Marvin Olasky

Plug-In: Looming Israel-Hamas war brings familiar questions about the end of the world

Plug-In: Looming Israel-Hamas war brings familiar questions about the end of the world

No big deal. OK, it’s sort of a big deal: went to Arlington, Texas, for the start of the World Series. Let’s go, Rangers! But you knew that I would say that.

Speaking of the Fall Classic, Marvin Olasky writes at ReligionUnplugged that the World Series “reflects life and what little we can control.” I sure hope my favorite team can control its bullpen and win its first title ever.

But you signed on for religion news, not my baseball analysis, so here goes: The new speaker of the U.S. House is a Southern Baptist who has served as a trustee of the SBC’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, Baptist Press’ Brandon Porter notes.

Rep. Mike Johnson, a Republican from Louisiana, suggested his election as speaker was ordained by God, according to Religion News Service.

This is our weekly roundup of the top headlines and best reads in the world of faith. We start again with the Israel-Hamas War, this time focusing on questions about the end of the world.

What To Know: The Big Story

End times debate: The Israel-Hamas war has sent Christians in search of prophetic meaning, as the Washington Times’ Mark A. Kellner, a former GetReligion contributor, explains:

Evangelical leaders are looking to the Bible’s end-of-days prophecies as congregants seek to understand the Israel-Hamas war.

While the Book of Revelation and the Gospel of Matthew offer details of what is to happen before Christ’s return, apocalyptic Scriptures have often been cited when global tensions flare up, such as Israel’s war of independence in 1948, the 1967 Six-Day War and the October War of 1973.

Believers also sounded alarms after the eruption of World War II, the Cold War and the 9/11 attacks.

“I think even secularists would tell you never have we faced so many severe threats in the world that we’re facing right now,” said the Rev. Robert Jeffress, senior pastor of the First Baptist Church of Dallas.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: What would happen if GetReligion provided 'hot' GOP debate questions?

Podcast: What would happen if GetReligion provided 'hot' GOP debate questions?

I’m not a fan of the cable-television festivals called “presidential debates,” because they rarely feature any substantial debates and the candidates don’t act presidential.

Maybe this is more evidence that I am what I am, a journalist who is a registered third-party person who doesn’t fit in America’s Republican-Democrat binary vise (rather like Megyn Kelly’s take here).

However, the producers at Lutheran Public Radio had an interesting idea for this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (CLICK HERE to tune that in). They asked me to prepare questions — thinking religion-beat, GetReligion-oriented stuff — that I would ask if (#ducking) I was the moderator at last night’s GOP presidential debate at the Ronald Reagan Library.

I came up with 10 or so questions and I’ll share some of those shortly. However, I knew that the subjects that most interest me — as an old-school First Amendment liberal — would not be on this debate’s menu.

First, let’s deal with the orange elephant in the room. The New York Post, in it’s “exclusive drinking game for the second Republican presidential debate,” reminded viewers to:

Take a sip of WATER …

… every time Donald Trump is mentioned. This will keep you hydrated.

Later, the Post team offered these style points:

Take a sip of your drink …

… every time a candidate says “woke”

… when a candidate calls another candidate by an unflattering nickname

… when someone references the Biden Crime Family

… when a candidate uses a 3-letter acronym (think FBI, IRS, DEI, CDC)

… when a candidate tries to deflect when asked if they think the election was rigged

… when a candidate says they support Trump’s movement (but think they’re the one to finish the job)


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Plug-In: The March On Washington, 60 years later -- looking back with faith

Plug-In: The March On Washington, 60 years later -- looking back with faith

Is it time for fall yet? We’re enduring yet another triple-digit day in my home state of Oklahoma, and I’m ready for cooler temperatures.

But you signed up for religion news, not a weather report, so let’s start with this: Belief in the prosperity gospel is on the rise among churchgoers, according to a Lifeway Research report by Marissa Postell Sullivan.

