Louisiana

, , , , , , , , ,

LSU's always controversial Kim Mulkey offers a highly personal quote (#crickets)

, , , , , , , , ,
LSU's always controversial Kim Mulkey offers a highly personal quote (#crickets)

I always watch the final March Madness games in the women’s tournament, because of the high quality of the playing and coaching and, yes, because as a Baylor University alum and legacy guy, it was hard not to watch coach Kim Mulkey’s teams in the dynasty years.

That said, I was one of the Baylor fans who were miffed when the administration either (a) smiled and let her hit the exit door for a few more dollars from her home-state school or (b) sort of pushed her toward that exit because she was too flashy, too conservative (however one wants to define that), too private or too willing to step on the toes of powerful men and women.

Mulkey is not a woman who knows her place.

So I paid attention to the stunningly improbable LSU run to the national title — at the end of Mulkey’s second year at that job, after arriving at a school in or near the SEC cellar.

I wondered, frankly, if she was going to say one of those things that she says that the press kind of has to look away and pretend that she didn’t say. I wasn’t expecting it to be a quote about religion.

With a minute to go in the game, Mulkey was shown crying — almost weeping — on the sideline when the dagger three-pointer hit the net to defeat a great Iowa team. The Tiger queen was still fighting to control her emotions during her first post-game comments to ESPN. Struggling to speak, and wiping away tears, she finally managed to answer the inevitable “How do you feel?” question from reporter Holly Rowe.

“Coaches coach for a lifetime. This is the fourth time that I’ve been blessed,” Mulkey said to Holly Rowe postgame. “Never in the history of LSU basketball, men or women, have they ever played for a championship. And to win it? I think my tears are tears of joy. I’m so happy for everybody back home in Louisiana.”

“Blessed” is, of course, deep-Bible Belt talk.

That’s from a Sam Gillenwater post at the On3 website: “Kim Mulkey 'blessed' after leading LSU to program's first national championship.” It’s the quote that ended the interview that caught my attention.


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

Parents, schools and 'LGBTQ themes': Why is the Associated Press being so vague?

, , , , , , , , , , , ,
Parents, schools and 'LGBTQ themes': Why is the Associated Press being so vague?

Let’s start here: I am a journalist who is married to a librarian. When it comes to First Amendment issues, we are old-school liberals. However, there are times when — in debates involving public schools, tax dollars and parental rights (without “scare quotes”) — there are First Amendment tensions that cannot be denied.

Week after week, I keep reading angry mainstream-press reports covering battles about removing LGBTQ-audience books from the libraries of schools in various red zip codes across America.

I confess that I am confused about what is happening in many of these debates. I assume that the content of proposed legislation is different in various states, but it’s hard to know the details in the news coverage. In particular, it’s hard to know if books are being removed from (a) mandatory classroom assignments, (b) recommended sex-education lists promoted to students or (c) library bookshelves — period.

Also, I am having trouble understanding the specifics of why parents are upset (and these concerns may vary from case to case). Most news reports stress that conservative (read “traditional” religious believers, either Christian, Jewish or Muslim) parents are upset about all LGBTQ content.

However, if and when journalists deem to quote parents, the parents seem upset about visual images and graphic stories that they consider to be pornographic or not age-appropriate for their children. Are their concerns valid? It’s hard to make judgements about that — since news reports never describe the details of their concerns, perhaps because the content is too strong for publication in newspapers.

With these questions in mind, let’s look at a recent Associated Press report that ran with this headline: “School library book bans are seen as targeting LGBTQ content.” Note that the headline seems to assume that books are banned from library shelves and that’s that. Here is the overture:

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — Teri Patrick bristles at the idea she wants to ban books about LGBTQ issues in Iowa schools, arguing her only goal is ridding schools of sexually explicit material.

Sara Hayden Parris says that whatever you want to call it, it’s wrong for some parents to think a book shouldn’t be readily available to any child if it isn’t right for their own child.


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

Life after Roe: What role will churches and faith play in work of pro-life Democrats?

, , , , , , , , ,
Life after Roe: What role will churches and faith play in work of pro-life Democrats?

As outraged Democrats jumped on social media after the fall of Roe v. Wade, some symbolic voices in the party offered careful words of celebration.

