, , , ,

Mennonite husband and wife say they have no hatred toward gays; media say they're 'anti-gay'

, , , ,

According to the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, Richard and Betty Odgaard are a small-town Mennonite couple whose faith is central to their lives.

That's why, Becket says, the Odgaards kept religious elements intact when they transformed a century-old Iowa church into an art gallery, bistro and flower/gift shop where they hosted weddings.

But the couple got in trouble when they refused to participate in a same-sex wedding.

Becket says:

Through the years, the Odgaards have gladly hired gay employees and served gay customers at the Gallery’s shops and bistro but they cannot personally participate in a wedding ceremony that violates their own religious beliefs.
Although there were numerous nearby venues that actively advertise to host same-sex weddings, when the Odgaards declined to host the wedding, the couple immediately filed a complaint with the State, triggering an intense media campaign against the Odgaards. They were subjected to hate mail, boycotts, personal attacks, and even death threats. Officials in the Civil Rights Commission showed open disdain for the Odgaards’ religious rights, and even denied them access to state court to defend their religious liberty claims. Shockingly, the State refused to dismiss its case against the Odgaards even after the two men — contrary to their prior sworn statements — admitted they had been married months before asking the Odgaards to host their ceremony.
Facing growing pressure from the State and potentially years of legal proceedings, with the risk of being forced to pay the couple’s legal fees, the Odgaards chose to remain true to their faith. They settled the charges brought against them, paying thousands of dollars to the couple, and agreed to stop hosting all weddings. Without this vital income, the Odgaards were forced to close the Gallery.

Fast-forward to this week: The Odgaards are making headlines for launching a billboard campaign promoting marriage as a God-ordained union between one man and one woman.

Or, to borrow the terminology used by news organizations such as the Des Moines Register,  Religion News Service and the New York Daily News, they are erecting "anti-gay marriage" billboards:


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , ,

Yo, New York Times: Does everyone agree as to why all those Catholic parishes are closing?

, , , , , ,

Faithful GetReligion readers know that, in the past, we have praised the New York Times Metro desk team for its coverage of the painful wave of Catholic church closings and parish mergers that has hit the Archdiocese of New York.

However, there has been a rather ironic subplot running through some of the coverage.

You know how your GetReligionistas are always complaining that mainstream reporters always find a way to find each and every possible political thread in religion-news stories, even if there are doctrinal themes that are much more central to the event? Think coverage of papal tours, for examples.

Now, the irony is that the Times team -- when covering these parish mergers and closings -- seems almost completely tone-deaf to some pretty obvious elements of Catholic politics (and real-estate business) linked to this story, elements that are pretty easy to tune in online.

I know that the Times folks know these elements are there, because they have seen them in the past and I praised them for it:

So implied issues of ethnicity, history, economic justice, liturgical style and theology. I've heard of churches exploding in fits of bitterness over the changing of hymnals and stained-glass windows. Imagine closing 50 churches in a city as complex as New York -- with all of the economic questions raised by locations of these facilities.
Air rights? How about prime land in a city with a real-estate and building boom that is almost out of control. For Cardinal Timothy Dolan, there are no easy financial and spiritual decisions here.

But the latest story is totally centered on people and emotions -- which are crucial elements of the story, of course. But there are other layers worth pursuing, especially linked to liturgy and tensions in the church. Oh yes, and demographics loom in the background, once again. 


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

Craig James takes on bias against religious conservatives at — uh — Fox Sports

, , , , , , ,
Craig James takes on bias against religious conservatives at — uh — Fox Sports

One of the most interesting discussions that I have with journalism students every semester is the moment when I ask them to identify the specific cultural and political philosophy that drives the editorial policies of Fox News and other giants associated with the world of Rupert Murdoch. 

They always say, "Conservative" or "right wing."

Then I ask them this question: "What kind of conservatism?"

At that point there is silence. The same thing happens when I ask them to tell me the difference between, let's say, Rush Limbaugh and the Rev. Mike Huckabee. Once again, most students simply blink and keep saying "conservative."

The answer, of course, is that Murdoch, like Limbaugh, is best described as a Libertarian conservative and, in particular, is not known for consistent, thoughtful (cough, cough) defense of conservative stands on moral and cultural issues. 

