, , , , ,

Pastor in Columbia, Mo., trashed by local paper for preaching about gender dysphoria

, , , , ,

I’ve only been through Columbia, Mo., once and that was in 2013 — at night — and I remember it as being kind of hilly. It’s best known as the home of the University of Missouri, which has one of the best journalism schools in the country, many of whose graduates no doubt work at the Columbia Daily Tribune, one of two newspapers in town.

A few weeks ago, the Tribune made a foray into religion coverage with a piece about the city’s largest megachurch, The Crossing, and its pastor’s decision to preach on the transgender issue.

As you may imagine, that sermon did not go over well in a college town. And, as you would imagine, the newspaper’s coverage devoted zero effort to understanding what this church believes and why its leaders defend these doctrines. You were expecting basic journalism?

Many in the local LGBTQ+ community are outraged this week over what they say was a transphobic sermon delivered Sunday at a Columbia church, which has since apologized and stated the message was not intended to be discriminatory.

Pastor Keith Simon of The Crossing delivered a sermon on gender dysphoria where he referred to transgender people as “broken,” compared intersex individuals with eunuchs and in one instance displayed Nazi propaganda imagery, comparing the Third Reich to LGBTQ+ “culture.”

His oration has so far caused a local art gallery to cut ties with the church and spurred a petition calling on another nonprofit to do the same. Simon could not be reached at the church on Friday and a staff member suggested emailing him, to which he did not respond.

The art gallery has been receiving donations from the church for some time, by the way. In a statement, the gallery objected to the preacher’s backing of “heteronormative philosophy.”


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , ,

Scoop and solid coverage: Joe Biden denied Holy Communion over abortion support, paper reports

, , , , ,

Way to go, Florence Morning News.

The South Carolina newspaper — specifically government and politics reporter Matthew Christian — got a scoop this week on a Catholic priest denying Holy Communion to former Vice President Joe Biden.

But the paper didn’t just get the news, it got it right.

This is solid, solid coverage by the Florence paper:

FLORENCE, S.C. — Former Vice President Joe Biden, a candidate for the Democratic nomination in the 2020 presidential race, was denied Holy Communion on Sunday morning at a Florence church.

Father Robert E. Morey of Saint Anthony Catholic Church confirmed Monday afternoon that he had denied the presidential candidate Holy Communion because of his stance on abortion. Biden, a lifelong Catholic, had attended the church’s 9 a.m. Mass.

Communion is one of seven sacraments in the Roman Catholic Church. The others are baptism, reconciliation, confirmation, marriage, anointing of the sick and holy orders.

In communion, parishioners receive the Holy Eucharist, a wafer and wine that when consecrated become the body and blood of Jesus, according to Catholic doctrine. In order to receive it, a Catholic must be in the state of grace, have gone to confession since his or her most recent mortal sin, have a belief in the doctrine of transubstantiation (a belief that the wafer and wine become the body and blood of Jesus), observe the Eucharistic fast and not be under censure.

Serious question: When’s the last time you saw that level of important religious detail that high up in a daily newspaper story?


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

Were they Pachamama statues? Some journalists declined to quote Pope Francis on that point

, , , , , , , , ,

The question for today, after a whirlwind of Vatican news: When historians write about the Synod of Bishops for the Pan-Amazon region, will they call it the “Amazonian” synod or the “Pachamama” synod?

While the synod handled complex issues of Catholic tradition (ordaining married men) and the theology of holy orders (women entering the modern diaconate), it also veered into ancient questions about Christians being tempted to worship other deities. At this point, Catholic progressives and conservatives were arguing about the first item in the Ten Commandments, as in: “You shall have no other gods before me.”

But what about other gods that are, to use a progressive term, in “dialogue” with the Holy Trinity?

Journalists became involved in this debate for a simple reason: Vatican press aides kept sending mixed signals about the role of Pachamama statues in some synod rites. Some mainstream news reports — we will look at The New York Times — declined to name the woman portrayed in these statues.

That’s an interesting editorial stance, in light of remarks by Pope Francis. Here are some key sections of a report in The Catholic Herald:

The statues, which were identical carved images of a naked pregnant Amazonian woman, had been displayed in the Carmelite church of Santa Maria in Traspontina, close to the Vatican, and used in several events, rituals, and expression of spirituality taking place during the October 6-27 Amazonian synod.

The pope said they had been displayed in the church “without idolatrous intentions,” according to a transcript provided by the Vatican press office. …

Let’s keep reading:

According to the transcript provided by the Vatican, the pope referred to the statues as “Pachamama,” the name traditionally given to an Andean fertility goddess, which can be roughly translated as “Mother Earth.”

While it is unclear whether he was using it colloquially, the pope’s use of the term “Pachamama” will likely further ongoing debate regarding the exact nature of the statutes, and what they represent.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , ,

Only The Atlantic dares call out the Kanye West–Donald Trump–Jesus Freak axis

, , , , , ,

Spencer Kornhauber has turned in a glibly critical review of Kanye West’s new film, Jesus Is King. He is not obliged to like West’s music now more than anyone had to like it before West’s deepened focus on the person of Christ. (West recorded “Jesus Walks” 15 years ago.)