"Let's Stand Together and Support Women and Children!!!", tweeted state Sen. Katrina Jackson, the African-American Democrat who sponsored Louisiana's trigger bill that includes potential 10-year prison sentences for those who perform abortions.

Jackson's added calls for "womb to tomb" legislation raising wages for childcare workers, funds to fight human-trafficking and new state programs helping families.

Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards, also a Democrat, posted several Twitter messages, including: "My position on abortion has been unwavering. I am pro-life and have never hidden from that fact." He stressed that this Louisiana bill included clauses protecting procedures in cases of "medical futility" and ectopic pregnancies and added that he believes it needed "an exception to the prohibition on abortion for victims of rape and incest."

The Democratic Party, in its 2020 platform, remained committed to "protecting and advancing reproductive health, rights and justice," while promising to "fight and overturn federal and state laws" limiting or opposing abortion rights.

But in the wake of the Supreme Court's recent Dobbs vs. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision, crucial debates about abortion laws will move to state governments. Some have already passed bills protecting unborn children and others have taken equally strong stands defending abortion rights.

Many states are located somewhere in between, noted Kristen Day, leader of Democrats for Life of America. In these states there will be tense negotiations over legislation -- such as "heartbeat bills," usually defined as abortion bans after six weeks of gestation -- that were impossible under court actions linked to Roe v. Wade.

While "pro-life" Democrats are an endangered species inside the D.C. Beltway, there are "hundreds of us active in state governments," said Day, reached by telephone. Many of these Democrats are linked to Black and Latino churches -- grassroots workers that national party leaders may not want to attack or alienate.


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

Religious liberty at SCOTUS, again: Touch, comfort and the prayers of clergy at executions

, , , , , , , ,
Religious liberty at SCOTUS, again: Touch, comfort and the prayers of clergy at executions

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear religious freedom arguments Tuesday in the case of a Texas death-row inmate named John Henry Ramirez.

Ramirez, 37, wants his Southern Baptist pastor to lay hands on him and pray before and during his execution. The state of Texas won’t allow it.

Time magazine’s Madeleine Carlisle provides a nice overview of the case.

“The job of a minister is not to stand still and be quiet,” Dana Moore, the inmate’s pastor, tells Time. “Prayer is very important. And the power of touch is real. It’s encouraging. It brings peace. It’s significant… Why can’t I hold his hand?”

In an August interview with New York Times religion writer Ruth Graham, Ramirez took responsibility for killing Corpus Christi convenience store clerk Pablo Castro, calling Castro’s 2004 death a “heinous murder.” (As noted by the Corpus Christi Caller-Times, Ramirez “beat and kicked Castro and stabbed him 29 times with a 6-inch serrated knife.” He and two female accomplices left the scene with $1.25.)

“It would just be comforting,” Ramirez said of wanting Moore by his side at the time of his lethal injection.

At The Associated Press, religion writer David Crary explains that the “ACLU has a long history of opposing the death penalty and also says that condemned prisoners, even at the moment of execution, have religious rights.”

Conservative church-state activists have been involved in this case, and others like it, since Day 1.

“Intriguingly, the ACLU’s position in the Ramirez case is echoed by some conservative religious groups which support the death penalty and are often at odds with the ACLU on other issues,” Crary reports.


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

After Hurricane Ida: Prayers, tears, light, miracles and donations from somewhere ...

, , , , , , ,
After Hurricane Ida: Prayers, tears, light, miracles and donations from somewhere ...

If you have ever lived in a major hurricane zone — Port Arthur, Texas, and West Palm Beach, Fla., for me — then you know that after the winds die down, the electric trucks (from all over) roll into town, from all over. The same thing is true with relief efforts from major religious groups. We’re talking Southern Baptists, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, World Vision, Churches of Christ and more.

The second half of that equation usually gets lots of ink the the religious press.

The elite newsrooms? Sometimes, yes. Lots of times, no.

So let’s look at a very interesting Hurricane Ida story from the Associated Press that provided all kinds of religion details about the locals and the people striving to help them: “Louisiana residents thankful for small miracles after Ida.” As a longtime GetReligion reader said, in an email:

This isn't profound, I guess it's just an example of "there, was that so hard?" . ... to report intimately about believers and clergy worshipping after a catastrophe. Frankly I've been kind of overwhelmed by the enormity of the loss in Louisiana — I joined a church relief team to help in Slidell and New Orleans a month after Katrina — and this story brought tears.

