The Houston Chronicle

, , , , , , ,

Looking ahead: What will be the big religion-beat stories during the year ahead?

, , , , , , ,
Looking ahead: What will be the big religion-beat stories during the year ahead?

This week’s edition marks the launch of Plug-in’s fifth year. If you enjoy it, please encourage friends to subscribe.

Black churches were hit hardest by the pandemic but did more to promote vaccines, according to a new study cited by ReligionUnplugged.com’s Clemente Lisi and Religion News Service’s Adelle M. Banks.

The Israel-Hamas war “has exposed a generational rift among U.S. Christians and their perceptions about the conflict.” Lifeway Research’s Aaron Earls details the differing views of young and old believers.

Also, a new national poll explores why most Republicans think former President Donald Trump is a person of faith. The Deseret News’ Samuel Benson delves into the findings.

This is our weekly roundup of the top headlines and best reads in the world of faith. We start by looking ahead to the (expected) major news of 2024.

What To Know: The Big Story

Campaign 2024: Hey, guess what? It’s a presidential election year.

ReligionUnplugged editor Clemente Lisi rounded up what you need to know about the faith-angles when discussing the candidates. The Catholic-beat scribe here at GetReligion also offered five Catholic news stories and trends to watch in 2024.

At The Conversation, Tobin Miller Shearer predicts how politics and religion will mix in 2024. He suggests three trends to track.

What will make news?: It’s impossible to know — in advance — what stories will dominate our attention in 2024.

But members of the Religion News Service team share the headlines they anticipate — from papal “reforms” to psychedelics to the aforementioned presidential voting.


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

Podcast: Once again, why is religion a 'green frog' topic in many mainstream newsrooms?

, , , , , , , ,
Podcast: Once again, why is religion a 'green frog' topic in many mainstream newsrooms?

The news editor at the Champaign-Urbana News Gazette — my first real newsroom gig — had an interesting name for for a certain kind of over-the-top reader who would call to complain about the news.

It didn’t really matter if the reader’s criticism was right or wrong. It was all about tone and, especially, whether or not the reader was complaining about a subject that editors took seriously.

My editor referred to these callers as “green frogs.”

You see, many of these adamant readers were complaining about issues linked to religion, morality and politics. (At that time, the born-again Jimmy Carter was in the White House and the Religious Right was just starting to organize.)

As the complaining went on and on, the news editor’s eyes would glaze and he would put the caller on hold. That’s when I would hear the following, since everyone knew that I wanted to become a religion-beat pro: “Mattingly, there’s a green frog on the phone! You talk to them.”

This brings us to this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (CLICK HERE to tune that in), in which host Todd Wilken asked a question that, in various forms, I have heard a thousand times over the past 40+ years.

Yes, that would be: Why don’t journalists “get” religion?

However, there are many variations. Why don’t editors hire trained religion-beat reporters? Why do newsrooms mess up the basic facts in some many religion stories? Why do many, not all, journalists IGNORE essential religion issues and themes in important news and events? Why do religious issues show up so often in studies probing media bias? Long ago, back when journalists in major newsrooms dared to fill out surveys about their work, why did half of pros in elite newsrooms write the word “none” in the space describing their religious faith?

I could go on and on. My chosen wording is this: Why don’t newsroom managers handle religion news with the same old-school journalism methodology — hire reporters who have training and experience on this beat and let them do their work — that they apply to subjects that they respect (such as politics, sports, law, arts, business, etc.)?


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

Podcast: Now what, after SBC 'messengers' have waved their yellow voting cards?

, , , , , , , , , ,
Podcast: Now what, after SBC 'messengers' have waved their yellow voting cards?

Here’s a warning to reporters who are preparing for future national meetings of the Southern Baptist Convention: Never call these folks “delegates.”

They are not delegates at some kind of political event. They are “messengers” from their local autonomous churches. You see, this isn’t some kind of cocktail-hour mainline Protestant denominational whatever, and many Baptists don’t like the word “denomination,” either. This is a “convention” and it only meets for three days each year.

Use the wrong language and Southern Baptists will give you a steely gaze and then say something nasty, like “Well, bless your heart.”

