Occasionally we’ll see stories where video games and religion collide, where a game might feature religion or a country might ban certain games if deemed religiously offensive.

For instance, one of my favorite stories includes one from last year about how a company hired a group to protest Dante’s Inferno, paying them to hold signs such as “Hell is not a Video Game” and “Trade in Your PlayStation for a PrayStation.” Believable, right?

Now we have a case where a group is trying to rate games for an entire religious body. Kotaku, a video game blog in the Gawker network, posts this interesting tidbit about how a group in the Middle East has launched a ratings system for games based on the tenets of the Islamic faith.

This makes it a world first, a system aimed at transcending national borders and laws and appealing directly to the parents and guardians of Muslims all over the world, regardless of which country they live in or which laws they live under.

The ratings body is called the Entertainment Software Rating Association, and “rates the content of…games based on parameters such as violence, promoting tobacco or drugs, sexual diversity [and] nudity”, according to a release issued by the group. As a result, “the rating system is designed based on the culture, society and the special values of Islam”.

What’s unclear is how these ratings will differ from the Entertainment Software Rating Board. For instance, when I look at the back of Mass Effect 2, it says that it’s rated Mature for blood, drug reference, sexual content, strong language and violence. The post’s author Luke Plunkett notes this and explains how it might differ.

“The approach of Islam is based on Human being innateness “Al Fitra”, and the most important innate trends are truth, virtue, benevolence, excellence tendency, innovation and creativity” he told attendants at the Dubai World Game Expo yesterday. “That’s why we made sure that ESRA team are proficient in these areas; Religion, Psychopathology, Educational psychology, Social psychology, Sociology of the family, Family Sociology, Emotional Psychology, Family therapy and Educational technology.”

As a freshly-launched initiative, there’s little other information on ESRA, though you’d imagine that it will mainly operate as an online reference for Muslim parents. That said, if ESRA ratings can be printed off on stickers and handed out to retailers in the relevant regions, there’s no reason it couldn’t also be used on game boxes not just in Islamic countries, but in any area there would be enough Muslim customers to make it worth their while.

The National, a government-owned newspaper in Abu Dhabi, published a report with a few examples of how it will assess the minimum age for each game: 6, 12, 15, 18 or 25.

Several games have fallen foul of regional moral standards in recent years. The Grand Theft Auto series, for example, was banned because it depicted prostitution, gambling and alcohol.

Dr Minaei said there were games that depicted Muslims as terrorists, while others were frightening for younger players.

He said the top age bracket was necessary because “there is a difference between an 18-year-old Muslim and a 25-year-old”. The latter, he said, “is more than likely married and some games are more suitable towards married people”.

After a little searching, it appears that the Entertainment Software Rating Association has been around for a few years now as the governmental rating system used in Iran. So is this group trying to branch out beyond Iran and become the definitive ratings system for all of Islam? Perhaps other reporters might do a little digging and find out whether this might have any impact on the gaming industry.

Cultures are sensitive to games, so occasionally you might see a game altered for a specific context. For instance, the use of the name “brahmin” was banned in India from Fallout 3. A few years ago, millions of copies of a game called Little Big Planet were withdrawn from warehouses after portions of the Koran were found in the accompanying music. As tmatt previously noted, “It does appear that ideas, yes, and beliefs, often have consequences—even in the digital world of virtual reality.”

Last year when late-term abortion provider George Tiller was killed inside his church, the media devoted many stories to late-term abortions. One of the things that I noted at the time was that I erroneously believed there were only three men in the country willing to abort late-term and full-term fetuses: Tiller, LeRoy Carhart and Warren Hern. This was based on the claims of the men themselves, which were repeated by many in the media.

So, for instance, the Los Angeles Times’ Robin Abcarian wrote:

Tiller had been the only abortion provider in Wichita, Kan., and his family’s decision to close the facility leaves only two other clinics in the country that perform late-term abortions.