But note: This story focuses — with good cause — on the locals and government efforts post-hurricane. That’s a great story. But maybe this needed a word about the other big religion hook in post-storm news?

Meanwhile, here’s the overture:

MARRERO, La. (AP) — Amid the devastation caused by Hurricane Ida, there was at least one bright light Sunday: Parishioners found that electricity had been restored to their church outside of New Orleans, a small improvement as residents of Louisiana struggle to regain some aspects of normal life.

In Jefferson Parish, the Rev. G. Amaldoss expected to celebrate Mass at St. Joachim Catholic Church in the parking lot, which was dotted with downed limbs. But when he swung open the doors of the church early Sunday, the sanctuary was bathed in light.


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

Thinking about 1962: Catholic politicos, an archbishop, excommunication, doctrine and race

, , , , , , , ,
Thinking about 1962: Catholic politicos, an archbishop, excommunication, doctrine and race

The equation was rather remarkable.

First you had some Catholic politicians who — in words and deeds — kept defying church teachings on an important and controversial topic in public life.

Then you had an archbishop who faced a tough decision about whether to do anything, beyond verbal warnings, to show them he was willing to defend these church teachings on moral theology and the sacraments.

When the archbishop stepped up and punished the politicos, denying them Holy Communion and more, the mainstream press — CBS and The New York Times, even — openly backed his actions with positive coverage.

Wait, what was that last thing?

Right now, the U.S. Catholic bishops are headed deeper into a showdown over the status of President Joe Biden and other Catholics who openly — through word and deed — defy church teachings on abortion, marriage, gender and other issues in which doctrines are defined in the Catholic Catechism and centuries of church tradition.

As part of the discussion this past week, America magazine — a strategic voice for Catholic progressives — can this fascinating essay: “What a 60-year-old excommunication controversy tells us about calls to deny Biden Communion.” It was written by Peter Feuerherd, a journalism professor at St. John's University in New York City. Here’s the overture:

In April 1962, Archbishop Joseph Rummel of New Orleans not only denied Communion to three Catholics in his archdiocese; he went a step beyond. At 86 years of age and in ill health — he would die two years later — he formally excommunicated the three, who vehemently opposed his efforts to desegregate Catholic schools.


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

How would Democrats, journalists and bishops view a centrist abortion stance by Biden?

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

Journalists who have studied the history of Catholic disputes about politicians and Holy Communion are probably familiar with this name — Archbishop Joseph Francis Rummel of New Orleans.

There’s a good reason that that.

In 1962, Rummel infuriated segregationists by ordering the integration of all local parish schools. This was especially important in the intensely Catholic culture of Louisiana and it led to debates about how bishops relate to Catholic politicians that continue to this day. That was the topic that loomed in the background during this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in) focusing on this recent GetReligion post: “Washington Post explores Joe Biden's faith, while embracing language of Catholic left.”

Back to Rummel. The 1964 New York Times obituary for this archbishop noted that he had, as early as 1949, taken actions expressing his opposition — clearly rooted in Catholic teachings — to segregation and other expressions of racism. In 1953 he issued an order stating that Black Catholics no longer had to wait at the end of the line to receive Holy Communion.

But it was the battle over integrating Catholic schools that put this archbishop’s name in the history books. The Times obit noted:

Archbishop Rummel's stand was publicly opposed by three prominent church members: Leander H. Perez Sr., president of the Plaquemines Parish Council, Jackson G. Ricau, executive director of the South Louisiana Citizens Councils, and Mrs. B. J. Gaillot Jr., head of Save Our Nation. Inc.

The three were excommunicated by the Archbishop after they failed to accept letters of “paternal admonition.”

Yes, they were excommunicated. That’s a big step beyond informing them that they should not receive Holy Communion. But note: These Louisiana politicians rejected a direct order from their bishop.

In recent decades, Catholic leaders have argued about whether Rummel’s action is relevant during discussions of how to handle Catholic politicians — especially those seeking national office — who openly support abortion on demand and take other actions to oppose church teachings on marriage and sex.

