Politics

, , , , , ,

Left and right cheer together, for a change, as U.S. Supreme Court defends religious liberty

, , , , , ,
Left and right cheer together, for a change, as U.S. Supreme Court defends religious liberty

Before putting his neck on the chopping block, King Charles I turned to his chaplain seeking personal peace after the chaos of the English Civil Wars.

The king was, on that infamous 1649 day, pondering heaven, hell and forgiveness.

“To show you that I am a good Christian," the king said, pointing to London Bishop William Juxon, "I hope there is a good man that will bear me witness that I have forgiven all the world, and even those in particular that have been the chief causers of my death. Who they are, God knows, I do not desire to know. God forgive them."

This isn't the kind of theology that ordinarily shapes U.S. Supreme Court decisions. Nevertheless, it was part of a litany of historical references during debates preceding a recent decision requiring Texas to grant a convicted murderer his Baptist pastor's audible prayers and comforting touch during his execution.

This was a rare moment in which activists on both sides of America's culture wars cheered for "religious liberty," a freedom that until recently didn't require cynical "scare quotes" that suggest uncertainty. This trend in First Amendment discourse has, for me, become the most important story I have covered during the third of a century -- as of this week -- in which I have written this national "On Religion" column.

The big question: Why did appeals to centuries of tradition work this time?

The condemned prisoner, John Ramirez, told the court he believed his pastor's "laying on of hands on him as he dies, and the vocalization of prayers and scripture, will assist his passing from life to death and will guide his path to the afterlife."

In his decision, Chief Justice John Roberts saluted the "rich history" of evidence supporting this prisoner's request "to have his pastor lay hands on him and pray over him during the execution. Both are traditional forms of religious exercise."


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

Podcast: Thoughts on a third of a century as a columnist (and a symbolic SCOTUS ruling)

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Podcast: Thoughts on a third of a century as a columnist (and a symbolic SCOTUS ruling)

This week marked a rather symbolic anniversary for my national “On Religion” column, which I have been writing now for (#GULP) a third of a century.

As you would imagine, I spend some time thinking about the subject for this week’s column: “Why 'religious liberty' has ended up inside quotation marks.” This column was also the hook for this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (CLICK HERE to tune that in).

Anyone who has followed my work with GetReligion and “On Religion” will not be surprised that I chose to write about the First Amendment and and a highly symbolic religious liberty case (no scare quotes there) at the U.S. Supreme Court.

But hold that thought. I’d like to walk through what are, for me, four symbolic columns I have written in the past, as I head into year No. 34.

That first column in 1988 was rather newsy: “Pat Robertson, evangelicals and the White House.” Here’s the lede on that:

On the morning before Easter, Pat Robertson stood in a pulpit under an American flag and a banner that read, "King of Kings, Lord of Lords."

Alas, change the name of the candidate and that still sounds rather relevant, considering the state of warfare inside American evangelicalism these days (see this must-read Richard Ostling post).

On the 10th anniversary of the column — that seemed like a long time, back then — I focused on a classic book by sociologist James Davison Hunter (“Culture Wars: The Struggle to Define America”) that has greatly influenced my work as a journalist and as a professor. The column opened by describing an interesting trend at political and religious rallies at that time:


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

Is evangelical Protestantism breaking into five factions in the United States of America?

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Is evangelical Protestantism breaking into five factions in the United States of America?

Let’s start with two quotes.

A weary grievance from the Bible: "Of making many books there is no end" (Ecclesiastes 12:12). The same can be said about endless journalistic articles trying to figure out what's with U.S. evangelical Protestantism in the age of Donald Trump -- saith The Religion Guy himself.

"A successful political movement must incorporate both elites and the people. Only intermittently, however, has the American right been able to achieve such a synthesis. That is why its victories have been so tenuous." So writes Matthew Continetti in "The Right," his new opus about U.S. political conservatism.

The Guy has taken Continetti's view regarding U.S. conservative Protestantism and is far more interested in the gap between its intellectual elite and the grassroots than e.g. the current hullabaloo over The New York Times describing worship mingling with Trumpified politicking by a segment of evangelicals (see tmatt post here).

