National Catholic Register

Synod on Synodality secrets: Are elite journalists concerned about zipped lips?

Synod on Synodality secrets: Are elite journalists concerned about zipped lips?

As a rule, journalists are not fond of secrecy and powerful leaders telling their followers to avoid the press.

This is especially true during high-profile meetings that could end up affecting the lives of a billion or so believers and institutions — parishes, schools, hospitals, you name it — affecting millions more.

Thus, I have been waiting to see what the mainstream press, especially in its most elite forms, would do with the decision by Pope Francis to ask participants in the global Synod on Synodality to, well, zip their lips when it comes to talking to the press. At the very least, I expected in-depth coverage of this angle and a hint of muted outrage.

Nope. Once again, we seem to have an interesting and highly symbolic Catholic story that is, apparently, only “news” to religion-market publications and the “conservative” press. Perhaps it is crucial whether journalists identify more with the views of the leader calling for secrecy than they do with the newsmakers who are anxious see an event proceed “on the record”?

Just asking. I, for one, remember how reporters (including me) pushed hard to open (or even invade) closed-door Catholic proceedings when they focused on clergy sexual abuse and earlier Vatican efforts to discipline adventurous (shall we say) American theologians and even bishops. Journalists were certainly convinced that “Reform Dies in Darkness,” or words to that effect.

Anyway, the Associated Press did include the following way down in a “news you can use” round-up at the start of the synod: “Things to know about the Vatican’s big meeting on the future of the Catholic Church.

The two-year preparatory phase of the synod was marked by a radical transparency in keeping with the goals of the process for participants to listen to each other and learn from one another. So it has come as something of a surprise that Francis has essentially imposed a media blackout on the synod itself.

While originally livestreams were planned, and several extra communications officers were hired, organizers have made clear this is a closed-door meeting and participants have been told to not speak to journalists. 

Paolo Ruffini, in charge of communications for the meeting, denied the debate had been put under the pontifical secret, one of the highest forms of confidentiality in the church.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

After all of the miracles he has seen in his life, why doesn't Indiana Jones truly believe?

After all of the miracles he has seen in his life, why doesn't Indiana Jones truly believe?

By the end of "Raiders of the Lost Ark," archaeologist Indiana Jones had learned enough to know that he should close his eyes when facing the wrath of God.

Apparently, that kind of power can melt Nazis -- without changing the hero's soul.

"Why won't Indiana Jones convert? We aren't insisting that he convert to our faith or to his father's faith or really to any faith in particular," noted Jack Bennett, in a Popcorn Cathedral video marking the "Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny" release.

"What we want to know is why he is always back to square one at the start of every adventure -- a skeptic, or even a scoffer. I mean, think about it: He has seen the Ark of the Covenant opened and the destroying angels pour out God's vengeance on his enemies. He has seen the sacred Hindu stones come to life. …He has seen the true cup of Christ heal his own father from a fatal gunshot wound -- on screen, with no ambiguity."

In what the 80-year-old Harrison Ford has promised is the finale, Indiana Jones remains the archaeologist who risks everything to keep supernatural, even holy, artifacts out of the bad guys' clutches.

This is a war between archetypes of Good and Evil -- with capital letters. The Nazis are on one side, fighting with a brave skeptic who careens through scenes based on Saturday-matinee classics. Miraculous stories from the past are mere fairy tales, until he learns that Higher Powers are at work. Then again, maybe it's just aliens or generic supernatural forces.

In the new film, Jones confesses: "I don't believe in magic, but a few times in my life I've seen things, things I can't explain." But after a life wrestling with sacred mysteries, he concludes: "It's not so much what you believe. It's about how hard you believe it."


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: Are on-the-record statements by Cardinal Hollerich relevant to his synod role?

Podcast: Are on-the-record statements by Cardinal Hollerich relevant to his synod role?

Unless there is a papal election in the near future, the Vatican Synod on Synodality (#VATICAN3) will be one of the most important religion-beat stories of 2023 and 2024 (click here for the dates).

One of the first defining documents of this process was released the other day — “Instrumentum Laboris. A document of the whole Church.” Apparently this was a “religion” story, the kind of inside-baseball development that was covered by Catholic publications on the doctrinal left and right.