The question, of course, is where to draw the line when discipling Catholics in public life. American bishops have ended up in a tense standoff linked to controversial actions taken by a rather controversial Catholic — Theodore McCarrick. Yes, that is “Uncle Ted.” As I noted in a recent “On Religion” column:


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

Looking back at 2020 voting: Here's five religion-news trends to think about -- so far

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Looking in the rearview mirror, it appears that Election Day 2020 led to a series of verdicts, but with many questions unanswered. While a few insist that the presidency remains in the balance, there were a series of changes and trends that emerged as a result of 2020 voting.

Control of the U.S. Senate, to the surprise of many, still appears to be up for grabs. while Republicans managed to gain ground in the House of Representatives, to the shock of the Democratic Party majority.

President Donald Trump did a lot better than the pre-election polls, but, in many states, did not capture as many votes as down-ballot Republicans. The president, and a small number of his supporters, continue to argue that judges may rule that ballot fraud will overturn or weaken Democrat Joe Biden’s narrow victory at the polls.

As a result of this confusion, details regarding some voting trends — particularly from faith voters — were slow to trickle in given that so many mail-in ballots were used as a result of the pandemic. Here is a summary of some of what we have learned, so far, about the impact of religious issues and voters in the 2020 election:

Catholic vote makes a difference, but for whom?

The Catholic vote mattered once again in this election cycle. Biden, who is poised to become first Catholic president since 1960, spent the past few months courting faith voters. Trump, in turn, also pursued the Catholic vote in swing states like Ohio and Pennsylvania.

The Catholic vote usually decides the Presidential election. This year the exit polls for Catholics all have @JoeBiden under water. This is curious given @realDonaldTrump's vote count in the rust belt.
New York Times: Trump 68%
AP: Trump 46%
NBC: Trump 66% pic.twitter.com/whJyYlldZU

— Raymond Arroyo (@RaymondArroyo) November 4, 2020

The Catholic vote, according to The Associated Press, seems to be evenly split — 49% going for Trump and 49% for Biden. NBC News, however, offered contradictory numbers — 37% of Catholics voting for Biden and a whopping 62% for Trump.

An EWTN News/RealClear Opinion Research poll from last month found Catholics favoring Biden by a 12-point margin (53% to 41%) over Trump. As expected, the president did better with Catholics who regularly attend Mass.


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

Question for 2020: Can Episcopal clergy consecrate bread and wine through the Internet?

, , , , , , , , ,
Question for 2020: Can Episcopal clergy consecrate bread and wine through the Internet?

In the late 1970s, the Episcopal Ad Project began releasing spots taking shots at television preachers and other trends in American evangelicalism.

One image showed a television serving as an altar, holding a priest's stole, a chalice and plate of Eucharistic hosts. The headline asked: "With all due regard to TV Christianity, have you ever seen a Sony that gives Holy Communion?"

Now some Anglicans are debating whether it's valid -- during the coronavirus crisis -- to celebrate "virtual Eucharists," with computers linking priests at altars and communicants with their own bread and wine at home.

In a recent House of Bishops meeting -- online, of course -- Episcopal Church leaders backed away from allowing what many call "Virtual Holy Eucharist."

Episcopal News Service said bishops met in private small groups to discuss if it's "theologically sound to allow Episcopalians to gather separately and receive Communion that has been consecrated by a priest remotely during an online service."

Experiments had already begun, in some Zip codes. In April, Bishop Jacob Owensby of the Diocese of Western Louisiana encouraged such rites among "Priests who have the technical know-how, the equipment and the inclination" to proceed.

People at home, he wrote, will "provide for themselves bread and wine (bread alone is also permissible) and place it on a table in front of them. The priest's consecration of elements in front of her or him extends to the bread and wine in each … household. The people will consume the consecrated elements."

Days later, after consulting with America's presiding bishop," Bishop Owensby rescinded those instructions. "I understand that virtual consecration of elements at a physical or geographical distance from the Altar exceeds the recognized bounds set by our rubrics and inscribed in our theology of the Eucharist," he wrote.

However, similar debates were already taking place among other Anglicans. In Australia, for example, Archbishop Glenn Davies of Sydney urged priests to be creative during this pandemic, while churches were being forced to shut their doors.

During a live-streamed rite, he wrote, parishioners "could participate in their own homes via the internet consuming their own bread and wine, in accordance with our Lord's command."


Please respect our Commenting Policy