Which brings us to a must-read article entitled "The Five Emerging Factions in Evangelical Higher Education" by Daniel K. Williams (contact: 678-839-6034 and dkwillia@westga.edu). He's a history professor at the University of West Georgia and author of "God's Own Party" (2010), and "The Politics of the Cross" 2021).

Williams reflects on the recent convention of the Conference on Faith and History, an association of Christians who teach this subject at both secular and religious colleges. Crucial: He writes only about diverse camps among evangelical scholars and schools. But does this breakdown characterize U.S evangelicalism as a whole? He depicts five factions.

Culture warriors -- These political conservatives actively oppose socialism, critical race theory, feminism, the new sexuality and "cultural liberalism in all its forms," while embracing "Trumpist conservative partisanship." Such teachers at e.g. Bob Jones, Liberty and Regent Universities; Patrick Henry and Saint Andrews Colleges; and elsewhere rarely interact with "the rest of Christian academia."

Anti-nationalists -- These evangelicals mostly agree with the culture warriors on the issues but don't want to be "adjuncts of the Republican Party" and are anti-Trump.


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

Blue states vs. red ones: Does the New York Times team get why the two are parting?

, , , , , , , , , , ,
Blue states vs. red ones: Does the New York Times team get why the two are parting?

Recently I was talking with a friend who is homeschooling her daughter in the eastern part of Washington state, which is far more conservative than the Seattle area, where I live. She was agonizing over whether to return her child to public school.

She’s not afraid of Covid; Washington state was one of the most careful states on that score, and masks were mandated longer here than most other places. What she really feared was the state’s liberal sex ed law, passed when Covid was beginning to ravage the local population. Washington state was the first place in the nation to have Covid, but what was our governor, Jay Inslee, doing at the time? Pushing through a graphic sex ed curriculum. The floor debate on it went on until 2 a.m., as I described here.

A recall election to zero out the curriculum failed.

Which is all to say that when the New York Times ran a piece headlined, “New Laws Moves Blue and Red States Further Apart,” it didn’t mention some of the more obvious reasons why people are walking away. Guess what? Many of these reasons are linked to issues are linked to morality, culture and religion.

SACRAMENTO — After the governor of Texas ordered state agencies to investigate parents for child abuse if they provide certain medical treatments to their transgender children, California lawmakers proposed a law making the state a refuge for transgender youths and their families.

When Idaho proposed a ban on abortions that empowers relatives to sue anyone who helps terminate a pregnancy after six weeks, nearby Oregon approved $15 million to help cover the abortion expenses of patients from out-of-state.

The Idaho ban is slated to begin April 22, unless some federal judge knocks it down. Abortion clinics in Oregon, particularly Bend, are expecting a deluge, as the central Oregon clinic is the nearest one to Boise that has easy abortion access. (Other nearer cities, like Walla Walla, Wash., have a Planned Parenthood clinic, but that clinic doesn’t do abortions after 10 weeks. And clinics in Salt Lake City require a 72-hour waiting period.)


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

White evangelicals, again: New York Times urgently probes praise music on political right

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,
White evangelicals, again: New York Times urgently probes praise music on political right

At this point, it’s safe to say that some New York Times editors are still engaged in a passionate quest to find a large group of Americans to blame for the 2016 general-election victory of Donald Trump of Queens.

There’s an obvious answer: White evangelicals. And it’s certainly true that independent and, especially, Pentecostal Protestants played a strategic role in the shocking rise of Orange Man Bad. It’s also true that independent evangelicals, fundamentalists, charismatics and Pentecostal believers have played high-profile roles in video-friendly pro-Trump events, including the January 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol to hunt down Vice President Mike Pence — a mainstream White evangelical if there ever was one.

However, White evangelical voters were not the crucial Rust Belt voters that put Trump in the White House, although Latino evangelicals and charismatics were a major force in Florida

Therefore, what are discerning religion-beat readers supposed to make of that long, vague Times sermon that ran the other day with this dramatic double-decker headline? (Sorry for the delay getting to this piece, but surgery slowed me down last week.)

The Growing Religious Fervor in the American Right: ‘This Is a Jesus Movement’

Rituals of Christian worship have become embedded in conservative rallies, as praise music and prayer blend with political anger over vaccines and the 2020 election.

