each year in a neglected southeast Kansas City neighborhood.

The school has provided its students, kindergarten through eighth grade, with a tuition-free private education. And with its “inclusive theology,” it always supported LGBTQ students and staff. But it did so quietly, as issues like same-sex marriage and gay clergy divided Protestant denominations while hate crimes and violence against the LGBTQ community rose.

OK, this is a story about theological, doctrinal divisions inside “Protestant denominations.”


Please respect our Commenting Policy