FBI

Podcast: Eastern Orthodox converts, Russian spies, the FBI and the Bible Belt (#horrors)

Podcast: Eastern Orthodox converts, Russian spies, the FBI and the Bible Belt (#horrors)

Yes, yes. I will confess my (possible) sin.

Several years ago some friends of mine in Bible Belt Orthodox churches said that there were times when they wished America could be ruled by the late Queen Elizabeth II, as opposed to the last couple of guys who have occupied the White House. We were discussing our frustration with America’s two-party binary political system.

I laughed and agreed.

Does this mean that I am a potential Russian spy and enemy of the state? That was one of the topics discussed during this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (CLICK HERE to tune that in). We were discussing two mainstream news stories that seem to be connected in the minds of some mainstream journalists.

First, consider this Religion News Service feature: “Riding a wave of converts, one group aims to fuse Orthodoxy with Southern values.” Then read this Newsweek story: “Russia's Trying to Recruit Spies From U.S.” It may also help to check out this earlier GetReligion post: “Concerning the new converts to Eastern Orthodoxy — Are they MAGA clones or worse?

But back to Queen Elizabeth II. We will get to the FBI in a moment or two.

The RNS feature focuses on a meeting of the small group of Orthodox converts — the Philip Ludwell III Orthodox Fellowship — down in the countercultural Bible Belt. I confess that I have never heard of this group, primarily since my East Tennessee parish is part of the Orthodox Church in America (which does have historic missionary ties to Russia), as opposed to the smaller Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia (which formed in response to the birth of the Soviet Union).

The RNS feature notes: “Orthodox Christianity in the United States is a kaleidoscope of languages and cultures as diverse as Russia, Greece, Ethiopia, Syria, Bulgaria and, increasingly, the American South.”

That’s accurate. It’s hard to describe how complex Eastern Orthodoxy is in this country and that includes the growing number of Americans (like me) who have converted to the faith during the past four decades (a trend that began long before Orange Man Bad).

Now, concerning the inspiration for this small Orthodox network:

Philip Ludwell III, the fellowship’s namesake, became one of America’s earliest converts to Orthodoxy in 1738 and then translated Russian Orthodox texts into English. His family held government positions in the Carolinas and Virginia and shared ancestry with Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee, born nearly a century later.

Obviously, we are talking about folks who are fundamentalist Confederate clones or worse:


Please respect our Commenting Policy

FBI war on 'rad trad' Catholics: Where's the outrage (or even fairness) in press coverage?

FBI war on 'rad trad' Catholics: Where's the outrage (or even fairness) in press coverage?

There are several factors that, when put together, make an event or trend a news story. 

The first is that it is new. It’s not a coincidence that the first three letters of the word news helps to form the word “new.”

Then there’s timing. Not just “what,” but also “when” something happens makes it newsworthy. “What” and “when” are essential to the five W’s (which also includes “where,” “who” and “why”) that reporters and editors worry most when determining news coverage.

The inability for certain types of stories to register with the secular press, especially legacy media, is yet another sign of the political, cultural and moral divisions in our society and the dying American model of the press. 

While this space is very much dedicated to critiquing news coverage of Catholic issues and those involving Catholics, it is very difficult to do so when there is little to no coverage of important Catholic stories by a very sizable chunk of the American media ecosystem. 

This takes us to a trio of stories involving the federal government and the Catholic church that took place during the first half of this month. At a time of year where the mainstream media is seeking Christian storylines to coincide with Lent, Holy Week and Easter Sunday (beyond photos of elaborate hats), the three stories I am about to dissect here drew very little mainstream media attention.

Instead, it was the Catholic press (once again!) and “conservative” secular media that did the bulk of the reporting on, for my first example, the issue regarding the decision by Walter Reed Hospital to drop a contract for Franciscan priests to provide pastoral care of patients and, instead, hiring a secular firm to oversee those same services going forward. Try to imagine “secular” Last Rites for Catholics?