The story repeated the claim. The Washington Post handled it better, I thought, by citing a 2001 survey of a few states saying that only a handful of abortion clinics and doctors were willing to perform late-term abortions.

Today the same reporter — Rob Stein — has a story about one of these doctors offering his services for women whose unborn children are closer to birth in Germantown, Maryland:

A Nebraska doctor who is one of the few in the country to perform abortions late in a pregnancy is planning to begin offering the controversial procedures at a clinic in Germantown, Md., an official said Tuesday. …

Only a handful of doctors perform abortions in late pregnancy, and Carhart has been the target of antiabortion protests.

I had happened to read a link to a much more recent survey than the 2001 cited by Stein in his reports last year. It appeared at the pro-life news site LifeNews. It cited a 2008 report, based on 2005 data, from The Guttmacher Institute. That institute used to be Planned Parenthood’s research arm, although it’s now independent of the country’s largest abortion provider. Anyway, the 2008 study indicates that they found 1,787 abortion doctors. Only 20 percent offer abortions after 20 weeks gestation, and only 8 percent offer abortions after 24 weeks. I think the earliest a baby has survived is around 21 weeks gestation.

Here are the goods from the Guttmacher Institute report:

Gestational limits. Most providers have lower and upper gestational limits for abortion services, and some women may have difficulty finding a provider if they seek an abortion too early or too late in pregnancy. For example, some providers will not perform an abortion if they cannot see the gestational sac on an ultrasound scan, which usually is not possible until 4-5 weeks after a woman’s last menstrual period.

Forty percent of providers in 2005 offered abortions at four or fewer weeks since the woman’s last menstrual period, about the same proportion as in 2001 (37%). The proportion of providers offering services increases with gestation and peaks—at 96%—at eight weeks. Sixty-seven percent of facilities offered at least some second-trimester abortion services (13 weeks or later). Twenty percent of providers offered abortions after 20 weeks, and only 8% at 24 weeks; comparable figures for 2001 were 24% and 13%, respectively.

So that means that some 350 doctors perform abortions after 20 weeks and more than 140 perform after 24 weeks.

LifeNews notes:

Mary Balch, an attorney who handle state legislation for the National Right to Life Committee, says the numbers are important because mainstream media outlets have attempted to make it appear there are very few practitioners willing to do late or late-term abortions.

“In an interview with Colorado abortionist Warren Hern published online November 5, 2010, Time Magazine perpetuated the prevalent myth that there are few, if any abortionists who perform abortions late in pregnancy,” she told LifeNews.com. “The Washington Post’s Rob Stein also furthered the myth in a November 10 piece saying that Carhart is ‘is one of the few in the country to perform abortions late in pregnancy.’”

“The truth is, abortions in the fifth month of pregnancy and later are widely available,” she added.

It does seem odd. If you have more than 350 doctors performing abortions after 20 weeks and another 140-plus doing it after 24 weeks, that should be mentioned in news stories. And if reporters are using “late-term” to refer to babies who are even closer to birth, that should be clarified, too. I’ve heard of “late-term” referring to abortions after 20 weeks but also to abortions after 12 or 16 weeks. I’m not familiar with it being used to describe abortions on even older fetuses. Anyway, the abortion debate can get awfully euphamistic and it helps to be absolutely clear about what gestational age we’re talking about.

Yes, I know, I know, I know.

I am a horrible Christian traditionalist (Eastern Orthodox, actually) who cares about liturgical traditions that are not good for the global economy. I get spooked or even angry when I hear a reggae-musak version of “Here Comes Santa Claus” over the speakers in a hamburger joint and it isn’t even Nativity Lent (think Advent) yet.

And then there’s THIS. It’s brilliant, but also kind of sad.

So I recognize that the following Associated Press business report is inevitable and, in fact, it’s an annual event. The question, for me: Why is the Los Angeles Times running this it on Nov. 29?

Here is the oh-so-familiar opening of the report:

In the unlikely event that your Christmas list this year includes every item mentioned in “The 12 Days of Christmas,” be prepared to pay nearly $100,000.