This brings me to a very interesting "Got news?" story, once again from Baptist Press, that should be interesting to watch -- if and when it receives major coverage in the mainstream press. Here is the top of the BP report:

DALLAS (BP) -- College football analyst Craig James has filed a religious discrimination lawsuit against Fox Sports alleging he was fired from a broadcasting position because of his Christian belief that homosexuality is sinful.
"This case is much bigger than me," James said according to a press release from Liberty Institute, the Christian legal organization representing him. "It affects every person who holds religious beliefs. I will not let Fox Sports trample my religious liberty. Today, many people have lost their jobs because of their faith. Sadly, countless are afraid to let their bosses know they even have a faith. This is America and I intend to make sure Fox Sports knows they aren't above the law."


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Mountaintop monks: The Oregonian provides a vivid look at a Benedictine abbey

Newspapers may be whittling down religion space and experts, but you can still catch examples of sensitive, long-form religion writing. One is the recent "Mount Angel Monks" feature in the Oregonian.

Smooth and fast-reading despite its 2,256 words, the piece provides an intimate look at the day in the life of Father Martin Grassel, the business manager of Mount Angel Abbey, about 40 miles South of Portland. We get glimpses of him at worship with some the other 55 monks there. We watch him pay bills and assemble a glass mosaic. We learn of his call to the Benedictine life and what his family thinks of it.

"Scatter gold coins throughout your story," I once heard at a writers' workshop, and this story fairly jingles with them. The vivid, even poetic passages start right with the lede:

MOUNT ANGEL — Morning comes softly here.
There are no cars, no sirens, no trash trucks, no dogs. Only a hundred chattering birds and the swish of a monk’s tunic. The air and earth are blue, and Mount Angel Abbey feels isolated from the woes of the world.

Another:

Such is the life of a modern-day monk. It is gentle, yet rushed. Secluded, yet vulnerable.
Like his ancestors, Grassel rises before the sun, brews beer and eats in quiet harmony with his spiritual brethren. He also pays bills, answers e-mail, carries an iPhone and lives with the knowledge that even life on the hilltop is uncertain.
Grassel’s life, imagined, might seem too quaint to be relatable — or even authentic. But a monk is a man, and a monastery is earth, sacred or not.

The Oregonian also teases out the human side of the otherwise organized monk: "Oakland Raiders paraphernalia and beer bottles give Grassel’s office a slight bachelor pad feel. There are at least two scratching posts and three bags of Temptations cat treats." The treats are for Cecilia, who trots with him to his office, then lounges in an upturned boxtop by his desk.

I also admired the equally peaceful, symmetrical story ending:


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , ,

Hey, enjoy some pretend journalism on 'a fake church in a real church'

, , , , ,

The lede read likes something straight out of a farcical newspaper:

As the chandeliers dim against the vaulted ceiling of the Chapel in the Mission, women wearing Baptist-size hats fan themselves while men balance heaping plates of eggs and biscuits on their chino-clad knees. A soloist emerges from the be-robed gospel choir and sings:
“When you call my name, it’s like a little prayer.”
The Madonna hit rings through the former funeral parlor and current performance venue: “Just like a prayer; you know I’ll take you there.” The choir and crowd join in.
The “there” is Sunday’s Finest, host, organizer and reverend-for-the-day Mustafa Khan’s “nonreligious” church service. Khan, who previously worked for Facebook in operations and marketing, has developed a loyal following among the new Mission scenesters with his events, including April’s Silicon Valley Fashion Week, San Francisco’s Daybreaker dawn dance parties, and the recently launched Midnight Brunch. For $30 to $40, guests at Sunday’s Finest get a comfort-food buffet, seats to the show/church service and a sense of small-town closeness in the big city.
“Brothers and sisters,” Khan, decked out in a black-and-gold brocade faux vestment with shimmering lamé pants, greets the guests, “Welcome to Sunday’s Finest. We’re a fake church in a real church.”

But the source of this story is not The Onion.

Rather, it's a piece from the San Francisco Chronicle.

As a Christian, I take my faith seriously and try to be respectful of other people's sincere beliefs — even if I don't share their beliefs.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , ,

An Islamic Caitlyn Jenner? Look in the Los Angeles Times

, , , , , ,

The Los Angeles Times is on quite the campaign to push social change, as of late. I'm sure that is shocking to you.

Recently I critiqued a “great reads” piece in that publication about a drag queen in New Mexico who wore a dress to his grandmother’s Catholic funeral. Not even a month later, here’s a San Francisco-based piece about a transgender Muslim man. 

The general theme of both seems to be that the only truth is that found in human experience, as opposed to religious doctrines and traditions. Journalists simply find a sympathetic character and tell their personal story, which of course runs counter to the beliefs of whatever religion this person holds or used to hold. This person’s life illustrates an evolving, personal truth that is so obvious, dissenting voices are not needed. 

