Follow your bliss

reiki1Reader Charlie Lehardy sent in a story from his local paper, the Arizona Daily Star. The paper regularly runs prominent articles on alternative spirituality, he said. Erin White’s interesting profile of a shamanic energy healer begins with the story of a woman, Susan Luzader Prust, who bought a piece of land to run a resort for dogs but felt that parts of the property were “a little spooky and scary.”

The businesswoman worried her company wouldn’t flourish amid the negative energy she felt. Then Prust hired Pam Hale Trachta, a shamanic energy healer who runs a business called On Solid Ground, to help her “heal” the land.

Energy healings, particularly in forms like Reiki, have surged in acceptance in recent years. The tradition dates back centuries among native South Americans, and the year-and-a-half-old Ealy Center for Natural Healing here, which is licensed by the state Board for Private Postsecondary Education, works with clients and teaches energy healing.

Energy healings may or may not have “surged in acceptance in recent years.” But the way the reader determines a quantifiable increase is through data, not an anecdote about one school being started. One of the biggest frustrations about reporting on these types of groups is the difficulty of coming up with hard numbers. But in the absence of hard numbers, it’s not appropriate to say energy healings have surged in acceptance.

Anyway, the story explains how Trachta left a corporate career of consulting. She would help companies restructure their personnel and business practices but left their “energy” untouched.

After Prust hired her, Trachta walked the acreage, calling in the four directions to create sacred space. Trachta then set out to find the heart of the land — what she considers the energy center.

“It is spiritual work — there’s no way around that,” she says, “but as soon as you mention that, people start picturing ghosts.”

That’s not an accurate idea of what she does, she says. “I work as a bridge to invisible influences that can be worked with to assist our quality of life.”

She struggles to verbalize the process in concrete terms. “It’s just a knowing,” she says. “All of a sudden, I got to a spot and felt sadness, a lump in my throat, and I ask, ‘Is this the heart of the land?’”

energystones1The two women sat on the land, and both say that, in their mind’s eye, they saw a young Apache man who told them he was sad because he’d had to leave.

After talking with the spirits still on the land, Trachta recommended a corn ceremony for healing. The two women layered tissue paper with symbolic bits — stickers of dogs, flower petals to represent plant life, sugar for Mother Earth, pink sugar for attracting clients — and buried the despacho, or offering, at the spot Trachta identified as the heart of the land.

The article goes on to describe Trachta’s business model and her self-awareness that people probably think she’s a bit out there. The reporter also talks to a skeptic with a group called Quackwatch. All in all, a great way to cover a non-traditional religious story.

Lehardy wondered whether alternative spirituality gets as much coverage in major newspapers and religion media as it does in Arizona. I seem to recall much more coverage when I lived in Colorado, which makes sense. A quick search of Reiki and New Age spirituality shows a bunch of coverage, but none in major media.

Science explains everything

ben crosses the lineI remember hearing a joke about a Sunday school teacher who was telling her young students about the Israelites crossing the Red Sea. This teacher was more learned than the average Sunday school teacher so she explained that the Moses hadn’t miraculously parted the water to enable the crossing. Rather, the sea was actually very shallow — only a couple of inches or feet deep, in fact. So while God did rescue his people, he didn’t use supernatural means.

“That’s amazing!” said Billy, one of her young charges.

The teacher explained that God was amazing but that this crossing hadn’t been such an amazing feat. In fact, Red Sea was a mistranslation. It was a sea of reeds. A Reed Sea. And so the Israelites only had to cross a very shallow sea.

“Wow! That’s super-amazing!” said Billy.

Exasperated, the teacher asked him what was so amazing about the Israelites traversing the Reed Sea.

“That the entire Egyptian army drowned in a few inches of water!”

I thought of that joke when I read the news today that a scientist thinks the biblical account of Jesus walking on the water has a scientific explanation. Here’s how the New York Times put it:

It was a stormy night on the Sea of Galilee and the disciples were out in a boat, battling a contrary wind, when they saw Jesus approaching, as if a spirit. “And he went up to them into the ship; and the wind ceased,” it is written in Mark 6:51. “And they were sore amazed in themselves beyond measure, and wondered.”

Doron Nof also wondered, in a measured, scientific way. A professor of oceanography at Florida State University, he conducted an inquiry and found what might be a natural explanation: ice.

Writing in The Journal of Paleolimnology, Dr. Nof and his colleagues point out that unusual freezing processes probably occurred in the region in the last 12,000 years, icing over parts of freshwater Galilee. This has not happened in recent history, but there were much colder stretches 1,500 to 2,500 years ago. . . .