Buying the 364 items repeated in all the song’s verses — from 12 drummers drumming to a partridge in a pear tree — would cost $96,824, an increase of 10.8% over last year, according to the annual Christmas price index compiled by PNC Wealth Management.

So you might want to try for just one of everything. That would cost $23,439, or 9.2% more than last year.

The 27th annual holiday index has historically mirrored the national consumer price index, but not this year. The Christmas index grew 9.2% from last year, compared with just a 1.1% increase in the much broader consumer index.

Much of this is due to surging gold prices, yada, yada, yada. And the cost of hiring nine ladies dancing — presumably these are unionized dancers — is up to $6,294.03. Couldn’t you just get nine ladies to volunteer from your trendy local parish’s liturgical dance team?

But here is what I want to know from GetReligion readers, especially the newsroom professionals: When are the 12 days of Christmas, the real ones? Does anyone know? Does this basic fact even matter? (We are talking, by the way, about the Western calendar, not observances in, oh, Russia or parts of the Middle East. I’m not asking an Orthodox question, here.)

Yes, I realize that some media outlets are already throwing the term around. I think some cable channel started 12 holiday movies in a row, like “Elf,” before Thanksgiving. Ignore that, please.

In an AP story such as this, does the reporter even need to mention the real 12 days? What about media coverage of alleged “12 days” events that do not take place during the real 12-day Christmas season? Do the facts matter at all?

Oh, one more thing. Please feel free to send us, during the next month or so, any really good or really bad stories that you see about the 12-day Christmas season.

What’s a bad story? You’ll know it when you see it. No “War on Christmas” stories, please, unless some mall decides to arrest people for caroling during the actual Christmas season.

Last month Southern Baptist Seminary President Albert Mohler reviewed The Subtle Body: The Story of Yoga in America. While he gave the book a favorable review, he used the review as an opportunity to discuss how Christianity and Hinduism differ and why that’s important. Peter Smith at the Louisville Courier-Journal highlighted Mohler’s review and it created a bit of a firestorm. The Associated Press even ran a story, which I dinged for failing to quote any Hindus on the matter, much less Hindus who agree with Mohler that yoga is a Hindu practice.

Paul Vitello at the New York Times mentioned the controversy in his length report headlined “Hindu Group Stirs a Debate Over Yoga’s Soul.” Here’s how the article begins:

Yoga is practiced by about 15 million people in the United States, for reasons almost as numerous — from the physical benefits mapped in brain scans to the less tangible rewards that New Age journals call spiritual centering. Religion, for the most part, has nothing to do with it.

But a group of Indian-Americans has ignited a surprisingly fierce debate in the gentle world of yoga by mounting a campaign to acquaint Westerners with the faith that it says underlies every single yoga style followed in gyms, ashrams and spas: Hinduism.

The campaign, labeled “Take Back Yoga,” does not ask yoga devotees to become Hindu, or instructors to teach more about Hinduism. The small but increasingly influential group behind it, the Hindu American Foundation, suggests only that people become more aware of yoga’s debt to the faith’s ancient traditions.

That suggestion, modest though it may seem, has drawn a flurry of strong reactions from figures far apart on the religious spectrum. Dr. Deepak Chopra, the New Age writer, has dismissed the campaign as a jumble of faulty history and Hindu nationalism. R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, has said he agrees that yoga is Hindu — and cited that as evidence that the practice imperiled the souls of Christians who engage in it.

The question at the core of the debate — who owns yoga? — has become an enduring topic of chatter in yoga Web forums, Hindu American newspapers and journals catering to the many consumers of what is now a multibillion-dollar yoga industry.

You can read Mohler’s rather more nuanced argument here. The Indian-American group is called the Hindu American Foundation, which can be found here.

I love that the Times is covering this and not mocking the Hindus or others who discuss the debt yoga owes to Hinduism. I’m almost inure to the treatment that folks like Mohler receive at times like this but thought the short shrift to Hindus who advocate for yoga as a Hindu practice was a lost opportunity.