That surprised me, since — normally — anything about the Vatican, LGBTQ+rights and women’s ordination makes headlines. Thus, I was glad that Religion News Service published, well, a very typical RNS news story about this document. See if you can spot the big ideas in this double-decker headline:

Vatican confirm synod topics will address questions of LGBTQ+ and women deacons

The document addresses inclusivity toward LGBTQ+ faithful, the issue of female ordination and welcoming toward divorced, remarried or polygamous couples

This story include a massive gap, in terms of essential content (that’s my opinion, of course) and that provided the hook for this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in). Before we go there, let’s look at a low-key document overview from The Pillar:

The document … acknowledges tensions in the synodal process, saying, “We should not be frightened by them, nor attempt at any cost to resolve them, but rather engage in ongoing synodal discernment. Only in this way can these tensions become sources of energy and not lapse into destructive polarizations.”

The goal of synodality, the document says, is to create “a Church of sisters and brothers in Christ who listen to one another and who, in so doing, are gradually transformed by the Spirit.”

A synodal Church, it says, is one marked by a willingness to listen, encounter, and dialogue, as well as by the humility to ask forgiveness for faults. It is a Church that celebrates unity in diversity and welcomes all people, while not shying away from speaking the truth in love.

For journalists who have covered decades of mainline Protestant life, terms such as “dialogue” and “unity in diversity” — perhaps even doctrinal diversity — will sound familiar.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Catholicism's internal cracks go public with Cardinal Robert McElroy ban on EWTN

Catholicism's internal cracks go public with Cardinal Robert McElroy ban on EWTN

It should come as no surprise to anyone that politicians don’t much like the press. This isn’t a shocking statement to anyone old enough to remember President Richard Nixon and Watergate.

Nixon, of course, wasn’t alone. A watchdog press has ran afoul of many presidents, including Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Donald Trump. This last one most of all.

In Catholicism, popes have also been media targets. Popes, compared to presidents, have been more gracious when speaking of the press. That even goes for the hyper-aggressive Italian media and their daily Vatican coverage.

As the left-right political divide widens, while many journalists working for mainstream publications abandon objectivity, so have the Catholic left-right doctrinal feuds. Francis’ papacy, in fact, has been plagued by it. Mainstream news coverage, for those who read this space, know that readers are increasingly fed narratives over reality.

The Catholic press operates differently. Those on the left wish to reform the church. Those on the right want to uphold and preserve centuries-old doctrines. Catholic media, depending where the publication or TV station falls on the doctrinal spectrum, isn’t governed by objectivity but by church teachings. This is where the conflict arises and when culture war battles within the church — and society at large — can manifest themselves.

This is an internecine battle among members of the Catholic hierarchy. In the crosshairs is EWTN. The media empire, founded by Mother Angelica in 1980, is a news organization that does all of its reporting through the lens of traditional Catholic teaching. It’s the 1992 Catholic Catechism network.

That frequently comes into direct conflict with the words and actions of Pope Francis’ strongest supporters, when dealing with ministry to LGBTQ Catholics, for example, and other culture-war issues.

Just as Obama went after Fox News and Trump against most everyone (even Fox News following the 2020 presidential election), we now have Catholic cardinals openly criticizing Catholic media. The recent case involving San Diego Cardinal Robert McElroy is an example of Catholicism’s internal divisions playing out in Catholic media.

McElroy’s target is EWTN, one of the largest Catholic news organization in the world.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: Is 'post-truth America' a right-wing or a left-wing term? Please discuss

Podcast: Is 'post-truth America' a right-wing or a left-wing term? Please discuss

Please ponder this pair of true or false questions.

When religious, cultural and political liberals complained about Donald Trump promoting his own “alternative facts” for use in the mainstream press, did they have a valid point? Was it fair game for them to apply the academic term “post-truth” in this case?

When religious, cultural and political conservatives complained about Democrats and their Big Tech-Big Media allies burying coverage of the Hunter Biden laptop scandal, funders of Antifa, origin debates about COVID-19 and Jane’s Revenge attacks on churches and crisis-pregnancy centers, did they have a valid point? Was it fair game for them to apply the academic term “post-truth” in this case?

