divorce

In 2023 America, organized religion has (this is not good news) become a luxury good

In 2023 America, organized religion has (this is not good news) become a luxury good

I’m in absolutely no sense a biblical scholar. I’m nothing more than a lay preacher who was called by a local American Baptist congregation because I was willing to fill the pulpit each Sunday. I took about five courses in the Bible in undergraduate.

I don’t remember a lot about those courses, but a handful of things have stuck with me. Let me get just a little bit preachy for a second. (And forgive me for any heresies).

One idea that I just can never shake is that one of the central themes in the Gospel of Luke is the great reversal. It’s most succinctly stated in 13:30, “Indeed there are those who are last who will be first, and first who will be last.”

It’s all over the text. The Magnificat of Mary, “He has brought down rulers from their thrones but has lifted up the humble.” (Luke 1:52). “For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.” (Luke 14:11) And, of course, “Jesus answered them, ‘It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.’” (Luke 5:31-32.)

The way that I understand Christianity is that Jesus was especially concerned with people on the margins of society. The sick, the poor, and the outcasts were high on his priority list. Thus, churches (being the extension of Jesus’ ministry), should focus their efforts on those exact same people.

But the data says that is not happening. Just the opposite in fact.

Religion in the 21st Century America has become an enclave for people who have done everything “right.” They have college degrees and marriages and children and middle-class incomes. For those who don’t check all those boxes, religion is just not for them.

I’m going to stop quoting scripture now (not my strong suit) to describing the data (which is way more comfortable for me). The conclusions are unmistakable: religion has become a luxury good, and that’s leaving most of society on the fringes, yet again.

Let’s start with that old chestnut that I roll out from time to time — the basic relationship between education and religious disaffiliation.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: Are on-the-record statements by Cardinal Hollerich relevant to his synod role?

Podcast: Are on-the-record statements by Cardinal Hollerich relevant to his synod role?

Unless there is a papal election in the near future, the Vatican Synod on Synodality (#VATICAN3) will be one of the most important religion-beat stories of 2023 and 2024 (click here for the dates).

One of the first defining documents of this process was released the other day — “Instrumentum Laboris. A document of the whole Church.” Apparently this was a “religion” story, the kind of inside-baseball development that was covered by Catholic publications on the doctrinal left and right.

That surprised me, since — normally — anything about the Vatican, LGBTQ+rights and women’s ordination makes headlines. Thus, I was glad that Religion News Service published, well, a very typical RNS news story about this document. See if you can spot the big ideas in this double-decker headline:

Vatican confirm synod topics will address questions of LGBTQ+ and women deacons

The document addresses inclusivity toward LGBTQ+ faithful, the issue of female ordination and welcoming toward divorced, remarried or polygamous couples

This story include a massive gap, in terms of essential content (that’s my opinion, of course) and that provided the hook for this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in). Before we go there, let’s look at a low-key document overview from The Pillar:

The document … acknowledges tensions in the synodal process, saying, “We should not be frightened by them, nor attempt at any cost to resolve them, but rather engage in ongoing synodal discernment. Only in this way can these tensions become sources of energy and not lapse into destructive polarizations.”

The goal of synodality, the document says, is to create “a Church of sisters and brothers in Christ who listen to one another and who, in so doing, are gradually transformed by the Spirit.”

A synodal Church, it says, is one marked by a willingness to listen, encounter, and dialogue, as well as by the humility to ask forgiveness for faults. It is a Church that celebrates unity in diversity and welcomes all people, while not shying away from speaking the truth in love.

For journalists who have covered decades of mainline Protestant life, terms such as “dialogue” and “unity in diversity” — perhaps even doctrinal diversity — will sound familiar.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

RIP Charles Stanley, a Southern Baptist media pro (and a megachurch preacher, too)

RIP Charles Stanley, a Southern Baptist media pro (and a megachurch preacher, too)

There’s an old saying in the Sunbelt that goes like this: When Jesus makes his glorious return on the last day, He will still have to fly through Atlanta.

I will visit that giant airport myself, today, on my way home from speaking at a Poynter Institute conference — “Telling the Stories of Faith and the Faithful” here in Los Angeles. One day featured meetings with West Coast reporters, including many that don’t work the religion beat, and the second day focused on talks with a circle of faith-group leaders. There were great questions and lots of dialogue.