To see what I mean, read here:

He walked unsteadily across the tattered green carpet inside the mosque. Out of habit, he stepped for a moment toward the women's section. Then he made his way to the front, where the men pray.
In one sense, everything felt familiar after a childhood spent in Islamic Sunday school every week: the smell of strong cologne worn by so many of the men, the low murmur of Koran recitations.
"Can they tell?" Alex Bergeron recalls asking himself as he knelt for prayer.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , ,

News? Handful of Democrats float a pro-woman plan to defund Planned Parenthood

, , , , ,
News? Handful of Democrats float a pro-woman plan to defund Planned Parenthood

So, in terms of politics (as opposed to undercover videos), was there anything really new in the U.S. Senate debates over funding for Planned Parenthood and the mainstream media coverage thereof? What else can bored journalists (meaning those that have elected to ignore dozens of issues linked to quotations in those undercover videos) look forward to covering in other Hill debates on this topic?

Well, there was one small -- critics would say "tiny" -- wrinkle that might prove interesting, in the event of a close vote in the future.

As always, Republicans who are willing to take this dangerous political step will need to find a few allies on the other side of the aisle. Yes, honest. They need to talk to at least a few Democrats.

Thus, I found it interesting that Baptist Press -- yes, a conservative wire service -- ended up paying attention to some proposals by Democrats for Life. (Confession: Yes, I am a pro-life Democrat and have a donor's bumper sticker in my office.)

We live in a day and age in which the number of pro-life Democrats is so small that the mainstream press considers the actions of this group "conservative," even when its proposals are in some way economically progressive. Thus, Democrats for Life draws little or no mainstream ink, but is covered by the alternative conservative press (surf this Google file, if you wish).

So what did Baptist Press report as the key element of this proposal?


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , ,

Adding to the Middle East mix; this time we're talking about Jewish terrorism

, , ,
Adding to the Middle East mix; this time we're talking about Jewish terrorism

Despicable Jew-on-Jew and suspected Jew-on-Palestinian acts of violence were committed in Israel last week, producing much agonized soul-searching among Israeli and Diaspora Jews over how this could happen. Not surprisingly, the international media has been all over the story, supplying enough answers to the question of "how" to satisfy every taste.

Here's a quick summation of events: 

Within the span of just a few days, right wing religious settlers clashed with government forces seeking to remove illegally built West Bank settler homes, an ultra-Orthodox man attacked a Jerusalem gay pride parade, knifing six and killing a teenaged Jewish girl, and suspected extremist religious settlers set fire to a Palestinian home, killing a toddler. (I say suspected because, as of this writing, no one's actually been charged with the crime, though all signs point to the involvement of radical Jews.) 

Want more detail, including how the Israeli government has reacted to these events? Read this solid Washington Post piece published earlier this week.

Israeli Jewish civilian violence rooted in religious or political extremism -- or an unfortunate mix of the two -- is not quite the man-bites-dog story it's generally portrayed to be. Sadly, it happens too often for that to be the case. Jews, Israeli or otherwise, are no less immune to the darker human impulses than anyone else. 

Still, the anguished "How could Jews do this?" trope carried the day.

My reading of the media landscape tells me that this is the case for several reasons.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , ,

Hard-hitting journalism on Baptist church's acceptance of same-sex marriage? Not exactly

, , , , ,

"Hard-hitting religion journalism," said the subject line on an email from a GetReligion reader.

Methinks that reader enjoys the fine art of sarcasm.

The friendly correspondent shared a link to a front-page story in today's Greenville News in South Carolina.

The story concerns a Baptist church — which disassociated itself from the Southern Baptist Convention in 1999 — deciding to embrace same-sex marriage.

At 1,900 words, the Gannett newspaper's report on "One church's journey" is long enough to be considered in-depth. But hard-hitting journalism it most definitely is not.

If newspapers wrote love songs instead of news articles, this is how one might go — complete with the reporter tweeting unabashedly about the church's "amazing transformation."

Here's the first verse:

The conversation at First Baptist Church Greenville took place well before the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision this summer to legalize same-sex marriages.
The dialogue was bold — particularly for one of downtown Greenville’s influential legacy churches that in its earliest years served as a birthplace for revered Southern Baptist institutions.
Would the congregation be willing to allow same-sex couples to marry in the church?
To ordain gay ministers?

 


Please respect our Commenting Policy