Women

, , , , ,

Pink Sisters: AP offers a sensitive profile on the life of cloistered nuns

, , , , ,

This has been a big year for stories about nuns, probably at least partly because their numbers in America have fallen by more than two-thirds in 50 years. A story by the Associated Press this week on the Holy Spirit Adoration sisters is a late entry, but a searching, incisive one.

The story stands out because the order, often simply called the Pink Sisters for their rose-colored habits, locks itself inside cloisters, talking to the public only through grilles. As their ranks have dwindled, the sisters have decided to open a little to the outside world in hopes of interesting young women to join. In response, AP gives us an inside look at the 20 sisters in the Philadelphia convent, one of four in the U.S.

We learn of the order's birth in the Netherlands, and of its purpose: "perpetual adoration of the Blessed Sacrament, the consecrated bread they uphold as the body and blood of Christ." The article adds the reason for the pink habits: "to symbolize the joy the sisters feel honoring the Holy Spirit." No religious "ghosts," no cynicism. Just telling it as the sisters see it.

I was a bit put off by this paragraph:

It may come as a surprise to some that a group of 20 nuns live a contemplative, secluded life not far from Philadelphia’s famed museums, historic landmarks, and government. The sisters leave the cloister only for emergencies, such as medical appointments.

That veers close to a condescending anthropological approach, examining the quaint practices of backward communities.  If AP wanted to raise the issue of why people choose religious life over tourism hotspots or centers of power, it should have asked the sisters. They no doubt have their reasons.

But the article redeems itself and better in the following section, describing the sisters' humble lifestyle:


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

A small step for women in Saudi Arabia, one that might have something to do with Islam

, , , , , , , , ,

It's an issue that your GetReligionistas have faced quite a bit in the past year or two, the simple question: Do the leaders of the Islamic State do what they do because of an "ideology," a "theology" or both?

The answer, of course, is "both." With its culture-shaping combination of doctrine, tradition and Sharia law, Islam is a complete package. If you look at history, it's pretty hard to find much of a case for the separation of mosque and state. How has that worked out in Turkey?

The Washington Post foreign desk has a feature today that offers news consumers another chance to see this equation at work without, in this case, some of the more hellish details of news about ISIS. In this case we are talking about women's rights in Saudi Arabia, specifically the right for women to vote and even to run for office.

Once again, a key element of the cultural equation is missing in this report -- the actual teachings of Islam. You can see this is an issue at the top of the story, with female candidates talking about recycling, day care and libraries:

These are hardly the rallying cries of revolutionaries. But, in the ultraconservative context of Saudi Arabia, such appeals are breaking new ground: They are coming from some of the more than 900 female candidates in the kingdom’s first nationwide election in which women are able to run -- and vote.
The balloting Saturday for municipal council seats across the kingdom -- from Riyadh’s chaotic sprawl to oil-rich outposts -- marks a cautious step forward in a nation where social change does not come easy. It must always pass muster through a ruling system that may be Western-allied but still answers to a religious establishment very wary of bold moves, particularly regarding the role of women.
Women still cannot drive. They must receive a male guardian’s permission to travel abroad alone, and face other daily reminders of Saudi Arabia’s strict brand of Islam and the state’s punishing stance against any open dissent.


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

Mercy, media! Stop the snark about the pope's Holy Year!

, , , , , , , , ,

I like puns and wordplay as much as anyone else (actually, more than anyone else, to hear some of my friends complain). But when a joke is a little too obvious -- as when headlines quote Pope Francis saying that mercy "trumps" judgment -- then it gets, well, a little too obvious.

Two of them did it yesterday, in announcing the Jubilee Year of Mercy declared by Francis. It's supposed to be a year when the faithful gain forgiveness for sins and rededicate themselves to modeling Christian values. But at least two stories start with a nudge-nudge, wink-wink toward American politics:

"Opening the Holy Year, Francis says mercy always trumps judgment," says Crux, briefly forsaking its usual high road.

"Pope Francis: Mercy trumps moralizing as he launches Holy Year," echoes the Salt Lake Tribune, as the cap for a dismaying blend of fact and sarcasm.