The article explains the origins of the viral debate about how much yoga owes to Hinduism. One of the readers who submitted the story thought the choice of “experts” arguing against yoga’s Hindu origins were a bit weak. They were, in fact, a Brooklyn yoga instructor and Deepak Chopra. We’re told that some religious historians think that yoga originated “in the Vedic culture of Indo-Europeans who settled in India in the third millennium B.C., long before the tradition now called Hinduism emerged.” But we’re not given any religious historians who agree with this. What’s more, the Vedic culture is strongly related to the origins of Hinduism, so some clarification about exactly where the argument differs would be helpful, too.

The reader notes:

Chopra is well-known author and spiritual leader, but is he the best person to comment on the origins of yoga? He’s an endocrinologist and self-help author, not a historian. Given his leading role in the “spiritual not religious” movement, doesn’t he have a vested interest in making sure that yoga is too closely associated with a specific religion?

Of course, the same conflict of interest might be argued for HAF. And the story is really about Chopra and the HAF’s conflict, and HAF’s campaign. I thought this was some great context:

Loriliai Biernacki, a professor of Indian religions at the University of Colorado, said the debate had raised important issues about a spectrum of Hindu concepts permeating American culture, including meditation, belief in karma and reincarnation, and even cremation.

“All these ideas are Hindu in origin, and they are spreading,” she said. “But they are doing it in a way that leaves behind the proper name, the box that classifies them as ‘Hinduism.’”

The debate has also secured the standing of the Hindu American Foundation as the pre-eminent voice for the country’s two million Hindus, said Diana L. Eck, a professor of comparative religion and Indian studies at Harvard. Other groups represent Indian-Americans’ interests in business and politics, but the foundation has emerged as “the first major national advocacy group looking at Hindu identity,” she said.

I was going to say that the article should probably note HAF’s Hindu Nationalist approach but Chopra is quoted arguing just that. Perhaps a bit more than a note would be helpful should Hindu identity get the additional coverage it deserves. Still, nice to see this article and the context it provides.

Three weeks ago, we enjoyed an interesting “Got news?” discussion concerning Florida Sen.-elect Marco Rubio’s religious affiliation.

That post delved into questions concerning a Roman Catholic politician who attends — and contributes tens of thousands of dollars to — a megachurch affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention.

Regular GetReligion reader and Tennessean religion writer Bob Smietana earned “Quip of the Month” honors (or should have) with this response to that post:

This is the perfect American religion story. Here’s a candidate who says he’s Catholic but goes to a Baptist church which doesn’t have Baptist in its name.

After the GetReligion post, religion reporter David Gibson wrote a compelling piece for Politics Daily. Still, it surprised me that none of the major dead-tree news organizations picked up the story, especially given Rubio’s high-profile status as a freshman senator-elect already mentioned as a potential presidential candidate.

Over the weekend, though, New York Times religion writer Mark Oppenheimer stepped into the fray with a “Beliefs” column headlined “Marco Rubio: Catholic or Protestant?” In terms of the key question itself, Oppenheimer’s column fails to deliver a definitive answer, instead relying — out of necessity — on the now-standard response from Rubio’s spokesman:

Of all the subjects that I write about for the Scripps Howard News Service, columns about trends in worship consistently generate some of the most intense responses from readers.

Nevertheless, it’s hard to say when a few anecdotes about changes in a few major churches constitute an actual news trend. If the Catholic Church revises the missal, that’s news. Change the Book of Common Prayer and that’s news. But how does one cover the diverse, sprawling world of megachurch Protestantism? How many high-def video screens and rock-show lighting systems does one need to create a national news story?

But CNN.com recently served up a legitimate story about a major worship trend, a story linked to the “worship wars” debates that have been growing for several decades.