Here is one strong opinion that is drawn — with his permission — from an email I received from Kenneth Woodward, for decades the religion-beat pro at Newsweek and the author of “Getting Religion: Faith, Culture, and Politics from the Age of Eisenhower to the Ascent of Trump.”

This is the most naive religion story I’ve read in decades and illustrates precisely why the Times still does not get religion. … Only the Times could publish a piece as misinformed as this one.

Why does Woodward think that? To some degree, he is blaming a newspaper story for lacking the kind of depth seen in interpretive magazine pieces produced during the glory years of religion-beat work at Newsweek and at Time by GetReligion patriarch Richard Ostling. For a short period of time, Emma Green was allowed to do similar work at the Atlantic.

Depth is an issue here. But this Times feature is quite long and has lots of room for anecdotes, when what is missing is a hard skeleton of facts that link (if this is possible) these vague trends and illustrations to actual denominations, publishing houses, parachurch groups, think tanks and academic institutions at the heart of American evangelicalism.


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

Five faith facts about the life of Ketanji Brown Jackson, the first Black woman at SCOTUS

, , , , , , , , , , ,
Five faith facts about the life of Ketanji Brown Jackson, the first Black woman at SCOTUS

Faith. It’s an important part of Ketanji Brown Jackson’s story.

Here are five religion facts about the 51-year-old judge who on Thursday became the first Black woman confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court:

1. Jackson will be “the first-ever nondenominational Supreme Court justice,” as Christianity Today’s Kate Shellnutt points out.

2. She’ll become the second current Protestant on the court (along with Neil Gorsuch), joining six Catholics (Samuel Alito, Amy Coney Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh, John Roberts, Sonia Sotomayor and Clarence Thomas) and one Jewish justice (Elena Kagan), according to Christianity Today’s Megan Fowler.

But Religion News Service’s Jack Jenkins tweets that Jackson will be “the only current Supreme Court justice who publicly IDsas Protestant.” “Gorsuch attended an Episcopal church before joining SCOTUS,” Jenkins explains, “but grew up Catholic and how he personally IDs is unclear.”

3. Jackson “has put her religious faith front, center — and vague,” notes The Associated Press’ Peter Smith. “She’s spoken strongly of the role of her faith in her life and career but hasn’t gotten into the specifics of that commitment.”

RNS’ Adelle Banks offers more details on Jackson’s past statements about her faith in God.

4. At a hearing last month, Jackson was pressed on her faith by Sen. Lindsey Graham, a Republican from South Carolina, ReligionUnplugged.com’s Hamil R. Harris reports.

The Deseret News’ Kelsey Dallas recounts this exchange between Graham and Jackson:

“On a scale of 1 to 10, how faithful would you say you are in terms of religion? I go to church probably three times a year so that speaks poorly of me. Do you attend church regularly?,” Graham said.

Jackson declined to give a rating, noting that she worried about the message doing so would send to Americans watching at home.


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

Podcast: Can the AP Stylebook team slow down the creation of new Godbeat 'F-bombs'?

, , , , , , , , ,
Podcast: Can the AP Stylebook team slow down the creation of new Godbeat 'F-bombs'?

Words matter, especially when covering a topic as complex as religion.

That concept has, of course, been one of the core doctrines of GetReligion for nearly 20 years and it was the hook for this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (CLICK HERE to tune that in). This episode discussed a few of the religion-language changes in the evolving Associated Press Stylebook — an update project that involved both Godbeat patriarch Richard Ostling and Bobby “Are the Rangers playing today?” Ross, Jr.

I am gung-ho about making stylebook improvements. Carry on!

But I have my doubts about whether these changes will have a major impact, when it comes to the butchering of religious language, information and history when complex religion subjects are covered by reporters (especially political-desk stars) with zero training and experience on this beat. After all, we already know that religion-news coverage radically improves when editors hire qualified writers and editors.

Thus, The Big Question, for my entire career, has been: Why don’t more newsroom managers show respect for religion news by hiring religion-beat pros?

So, will the improved AP bible help? Well, consider the many GetReligion posts over the years praising the stylebook entry for “fundamentalist,” while noting that way too many reporters ignore that advice. Why does this happen? Here is some material from an “On Religion” column I wrote on the topic (“Define fundamentalist, please”). First, the classic stylebook language:

"fundamentalist: The word gained usage in an early 20th century fundamentalist-modernist controversy within Protestantism. ... However, fundamentalist has to a large extent taken on pejorative connotations except when applied to groups that stress strict, literal interpretations of Scripture and separation from other Christians.