Thinking about the Atlanta airport reminded me of what I think was as highly symbolic encounter with the Rev. Charles Stanley, a pivotal Southern Baptist leader and preacher who died this week. See this Associated Press report: “Charles Stanley, influential Baptist preacher, dies at 90.

The leader of First Baptist Church of Atlanta was elected SBC president in 1985 during what was, in my experience, one of the most intense, even angry, national conventions ever (and that’s saying something) during the near life-and-death Southern Baptist civil war of that era.

To get to that meeting in Kansas City, working for The Charlotte Observer, I had to (#DUH) change planes in Atlanta. I ended up on the same plane with Stanley, who was rumored to be a candidate for SBC president. He was in First Class, obviously, and I was not, obviously. After we had been airborne for an hour or so, I walked up front to give Stanley my card and to request an interview before the election.

Seeing that he was reading a document, I confess that I looked it over before I alerted him to my presence at his right shoulder.

Trust me — I wish I had a photographic memory. Why? Because he was reading a professional set of public-relations guidelines describing (#WaitForIt) how to deal with journalists after his election as SBC president.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Return of the evangelical arguments about morality, character and two-party politics

Return of the evangelical arguments about morality, character and two-party politics

It was totally logical for the Southern Baptist Convention to pass its "Resolution on Moral Character of Public Officials" in 1998.

Consider this "whereas" clause: "Some journalists report that many Americans are willing to excuse or overlook immoral or illegal conduct by unrepentant public officials so long as economic prosperity prevails." This was followed by: "Tolerance of serious wrong by leaders sears the conscience of the culture, spawns unrestrained immorality and lawlessness in the society, and surely results in God's judgment."

Thus, the SBC urged American leaders to "live by the highest standards of morality both in their private actions and in their public duties."

Yes, this resolution passed soon after the infamous claim by President Bill Clinton, a Southern Baptist, that "I did not have sexual relations with that woman."

It was easy to predict who thought Clinton should exit the White House, noted conservative writer Marvin Olasky, who was writing "The American Leadership Tradition: Moral Vision from Washington to Clinton" at that time.

"In poker, you really don't know what cards someone has," said Olasky, reached by telephone. "You can't tell, with certainty, the character of a politician. … In that book, I argued that the state of a man's marriage was a strong tell. If he's faithful in his marriage, he's likely to be faithful to the nation."

Olasky's fellow religious conservatives praised the book. But things changed when he wrote a World magazine essay in 2016 entitled, "Unfit for power," arguing that Donald Trump should step aside as the Republican nominee.

"Clinton had denied having a sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky, but her stained blue dress bearing Clinton's DNA was proof that he had used his power for adulterous purposes, and then lied about it," wrote Olasky. Then there was the videotape showing "Trump making lewd remarks about groping women's genitals. While many opponents … have criticized Trump's character, the video gave us new information about how Trump views power as a means to gratify himself."

Olasky recirculated this 2016 editorial after Trump's recent announcement that he would seek the presidency once again, igniting renewed social-media warfare among evangelicals about morality, character and the winner-take-all nature of American politics -- especially when Supreme Court seats are vacant.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: Are sweaty men exercising at dawn (then praying) a New York Times story?

Podcast: Are sweaty men exercising at dawn (then praying) a New York Times story?

Anyone who watches advertisements during football games knows that American men are doing just great, these days.

There appear to be gazillions of racially diverse circles of thin men out there — roughly 30-50 years of age — who get together all the time in sports bars with loads of disposable income to spend on beer and mountains of chicken wings in a wide variety of flavors. Others travel all over the place in their rad sports vehicles or those pick-up trucks that are part troop-carriers, part luxury vehicles.

There are some rotund, middle-aged, often bald, White losers out there, of course, but their family members or lovers are still around to laugh at their misadventures.

Yes, this screed from an elderly guy (on a diet, even) is directly connected with this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (CLICK HERE to tune that in). This week’s program focused on a fine, fascinating New York Times piece by religion-beat pro Ruth Graham. The double-decker headline on this piece proclaimed:

For Suburban Texas Men, a Workout Craze With a Side of Faith

In Katy, outside Houston, many men have taken up F3, a no-frills fitness group where members push themselves physically but also bond emotionally.

I heard from several readers praising this story (and followed buzz on Twitter) and people kept saying: What inspired the Gray Lady to do a positive story about a bunch of evangelical men (one with a “Republic of Texas” tattoo) bonding through exercise, fellowship, service and prayer?