As Kornhauber describes it, Jesus Is King sounds nearly as tedious as Goddfrey Reggio’s Koyaanisqatsi, except that West’s film is 35 minutes, compared to 86 minutes of unsubtle imagery about the evils of using technology to ease our quotidian lives.

Still, there are some clunkers here that suggest an inattention to detail. In two paragraphs, Kornhauber makes the humorous point that having one’s hair dyed is an odd moment for a spiritual awakening:

West replied that his come-closer-to-Jesus episode happened around April, when he got his hair colored purple. “I remember when the hair dye was placed on my head the morning before Coachella,” he said. “It felt cold. I didn’t like it. I had an aversion to it. And then when the guy was dyeing it, I didn’t even like how it came out.”

As far as the beginnings of awakening stories go, this one’s definitely new. Bob Dylan had a cross thrown at him by a fan and then was visited by Christ in his hotel room. Kanye West got a bad dye job — and then what? Dunno. West changed the subject to the decline of manufacturing jobs in the United States.

Hold the phone: a fan threw a cross at Dylan? What part of his body was the target? His head? His heart? His butt?

A simple click of the link provides the same language Dylan has used about this incident since the late 1970s: the fan tossed the small cross onto the stage. There’s no indication of its proximity to Dylan, much less where the fan had aimed.

Here’s something more substantial. Kornhauber writes:

The film made me think of funky, stucco mid-century churches, and the way they can seem like campy architectural artifacts today. It made me think of Jesus Freaks, and Hillsong, and all the other revival movements aimed at hipping up Christ.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , ,

'Bless these bats,' says Nationals' priest right before Washington's World Series bats go cold

, , , ,

The baseball gods (theology lesson here if you missed it) certainly have a sense of humor.

How else to explain the timing of the Washington Nationals’ bats going cold over the weekend?

I’m joking (mostly).

But on Friday, Washington Post religion writer Michelle Boorstein had a nice feature on the team chaplain, headlined “‘Bless these bats’: Meet the Nationals’ priest praying for a World Series victory.”

With the Nationals up 2-0 on the favored Houston Astros and headed home for the first World Series games in the nation’s capital since 1933, it was a feel-good profile that opened like this:

As he roams the Washington Nationals’ locker room and batting cages this weekend, Monsignor Stephen Rossetti has two messages for the baseball players he is there to serve.

This: God loves you no matter whether you win or lose.

And also this: Never give up or give in! Pray to win!

“Bless these bats,” the 68-year-old team chaplain appeals to God before games as he makes a sign of the cross and sprinkles holy water on the sporting equipment.

A 10-year veteran of offering spiritual care to Nats’ players, Rossetti is in an unusual way a perfect match for people under intense pressure. A psychologist as well as a priest, he was the longtime head of a key Catholic mental health facility serving sexually abusive priests, has done chaplaincies at the South Pole, worked in intelligence for the U.S. military and dreams of completing a priestly stint at a space station.

I’m used to dealing with people and their humanity,” Rossetti said Thursday outside the park, which was bustling in the sunshine with security, fans and tourists sniffing around the about-to-be World Series venue. “In baseball, if you’re batting .300, you’re a star, and that means the other two times you’re striking out. The point is: Hang in there, stay in the fight. And also — redemption.”

At this point, the Nationals’ redemption — if it comes — will have to happen in Houston.


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

A day later: What's the latest Washington Post headline mourning Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi?

, , , , , , , , ,

It’s hard to know what to say about the Twitter explosion that greeted the Washington Post decision to edit the headline atop its bookish obituary for Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of Islamic State forces that ravaged large portions of Iraq and Syria.

By just about anyone’s definitions he was a terrorist, rapist and mass murderer. On the other hand, I must admit that I didn’t know much about his career as a “conservative academic,” to use one interesting label included in this long Post feature.

Yes, we will get to some of the searing mock headlines responding to this popular Twitter hashtag — #WaPoDeathNotices. But first, here is a basic story-about-the-story summary care of The Hill:

The Washington Post changed the headline on its obituary for ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi after initially calling him an “austere religious scholar at helm of Islamic State.”

Wait. “Initially” calling him what? The very next sentence notes:

The Post changed its headline for the obituary at least twice Sunday, starting by describing al-Baghdadi as the “Islamic State’s terrorist-in-chief.” The newspaper then adjusted the headline to call al-Baghdadi the “austere religious scholar at helm of Islamic State,” sparking some backlash on social media. 

The headline has now been updated to describe al-Baghdadi as the “extremist leader of Islamic State.”

Clearly, someone thought “terrorist-in-chief” was a bit over the top and said the headline should be softened to reflect the tone of the story itself — which is dominated by information about the academic and semi-political career of al-Baghdadi, rather than his blood-soaked actions as the ISIS semi-prophet.

