The Guardian

Beyond Barbie and the Bomb: It's time for religion-beat pros to prepare for #BarbAslan

Beyond Barbie and the Bomb: It's time for religion-beat pros to prepare for #BarbAslan

Hey, religion-beat professionals and news consumers.

I know that it’s hard, right now, but try to ignore the whole “Barbenheimer” phenomenon. That tsunami is really a business-beat story — as Disney and Hollywood hang on for dear life (post-Snow White 2024) in a bitterly divided America.

I am talking about #BarbAslan.

Let’s start here, with the double-decker headline on this totally haunted little story at Entertainment Weekly:

Greta Gerwig says she's 'properly scared' about directing new Chronicles of Narnia movies

The filmmaker is going from Barbie Land to meeting Aslan.

OK, why is she “scared”?

Well, it is a big franchise and the financial risk to Netflix will be substantial. And then there is the fact that Narnia believers rank right up there with Lord of the Rings fans, when it comes to long attention spans and a fierce dedication to sweating the details.

What kind of details? Well, consider this headline from The Guardian, during an earlier Chronicles of Narnia media storm: “Narnia represents everything that is most hateful about religion.”

Thus, how does the EW story handle the obvious Christian images and themes in Narnia, when writing about Gerwig — Barbie, Little Women, Lady Bird — guiding the latest video version of these classics by C.S. Lewis? Think of it this way: What would Screwtape say?

That’s easy. The editors totally ignored it. Here is the overture:

Greta Gerwig is sharing her nerves about leading the charge on a new series of Chronicles of Narnia movies.

The Barbie director has been tapped to write and direct at least two films for Netflix based on the beloved C.S. Lewis novels, and she admitted during a recent podcast appearance that she's "terrified" to start developing them. 


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Plug-In: Many churches are vanishing, while others are growing. Trends worth covering?

Plug-In: Many churches are vanishing, while others are growing. Trends worth covering?

This newsletter marks the return of Weekend Plug-in after two weeks of vacation. Did you miss me?

I’m still catching up on the headlines I missed while watching a whole lot of Texas Rangers games.

But I know the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on two important religious freedom cases — one on religious accommodation at work and the other involving free speech and free exercise protections for people of faith who are creative professionals.

Click the preceding links, by the way, to read excellent coverage of the decisions by the Washington Times’ Mark A. Kellner.

In more recent news, the gunman who killed 11 people in a Pittsburgh synagogue is eligible for the death penalty, a federal jury announced. The decision clears the way, as The Associated Press’ Peter Smith reports, “for further evidence and testimony on whether he should be sentenced to death or life in prison.”

In case you need a reminder, this is our weekly roundup of the top headlines and best reads in the world of faith. We start with the giant religion trend that should be bigger news.

What To Know: The Big Story

Houses of worship closing: “Everybody is caught up with fighting over sexuality or politics on Twitter — and almost no one is paying attention (to) the collapse of congregational life in America.”

Religion News Service national writer Bob Smietana made that prescient observation on social media this week. Smietana, of course, wrote a book on the subject called “Reorganized Religion: The Reshaping of the American Church and Why It Matters.”

Many churches are shrinking. Then again, some churches are growing. Trends worth covering? What are the patterns here?


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Pascha in Ukraine, 2023: That's a subject journalists view through a totally Western lens

Pascha in Ukraine, 2023: That's a subject journalists view through a totally Western lens

Ask faithful members of Eastern Orthodox churches to name the most important day of the Christian year and about 99.9% of them will say this — “Pascha.”

This is the ancient Orthodox term for the feast of the Resurrection of Jesus. As the OrthodoxWiki.org website notes, “Pascha” is “a transliteration of the Greek word, which is itself a transliteration of the Aramaic pascha, from the Hebrew pesach meaning Passover.”

Pascha rites around the world began just before midnight on Saturday and proceeded into the early hours of Sunday, followed by festivities to break the long, intense fast of Great Lent. Folks get home about 4 a.m.

Needless to say, this was not a normal Pascha in Ukraine. I was curious to see how mainstream newsrooms would cover the rites in the Ukraine, where two competing Orthodox bodies are united in their opposition to the Russian invasion of their land, but separated by decades of competing claims of which church represents the future of the faith in Ukraine (see this earlier post-podcast on that topic).

I was curious, as an Orthodox layman (this Pascha marked the 25th anniversary of my family’s conversion), how mainstream news organizations would cover Pascha 2023 in Ukraine — so I ran an online search for the terms Ukraine and “Pascha.” The result — zero 2023 news reports containing “Pascha.”

Ah, but what if journalists ignored Orthodox history, tradition and theology and only referred to this feast day as “Easter,” the Western Christian term?

What if your stories contained zero references to “Pascha” and only said “Easter”? That online search yielded some mainstream reports, which often mentioned “Orthodox Easter,” thus viewing the most important day in Eastern Orthodoxy through a totally Western lens. Try to imagine doing this with any other global faith group of 260 million members, Christianity’s second largest Communion. Imagine changing the name of “Passover,” “Ramadan” or even “Easter” (when covering Rome and Protestantism).