I would argue that the correct answer is “yes,” in both cases.

Debates about the meaning of the term “post-truth” were at the heart of this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in). There was a logical reason for that, since Clemente Lisi and I were speakers in a March 10-11 conference in Washington, D.C., with this title: “Journalism in a Post-Truth World.” The conference was sponsored by Franciscan University of Steubenville and the Eternal Word Television Network.

The Franciscan University press release afterwards noted that the participants included journalists from the “National Catholic Register, The Washington Post, OSV News, Fox News, CNN, RealClearPolitics, The Catholic Herald, The Spectator, Washington Examiner, National Review, The Daily Signal, Catholic News Agency, The Daily Caller, and GetReligion.” Well, I had requested that I be identified as a columnist with the Universal press syndicate, but I wear several hats.

That’s a list that clearly leans to newsrooms on the cultural right, but with some solid mainstream voices as well. For example, I was on a panel about Catholic news coverage with the (in my eyes) legendary religion-beat pro Ann Rodgers, best known for several decades with the Pittsburgh Press and Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Also, click here for a Lisi post at Religion Unplugged about his presentation.

It’s safe to say that someone was there from the National Catholic Reporter, because of this headline in that progressive Catholic publication: “EWTN-sponsored conference on journalism embraces right-wing 'post-truth' narrative.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

The Associated Press turns crisis pregnancy centers into 'anti-abortion' sites and that's that

The Associated Press turns crisis pregnancy centers into 'anti-abortion' sites and that's that

There comes a time when some journalists feel they must dissent from the prevailing winds of their occupation, and I’ve finally reached that point.

My concern comes from a piece in the National Catholic Register on how new terms describing abortion handed down by the Associated Press –- the standard bearer for American journalism –- have made this new normal something I can no longer follow.

The Associated Press or AP, for those of you not employed by news organizations, sets the correct titles and grammar for work in American journalism. Everyone follows whatever AP decides something should be called, using the evolving standards of the Associated Press Stylebook.

Until now. Typically, AP leaders have tried to avoid taking sides in the abortion and gender debates. However, their most recent rules makes it quite impossible for some journalists — including myself — to cover this complicated topic the way AP insists that we cover it.

In the past, for example, journalists argued about calling activists on one side “anti-abortion,” as opposed to “pro-life,” while those on the other side were given a label they welcomed, as in “pro-choice.” That second label evolved into “pro-abortion rights.” We will come back to that.

Now this. From the Register:

The Associated Press (AP) issued new guidelines advising reporters not to use the terms “crisis pregnancy center” or “pregnancy resource center” but to instead refer to centers that offer pro-life counseling and support as “anti-abortion centers.”

Reporters should “avoid potentially misleading terms such as pregnancy resource centers or pregnancy counseling centers,” because “these terms don’t convey that the centers’ general aim is to prevent abortions,” according to the AP’s Abortion Topical Guide.

The changes were made last November but are just getting publicized now.  And these centers –- PRCs --aren’t just there to prevent abortions, which anyone who walks into one soon discovers.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Adding a few sources for those post-midterms thumbsuckers on the religion beat

Adding a few sources for those post-midterms thumbsuckers on the religion beat

When the dust has (thankfully) settled following Election Day, writers on politics, and on religion, and on religion-and-politics, will be analyzing what it all means for the future direction of U.S. culture.

Some matters on the agenda:

* Are the results a fluke, or a trend? What do they signal about 2024? Is the “religious right” a growing or receding force? How will the expected Trump 2024 campaign affect evangelicalism? What will Trumpism be post-Trump? Did the abortion issue hurt Republicans? Did religious liberty issues hurt Democrats? How do moral concerns shape inflation? Immigration? Crime? Ukraine?

* Then factions. What’s going on with the pivotal white Catholics? And Hispanic Catholics? Can Republicans ever make inroads among Black Protestants? Did religiously interesting new figures emerge among the Republicans’ record number of minority candidates?

* Here is a growing niche that should get its own sidebar: How crucial are non-religious voters for Democrats’ prospects?

* Oh, and how should journalists define “Christian nationalism” and how influential is that crowd anyway?

* And whatever else develops.