There are all kinds of issues to debate about this story — which only shows that the subject is quite complex. But let’s not miss the fact that the story needed to be written in the first place. Here’s the top of the report:

No one has touched the organ at First United Methodist Church in Oakland, Neb., since last January. That’s when 80-year-old Pat Anderson played her last note as the small-town church’s volunteer organist, a post she held for 18 years.

“It was time for me to retire,” she said. When she did, there was nobody to step in. Two young women have taken over the musical duties for the 190-member congregation, but they play a digital piano — not the organ.

“There are some people who wish we had the organ still, but they face the reality that it just isn’t going to happen,” said the Rev. Richard Karohl.

First United’s struggle is indicative of a nationwide plight: There aren’t enough organists to fill all of the open church positions. Many of the stay-at-home moms who once volunteered as organists are working now, and fewer young people are studying the organ. Those who are training to be professionals aren’t interested in playing for small churches where the music program is limited to Sunday services and the pay is minimal — if there’s pay at all.

Once you’ve read the story, note that this issue is framed as a problem within the nation’s more liberal mainline Protestant churches. This is a story with roots. About two decades ago, there were stories about how many urban churches were losing their skilled organists and musicians because of the AIDS crisis.

Now, other factors are at play — including money. Many small mainline churches are getting even smaller, for a number of reasons. The people in the pews are also aging, which means that the audience for traditional church music is declining with the membership decline. The World War II era faithful are passing from the scene.

There are skilled musicians out there. But who can afford them?

“There’s a great supply [of organists] for the right kind of jobs,” said James Thomashower, executive director of the 18,000-member American Guild of Organists. Compared to 30 years ago, there are fewer trained organists — but they’re chasing fewer attractive positions. It’s a buyers’ market for churches with ambitious music programs.

“There are many, many highly qualified organists who would like to have a fine job on a fine instrument that pays a good wage,” Thomashower said.

That wage, according to the Guild, should be between $63,000 and $83,000 a year, including benefits, for a full-time organist with a bachelor’s degree in organ performance or sacred music.

This, in an era in which many mainline churches are struggling to even pay a decent salary-and-benefits package for a pastor. Is it easier and cheaper to use a piano, a volunteer “praise and worship” band or some other compromise? But pop/folk service music in aging mainline churches? That’s a recipe for, yes, worship wars.

So this story represents a good start in covering a major story. What’s next? For starters, CNN needs to fill the gaping hole caused by the lack of information about finances and membership issues in mainline churches. In other words, where did the jobs go?

Meanwhile, note that this report does not address what is happening in the new American mainline, which is the world of independent evangelical and Pentecostal churches. That’s where the numbers are, today. And, trust me, there are worship wars stories in those flocks, as well. Go for it.

Photo: From GovernmentAuctions.org

Twitter has its faults but it’s an amazing way to follow major world events in real time. Take the situation in the Koreas. North Korea shelled South Korea’s Yeonpyeong Island a few days ago, in a deadly artillery attack. The United States and South Korea took up position in the Yellow Sea today for joint military exercises. Journalists have been told they should leave the island. North Korea has threatened another “merciless” attack.

As soon as the initial attack happened, news spread on Twitter long before it was broadcast on cable outlets. Still, it’s great to have a full-length article that explains the context and larger issues surrounding the latest conflict. This Associated Press report, for instance, reminds readers that North Korea killed 46 South korean sailors earlier this year when it attacked a warship.

Here’s how the article ends:

Hours earlier, the rattle of new artillery fire from North Korea sent residents, journalists, police and troops scrambling for cover on Yeonpyeong Island. None of the rounds landed on the island, military officials said, but the incident showed how tense the situation remains.

Saying they could not guarantee the journalists’ safety, South Korea’s Defense Ministry sent a ship to ferry them off the island but bad weather forced them to cancel the evacuation. About 380 people, including 28 islanders and 190 journalists, remained on Yeonpyeong on Sunday, officials said.