Francis, of course, said nothing about presidential politics or the judgmental Donald Trump in launching the Year of Mercy. He merely reminded us to care about what he believes God cares about, and to act in accordance with our beliefs. And in grand papal imagery, he symbolized the opening of the year by pushing open a large bronze Holy Door at St. Peter's Basilica, allowing clergy and pilgrims alike to enter and find mercy.

After Crux pushed past its little dig at Trump, it did provide a nice article. It also focuses on a quote used in many other media reports:


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

What questions must reporters ask, when faith and violence are twisted together?

, , , , , , , , , , ,
What questions must reporters ask, when faith and violence are twisted together?

This may seem like a bit of a reach, but does anyone out there remember the story about the mad, misogynic gunman at the Planned Parenthood facility in Colorado Springs? Does the name Robert L. Deal, Jr., ring any horrible bells? How about Pastor Garrett Swasey?

Yes, at the time Issues Etc. host Todd Wilken and I were recording this week's "Crossroads" podcast (click here to tune that in), the Colorado Springs story was still being discussed -- a lot. We spent much of our time discussing the religious angles of that event and, in particular, what kinds of questions mainstream reporters needed to be asking if their goal was to find facts that would or would not link Deal to any particular religious group or tradition, let alone the mainstream pro-life movement.

While we were recording, Syed Rizwan Farook and his wife Tashfeen Malik were on the run after attacking Farook's co-workers at a holiday party at the San Bernardino County Health Department.

You will not hear about that in this podcast. However, you will hear us discussing PRECISELY the kinds of questions that reporters are now asking about the forces that may or may not have shaped the lives and worldviews of Farook and Malik.

What kinds of questions could possibly apply to both Deal and to this terrorist couple in San Bernardino? Well, questions like these.

How did they spent their time and money?


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

Glimpses inside lives of Farook and Malik: Stunning details on the road to ISIS

, , , , , , , , , ,

Law enforcement officials and reporters continue to plug new information into the still mysterious timeline of the lives of Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik, but now the emerging picture has been framed by one stunning, but not surprising, piece of information.

The bottom line: Deadly violence linked to ISIS has come to the United States, either through online poison or through contacts during visits to Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. The answer, of course, could be "both-and." Were two people -- alone -- really gong to use all of those pipe bombs and thousands of round of ammunition, while taking care of a 6-month-old baby?

Early on, reporters (and law officials, one can assume) were surprised to find little online evidence that Farook and Malik existed. Now it's clear -- in another sign of premeditation and planning -- that they had attempted to wipe their cyber slates clean.

But that's almost impossible, which led to today's big revelation. Here is the CNN link:

Authorities are officially investigating the San Bernardino, California, massacre as "an act of terrorism," FBI official David Bowdich said Friday.
Bowdich said a number of pieces of evidence pushed authorities to launch a terrorism investigation. He noted some phone conversations between at least one of the San Bernardino shooters and others are being investigated by federal officials. ...
Investigators think that as the San Bernardino, California, massacre was happening, female shooter Tashfeen Malik posted a pledge of allegiance to ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi on Facebook, three U.S. officials familiar with the investigation told CNN. Malik's post was made on an account with a different name, one U.S. official said.

Several major newsrooms have now published long features built on emerging information about Farook and the still very mysterious figure that is Malik, his wife. In addition to CNN, that includes The New York Times, The Washington Post and an unusually straightforward news piece at The Daily Beast.

Compared with earlier coverage, it is striking how much of the new information that is emerging is linked to religion and, in particular, the degree to which Farook was known as a devout, practicing Muslim -- while also leaving clues that he may have believed that he was now practicing the faith on another level and might need to leave America.


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

San Bernardino again: Early facts, lots of questions and a new mother with an AR-15

, , , , , , , ,

If you look up a list of things that women in Saudi Arabia are not allowed to do, you will find several issues that are frequently discussed in the press. Women are not, for example, allowed to drive cars or, to a large degree, compete in sports. Many news consumers would know that Saudi women are not supposed to leave their houses without being accompanied by a "male guardian."

Now, after the San Bernardino massacre, it might be appropriate to ask this question. Would a woman from Saudi Arabia, or with some tie to that kingdom, be allowed to do military style training with an assault weapon and even explosive devices?