Specialists will be familiar with ReligionLink, a valuable service of the Religion News Association that, among other features, posts periodic memos on a specific topic in the news, providing detailed background, links to articles and proposed sources. Subscribe for free here.

Its October 18 posting laid out he midterm elections, listing no less than 76 background items from varied media and 25 expert sources. This material will remain just as useful for those post-election analyses next week and beyond.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Plug-In: Ties the bind -- Elizabeth II wove threads of faith and family into her funeral rites

Plug-In: Ties the bind -- Elizabeth II wove threads of faith and family into her funeral rites

In a previous Plug-in, we highlighted the importance of Queen Elizabeth II’s Christian faith in her life.

The 96-year-old monarch’s funeral rites certainly reflected that.

The Guardian’s Harriet Sherwood explains:

The powerful liturgy and rituals of the Church of England – the established church since the 16th century but increasingly marginalised in everyday life – were at the heart of a ceremony watched by billions around the world.

The Queen’s funeral took place under the magnificent gothic arches of Westminster Abbey, the setting for every coronation since 1066, home to the tombs of kings and queens, and the church where the then Princess Elizabeth was married in 1947.

The service was taken from the 1662 Book of Common Prayer, the C of E’s official prayerbook, noted for its beautiful and archaic language but largely displaced in recent decades by those seeking a more modern style of worship.

The Queen was said to be devoted to the Book of Common Prayer, along with the hymns and readings chosen personally by the monarch for her funeral.

The Washington Times’ Mark A. Kellner offers additional details:

“Few leaders have received the outpouring of love we have seen,” Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby said during the state funeral. “Her Late Majesty’s example was not set through her position or her ambition, but through whom she followed.”

Archbishop Welby said the queen, who reigned for 70 years and celebrated her Platinum Jubilee in June, modeled the servant leadership expressed in the life of Jesus, her savior.

“People of loving service are rare in any walk of life,” he said. “Leaders of loving service are still rarer. But in all cases, those who serve will be loved and remembered when those who cling to power and privileges are long forgotten.”

At the National Catholic Register, Father Raymond J. de Souza characterizes the queen’s state funeral this way:


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Pro-abortion rights activists hit Catholic churches, but you probably didn't read about it

Pro-abortion rights activists hit Catholic churches, but you probably didn't read about it

If there was ever a doubt that Americans are living in two, separate news universes, then the past two weeks certainly crystallized that reality even more than the polarizing presidential elections of 2016 and 2020.

Americans who lean left politically, comfortable with reading just The New York Times or Washington Post, have been treated to apocalyptic news stories and opinion pieces — it is often hard to tell which is which — stemming from the leak of the draft decision that could overturn Roe v. Wade.

Did you know that gay marriage is now at risk? Did you know that this incarnation of the U.S. Supreme Court is illegitimate? For these elite news organizations and their readers, reversing the right to abortion is just the first attack by fascist Republicans — you wait and see.

On the right, conservatives who watch opinion shows on Fox News Channel or read Brietbart can’t get enough of how President Joe Biden has been an abject failure, particularly when it comes to inflation.

Have you seen how high gas prices are? Did you read about the baby formula shortage? To those news organizations, it’s all about fixing these problems by “owning the libs” by getting the GOP in control of the House and Senate in the November midterm elections.

I have friends on both sides of the political aisle and it’s shocking to me how much one side doesn’t know about what the other is reading and thinking. It often takes weeks for stories that one side repeatedly reported on to ever make it into the pages and onto screens of the other side.

It’s not a failure of our politics. Those have always been polarized. This is a failure of journalism.

Let me explain how these two news universes (while great for the bottom line of news organizations catering to their bases) led to a major news story being totally ignored by many mainstream news sites.

The protests — deemed an issue with “a lot of passion” by the White House — over abortion spilled over into houses of worship, especially Catholic churches. Is the First Amendment right to protest on private property more important than freedom of religion? Not according to the Constitution, and that’s what the news media should be concerned with reporting, not with managing narratives.

It’s therefore not a surprise that pro-abortion rights folks protesting outside churches — and in some cases disrupting Mass — received little to no coverage in most mainstream national news organizations.


Please respect our Commenting Policy