From a distance, the scientists suggested, a person on the ice might appear to be walking on water, particularly if it had just rained and left a smoothed-out watery coating on the ice.

Not to sound like Billy, but that is amazing that a boat could be battling rough seas at the same time Jesus was walking on ice nearby. Not to mention that this event occurred immediately after Jesus fed thousands with the few loaves and fishes. And remember what the Bible says about that group? That Jesus told them to recline on the “green grass”? Sounds like winter.

Following on the heels of the prayer study, it’s interesting to see so much media coverage of scientific attempts to explain either supernatural occurrences or issues of spirituality. It’s also interesting to contrast with the media treatment of religious explanations of scientific phenomena.

When any group questions or raises concerns with the current scientific explanation for a given issue, it rarely if ever gets to just tell its side of the story without rebuttal. And that’s only fair and right. But when some scientist comes up with an outlandish explanation debunking Christ’s power, it would be nice if reporters would seek a response from other scientists or followers of Jesus who could explain the significance of the story.

Maybe God only answers the prayers of Methodists

PrayingA $2.4 million study on the effect of intercessory prayer came out last week and received a bunch of coverage. Researchers studying 1,800 heart-bypass patients at three hospitals found that intercessory prayer by strangers has no effect on the health of the person being prayed for. They also found that people fared worse — in the short-term at least — if they knew they were being prayed for.

But the study was a bit more complex than that. Over 3,000 patients were asked to take part in the study and over 1,800 agreed. Patients were randomly divided into three groups:

• people who were prayed for but were told they may or may not be prayed for

• people who were not prayed for but told they may or may not be prayed for

• patients who were prayed for and told they would be prayed for.

Some of the ways this study was done well (and it should have been for $2.4 million!) were that patients were randomly assigned, doctors were not told what group the patients were assigned to, the sample size was large and data collected about the participants showed there weren’t big differences across the three groups.

But there were problems, too. Patients may or may not have been prayed for by people who cared about them and knew them. The study didn’t capture that information — instead it farmed out first names and the first letter of last names to strangers in three different congregations (two Catholic and one Protestant). God had only 14 days to work healing. Or, rather, congregants only prayed for the patients for 14 days. My congregation prays for people as long as they are in need of prayer. In some cases, we have been praying for people for years. It never occurred to us that this meant intercessory prayer was failing!

Stories were sort of all over the map, but most reporters did a good job of characterizing the study. Here’s Michael Conlon of Reuters:

A study of more than 1,800 patients who underwent heart bypass surgery has failed to show that prayers specially organized for their recovery had any impact, researchers said on Thursday.

And here is Rob Stein in the Washington Post:

Praying for other people to recover from an illness is ineffective, according to the largest, best-designed study to examine the power of prayer to heal strangers at a distance.

It’s just interesting to see two reporters in action. The first lead emphasizes the manufactured aspect of the prayers. While the second lead shows the study looked at prayer by strangers, it makes it seem like the study proves all prayer is ineffective — which is much more broad than the study itself purports.

Anyway, I know the unemployed, sick and dying at my church will still be prayed for. Speaking of lead paragraphs, this satirical one made me laugh:

A team of scientists today ended a 10-year study on the so-called “power of prayer” by concluding that God cannot be manipulated by humans, not even by scientists with a $2.4 million research grant.

Heh.

God wants you to be a millionaire

osteenI have a friend, and former editor, who used to watch televangelists with a drinking buddy. They would come home from a night on the town and keep drinking while watching CBN or some other preacher network. It was all fun and games until one night they accidentally donated $50 to Pat Robertson. The good news is that they realized they needed to cut back on their drinking.

I confess that I also like to watch televangelists while imbibing. And one of my favorites is Joel Osteen. I have been watching the ubiquitous preacher for years now, waiting for him to say anything uniquely Christian. If you watch him, you’ll know he has GREAT NEWS where other preachers just have Good News. Did you know God wants you to be wealthy and get a great-looking spouse? It’s true. Did you know God wants you to get a killer job and a fast car and the respect of your peers? True again.

Osteen is everywhere. His book, Your Best Life Now: 7 Steps to Living at Your Full Potential, sold more than 3 million copies. He packs the former Compaq Center, where the Houston Rockets used to play, with 40,000 devoted fans every week. The New York Times‘ Ralph Blumenthal wrote a fascinating profile of Osteen, who just signed a huge contract for a new book, possibly as much as $13 million.