Of course, readers need to be told that “Pascha” is the ancient Christian term for the season that, in the dominant West, is known by the somewhat controversial (for some outsiders) term “Easter.” But shouldn’t coverage of Pascha at least include, you know, the word “Pascha”?

It’s hard to imagine a more fitting metaphor to describe most, if not all, of the warped mainstream press coverage of the role that Orthodox history and faith is playing in Ukraine. I have already written about this several times and I’m about to board an airplane to head to Los Angeles. So let me be as quick as possible.

If reporters had the slightest interest in the historic Ukrainian Orthodox Church — with 1,000 years of shared history with Slavic cultures — they would be paying attention to this church’s (a) ongoing attempts to sever, within the limits of Orthodox canon law, it’s remaining ties to the Russian Orthodox Church, (b) its leaders’ opposition, since Day 1, to the Russian invasion and (c) the criticisms of this church by leaders of the new, competing Orthodox Church of Ukraine, which is supported by the United States, the European Union, the current Ukrainian government and the tiny, but symbolic, Ecumenical Orthodox Patriarchate in Turkey. These criticisms have escalated into a full-tilt government attempt to crush the older Orthodox body.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: Is Christmas 'news'? Not really, unless it is a case of 'Christmas AND ...'

Podcast: Is Christmas 'news'? Not really, unless it is a case of 'Christmas AND ...'

At least once a year, back in the days when I was in a newsroom full-time, I would have a semi-argument with an editor about this question: Are debates about worship issues “hard news”?

Every now and then I would win and we’d run a story — like a feature about United Methodists arguing about gender-neutral language for God (this was in the 1980s). When it ran, all hellfire broke loose, which convinced some editors that I was right. Others, however, were upset that so many readers disagreed with their conviction that a religion-religion story was news, as opposed to religion-politics stories.

This brings me to Christmas — which is on a Sunday this year. This has led to some interesting polling and emotional online debates, but, so far, not much news coverage about the central worship question: Should churches celebrate Christmas on Christmas, even if Dec. 25 falls on a Sunday? This was the hook for this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (CLICK HERE to tune that in).

Research? The team at Lifeway Research has done two studies linked to Christmas worship. For example, see this Baptist Press headline: “Most churches plan to open on Christmas and New Year’s Day.” I wrote a column the other day with this headline: “When is Christmas? That depends on the person asking.”

Back to the question about worship being news. You end up with an equation that goes something like this:

* Flocks of people attending Latin Mass rites is not news.

* The pope questioning the motives of traditional Catholics who support the Latin Mass is news.

* A major American political leader — Joe Biden, perhaps — supporting the pope’s take on the Latin Mass would be big news.

See how this works? You can see how this would apply to the whole “When is Christmas?” debate. It matters to millions of people in pews. It doesn’t matter to the political desk.


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

Plug-In: Ties the bind -- Elizabeth II wove threads of faith and family into her funeral rites

Plug-In: Ties the bind -- Elizabeth II wove threads of faith and family into her funeral rites

In a previous Plug-in, we highlighted the importance of Queen Elizabeth II’s Christian faith in her life.

The 96-year-old monarch’s funeral rites certainly reflected that.

The Guardian’s Harriet Sherwood explains:

The powerful liturgy and rituals of the Church of England – the established church since the 16th century but increasingly marginalised in everyday life – were at the heart of a ceremony watched by billions around the world.

The Queen’s funeral took place under the magnificent gothic arches of Westminster Abbey, the setting for every coronation since 1066, home to the tombs of kings and queens, and the church where the then Princess Elizabeth was married in 1947.

The service was taken from the 1662 Book of Common Prayer, the C of E’s official prayerbook, noted for its beautiful and archaic language but largely displaced in recent decades by those seeking a more modern style of worship.

The Queen was said to be devoted to the Book of Common Prayer, along with the hymns and readings chosen personally by the monarch for her funeral.

The Washington Times’ Mark A. Kellner offers additional details:

“Few leaders have received the outpouring of love we have seen,” Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby said during the state funeral. “Her Late Majesty’s example was not set through her position or her ambition, but through whom she followed.”

Archbishop Welby said the queen, who reigned for 70 years and celebrated her Platinum Jubilee in June, modeled the servant leadership expressed in the life of Jesus, her savior.

“People of loving service are rare in any walk of life,” he said. “Leaders of loving service are still rarer. But in all cases, those who serve will be loved and remembered when those who cling to power and privileges are long forgotten.”

At the National Catholic Register, Father Raymond J. de Souza characterizes the queen’s state funeral this way:


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: Experts call the Unification Church a 'cult,' and that word requires explanation

Podcast: Experts call the Unification Church a 'cult,' and that word requires explanation

It has been a long time since I have done a podcast post about a developing news story only one day after I wrote the original post on that topic.