A similar burst of artillery fire Friday occurred just as the U.S. military’s top commander in the region, Gen. Walter Sharp, was touring Yeonpyeong Island. No shells landed anywhere in South Korean territory.

Calls for tougher action made way Sunday for pleas for peace among about 150 South Koreans who turned out for a vigil Sunday evening in a Seoul plaza, huddling with candles in paper cups and chanting, “Give us peace!”

“It was very shocking,” said Kang Hong-koo, 22, a student. “I’m here to appease the souls of the people who were killed in the North Korean attack. I hope the current tense situation is alleviated quickly.”

As the reader who submitted this story notes “Wow, is there enormous ghost dropped into our laps at the end of this story.” And he’s right. What religious tradition is the student referring to? Was the vigil for that particular religion or was it interfaith? And it also suggests all sorts of other angles to explore. For instance, what are the religious differences between North and South Korea? And do they play any role in the conflict here?

It’s been quite a few years since I read William McGowan’s Coloring the News: How Political Correctness Has Corrupted American Journalism. It was a surprisingly popular book considering the book does nothing more than discuss some of the basics of modern media bias.

McGowan was editor of Washington Monthly and has been published at the Washington Post and the New York Times Magazine, among other places. He’s conservative but speaks about journalism as someone who loves journalism. This made his critique much better than a lot of what passes for media criticism.

So his last book was about how many in the media approach news gathering with political correctness in mind. This is why it’s not uncommon to see a journalist seek help on a story by asking if anyone knows of a Hispanic woman with a college degree who is struggling to get a business off the ground while managing a healthy work-life balance. I always think, when I come across such requests, “Aren’t we supposed to report first and frame the story later?” But these things happen all the time and, sad to say, I don’t think McGowan’s book did anything to stop it. At least people are more informed about how political correctness can bias the news.

Anyway, McGowan is out with a new book focusing on coverage problems at the New York Times. It’s titled Gray Lady Down: What the Decline and Fall of the New York Times Means for America.

The Daily Caller ran a brief interview with him. McGowan begins by saying journalism is one of America’s most important democratic institutions, that the Times is central to our policy debates and our common culture, that it used to represent the gold standard of American journalism, but that it’s been tarnished. He says his book seeks to understand what policies and personalities are responsible:

3. Is there an individual or a group of individuals who deserve the lion’s share of the blame for the decline of the New York Times?

I think the current publisher, Arthur Sulzberger Jr., who has been in control now for almost 20 years bears the most responsibility. Granted, in the last few years, he and other news executives, at the Times and in the news industry at large, have been dealt a bad hand with loss of revenues from the competition of the Internet. But Sulzberger has played that hand quite badly, allowing ideology to subtract from the paper’s credibility and gravitas. And unfortunately, the rot at the top is not going away short of a change of leadership. Yes, the Times has made efforts at reform, especially since the Blair scandal and other institutional embarrassments. But like a recovering addict who pledges sobriety, they’ve fallen off the wagon with too much regularity and its reform initiatives have had only spotty success.

4. What are the greatest problems you see with the New York Times’ coverage of issues today? And is there a particular area where they are especially bad?

The Times has been particularly bad on race, immigration, the growth of Islam in America, gay rights (especially gay marriage), the War on Terror and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The common thread is a mentality defined by a kind of “punitive liberalism” which holds that America at its core is somehow morally tainted and needs to atone — to “reclaim its soul” as one of its op-ed columnists put it.

It’s not news that the paper has had trouble with coverage of gay rights. Years ago the paper’s public editor brutally referred to the coverage as “cheerleading.” But it is interesting to see criticism of the coverage of Islam. In later questions, he says the Times is too ready to make accusations of “Islamophobia” when discussing the “War on Terror” and too resistant to report on some aspects of Islamic culture, particularly those dealing with women, that are at odds with progressive American culture.

So what do you think? Has your view of The New York Times changed over the years? What you think is best and worst about the Times? Do you still think it’s the gold standard of American journalism? Why or why not? And what do you think about its overall coverage of Islam?

