, , , , , , ,

Evolving journalism doctrines: Associated Press adds clarity on the 'T' in LGBTQ+

, , , , , , ,
Evolving journalism doctrines: Associated Press adds clarity on the 'T' in LGBTQ+

The 70-year-old Associated Press Stylebook is continually updated and thus provides a barometer of societal trends as it sets widely-observed standards for media usage.

On June 2, the AP editorial team issued a updated “Transgender Coverage Topical Guide” that’s very timely, and not just because June is Pride Month. The AP style bible has been evolving on LGBTQ issues in recent years and this latest update is yet another step to embrace changes linked to the Sexual Revolution.

Just last week, CNN reported that 19 state legislatures have enacted new bills with various limits on “gender-affirming” treatments for transitions that apply puberty blockers, hormone replacement or surgery to alter genital organs.

Most of these laws apply only to minors. They’re usually promoted by Republicans and opposed by Democrats. Other familiar disputes involve sports participation, as well as privacy issues in locker rooms, bathrooms or shelters for girls and women.

Also last week, the Public Religion Research Institute released a poll whose big sample of 5,046 enabled breakdowns into 11 religious categories. Majorities in nine of the 11 believed “there are only two genders,” with only minority support among Jews and the religiously unaffiliated.

Comparison with a 2021 PRRI poll shows U.S. opinion is getting more conservative on these matters.

Among all respondents, 59% said “only two” in 2021 but 65% currently. Democrats rose from 38% to 44%. Hispanic Catholics jumped from 48% to 66% and white Catholics from 62% to 69%. (In March, the U.S. bishops’ doctrine committee stated that Catholic health institutions “must not” perform surgical or chemical change of a body’s “sexual characteristics,” whatever a patient’s age.)

Subscribers to the updated online “Stylebook” have much to ponder.


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

Should women serve as pastors? Big majorities of modern evangelicals say, 'Yes'

, , , , , , , , ,
Should women serve as pastors? Big majorities of modern evangelicals say, 'Yes'

The Southern Baptist Convention is holding its annual national meeting right now in New Orleans. About 12,000 messengers are assembled to chart the direction of the convention for the next year. There are lots of issues that are being discussed these next few days that are really about a schism in the SBC between the very conservatives and the pretty conservatives.

The most public aspect of that conflict is allowing women to be pastors in Southern Baptist Churches. In the last year, Saddleback Church, in Southern California was disfellowshipped from the SBC for ordaining women. Their former pastor is the Rev. Rick Warren, who is one of the most famous evangelicals in the United States.

He’s been mounting a social media campaign the last few days, trying to make the case for a return to fellowship for Saddleback.

But really what is happening is Warren is trying to steer the SBC in a slightly less conservative direction while groups like the Conservative Baptist Network’s rallying cry is “change the direction” — which I will argue is code for this: become more conservative in the coming years.

What does polling say about Warren’s view of women serving as pastors?

I can answer that with some polling data that I collected with Paul Djupe and Andrew Lewis in March of 2020 when COVID-19 was just ramping up. We asked folks if a woman could operate in certain capacities in a church given that they had training and certification. The results here are restricted to just those who self-identify as evangelical.

Yeah —-there’s overwhelming agreement among evangelicals that women can teach Sunday School, lead morning worship and preach at a women’s conference. Even in the case of women preaching from behind the pulpit on Sunday morning there is very little resistance.

Nearly three quarters of evangelicals agree that a properly trained and certified woman can preach on Sunday morning. Just 12% disagree with that statement and 15% have no opinion.


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

Pat Robertson: Was he an influential religious broadcaster or some kind of 'evangelicalist'?

, , , , , , , , , , ,
Pat Robertson: Was he an influential religious broadcaster or some kind of 'evangelicalist'?

I must admit that I have not had the time to dig into the 666 million words or so (that’s an estimate) of news and commentary dedicated to the death of the Rev. Pat Robertson. It’s hard to do much reading when at the wheel of a car for about 1,400 miles (and that was the return trip).