Quite a few journalists attended this year’s SBC meeting because there were headline-worthy — from their editors’ point of view — topics on the agenda, like clergy sexual abuse, Critical Race Theory and an election to determine if some new-breed conservative “pirates” (that was their term from 2021) were going to wrest the wheel of the ship away from the allegedly “woke” establishment conservatives.

As you would imagine, host Todd Wilken and I dug into all of this during the “Crossroads” podcast this week (CLICK HERE to tune that in). One of the big themes was that the hard-news coverage of this convention — especially by “Location, location, location” pros from major SBC centers, like Houston and Nashville — was top-notch.

Veteran GetReligion scribe Bobby “Positive” Ross, Jr., will offer pages of URLs in his Plug-In feature this week, so I will not try to do that (I’ll post a link when it goes public). But this is what happens when major newsrooms send religion-beat professionals to cover a major event. Readers don’t have to agree with every single thing that they saw in the #SBC2022 coverage, but what we had here was a tsunami of serious coverage from professionals, backed by the skilled Baptist Press team running the on-site newsroom.

With that in mind, let me note a Big Ideas from this podcast.

* If you study attendance numbers at previous “hot” SBC meetings, you will notice a logical trend linked to a map of the Bible Belt. In this online list, note the 1985 Dallas convention drew 45,519 messengers and the 1986 Atlanta convention drew 40,987.

Yes, these were the pivotal years in the historic “conservative resurgence” in SBC life. But, truth is, those numbers also reflect how far ordinary messengers can drive in one day jammed into the buses or vans owned by “ordinary” SBC congregations.


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

Plug-In: Lots of news about Southern Baptists, U.S. Catholic bishops and even a modern Jonah

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Plug-In: Lots of news about Southern Baptists, U.S. Catholic bishops and even a modern Jonah

One.

Two.

This makes three straight weeks that the Southern Baptist Convention’s big meeting in Nashville, Tennessee, has topped Plug-in.

Want an impossible challenge? Try highlighting the best coverage out of the plethora of headlines produced in Music City this week.

Some of the big news:

• The surprise election of “moderate” (if you’re OK with that term from the SBC past) pastor Ed Litton from Alabama as the SBC’s president.

Religion News Service’s Bob Smietana, the Washington Post’s Sarah Pulliam Bailey, Christianity Today’s Kate Shellnutt, the New York Times’ Ruth Graham, The Associated Press’ Travis Loller and Peter Smith and ReligionUnplugged’s own Hamil R. Harris all offer insightful coverage on that. (Even the Los Angeles Times weighs in, via Atlanta bureau chief Jenny Jarvie.)

• The skirmish over critical race theory, which Chris Moody describes in an in-depth narrative piece for New York Magazine.

Also, don’t miss The Tennessean’s Wednesday front-page report by Katherine Burgess, Duane W. Gang and Holly Meyer.

For more on the CRT angle, see Adelle M. Banks’ RNS story and Greg Garrison’s Birmingham News coverage.

• The major action to confront sexual abuse in the denomination, as the Houston Chronicle’s Robert Downen, CT’s Shellnutt, the Memphis Commercial Appeal’s Burgess and RNS’ Smietana detail.


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

#SBC2021, CRT and sexual abuse: Are compromises possible in this complex showdown?

, , , , , , , , ,
#SBC2021, CRT and sexual abuse: Are compromises possible in this complex showdown?

When most journalists, and thus most news consumers, think of Southern Baptists it’s highly likely that “compromise” is not one of the first words that leaps to mind.

But think about this for a moment. The current firestorm surrounding the Southern Baptist Convention’s national meetings in Nashville (tomorrow and Wednesday) centers on recent efforts by the convention’s leaders to find working compromises on two explosive issues in church life — racism and sexual abuse. In both cases, forces have pulled at convention leaders to move further to the right or to pursue more “progressive” options that would clash with realities in SBC life and polity.

Consider the hellish realities of racism and, in particular, the complex secular doctrines of “Critical Race Theory.” The SBC could praise CRT and embrace it or totally reject this school of thought. A compromise? That would stress listening to conservative Black church leaders and saying that CRT makes some points about racism in America that are valid, but that it also contains secular views of evil and race that do not mesh with traditional Christian beliefs. Hold that thought.