If you’re a college football fan, you’re familiar with Cam Newton: He’s the star Auburn quarterback who — for now— leads most Heisman polls. This afternoon, his unbeaten, second-ranked Tigers face the No. 11 Alabama Crimson Tide in an Iron Bowl with national title ramifications.

You also know, though, that Newton has been making headlines for more than his on-field prowess. And not in a positive way. As ESPN.com’s excellent college football columnist Ivan Maisel noted:

Newton may be the best player in the country, but in the last month Newton and his father have had their reputations sullied by accusations that Cecil Newton shopped his son’s talent for money. That’s the kind of snack on which opposing fans feast.

Now you may be wondering — especially if you haven’t followed the news concerning the NCAA investigation — what in the world this has to do with religion. Oh, we need a GetReligion angle? Even on the day after Thanksgiving? Tough crowd.

But since you asked: The quarterback’s father is the pastor of a small Pentecostal church. Over the past few weeks, the church has figured into news reports on allegations that Cecil Newton sought $180,000 for his son to play football with Mississippi State. Those allegations raise the issue of whether the father received any financial incentive for his son to sign with Auburn, which would be a major violation of NCAA rules.

ESPN.com reported earlier this month:

Cecil Newton said the family received a letter from the NCAA “about a month ago” asking for financial statements. He said he submitted bank statements and records for the church where he is pastor, Holy Zion Center of Deliverance in Newnan, Ga., along with other records.

The church has been in the news in Coweta County, Ga., often in the past year. According to stories in The Times-Herald newspaper, Cecil Newton’s church was in danger of being demolished by order of the Newnan City Council in 2009 for failing to meet the city’s building code. One story said Cecil Newton told the council last September the building would be brought to code “inside of six months.” After numerous delays, extensions and compromises from the council, renovation work began last spring and The Times-Herald reported last week that the church is in compliance with Newnan’s building requirements.

“If you’ve ever seen our church, you’d know we don’t have any money,” said Cam Newton’s mother, Jackie. “We have nothing.”

Questions about the church prompted an NBC Sports blogger — perhaps in need of GetReligion remedial training — to remark a few days later:

Aside from the fact that the church name sounds like a cult, there would seem to be nothing spectacular about Cecil’s establishment.

The blogger’s comment gave me the distinct impression that he’s never read that headline-grabbing Pew Forum study from a few years ago on the rising tide of Pentecostalism. (That was an attempt at humor, by the way.) Seriously, though, the remark sent me on a Google search for any mainstream media coverage of the church. I was curious about the church and wanted to know more about its role in this. At the time — a couple of weeks ago — I couldn’t find anything beyond bare-bones mentions.

So I was pleased this week when the Old Gray Lady herself ran a piece with this headline:

Church Has Role In Newton Inquiry

From The New York Times’ story:

Newton, 50, is the bishop overseeing five small Pentecostal churches in Georgia, including the church here, where he is also pastor, and another in Savannah, which is led by his sister-in-law, Gail Norwood.

“He’s a very caring, very loving bishop,” Norwood said Sunday after a weekly service at her church, Holy Zion Holiness, attended by a dozen adults and a handful of children. “Bishop Newton and my sister, Jackie, have all our support.”

Newton took over as bishop of the churches about 10 years ago, after the death of Talmadge Wilder, who was the founder of their small denomination and Newton’s father-in-law. On Sunday, Norwood asked the congregation to pray for Cecil Newton and his family. After the service, she said the controversy had not disrupted the congregation. “We are at peace,” she said.

For relevant details, that’s a start. Unfortunately, that’s as deep as the story goes concerning Newton’s church and denomination (does it have a name?). The reference to an interview after a weekly service makes it appear that the reporter was present, but no observations or scenes from the service are included. Overall, this is just an extremely vague report that provides no real insight into what Newton or the churches he oversees believe.

Mainly, the story runs down what is known so far about the NCAA investigation, with bits and pieces concerning the church’s dealings with the city and the cost of its repairs sprinkled in. That information is important, but it’s not enough.