But I do have some thoughts on the passing of the charismatic quote machine that journalists loved, loved, loved to hate (see my 2005 commentary for the Poynter Institute). If Robertson didn’t exist, blue-zip-code pundits would have created him ex nihilo.

Truth be told, I never met the man — even though, technically speaking, I briefly worked for him during a failed 2000 attempt to build a D.C. beltway-based master’s degree journalism program for Regent University.

How to describe Pat Robertson?

First and foremost, he was a media maven and entrepreneur, creating the Christian Broadcasting Network in 1960. Years later, he sold the Family Channel for something like $2 billion. Love it or hate it, the niche-news and commentary DNA of The 700 Club can be found all over the place on cable television.

For journalists, he was mainly a political activist — playing a major role in the creation of the Christian Coalition. In 1988 he made a surprisingly relevant attempt to win the White House, seeking the Republican nomination. He was the son of a U.S. senator and, before jumping into media work, graduated from Yale Law School and New York Theological Seminary.

The media entrepreneur poured millions of dollars into academica, with the creation of Regent University — which only offered graduate-school degrees in subjects that Robertson considered culturally significant (such as law and mass communications).

Robertson was a bestselling author, with the help of numerous ghost writers (including a major gay-rights pioneer).

I would argue that his most significant achievement was helping merge the charismatic movement into mainstream evangelical Protestantism, adding doctrinal elements of Pentecostalism into the rapidly growing world of post-denominational Christianity in America and around the world.

But here is the big journalism question: Why do so many mainstream journalists call Robertson an “evangelist,” even though crusades and public preaching of that style were never part of his life and work?


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

DeSantis' Catholic faith goes under the media microscope before '24 presidential primaries

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
DeSantis' Catholic faith goes under the media microscope before '24 presidential primaries

The presidential race is just starting to heat up. While it may still be early, candidates are popping up every few days and announcing their intention to seek the Republican nomination in 2024.

Among those seeking to dislodge the early favorite — polling shows that to be former President Donald Trump — is Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. This is the same man who has become something of a conservative darling in recent years for relentlessly going after “woke” ideology. His battle with Disney is an example of a culture war fight DeSantis hasn’t been afraid to address in recent years.

DeSantis has been criticized for many things, from whether his wife Casey is “a problem” to confusion over the pronunciation of his last name.

As the past weeks have shown, DeSantis’ foray into national politics has come shone a brighter media spotlight on him, his family and beliefs.

Yes, Christian beliefs. It’s true that DeSantis is seen as possibly the only candidate in the ever-growing GOP primary field capable of defeating Trump and possibly even President Joe Biden.

This increased scrutiny — both by the mainstream and religious press — has included whether or not DeSantis, a Catholic, is personally devout. I tackled this very topic more than a year ago in a post that ran under the headline “As Florida’s DeSantis wages culture war, his Catholic faith isn’t news — unless it’s used to attack him.”

Here was the main thrust of my argument:


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

Plug-In: Life after Pat Robertson, a religious broadcaster who mixed religion and politics

, , , , , , , , ,
Plug-In: Life after Pat Robertson, a religious broadcaster who mixed religion and politics

In the headlines, former President Donald Trump has been indicted on federal charges in the classified documents case. A possible prison sentence aside, will the case help or hurt Trump with conservative Christian voters? Stay tuned.

Here in Oklahoma City, where I am, the Oklahoma Sooners celebrate their third straight Women’s College World Series championship. The best team in college sports finished the season by winning a record 53 games in a row.

And yes, Jesus is a big part of their team chemistry, as ESPN’s Hallie Grossman has highlighted.

This is our weekly roundup of the top headlines and best reads in the world of faith. We start with Thursday’s death of Pat Robertson at age 93.

What To Know: The Big Story

‘He obeyed God’: That’s how the Christian Broadcasting Network characterizes Pat Robertson’s life.