On sexual abuse, there are progressives who want the SBC to start some kind of national agency that would be granted powers to yank abusive clergy and congregations into line. This would clash with Baptist teachings on the autonomy of local churches. At the same time, others say SBC leaders have already gone to far while trying to create a centrist, compromise, stance — providing some guidelines for churches facing accusations of sexual abuse, as well as best-practices materials on how to help victims.

So, here is the journalism question to ponder in the next few days: Can national-level religion reporters find a way to avoid the classic two-army, left vs. right, template that dominates most news coverage of clashes of this kind? This would allow readers to see the larger picture — the attempt to find compromises between two extremes that please enough conservatives to prevent a damaging explosion in SBC life.


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

After the U.S. Capitol riot: Personality cults do not mix well with traditional Christian faith

, , , , , , , , , , , ,
After the U.S. Capitol riot: Personality cults do not mix well with traditional Christian faith

Year after year, thousands of Americans attend the March for Life, marching past the U.S. Capital on a late January date close to the anniversary of Roe vs. Wade.

Most of the marchers are young and come by bus from Catholic and evangelical schools. While most of the groups present are conservative, there are smaller groups like Secular Pro-Life and Democrats for Life. Most of the banners contain slogans such as, "Abortion Hurts Women," "Love Life, Choose Life" or "We are the Pro-Life Generation."

Things were different at the Save America March backing President Donald Trump's efforts to flip the 2020 election. Some banners contained messages like "Jesus is my Savior, Trump is my President." But many more proclaimed "Stand with Trump!" or "Trump 2020: No More Bulls--t."

It's one thing to march for a cause. It is something else to hail a political leader as the key to saving America, said Southern Baptist Seminary President R. Albert Mohler, Jr., a central figure in evangelical debates about Trump.

"The American experiment in ordered liberty is inherently threatened by a cult of personality. And we saw the results of that. … So many of those who were there as protestors explicitly said that they were there in the name of Donald Trump," said Mohler, in a podcast the day after U.S. Capitol riot. "It was Trump that was the name on the banners. They were not making the argument about trying to perpetuate certain political principles or even policies or platforms."

History shows that personality cults -- left or right -- are dangerous, he stressed. After this "American nightmare," Christians should soberly ponder the "way sin works" and its impact on powerful leaders who are tempted to become demagogues.

"Demagoguery simply means that you have a character who comes to power on the basis of emotion, rather than argument, and passion rather than political principles," said Mohler.

It's crucial to know that, in 2016, Mohler was numbered among evangelical leaders who opposed Trump's candidacy. When the New York City billionaire clinched the GOP nomination, Mohler tweeted: "Never. Ever. Period."

But in 2020 he said he would vote for Trump in support of the Republican Party, thus opposing the Democratic Party platform.


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

Thinking about, and with, Al Mohler: America's 'ordered liberty' was set afire -- by Trump

, , , , , , , ,
Thinking about, and with, Al Mohler: America's 'ordered liberty' was set afire -- by Trump

If you have followed the divisions inside the Southern Baptist Convention since 1979, or even earlier, you know this name — R. Albert Mohler, Jr. He was — for some — a L’enfant terrible among the conservatives in the early biblical inerrancy wars who (like him or not) grew, as president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, into one of the most important Southern Baptist voices of the late 20th and early 21st centuries.

It would be hard to describe the degree to which many Southern Baptists in the defeated “moderate” establishment detest Mohler, for a variety of theological, cultural and political reasons. At the same time, in the Donald Trump era, there are many in the ranks of far-right Southern Baptist life who view him as a traitor or even “politically correct.”

This is not an easy era in which to lead conservative religious institutions, even those with clout and many supporters. And it’s crucial to know that Southern Baptists leaders were, like evangelical leaders in general, sharply divided on whether to support the rise of Trump in 2015-2016. (Click here for the GetReligion typology describing six different evangelical views of Trump.)

Out of the tsunami of important statements by religious leaders following the U.S. Capitol riot, I have selected — as this weekend’s “think piece” — two articles by and about Mohler, Trump and the hellish scenes of January 6th. The first is a Houston Chronicle interview with Mohler by Robert “wut is happening?” Downen, an emerging religion-beat force in Texas and American in general. The headline: “Evangelical leader Albert Mohler says he’s horrified by chaos at Capitol, but stands by Trump vote.”