Meanwhile, yet another Roman Catholic diocese in California has filed for bankruptcy, the Washington Post’s Paulina Villegas reports.

“The San Francisco Archdiocese is the third Bay Area diocese to file for bankruptcy after facing hundreds of lawsuits brought under a California law approved in 2019 that allowed decades-old claims to be filed by Dec. 31, 2022,” The Associated Press’ Olga R. Rodriguez notes.

At Christianity Today, Kate Shellnutt explains how the Christian Standard Bible has found its place in a crowded evangelical market.

This is our weekly roundup of the top headlines and best reads in the world of faith. Our big story concerns Monday’s 60th anniversary of the Aug. 28, 1963, March on Washington.

What To Know: The Big Story

Evolution of activism: “The March on Washington of 1963 is remembered most for the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.'s “I Have a Dream” speech — and thus as a crowning moment for the long-term civil rights activism of what is sometimes referred to as the ‘Black Church.’”

That’s the lede from The Associated Press’ David Crary, who adds important context:

At the march, King indeed represented numerous other Black clergy who were his colleagues in the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. But the march was the product of sustained activism by a broader coalition. Black and white labor leaders, as well as white clergy, played pivotal roles over many months ahead of the event.

Moreover, the Black Church was not monolithic then — nor is it now.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

After 303 Creative: Can readers find Twitter voices (hello David French) that help us think?

After 303 Creative: Can readers find Twitter voices (hello David French) that help us think?

It’s been a scary couple of days for post-liberals in America, with two major Supreme Court decisions (one of them unanimous) defending old-liberal concepts of religious liberty and free speech.

When the 303 Creative LLC decision hit the headlines (click here to read the majority opinion), I did something that’s quite rare in my household — I turned on the television and tried to watch mainstream cable-TV news.

Let’s face it: I struggle to understand why we have journalists who want the state to have the power to compel speech (intellectual content in general) in the work of writers, artists, video professionals, etc. But this post isn’t about the content of the news coverage of these decisions.

No, this is a post that I was requested to write after a recent luncheon with clergy, students, faculty and others at the Overby Center at Ole Miss. We kept coming back to a crucial question for news consumers: How do we find a compelling mix of news and commentary — representing different points of view — in an age in which most newsrooms embrace business models in which they tell paying customers exactly what they want to hear?

Here is another way of stating that: How do we find news and commentary that helps us understand the views of people what we need to respect (or at the very least truly tolerate), even when we disagree with them?

This led me to Twitter. I told folks that, when the 303 Creative decision was released, they needed to read whatever First Amendment specialist David French wrote about it. Why? Because I was convinced that he would find a way to parse the opinions and offer insights that made people on both sides of the decision very uncomfortable.

This is, frankly, why I have followed his work for several decades. This is why he is on a short list of people that I follow on Twitter when digging into major news trends and events. Hold that thought, because I will share my current version of that list at the end of this post.

But back to French and the headline on his New York Times column about this SCOTUS decision: “How Christians and Drag Queens Are Defending the First Amendment.”

Told ya.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Plug-In: What do we know about the faith of the two latest GOP White House candidates?

Plug-In: What do we know about the faith of the two latest GOP White House candidates?

A week has passed since influential pastor and author Tim Keller’s death. Look for some of the best tributes to him below.

Making news today: Texas’ GOP-controlled House could impeach scandal-ridden Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton and kick the longtime Christian right culture warrior out of office, The Associated Press’ Jake Bleiberg and Jim Vertuno report.

Jumping into this week’s roundup of the top headlines and best reads in the world of faith, we start with two new entrants in the 2024 presidential race.

What To Know: The Big Story

Political opposites: “One has the most winning personality in politics,” the Wall Street Journal’s Peggy Noonan says of South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott.

“The other doesn’t but has a story to tell about policy,” Noonan says of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.

Thusly, the Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist and speechwriter for former President Ronald Reagan characterizes the two aspirants who declared for the GOP nomination this past week.