The second was the decision by the Department of Justice to recommend zero jail time in a plea deal involving a suspect charged with destruction of property at a Catholic church in Washington last year.

Finally, there were, according to documents, traditional Catholics who were targeted by the FBI because they could be considered domestic terrorists.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Mainstream outlets ignore anti-Catholic angles in Merrick Garland's Senate testimony

Mainstream outlets ignore anti-Catholic angles in Merrick Garland's Senate testimony

It’s almost always news when a public official testifies before a congressional committee. Such was the case when Attorney General Merrick Garland faced the Senate Judiciary Committee. 

As expected, it was an important, and often heated, four hours of testimony that was highlighted by the back-and-forth exchanges between Garland and Republican senators on the panel. You can read Garland’s opening remarks on the DOJ website. 

Beyond his prepared remarks, there were plenty of potential storylines tied to religion that surfaced in the hearing. However, depending on which news organizations one follows, these storylines either made it into the news coverage or they were never mentioned. 

The Garland hearing comes at a time of heightened polarization, something made worse by the Supreme Court decision that rolled back the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion. The aftermath of that decision has resulted in increased vandalism of Catholic churches, pro-life pregnancy centers and even a now-retracted FBI memo that targeted some traditional Catholics

The content of the coverage of the questions asked and the contents of Garland’s responses depended on what reporters, editors and news organizations deemed important. This has been the case for decades, but the shift has changed dramatically in more recent years as news organizations divide themselves into political camps depending on the beliefs of their faithful audiences

Did valid religion angles, especially those involving Catholics, make it into the coverage of national legacy media outlets? 

Here is a hint: Prayers by protestors at abortion facilities appear to be considered much more dangerous, and thus newsworthy, than vandalism, or even arson, at Catholic churches and crisis pregnancy centers. News coverage of this Senate hearing seemed to have been produced by journalists living in parallel universes. Once again, this is the dominant news trend in the Internet age.

Here is the top of the New York Times report on the Garland hearing: 

WASHINGTON — Republicans subjected Attorney General Merrick B. Garland to a four-hour grilling before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, a harbinger of the fights that loom ahead as the party targets the Justice Department in the months leading up to the 2024 election. 


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Why you probably missed news about the FBI memo calling out 'radical traditionalist' Catholics

Why you probably missed news about the FBI memo calling out 'radical traditionalist' Catholics

The politicization of American society has affected a great number of institutions — from universities to major sports leagues to large corporations. Right now, there are a great many things that divide us as Americans.

The FBI has also become politicized. This is a belief that picked up momentum during Donald Trump’s presidency, but continues to exist now under the Joe Biden administration. If journalism is the place that you believe should shed a light on this painful paradox, then you’d be sadly mistaken.

Not only has the FBI possibly been politicized, but so has journalism, and we’re all poorer for it. A great example of this journalistic disconnect is an important story that “conservative” and “religious” media covered, while it was ignored by the vast majority of mainstream news outlets, including our culture’s most elite and powerful newsrooms.

The key question: Has the FBI decided that “radical” Catholics are dangerous and a threat to American public life?

On Feb. 8, a website called UncoveredDC reported on an FBI document titled “Interest of Racially or Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremists in Radical-Traditionalist Catholic Ideology Almost Certainly Presents New Mitigation Opportunities.”

UncoveredDC says on its website that it pledges “to work hard to bring you the unvarnished truth, a concept the legacy media abandoned long ago.” It is considered a right-wing news website given the people it covers and the angles it takes on stories. That doesn’t mean that what they are reporting on isn’t true, especially if it comes on the form of official government documents.

The memo, out of the FBI’s Richmond, Va. field office, zeroed in on what it called “Radical-Traditionalist Catholics.” The memo notes that FBI investigations have found that there is a “growing overlap” between white nationalists and the RTCs. The Jan. 23 memo claimed that RTCs are a small minority within Catholicism. It said that they adhere to beliefs that are “anti-Semitic, anti-immigrant, anti-LGBT” and linked to “white supremacy.”