However, yesterday’s post — “New York Times report says the Unification Church is a 'church' and it's as simple as that” — turned out to have some old issues connected to it that, when discussed in this week’s “Crossroads” episode, took us back into a familiar journalism minefield. (To get to the actual podcast, JUST CLICK HERE.) Can you say “cult”?

Before we get to the old issue of journalists (and academics) struggling to define “cult,” let’s look at some of the ways and religious and political language are woven into the story of the assassination of former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan — primarily through the family history of Tetsuya Yamagami, who was arrested after the shooting. This is from The Guardian:

Tetsuya Yamagami has confessed to killing the former Japanese prime minister during a campaign speech on Friday. He blamed the global religious movement — whose members are often referred to as Moonies — for bankrupting his family, and believed that Abe had championed its activities in Japan.

The Japan branch of the church has confirmed that Yamagami’s mother is a member, but declined to comment on the suspect’s claims that she had made a “huge donation” more than 20 years ago that left the family struggling financially.

The branch’s president, Tomihiro Tanaka, told a press conference that Yamagami’s mother became a follower in the late 1990s, adding that the family had suffered financial ruin around 2002.

As I mentioned in the first post, it’s normal to call the Unification Church a “church” on first reference, since that is it’s primary name — as opposed to the Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity or the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification.

The journalism issue here is how reporters describe this religious movement in follow-up references and how much material news reports include about the messianic claims of its founder, the Rev. Sun Myung Moon. Let’s return to the Guardian report:

Moon, who died in 2012, said he had had a vision aged 15 in which he was told by Jesus to complete his unfulfilled mission to restore humanity to a state of “sinless” purity.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Dramatic story of Kyrgyz Christian swept up in China's Uyghur repression gets very little ink

Dramatic story of Kyrgyz Christian swept up in China's Uyghur repression gets very little ink

In all the stories about Ukraine and the genocide/war happening there, it’s easy to forget the other genocide going on in western China.

A number of weeks ago, Axios.com published a short about China’s “crime’s about humanity” there, particularly against the more than 1 million Muslims who are imprisoned in this 21st century gulag.

Lost in the details of this story is a second angle that would be of great interest to lots of readers in the United States and elsewhere — that Christians too have been caught up in the dragnet.

A Christian Chinese national who spent 10 months in a Xinjiang detention camp has arrived in the United States after months of behind-the-scenes lobbying by U.S. lawmakers, human rights activists and international lawyers.

Why it matters: The man, Ovalbek Turdakun, will provide evidence that international human rights lawyers say is vital to the case they have submitted to the International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutor arguing that China has committed crimes against humanity in Xinjiang.

Here are several crucial details in this overlooked story:

* Ovalbek and his wife and child were authorized to enter the U.S. on significant public benefit parole, which permits entry for special purposes such as testifying in a proceeding, but does not grant immigration status, because of the value of the testimony they are expected to give. Ovalbek crossed the borders of several Asian countries to get out, finally landing at Dulles Inernational Airport on April 8. Thus:

The big picture: Ovalbek Turdakun is a unique witness to Chinese government repression in Xinjiang, according to international lawyers, U.S. officials and others with knowledge of the case.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Yes, there's a religion story behind those statistics about China's shrinking population

Yes, there's a religion story behind those statistics about China's shrinking population

China made the news again last week for an odd reason — its demographics.

Only 12 million babies were born last year in China, the lowest number since 1961. You can think of 35 years of forced abortions and mandatory IUD devices for that. Oh, and going after the offspring of Uyghur Muslims, house-church Christians, Tibetan Buddhists and Falun Gong practitioners figure into that number, as well.

But the details of that important religion angle didn’t make it into the stories I read. In the New York Times:

Figures from a census released on Tuesday show that China faces a demographic crisis that could stunt growth in the country, the world’s second-largest economy. China has long relied on an expanding and ambitious work force to run its factories and achieve Beijing’s dreams of building a global superpower and industrial giant. An aging, slow-growing population — one that could even begin to shrink in the coming years — threatens that dynamic.

Now listen to how the next paragraph explains how this happened.

While most developed countries in the West and Asia are also getting older, China’s demographic problems are largely self-inflicted. China imposed a one-child policy in 1980 to tamp down population growth. Local officials enforced that policy with sometimes draconian measures. It may have prevented 400 million births, according to the government, but it also shrank the number of women of childbearing age.

“Sometimes draconian” measures? Forcibly aborting a woman’s second child is, by definition, draconian.

Beijing is now under greater pressure to abandon its family planning policies, which are among the world’s most intrusive; overhaul an economic model that has long relied on a huge population and a growing pool of workers; and plug yawning gaps in health care and pensions.

Well, yes, when local cadres monitor the exact timing of women’s periods to make sure they’re not pregnant, that’s pretty intrusive.


Please respect our Commenting Policy