The first answer: The story was written by a veteran religion reporter, not someone off the political or strange cultures desk. The men talk, they tell their own stories. They are not walking straw men ready for a beating. By the way: It also looks like F3 groups, or at least the one in this feature, are pretty diverse in terms of race. Hold that thought.

I think the crucial statement is at the top of the article and it isn’t the lede. Here is the note from the editors:

We’re exploring how America defines itself one place at a time. In a Houston suburb, men have been flocking to a workout group that promises more than just a sweat session; together, they aim to ease male loneliness.

Note the touch of humility: “We’re exploring how America defines itself one place at a time (I added the bold type). The goal here is to let Americans outside describe their own lives, as opposed to the Times doing that for them?


Please respect our Commenting Policy

New podcast: Sex, marriage and babies are now topics too hot for preachers to handle?

New podcast: Sex, marriage and babies are now topics too hot for preachers to handle?

Hey religion-beat reporters (and even pros who cover politics): Want to find some really interesting stories?

Ask this question: What are the subjects that clergy are afraid to address in the pulpit? This was the big idea looming in the background during this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (CLICK HERE to tune that in).

For example, lots of people interpreted the silence of many super-preachers on the ethics and affairs of Donald Trump as evidence of support for him. It is much more likely (see some of the info in this “On Religion” column) that they knew the people in their pews were divided on this topic.

Thus, they were afraid to discuss it. They didn’t want to start a war.

Here’s another case study, one so old that my reporting on it predates the Internet. But I addressed the topic in this 2016 post here at GetReligion. Remember the “True Love Waits” phenomenon?

Anyway, I realize that for many people the whole "True Love Waits" thing was either a joke or an idealistic attempt to ask young people to do the impossible in modern American culture. …

What fascinated me was that, according to key "True Love Waits" leaders, they didn't struggle to find young people who wanted to take vows and join the program. What surprised them was that many church leaders were hesitating to get on board because of behind-the-scenes opposition from ADULTS in their congregations.

The problem was that pastors were afraid to offend a few, or even many, adults in their churches — even deacons — because of the sexual complications in many lives and marriages, including sins that shattered marriages and homes. Key parents didn't want to stand beside their teens and take the program's vows.

This brings me to some amazing Gallup Poll data that —as far as I can tell — didn’t receive any news coverage when it came out in 2020. There was a Twitter flurry about it the other day, which led to some people re-upping this “story” that wasn’t a “news story.”

The headline on the feature at Gallup: “Is Marriage Becoming Irrelevant?” Here is a chunk of the information that should have raised eyebrows, for reporters and preachers — including clergy who face people sitting in “red,” “conservative” pews.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

No vacation at Vatican? Thinking about an 'August surprise' from Pope Francis

No vacation at Vatican? Thinking about an 'August surprise' from Pope Francis

If you have lived and worked in Washington, D.C., you know that Beltway-land has its own unique media traditions.

For example, no one is surprised when politicos issue somewhat embarrassing statements and proposals late on Friday afternoons, especially during the seasons in which half of the city’s journalists and chattering-class superstars are parked in traffic on the Chesapeake Bay Bridge in Annapolis on their way to the beach. After all, who pays attention to the news on Saturdays and it’s too late to do a major feature for the Sunday newspaper.

Then there is the “October surprise,” which is when a presidential candidate who is trailing — especially an incumbent president — makes a wild domestic policy proposal, foreign policy gesture or accusation against his enemies in an attempt to jump-start the race and gain ground in the polls.

With that in mind, it’s interesting to pause and think about an interesting Crux analysis piece by editor and super-insider John L. Allen, Jr., that just ran with this headline: “Pope’s ‘August surprise’ could be most counter-cultural stand of all.” Allen didn’t make a specific proposal for an upcoming bombshell, but did say that this pope has a history of making news during a month when Italians — it's almost a sacred tradition — are on vacation.

I asked Clemente Lisi, our resident Italian and Catholic-media pro, what he thought of this thesis. He quickly answered — even though (irony alert) he is on vacation this week. His email said:

I know the feeling well. I spent every August in Italy as a child visiting relatives and being on vacation. And yes, everything was closed!