That sounds like a big story, especially with a rosary-carrying Catholic in the White House, even if he is a Catholic who has — in word and deed — rejected some ancient doctrines of the church.

Why was this story not covered by most news outlets?


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Journalism question for these times: When are death threats 'real' death threats?

Journalism question for these times: When are death threats 'real' death threats?

Here is a journalism question for you: When is a death threat an actual “death threat”?

Let me state that another way: When do words that clearly communicate a death threat represent a “real” or legitimate death threat in the eyes of journalists, local police and (wait for it) the Department of Justice?

We can add another question I received via email from a religion-beat veteran: In what sense is a death threat “pro-choice”?

Yes, once again we are looking at a story that is linked to abortion, a topic that mixes politics, religion, law and science. In this case the event that made news (barely) was the vandalism of yet another Catholic church in a blue zip code. Here is the entire report from a local CBS newsroom and note the headline, which inspired that email question: “Catholic Church in Lansing vandalized with pro-choice graffiti.”

(CBS DETROIT) - The Diocese of Lansing released video footage of three people vandalizing the Church of the Resurrection with spray-painted pro-choice graffiti.

The incident happened on Saturday, Oct. 8, between 11:52 p.m. and 11:56 p.m. Video footage shows the three suspects walking up to the church from the area of Jerome and Custer, spay-painting the church, and then leaving the area.

The suspects spray-painted on the doors, signage, and sidewalk of the church, and the messages included: "Restore Roe" and "Is overturning Roe worth your life or democracy?"

Police are reviewing the security footage and searching for the suspects. According to the Diocese of Lansing, the graffiti has been power-washed.

If anyone has any information about this crime, they are urged to contact the Lansing Police Department at 517-483-4600.

The key language: “Is overturning Roe worth your life or democracy?" What are the logical implications of the words “worth your life”?

I realize that some anti-abortion demonstrators use chants claiming (thinking “mortal sin” consequences) that those taking part in abortions are risking their souls. Is that the same thing as saying that the U.S. Supreme Court voting to overturn Roe v. Wade is, addressing Catholic worshippers, “worth your life”?


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Plug-In: Five key story angles linked to Texas synagogue where hostages were taken

Plug-In: Five key story angles linked to Texas synagogue where hostages were taken

When I first saw news on social media of a ranting man taking hostages at a Texas synagogue Saturday, I immediately clicked the link to an Associated Press report.

To my shock, I discovered that the standoff involved Congregation Beth Israel in Colleyville, Texas.

I first wrote about that suburban congregation nearly two decades ago when I covered religion for AP in Dallas.

In 2004, I did a national feature on “frequent-flier rabbis” filling a need at then-fledgling Congregation Beth Israel and other small Jewish congregations across the nation. That same year, I wrote about Anna Salton Eisen, one of the congregation’s founders, and her Holocaust survivor father, George Lucius Salton.

Just this past October — 17 years later — Eisen trusted me to tell her family’s story again. I wrote a follow-up piece for AP on a surprising “reunion” between Eisen and the children of several Holocaust survivors who were in concentration camps together.

“I started this synagogue with two other families and am heartbroken and fearful,” Eisen wrote on Facebook on Saturday. “What has become of the world?”

I shared her status on my page and asked my friends to pray for a peaceful end. I was so relieved when Rabbi Charlie Cytron-Walker and two other hostages escaped unharmed Saturday night. A fourth hostage was released earlier. The FBI hostage rescue team shot the gunman.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Plug-in: Supreme Court questions inmate's demand for vocal prayers in Texas death chamber

Plug-in: Supreme Court questions inmate's demand for vocal prayers in Texas death chamber

Last week, we set the scene for the U.S. Supreme Court’s hearing of a religious freedom case involving a Texas death-row inmate.

This week, we summarize the mixed response justices gave in that inmate’s case.

Christianity Today’s Daniel Silliman lays out the plot aptly:

If you give a man in a Texas execution chamber the right to a prayer, is he entitled to two?

Can he ask for candles?

Or Communion?