“You know what, I’ve never done it for the money,” he said in an interview after Sunday’s service, which he led with his glamorous wife and co-pastor, Victoria. “I’ve never asked for money on television.” But opening oneself to God’s favors was a blessing, he said. “I believe it’s God rewarding you.” . . .

Or, as he also puts it: “God wants you to be a winner, not a whiner.”

He is not shy about calling on the Lord. He writes of praying for a winning basket in a basketball game, and then sinking it; and even of circling a parking lot, praying for a space, and then finding it. “Better yet,” he writes, “it was the premier spot in that parking lot.”

The article is all about Osteen’s teaching of the prosperity gospel, so it includes a lot of details about money. He shows how much money Osteen brings in at each week’s services ($1 million), how much money via mail ($20 million), the size of his staff (300), how much it cost to turn the Compaq Center into a church ($95 million) and the state of the church’s financial statements (notable for their accountability). The most interesting detail by far is that the church put a globe instead of a cross in what would be the apse.

What’s nice is that Blumenthal treats Osteen respectfully while giving a voice to Osteen’s critics:

In “Your Best Life,” Mr. Osteen counsels patience, compassion, kindness, generosity and an overall positive attitude familiar to any reader of self-help books. But he skirts the darker themes of sin, suffering and self-denial, leading some critics to deride the Osteen message as “Christianity lite.”

“He’s not in the soul business, he’s in the self business,” said James B. Twitchell, professor of English and advertising at the University of Florida and author of a forthcoming Simon & Schuster book on megachurches: “Shopping for God: How Christianity Went From in Your Heart to in Your Face.”

“There’s breadth but not too much depth, but the breadth is quite spangly, exciting to look at — that’s his power,” said Dr. Twitchell who called Lakewood “the steroid extreme” of megachurches. He said church critics fault Mr. Osteen for “diluting and dumbing down” the Christian message, “but in truth,” he said, “what he’s producing is a wild and alluring community.”

The article is really interesting and informative, and I’m sure Osteen’s fans and critics would both agree. I would have liked a bit more comparison between Osteen’s theology of glory and the theology of the cross, but that it was alluded to at all is a great start.

But she was wearing a short skirt . . .

rahmanAbdul Rahman, the Christian man who was in danger of being executed under Afghan’s Islamic laws, was released and flown to Italy. The cabinet of Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi granted his asylum plea in an expedited process. And just in the nick of time, as the BBC reports:

Suggestions he might be offered asylum have outraged politicians in Afghanistan.

The issue was discussed in the Afghan parliament on Wednesday, with almost all MPs in agreement that “his leaving Afghanistan must be prohibited”, the AFP news agency reported.

Dr Assadullah Hymatyar, an MP from Logar province, told the BBC that parliament was planning to investigate the events that led to Mr Rahman’s release.

Time‘s Rachel Morarjee, writing from Kabul, had a bizarre piece alleging that Rahman was a deadbeat, abusive dad who shamed his family. The title of the piece, by the way, is — and I am not joking — “Abdul Rahman’s Family Values“:

Rahman, 40, has become the poster boy for the Christian right and for religious freedom. Closer up, however, the picture painted by the local police who arrested him shows a candidate not quite ready for family values. Rather, a portrait emerges of a deadbeat dad with psychological problems who couldn’t hold down a job, abused his daughters and parents and didn’t pay child support.

First, what is this “poster boy for the Christian right” business? Does the Christian left not care about Rahman’s fate? Or, if it does, does it get to be camped in the religious freedom camp? Why, then, does the Christian right get its own nonreligious freedom category?

Second, for all we know, these scandalous accusations against Rahman could be true. For all we know, for that matter, Rahman could have tortured small animals, robbed dying widows and taunted disabled children. But last time I checked, Rahman was not facing a death sentence for being unemployed, etc. He was facing a death sentence for converting from Islam. Printing the allegations, which have nothing to do with the international outrage his plight has caused, is about as appropriate as printing the sexual history of a rape victim.

No one was arguing that Rahman should live because he was a good person. Instead, people were arguing that Rahman should not be killed for converting from Islam. While more information about Rahman is needed and desirable, I’m not sure statements from the police reports that led to his life-threatening situation are the best character witnesses. What’s more, the reporter never speaks with anyone who may find the police statements questionable. She also never speaks with anyone who thinks the allegations are irrelevant to the Muslim apostasy problem. It bears repeating that this issue is not going away just because the Italian government provided Rahman with sanctuary.