This papal August surprise could very well be a symptom of the media’s lack of attention during this month. In the pre-Donald Trump years, August was typically considered a “slow month” — at least in the United States — and also a time when many editors took time off after a long year. The same thing happens in Italy, probably on a grander scale.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

A World Series MVP's marriage crashes and his pastor is more than a role player in the drama

A World Series MVP's marriage crashes and his pastor is more than a role player in the drama

Celebrity divorces are rarely tidy and uncomplicated. This is especially true when one of the people in the marriage is alleged to have been sleeping with the couple’s marriage counselor.

Two more details: The marriage counselor was (1) both the couple’s pastor and (2) the leader of a charitable foundation funded by the jilted husband. Now, throw in the fact that the husband was, at the time, a Major League Baseball star — the 2016 World Series MVP — with the Chicago Cubs.

This is not, alas, your usual upbeat Bobby Ross, Jr., story about God and baseball. Several news operations have reported on this sad affair, but the key report ran, logically enough, at The Chicago Tribune. The headline: “Ben Zobrist lawsuit alleges his pastor had an affair with his wife Julianna and defrauded the former Chicago Cubs player’s charity.

The story was written by a reporter who covers “sports pop culture with a Chicago focus as well as a range of other topics from the White Sox to fantasy football.” As you would expect, this story misses one or two religion details that many readers would have liked to have known. Here’s some crucial material right up top:

The lawsuit against Byron Yawn, CEO of the Nashville-area counseling firm Forrest Crain and Co., seeks $6 million in punitive and compensatory damages through a jury trial.

According to the complaint filed May 6 in Nashville Circuit Court, Yawn, while acting as the Zobrists’ marital counselor and executive director of Ben Zobrist’s charity, “usurped the ministerial-counselor role, violated and betrayed the confidence entrusted to him by the plaintiff, breached his fiduciary duty owed to the plaintiff and deceitfully used his access as counselor to engage in an inappropriate sexual relationship with the plaintiff’s wife.”

Yawn’s attorney, Christopher Bellamy of Nashville-based Neal and Harwell, told the Tribune …: “At the end of the day, a woman has the right to choose who she wants to be with. We’re in the middle of litigation, so I can’t really comment further at this point, but that’s what it boils down to.”

Yes, that certainly raises moral questions, in terms of the actions of high-profile conservative Christians. But that is not the stuff of journalism discussions.

I did, however, want to know more about this pastor and the church at the heart of this drama.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Religion ghosts in Bill and Melinda Gates split? There are some old questions to ask ...

Religion ghosts in Bill and Melinda Gates split? There are some old questions to ask ...

I have written quite a few headlines over the past four decades or so and read a kazillion more. Still, I have to admit that a news headline the other day in The Washington Post stopped me in my tracks: “If Bill and Melinda Gates can’t make a marriage work, what hope is there for the rest of us?

I immediately assumed this was some kind of first-person commentary.

However, it appears that this was a news feature — using the break-up of one of the world’s richest couples as a chance to examine the marital stress caused by COVID-19 lockdowns, life changes for aging Baby Boomers and the resulting need for professional counseling. Here’s the overture:

Just imagine how many hours of couples therapy you can afford when you’re among the world’s richest people. Or the shared sense of purpose you could forge while raising three children and running a $50 billion charitable foundation with your spouse.

Then imagine that it’s not enough to keep you together.

In announcing their decision to divorce, Bill and Melinda Gates cited the work they’d done on their marriage, and a mutual sense of pride in their children and philanthropy. But, they said in identical joint statements shared on Twitter, “we no longer believe we can grow together as a couple in this next phase of our lives.”

Now, for millions of Americans it would be logical to ask another question whenever a couple faces a crisis of this kind. It’s a kind of two-edged sword question that can be carefully worded as follows: Did religions and-or moral issues have anything to do with the break-up of this marriage?

All of the initial coverage that I saw didn’t include any religion/moral information at all. There is a chance that these questions will be asked in the days ahead, now that the Wall Street Journal and other publications have added a rather problematic name to the cast list in this drama — Jeffrey Epstein.

However, I had already opened a digital file folder on this topic because my pre-Internet (think dead tree pulp) files on this couple included a lengthy 1997 Time magazine feature with this headline: “In Search of the Real Bill Gates.” This long-ago article included several details of interest, including at least two of the religious-moral nature. We will take the less famous of these two details first:


Please respect our Commenting Policy