If the United States Supreme Court says a condemned man has the religious right to have his pastor touch his foot while the state injects a lethal dose of chemicals into his veins, then will the court also have to allow a pastor to touch a man’s hand, his head, or even the place where the needle pierces the skin?

The justices quizzed attorney Seth Kretzer about the slippery slope of death penalty prayer on Tuesday morning, as they weighed whether the First Amendment and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), passed by Congress in 2000, give 37-year-old John Henry Ramirez the right to have his pastor lay hands on him and pray aloud when the state of Texas puts him to death.

The high court was skeptical of the inmate’s “demand that his pastor be allowed to pray out loud and touch him during his execution,” according to The Associated Press’ Jessica Gresko.

Justice Clarence Thomas raised concerns “about inmates ‘gaming the system’ by asserting dubious religious claims that served to delay their executions, notes the Wall Street Journal’s Jess Bravin.

The court “seemed divided,” explains the Washington Post’s Robert Barnes, who produced a “deeply reported and evocative” advance piece on the case, reporting from Corpus Christi, Texas.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

When the FBI infiltrates a Bible study, why does CNN say it was a fake 'Bible study'?

When the FBI infiltrates a Bible study, why does CNN say it was a fake 'Bible study'?

Every so often, one comes across a news story that’s beyond odd.

Ever since the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, law enforcement has been trying to get to the bottom as to who and what were the planners for all this. We all know that. But this time around, the FBI infiltrated something new — a Bible study in Alexandria.

Or, as many media are saying, a “Bible study.”

Look at this part of a CNN piece. The key is to try to find some information on a specific religious institution or movement linked to this activity:

The FBI has infiltrated a "Bible study" group in Virginia that after the January 6 riot had members discussing surveilling the US Capitol and their wish for secession from the US, and investigators closely followed one member's plans to build and test Molotov cocktails, according to recently unsealed court records.

The newly disclosed criminal case against Virginia man Fi Duong -- who also goes by "Monkey King" and "Jim," according to the court record -- arose after Duong interacted with undercover law enforcement officers several times on January 6 and into recent months, when the FBI ultimately gained access to his group in Virginia then accompanied him to an old jail as Duong allegedly pursued bomb-building.

Looks like an FBI agent befriended Duong and began hanging out with him and his friends.

Duong told the FBI agent that his group tried to be "cloak and dagger" and wanted to "build resistances," according to court records. The agent then attended what the group members called a "Bible study" meeting at an Alexandria, Virginia, house in February, where the group members discussed the Bible and secession, weaponry and combat training, and using methods to make their communications private, according to court records.

One person in the group commented at the meeting about creating "a semi-autonomous region" for Virginia. "I like the Constitution; I don't like the Democratic sh*t this region keeps voting for," the person said, according to the FBI.

I’m curious why the scare quotes are put around this Bible study group when it’s obvious there really was discussion about the Bible at this gathering. I listened to CNN’s video alongside the article and the reporter called the gathering “a so-called Bible study meeting.”


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Falwell Jr., Liberty University share GetReligion's post on Politico story — but did they actually read it?

Another bizarre twist in the Jerry Falwell Jr. story came Tuesday when the Liberty University president accused former board members and employees of an “attempted coup.”

That claim came a day after a long, negative Politico piece on Falwell quoted two dozen anonymous sources characterized as “current and former high-ranking Liberty University officials and close associates of Falwell.”

How bad are things for Falwell and Liberty?

Well, both of their official Twitter accounts tweeted my GetReligion post from Monday in which I declared, “Sorry, but Politico's long exposé on Jerry Falwell Jr. lacks adequate named sources to be taken seriously.”

If you missed that post, you really should read it before finishing this one. What I am about to say will make much more sense with that background in mind. Also, that post has generated a lot of good discussion along with a few typical troll comments from people who obviously didn’t take time to read what I wrote.

Of course, a few folks on Twitter (here and here, for example) asked if Falwell and Liberty actually read what I wrote.

After all, my post was no fan letter to Falwell.


Please respect our Commenting Policy