Consider this recent Associated Press update about 28-year-old Syed Rizwan Farook and his wife Tashfeen Malik, 27:

The suspect in the Southern California shooting that left 14 dead traveled to Saudi Arabia earlier this year and returned with a wife.
Co-worker Patrick Baccari says Syed Farook was gone for about a month in the spring. When he came back word got around Farook had been married, and the woman he described as a pharmacist joined him shortly afterward. The couple had a baby later this year.
Baccari says the reserved Farook showed no signs of unusual behavior, although he grew out his beard several months ago.

Various reports agree that Farook was a "very religious" Muslim, but they also note that the couple appeared to be living a "modern life" and -- in a phrase that keeps showing up -- they were "living the American dream." Was this life a cover story?


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

An Advent miracle? Check the fine details in the baby in a Queens manger story

, , , , , , ,

Why a purple towel?

If you have followed the news online in the past day or so, you have probably seen reports about the newborn baby that was left -- umbilical chord still attached -- in a manger scene inside a church in Queens.

It has been interesting to follow the coverage as it developed, with a strong burst of holiday sentiment from news producers everywhere who have been quick to proclaim, "It's a Christmas miracle!"

Ah, but there are some intriguing fine details in this story that are worth pondering. Let's start with an early Reuters report, as circulated by Religion News Service. This is pretty much the whole story:

NEW YORK (Reuters) -- A newborn with his umbilical cord still attached was found lying in a manger at a New York church, police said on Tuesday.
At Holy Child Jesus Church in the borough of Queens on Monday, the custodian found the crying infant wrapped in towels in the indoor nativity scene he had set up just before his lunch break, a New York police spokesman said.
Father Christopher Ryan Heanue, one of the priests at the church, said he and others placed a clean towel around the baby while waiting for paramedics to show up.
“The beautiful thing is that this woman found in this church -- which is supposed to be a home for those in need -- this home for her child,” Heanue said, referring to the person he assumes left the baby there.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, ,

Holiday fare? National Geographic delivers a meandering mess on the Virgin Mary

, ,

Just in time for Christmas, National Geographic magazine has given us an article “How the Virgin Mary became the world’s most powerful woman” for its December issue. Sounds like a great story, I thought.  Then I saw the splashy graphics mapping Marian sightings around the world and the photos of various Marian devotees. I realized this article wasn’t about Mary, it was about the people who say they’ve seen Mary and those who pray to her. And sure enough, a story that promised so much failed to deliver in a big way.

Here’s how it begins:

It’s apparition time: 5:40 p.m. In a small Roman Catholic chapel in Bosnia and Herzegovina, in the village of Medjugorje, Ivan Dragicevic walks down the aisle, kneels in front of the altar, bows his head for a moment, and then, smiling, lifts his gaze heavenward. He begins to whisper, listens intently, whispers again, and doesn’t blink for ten minutes. His daily conversation with the Virgin Mary has begun.


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

Sing it! Going to the 'chapel' (maybe) and we're gonna get married (on our terms)

, , , , , , , , , , , ,
Sing it! Going to the 'chapel' (maybe) and we're gonna get married (on our terms)

There is an old saying in the religion-beat world that goes something like this: You can always find interesting news trends if you keep looking at what happens when each generation moves through the symbolic crossroads of life -- being born, getting married, having children and dying.

During this week's Crossroads podcast (click here to tune that in), host Todd Wilken and I talked about a number of different trends linked to marriage in this day and age, spinning off from two New York Times stories. One was about people flocking to New York City for secular weddings in a state-run marriage bureau chapel. Yes, "chapel." The other was about the trend toward very sexy -- but still white -- wedding dresses.

All kinds of issues came up in this discussion. For example: Lots of churches have had to establish policies on how to handle couples who have been "living in sin" -- that's what people used to call it -- before marriage. There are still interesting stories to be found linked to that topic. But times move on. I am curious. In the age of R-rated wedding dresses, are religious leaders going to have to have wedding dress codes for brides? Do priests and rabbis need to approve wedding dresses in advance?

Truth be told, there is a big, big subject looming in the background during this chat. We are talking about radical American individualism and its whole "this day is all about you" wedding ethos that produces both gigantic, break-the-bank church weddings and all of those destination weddings on beaches, mountain cliffs and who knows where.

The bottom line is even bigger than the financial bottom line: Is the wedding a sacrament or not? Is the rite defined by individuals or by worshipping communities?


Please respect our Commenting Policy