More from CBN:

Pat Robertson dedicated his life to preaching the Gospel, helping those in need, and educating the next generation. He founded the Christian Broadcasting Network and numerous organizations, including Operation Blessing, Regent University, the American Center for Law and Justice, and International Family Entertainment Inc. He was also a New York Times best-selling author and host of The 700 Club.

Pat was married to the love of his life and partner in ministry for 67 years, Dede Robertson, until she died in 2022. Together, they had four children, 14 grandchildren, and 24 great-grandchildren.

Religion and politics: Robertson was a “pugnacious conservative whose Christian Broadcasting Network defined televangelism for decades,” the Washington Times’ Mark A. Kellner writes.

“With CBN, ‘The 700 Club,’ Regent, the Christian Coalition, and a run for president, he changed evangelicals’ place in public life,” according to Christianity Today’s Kate Shellnutt.

The 1988 Republican presidential candidate “turned evangelicals into a powerful constituency that helped Republicans capture Congress in 1994,” the New York Times’ Douglas Martin notes.

Robertson’s legacy: The Associated Press’ Ben Finley explains:


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

Flashback: That popular question, 'Who was the most remarkable person you've covered?'

, , , , , , , ,
Flashback: That popular question, 'Who was the most remarkable person you've covered?'

Mother Teresa was having a bad press conference.

Journalists gathered for her 1989 Denver visit seemed determined to ask a litany of questions about her views on every imaginable issue in world affairs and American politics. The soft-spoken, yet often stern, nun seemed confused and kept stressing that her Missionary Sisters of Charity would always focus on the needs of the needy and the sick, including those suffering from AIDS.

One television reporter even asked if the day's main ecumenical event — a "Celebrate Life with Mother Teresa" prayer rally — would include a Mass. Once again, the tiny sister from Calcutta was confused. How could there be a Catholic Mass if the rally included Lutherans, Baptists, Episcopalians, Pentecostal believers and clergy from other churches?

"We will pray together," she said. "That is what we can do."

I raised my hand and asked another question that I knew she might not want to answer. I had heard that she had privately toured Northeast Denver, an impoverished area hit hard by gangs. Might she open a mission there?

Mother Teresa smiled, but gently deflected the question, noting that Denver had recently been added at the end of a long list of dioceses worldwide making just such a request.

What happened next was a singular moment in my journalism career, one that awkwardly blurred the lines between the personal and the professional.

Why bring this up right now?


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

Thinking about C.S. Lewis and today's emerging prophets of transhumanism

, , , , , , , , , , ,
Thinking about C.S. Lewis and today's emerging prophets of transhumanism

Are there any C.S. Lewis enthusiasts in the house?

How about people who, well, detest the famous Oxford don and Christian apologist?

It is my hope that this think piece (pounded out during a two-week road trip) will appeal to both.

Right now, I am about to finish reading — for the 10th time, or something like that — the Lewis “Science fiction trilogy.” It ends with “That Hideous Strength,” a head-spinning mix of science fiction, Arthurian legend and a blistering satire of stuffy, insular, corrupt, boring elites in British higher education (in other words, the world in which Lewis lived until his death in 1963). It’s the narrative fiction take on his prophetic “The Abolition of Man.”

I do not want to give away the plot, of course. But the big idea is that elite there’s that word again) scientific materialists, in a quest for their own brand of immortality and desire to modify the human person, turn to the occult and, well, the Powers of Darkness. You may never hear the term “head,” when used to describe the leader of a school or movement, again without thinking of this book.

So what would Lewis think of this haunting feature from Suzy Weiss at The Free Press? Here’s the double-decker headline:

The Tech Messiahs Who Want to Deliver Us from Death

They see death as a software error — and they have a plan for fixing it. But should they?

The overture:

Kai Micah Mills is going to freeze his parents. 

“They’re both going to be cryopreserved, regardless of their wishes,” Mills told me. 