Downen notes that:

Mohler is the longtime president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s flagship seminary in Louisville, Ky., and is a contender to lead the SBC when the faith group elects a new president in June.

The evangelical leader has forcefully condemned Trump over the last half-decade, characterizing him as a sexual predator at one point and, after Trump clinched the Republican Party nomination in 2016, Tweeting simply: “Never. Ever. Period.”


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

Plug-in: 'Racy' snapshot of Liberty's Jerry Falwell Jr. sparks heat, curiosity and wisecracks

, , , , , , , ,

“Wut is happening,” Houston Chronicle religion writer Robert Downen quipped on Twitter this week.

Downen’s colloquial query about an, um, unexpected snapshot of Jerry Falwell Jr. quickly went viral.

Falwell is, of course, the president of Liberty University and a prominent evangelical ally of President Donald Trump.

As noted by Julie Roys, an independent Christian journalist, the “racy picture” of Falwell and a woman was seemingly taken at a party on his yacht. Falwell posted the image to his Instagram page and then quickly deleted it.

“In the picture,” Roys explained, “Falwell and a woman, described as a friend, appear with their shirts hiked up and pants unzipped with the caption: ‘Lots of good friends visited us on the yacht. I promise that’s just black water in my glass.’”

Roys added: “A video of the party also showed up on the internet, featuring Falwell and others at what appears to be a Trailer Park Boys themed party. The scenes are surprising, given that Falwell is the president of the largest Christian university in the country. One guest in the video makes a vulgar gesture toward the camera. Some are wearing tight clothes with bellies exposed. Many have cigarettes dangling from their mouths.“

At first, some questioned whether the man in the picture was actually Falwell. But it soon became clear that it was indeed him.

Later, Falwell apologized for posting the photo, Politico reported. But the same news article said he “also defended the incident as a vacation ‘costume party’ that was ‘just in good fun.’”

“I’ve apologized to everybody,” Falwell said in an interview with radio station WLNI 105.9 FM in Lynchburg, Va. “And I’ve promised my kids I’m going to try to be — I’m gonna try to be a good boy from here on out.”

For his part, Downen — best known for his award-winning investigative project on sex abuse in Southern Baptist churches — said he was surprised by the heavy response to his tweet.


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

Religion is the hidden theme in this coronavirus-hydroxychloroquine controversy

, , , , , , , ,

A group of doctors in white coats was the big news last week and for those of you living under a rock, I am referring to some press conferences in front of the U.S. Supreme Court. They featured a racially mixed group of about 10 people dressed in white lab coats.

All of them — who were doctors of one sort or another — gave their names and that of their workplaces, making it easy for anyone to check them out. Their plaint? The anti-malaria drug hydroxychloroquine is a proven tool in treatment of COVID-19 and there’s something rotten in Denmark when you can’t even post a video on social media about it.

But did you see much reporting examining their arguments?

No, you heard about “demon sperm” and “alien DNA.”

It didn’t take long before Facebook, Twitter and YouTube were treating the event as akin to anti-vaxxer screed. Censors at all three platforms were working overtime to get this presser erased. Certain media managed to get a look-see at these medics, and what did they concentrate on in their reports?

Their religious views, of course.

Especially the religion of the one black woman in the crowd. We’ll get back to that shortly. First, some background from the New York Times, which was in quite a swivet about the whole thing.

In a video posted Monday online, a group of people calling themselves “America’s Frontline Doctors” and wearing white medical coats spoke against the backdrop of the Supreme Court in Washington, sharing misleading claims about the virus, including that hydroxychloroquine was an effective coronavirus treatment and that masks did not slow the spread of the virus.

The video did not appear to be anything special. But within six hours, President Trump and his son Donald Trump Jr. had tweeted versions of it, and the right-wing news site Breitbart had shared it. It went viral, shared largely through Facebook groups dedicated to anti-vaccination movements and conspiracy theories such as QAnon, racking up tens of millions of views. Multiple versions of the video were uploaded to YouTube, and links were shared through Twitter.

Well, surely the public can’t be allowed to see that, right?


Please respect our Commenting Policy