Want to know what the church itself is like? Readers must settle for this kind of detail:

Blandburg called the congregation close-knit. “To me, it feels like more of a family than any church that I’ve ever been to,” she said.

Oh, there’s also this:

Cecil Newton Sr. has proved to be a good role model for his children and others in the congregation, Blandburg said. “The kids that come from here are doing well.”

A very loving bishop. A close-knit church family. A good role model.

I give the Times credit for recognizing a key angle — the church — in the Newton saga. I just wish the paper had dug a whole lot deeper. This story produced a few positive yards, but it fell short of the end zone. Way short.

Every now and then, your GetReligionistas whine a bit when mainstream news publications publish stories that are full of religious reference, yet contain almost no facts about religion at all. Yes, I’m still thinking about this one at the moment, care of the Washington Post.

Some GetReligion readers like to suggest that, by leaving the religious elements of the story foggy, the editors believe that they are reaching out to readers who might not be comfortable with the religious specifics. You know, vague religion for an era of vaguely religious people.

Well, I can see the logic in that, sort of. We do live in a vaguely spiritual age.

But this is something like saying that the mainstream press should avoid the details of political stories, since we live in an era when an increasing number of Americans are not interested in the fine details and many have cynically tuned out politics altogether. Why mention the names and doctrines of the political parties anyway? Why get into the details of court decisions and all of those thick bundles of legislation?

I have always suspected that, for many editors, the fine details of religion are especially threatening and suspicious. After all, religion is supposed to be a totally private matter, so that editors can focus on important issues in the real world — like politics and sports. And we also know that religion is all about feelings and emotions, unlike the calm, logical, rational and factual world of political life. Yeah, right.

Why do I bring this up? Please read the following Seattle Times story, which I think is rather amazing. Then again, I have always been interested in the study of near-death experiences and related matters. Here’s the top of the story:

It would take an unusual man to decide, in a split second after witnessing a car crash, to crawl into the Subaru that had erupted into flames 8 feet high to try to save a little girl and her dad.

A week ago … that is what Kenny Johnson did. … Johnson, 40, was pulling out of the driveway, he says, when he saw a Ford Fusion heading north on the arterial at more than 60 mph. Then, there was the crash into cars waiting at a stoplight.

Johnson remembers seeing other witnesses hurry to the scene. But nobody went into the flames. “Everybody was kind of frozen,” he says.

He remembers talking to himself as he went into the Subaru: “Oh, my God, this car is gonna blow up and I’m going to be in it. Well, if does blow up, I guess I’m going straight to heaven because I’m trying to save that little girl.”

The little girl lived. The father — 37-year-old Andy Kotowicz — died three days later.

There are many crucial details that you need to read linked to the wreck and the father’s work with a company called Sub Pop. But eventually we reach the calmly reported details at the end of the story.

Days passed, and Johnson went back to his routine. That is, until Tuesday morning around 6, he says.

“My wife is next to me in bed. She’s sleeping. Everything is where it’s supposed to be,” says Johnson. “Then there is this man standing right by the bed. He says he needs help with a few things. I say, ‘OK.’

“Now, I know it’s him (Kotowicz) even though the only time I had seen him was at the accident, when he didn’t look, you know, normal. He says he wants me to give a message to his wife and to his daughter. That’s private, so I can’t tell you about that message.

“He also tells me to talk to the people at Sub Pop, he wants to let them know not to be mad at the driver that caused the accident. That’s his message.”

Johnson says that later that day, he went to the Sub Pop website, and there it was, a memorial photo of the man who had stood by his bed: Kotowicz.

Read it all, but you won’t learn anything else about that vision. You also will learn zippo about the faith of the man who received the vision or that of the deceased father who offered the message to his grieving family and offered words of forgiveness for the driver who killed him.

Details, details. Who needs them?

Is the story stronger without those few additional words that would have provided some context? What think ye?