Scott focuses on faith: “A cornerstone of Republican Tim Scott's political career has been an unyielding faith,” USA Today’s Phillip M. Bailey notes.

Monday’s campaign kickoff by Scott, one of the nation’s most prominent Black Republicans, emphasized his Christian faith and personal story, according to the Washington Post’s Marianne LeVine.

At Politico, Natalie Allison asks, “Can Tim Scott actually win with piles of money, lots of faith and a big bet on Iowa?”


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Return of the evangelical arguments about morality, character and two-party politics

Return of the evangelical arguments about morality, character and two-party politics

It was totally logical for the Southern Baptist Convention to pass its "Resolution on Moral Character of Public Officials" in 1998.

Consider this "whereas" clause: "Some journalists report that many Americans are willing to excuse or overlook immoral or illegal conduct by unrepentant public officials so long as economic prosperity prevails." This was followed by: "Tolerance of serious wrong by leaders sears the conscience of the culture, spawns unrestrained immorality and lawlessness in the society, and surely results in God's judgment."

Thus, the SBC urged American leaders to "live by the highest standards of morality both in their private actions and in their public duties."

Yes, this resolution passed soon after the infamous claim by President Bill Clinton, a Southern Baptist, that "I did not have sexual relations with that woman."

It was easy to predict who thought Clinton should exit the White House, noted conservative writer Marvin Olasky, who was writing "The American Leadership Tradition: Moral Vision from Washington to Clinton" at that time.

"In poker, you really don't know what cards someone has," said Olasky, reached by telephone. "You can't tell, with certainty, the character of a politician. … In that book, I argued that the state of a man's marriage was a strong tell. If he's faithful in his marriage, he's likely to be faithful to the nation."

Olasky's fellow religious conservatives praised the book. But things changed when he wrote a World magazine essay in 2016 entitled, "Unfit for power," arguing that Donald Trump should step aside as the Republican nominee.

"Clinton had denied having a sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky, but her stained blue dress bearing Clinton's DNA was proof that he had used his power for adulterous purposes, and then lied about it," wrote Olasky. Then there was the videotape showing "Trump making lewd remarks about groping women's genitals. While many opponents … have criticized Trump's character, the video gave us new information about how Trump views power as a means to gratify himself."

Olasky recirculated this 2016 editorial after Trump's recent announcement that he would seek the presidency once again, igniting renewed social-media warfare among evangelicals about morality, character and the winner-take-all nature of American politics -- especially when Supreme Court seats are vacant.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Thinking about Olasky's 2016 blast at Donald Trump, as journalists prepare for 2024

Thinking about Olasky's 2016 blast at Donald Trump, as journalists prepare for 2024

So, I heard that former President Donald Trump made some kind of announcement the other day. That means (#SIGH) that we have to think, again, about that whole elite-media thing with 81% of White evangelicals adoring Orange. Man. Bad.

But readers who scan this Google file on that subject will find plenty of reminders that — when White evangelicals had a GOP choice in the 2016 primaries — many provided core support for Trump while just as many voted for other candidates.

With that in mind, consider this National Review headline: “Can DeSantis Win the Evangelical Vote?” That leads to this summary:

… (I)fDeSantis does intend to challenge Trump, he must convince conservative Christians — particularly white Evangelical Protestants, who made up almost half of the GOP electorate in the 2012 and 2016 primaries — to support his cause.

DeSantis would seem well-suited to the task. He has taken a strong stance on many of the social issues that matter most to Evangelicals: This year alone, he stood up against LGBTQ indoctrination in schools and signed a bill banning abortion after 15 weeks of gestation (in a state where 56 percent of adults say abortion should be legal in all or most cases); most recently, at his urging, state medical boards banned puberty blockers and transgender surgery for minors. …

And all of this ignores character. Between his three marriages, his lewd comments about groping women, and his friendship with Hugh Hefner, Trump was always an odd champion for the Moral Majority. DeSantis, on the other hand, has avoided scandal so far and cultivated a family-man public image that Evangelicals might find appealing.