"In general, do not use fundamentalist unless a group applies the word to itself."

Alas, for reporters and academics, one person’s "evangelical" is another's "fundamentalist” and “fundamentalist” is basically and F-bomb.


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

Ukraine war savagery will loom over this year's World Council of Churches Assembly

, , , , , , , ,
Ukraine war savagery will loom over this year's World Council of Churches Assembly

If Russian invaders continue their current aggression, how much of Ukraine will be turned to rubble and how many innocent civilians will be dead by August 31?

That's opening day for the 11th global Assembly in the 74-year history of the World Council of Churches (WCC). COVID willing, the delegates from 352 Protestant and Orthodox church bodies will be joined by thousands of observers, including Catholic and evangelical Protestant representatives.

The WCC has gotten little media ink in North America during recent times, but 2022 sparks obvious news interest in how the organization deals with the Ukraine imbroglio at the Assembly, which runs through Sept. 8 in Karlsruhe, Germany.

Media that do original international reporting and have the money should be laying plans to staff the event, which The Guy knows from covering the 1975, 1983 and 1998 Assemblies supplies numerous trend stories and features alongside the spot news. Reporters unable to attend in person should be lining up contacts to help interpret the goings-on long distance.

This is a critical moment for the WCC, Orthodoxy and global Christian unity. The Russian Orthodox Church, some of whose leaders have made public statements hacking Vladimir Putin's war, is by far the WCC's biggest member — claiming 113.5 million parishioners plus another 30 million in its Ukraine jurisdiction and with ties elsewhere. That compares with the WCC's reported over-all church constituency of 580 million.

On Sunday, former Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams all but demanded that the WCC expel the Russian Orthodox Church from membership:

“The riot act has to be read. When a church is actively supporting a war of aggression, failing to condemn nakedly obvious breaches in any kind of ethical conduct in wartime, then other churches have the right to raise the question and challenge it — to say, unless you can say something effective about this, something recognizably Christian, we have to look again at your membership.”

Also last week, Bishop Rob Schenck of America's Dietrich Bonhoeffer Institute in Washington, D.C., took to Religion News Service to promote a Ukraine petition campaign. It urges the WCC to expel the Russian Orthodox from membership over Moscow Patriarch Kirill's "unholy compact" with Russian dictator Putin.


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

Naw! Nobody in the Title IX wars is asking LGBTQ questions about religious schools

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Naw! Nobody in the Title IX wars is asking LGBTQ questions about religious schools

Every now and then, I finish reading a major-media news story and I think: Wait a minute. There’s a massive hole here (and one that’s going to produce all kinds of news headlines). Didn’t anyone notice?

In this case, we are talking about another story involving a head-on collision between the First Amendment and the evolving doctrines of the Sexual Revolution. The battleground is the hyper-tense world of higher education. The Washington Post headline, in this case: “New Title IX rules set to assert rights of transgender students.”

We will get to the overture in a moment. But can you spot the “hole” that is sort-of mentioned in this background paragraph which is buried way down in the Post report?

Title IX is a 1972 law that bars discrimination on the basis of sex in any educational program or activity that receives federal money. Schools found in violation risk losing federal aid. Advocates have long held that this definition rightfully includes discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.

OK. Does “any educational program or activity that receives federal money” include student-loan programs?

If so, maybe this story should have at least mentioned the 7,000 or so religious colleges and universities in this land? I mean, is there any chance that LGBTQ activists are going to challenge the religious liberty claims of these schools, many of which are explicitly doctrine-defined voluntary associations?

With that in mind, read the top of this feature at The Conversation: “What is the religious exemption to Title IX and what’s at stake in LGBTQ students’ legal challenge?”

While federal law shields most U.S. students from gender and sexual orientation discrimination, an estimated 100,000 LGBTQ students at religious institutions do not have the same protections.

Under a religious exemption provision, scores of colleges and universities can – and do – discriminate on the basis of someone’s sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression.

A class action lawsuit now challenges that discrimination.


Please respect our Commenting Policy