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

Podcast: Who gets to pin labels on the armies fighting in those good 'ole SBC wars?

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Podcast: Who gets to pin labels on the armies fighting in those good 'ole SBC wars?

Once upon a time, starting in the late 1970a, the Southern Baptists Convention had a big civil war — fighting about the authority of the Bible and “biblical inerrancy,” a rather inside-baseball term that was little known by pew-folks at that time.

There were two big armies, with the gray three-piece-suit players of the Southern Baptist establishment and on the other the rebels who, if my memory is correct, sometimes wore plaid. Cut me some slack, because it’s been a long time. But this background was crucial in this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in), focusing on early coverage of strife leading up to the 2023 SBC meetings next week in New Orleans.

The good guys back then called themselves “moderates” because they tended to seek compromise stances on hot-button issues — such as abortion and the ordination of women. Thus, journalists called them “moderates.”

The bad guys called themselves “conservatives” and took strong stands on the big Bible issues (with the exception, let’s say, of economic justice). Thus, many journalists called them “fundamentalists” — including some rather ordinary evangelicals who didn’t fit that f-word term.

The right said there were “liberals” all over the place and the SBC left said “liberals” didn’t exist. Truth is, there were very few doctrinal liberals around (in a seminary chair or two) who were weak in defending ancient beliefs — think the Resurrection and the Virgin Birth of Jesus. Journalists were not interested in investigating facts related to these debates, since the “moderates” said that was all, well, disinformation.

Flash forward to the present. The few remaining “moderates” have mainline Protestant demographics and often have quiet disputes about mainline Protestant-style issues (think LGBTQ+ matters).

The hot-button SBC 2023 issues are (1) how tough to be on fighting sexual abuse and (2) the ordination of women (and old issue is back).

Everyone defends biblical inerrancy (while maybe offering slightly different definitions). Everyone stands together on the big doctrinal issues. In the background, however, is an important issue — when it comes to an issue like ordaining women, does the SBC have “doctrines” or “opinions”?


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

Why is Amazon Prime trashing the Duggar parents and the wide world of homeschooling?

, , , , , , , ,
Why is Amazon Prime trashing the Duggar parents and the wide world of homeschooling?

This past week or so has been a bad media moment for homeschooling. First there was a Washington Post expose on “the revolt of the Christian homeschoolers” that ran May 30.

Mind you, this is a time when homeschooling in America is at all-time highs. Then, starting last Friday, Amazon Prime premiered “Shiny Happy People,” its four-part series on the woes of the Duggar family, the stars of the long-running reality TV special “19 Kids and Counting.”

The latter is one of the more bizarre examples of circumstantial evidence, imputed (but not proven) guilt and overkill that I’ve seen in a long time. I’ll get to the Post piece in a moment, but the pile-on @AmazonPrime simply must be addressed.

For starters, not only does the series go after the Duggar parents Jim Bob and Michelle, but it also trashes the Institute in Basic Life Principles (IBLP) or what a lot of us who attended it in the 1970s used to call Basic Youth Conflicts. Bill Gothard, its founder, resigned in 2014 after being accused by multiple women of sexual abuse.

The series starts with a number of unidentified people (we learn their names later in the series but still) accusing IBLP of “spiritual, emotional, physical, psychological abuse” and essentially being the spiritual engine that fed the Duggar family empire. That and the fact that the Discovery TLC Network became a multi-billion-dollar company partly due to them.

“Homeschooling is the linchpin of this whole project,” said one woman.

Does that include all the homeschoolers who made it into Harvard and other forms of elite education? There are many facets to this nondenominational, multiracial movement.

“World domination is their goal,” intoned another man.

The series (I’ve watched two of the episodes so far) careens back and forth from homeschooling to the Duggars to conservative politics to the IBLP, trying to throw as much dirt as possible on them all. Is everyone who was ever involved with the IBLP and homeschooling a wacko?


Please respect our Commenting Policy