OK, it would be good to take a flashback to a crucial moment in this drama.

As candidate Trump ramped up in 2016, one of America’s most consistent voices on religious, moral and cultural issues — Marvin Olasky — wrote and published a World magazine essay with this headline: “Unfit for power — It’s time for Donald Trump to step aside and make room for another candidate.

Any journalist who wants to cover the next two years of American politics needs to read this essay, which Olasky recently re-upped on Twitter.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Plug-In: Minichurches and burned-out pastors -- four crucial COVID-19 trends to follow

Plug-In: Minichurches and burned-out pastors -- four crucial COVID-19 trends to follow

COVID-19 rages on.

So does the pandemic’s big impact on American religion.

From in-person attendance declining to pastors burning out, here are four related trends to watch:

(1) Churches changed during the pandemic and many aren’t going back (by Janet Adamy, Wall Street Journal)

“The number of churchgoers has steadily dropped in the U.S. over the past few decades,” Adamy reports. “But Covid-19 and its lockdown restrictions accelerated that fall. In-person church attendance is roughly 30% to 50% lower than it was before the pandemic, estimates Barna Group, a research firm that studies faith in the U.S.”

(2) Why the minichurch is the latest trend in American religion (by Bob Smietana, Religion News Service)

Smietana profiles a small church in Wisconsin, noting, “Cornerstone is part of the fastest-growing group of congregations in America: the minichurch. According to the recently released Faith Communities Today study, half of the congregations in the United States have 65 people or fewer, while two-thirds of congregations have fewer than 100.”

(3) The pastors aren’t all right: 38% consider leaving ministry (by Kate Shellnutt, Christianity Today)

“Pastoral burnout has worsened during the pandemic,” Shellnutt explains. “A Barna Group survey released (this week) found that 38 percent of pastors are seriously considering leaving full-time ministry, up from 29 percent in January.”

See related coverage from the Washington Times, by former GetReligionista Mark A. Kellner.

(4) Most churches find financial stability in 2021 (by Aaron Earls, Lifeway Research)

“Emerging from the pandemic, most churches don’t seem to be underwater financially, but many are treading water,” Earls reports.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: Why was the New York Times so interested in Marvin Olasky? Take a guess ...

Podcast: Why was the New York Times so interested in Marvin Olasky? Take a guess ...

Why was The New York Times so interested in Marvin Olasky and his views on journalism and Christian faith?

That’s a question that I heard several times this week from readers and others.

Actually, the Times published a previous article on Olasky, which I mentioned in a post here earlier this week (“Wut happened? Tensions behind World's move to push Olasky out of his editor's chair”). So let’s tweak that question a bit, to get to the point that host Todd Wilken and I discussed in this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to listen to it).

Why was the Times team so interested — it’s a long, complex feature — in Olasky right now?

Actually, the answer to that question is pretty clear. Read the headline: “His Reasons for Opposing Trump Were Biblical. Now a Top Christian Editor Is Out.” Now,. read the thesis statement:

At one level, Mr. Olasky’s departure is just another example of the American news media sinking deeper into polarization, as one more conservative news outlet, which had almost miraculously retained its independence, is conquered by Mr. Trump.

It also marks the end of a remarkable era at a publication that has shaken evangelical churches and related institutions with its deeply reported articles. … At a time when hot takes get the clicks, these articles offered something old-fashioned and hard for any community to take: accountability reporting.

That’s actually two answers, isn’t it.

Answer No. 1: Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump. Answer No. 2: Olasky has built a magazine known for producing hard-news articles. That’s rare, in today’s digital world dominated by a quick-click business model that loves opinions and commentary work. The editorial approach at World was shaped by cultural, religious conservatism, more than partisan politics.

Think of this magazine as an evangelical version of the late, great New Republic.


Please respect our Commenting Policy