You can see the roots of the second Post headline in the lede that remains intact:


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , ,

In astronomy journalism, journalists still fear using G-word and asking ultimate questions

, , ,

I’m fascinated with astronomy — always have been — and had I been better at math, I might have taken that as a career path instead of the writing/journalism route. The former would have definitely earned me more money.

In recent years, there’s been a lot more news articles out there about the topic; not just about terraforming Mars, but really 22nd century stuff such as parallel universes (and M-theory and string theory) ; dark matter, the heliopause, exoplanets and building cloud cities on Venus.

Just this month, one of the two winners of the Nobel prize for physics is a scientist who put together a theoretical framework for what happened just after the Big Bang.

There’s more journalism out than ever on sophisticated astro topics and the motherlode of all astronomy pieces is Medium, which offers several a day on the specialized feed that I receive. Popular Science, Scientific American and Business Insider are other sources. But in all the discussions about the Big Bang and beyond, there is one thing that is never mentioned.

Yes, we are talking about what came before the Big Bang or what/who made the Big Bang happen 13.8 billion years ago. In other words, journalists are avoiding the debates about God. Most pieces I read are silent on the topic, although this Quanta magazine piece wonders if the late theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking was right when he said the universe has no beginning.

National Geographic, in the video shown above, puts the God question into a “creation myths” category. Generally, religion isn’t treated seriously in science media. I quote from this piece in Medium about what happened just after the Big Bang is typical of silence out there.

Immediately after the Big Bang, when the Universe was nothing more than a hot sea of subatomic particles, photons crashed into and scattered off of everything they encountered. Then, as space expanded and time elapsed, various different regions of higher energy began to have the same pressure as regions of lower energy. Gradually, certain sectors of the Universe were able to collapse into the seedlings of primordial Black Holes. …


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , ,

What does faith have to do with it? Romney is on a moral crusade, for some vague reason

, , , , ,

When you hear the name Mitt Romney, what are the first two or three things that pop into your head?

I mean, other than the fact that he’s from Utah and he speaks French.

Come to think of it, why does Romney speak French? Did he have a special reason to learn that language at a specific point in his life?

Oh, one more question. If you were writing a feature about tensions between Romney and one Donald Trump — that thrice-married New York City playboy — what major influence on the life and squeaky-clean image of the Utah senator that you would have to struggle to avoid mentioning?

This brings us to this weekend’s think piece, a McKay Coppins feature in The Atlantic that ran with this double-decker headline:

The Liberation of Mitt Romney

The newly rebellious senator has become an outspoken dissident in Trump’s Republican Party, just in time for the president’s impeachment trial.

Remember that the focus on this piece is on Romney’s willingness to stand in judgment of Trump’s character and moral fiber, or lack thereof. So how in the world did it avoid any discussion of his strong and very public faith as a leader, for many years, in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? Were editors scared to use the “M-word,” in light of recent labeling changes in this faith?


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

Big news stories lurk on both sides of shrinking middle ground in American religion

, , , , , , , , , , ,
Big news stories lurk on both sides of shrinking middle ground in American religion

Religion and politics. Religion and politics. Religion and politics.

Or, sometimes it’s politics and religion.

Either way, we all know what factor — more often than not — turns a religion-news story into a big news story in the eyes of most newsroom managers. Well, sex scandals are good, too.

Normally, this politics-and-religion reality bugs me, because there is so much more to the religion beat than whatever content happens to overlap with the current political headlines.

But, right now, I think it’s obvious that the biggest news story in American politics is directly linked to the biggest story in American religion. I am talking about a trend that has been discussed in several 2019 Crossroads podcasts — including this week’s edition (click here to tune that in).

It’s the growing polarization between the world of traditional religious believers (defined primarily in terms of the PRACTICE of their faith) and the growing flock of open atheists-agnostics and the spiritual-but-not-religious phenomenon that overlaps with the growth of the religiously unaffiliated. It lines up with the hotter-than-hades rift in American culture and politics.

There are so many stories linked to this. We’re talking about the demographic implosion of the old liberal Protestant mainline. Then there’s the surging number of independent churches and nondenominational believers. There’s a growing number of Americans — small, but important — in other world religions. There are people (like me) who grew up in one tradition (Southern Baptist, in this case) and converted to another (Eastern Orthodoxy).

There are so many numbers, so many polls. The Pew Research Center, LifeWay Research, Barna and others keep cracking out fascinating numbers.

In the podcast, I mentioned — once again — Donald Trump and the infamous “81% of white evangelicals just love Donald” theme that can be found in news coverage on a daily basis (or so it seems). Yes, about half of those white evangelicals wanted to vote to some other GOP candidate. And about 40% of evangelicals appear to have stayed home or some voted third party.

Out of all of the topics that floated into this week’s podcast, let me stress one — the changing religious world of Latino Americans. Consider this lede atop a recent Crux report:


Please respect our Commenting Policy