Women on the altar — Yay!

altarboysRoman Catholics who believe only males should serve the Sacrament or hold the lectionary open are backward and awful and almost without reason. Or so the Washington Post‘s Caryle Murphy and Michelle Boorstein would have you believe. Yes, members of the same mainstream American media that cautiously explain why some Muslims riot over political cartoons featuring Muhammad write a whole story without explaining the historic Christian view for an all-male priesthood and altar staff.

Last week it was announced that the Arlington Diocese would introduce females at the altar. I was deeply curious about how reporters would handle this story since I belong to a church which has only male pastors. For the same reason we permit only certain males to serve as pastors, we permit only certain males to serve as deacons and acolytes. In other words, we’re even more exclusive than your run-of-the-mill sexist, backward Roman Catholics! And what about those church bodies that frown on any lay assistants period?

Anyway, I sat slack-jawed as I read the puffery which passed for a news report of the change in Arlington. I honestly wish I could just quote the entire piece to show how unbalanced it is. Beyond the populist perspective — as if all that matters is whether public opinion in the pews is tilted one way or the other — the article just completely fails to mention doctrinal arguments for male-only acolytes. Imagine, if you will, that you were writing a press release for an imaginary group called Catholics for Female Acolytes and see if you would have changed anything from this Washington Post lead:

Despite the short notice, they were more than ready to make parish history yesterday at Our Lady Queen of Peace Catholic Church in Arlington.

Emily Wallis held the lectionary open while the priest read from it. Angela Barbieri brought the ceremonial vial of water to the altar. And Margaret Lister followed the priest down the aisle to shake hands with her congregation, just as she’d always seen altar boys do.

“It was fun,” Margaret, 7, said later. “I always wanted to be on the altar. I wanted to see what it was like to be helping the priest.”

This particular priest, the Rev. Leonard J. Tuozzolo, was just as excited as his female helpers in their floor-length white robes called albs.

“This is very historical,” the pastor, vested in Lent’s penitential purple, said at yesterday’s 9:30 a.m. Mass, during which female servers directly assisted in the liturgy. “We’re no longer gender-restricted.”

His assembled parishioners, including squirming children, young families and elderly couples, responded with loud applause and “Yays!”

The authors say the diocese is divided between “conservative and liberal Catholics” — which means absolutely nothing, at least to me. I know many Roman Catholics and I love nothing more than to ask them about their views of their church and no matter how well I think I understand them, I would be loathe to describe them as conservative or liberal. The authors say the Arlington bishop “seemed to be trying to please both” sides by permitting two parishes to offer a Latin Mass. Ah yes, both sides. Because we know in Roman Catholic issues, there are usually two sides — one liberal and one Tridentine-loving conservative. Let’s go back to the love-fest where we see that girls are uniquely suited to the altar tasks:

Lyn McGee, who has 11-year-old twins — a boy and a girl — said she is glad she no longer has to explain to daughter Taylor why only her brother Conor could assist the priest at St. Anthony of Padua Parish near Baileys Crossroads in Fairfax County. St. Anthony is expected to begin allowing altar girls soon.

Taylor is more engaged in the Mass than her brother, McGee said, and she notices such things as his untied shoelaces. She believes that she can help him fix such things if she’s a participant, McGee added. “She said, ‘I can finally put him together before he walks down the aisle! He always has something dragging,’” McGee recalled.

altardancersFinally the authors get to the conservative folks who they say are displeased that this is a first-step toward a female clergy. Instead of citing doctrinal opposition to female priests or female altar servers, the authors instead look at what one scholar, theologian, expert, official, commenter on a blog worries about as an effect of ending the male altar service:

A mother named “Denise” expressed her concerns on Open Book. “The nature of young boys is that when you introduce girls into the activity, it lowers the value or status of the activity in their eyes and the boys’ participation decreases,” she wrote. “From these boys come our priests and the Arlington Diocese has been blessed with abundant seminarians. Why would we jeopardize that now?”

The Rev. Brian G. Bashista, head of the diocese’s Office of Vocations, said there is no evidence of a connection between the sex of altar servers and the number of men entering the seminary. The most influential factors in men becoming priests or women becoming nuns are family and faithful priests, he said.

“This is a difficult time for some people,” he said of the introduction of female altar servers, “and we need to be prayerfully patient.”

Well, I guess if the unbiased diocesan official rebuts a negative claim from a one-named blog commenter then we’ve provided all the balance we need. But we also throw in a patronizing comment about those poor people who are slow to accept change. Because we all know that they’re just fearful sexists who don’t like any progress or equality between the sexes. To drive the point home, the reporters quote a few more parents and female acolytes who praise progress and equality between the sexes in the church.

Wow and wow. I have absolutely no doubt that it was easy to find any number of parents who were elated that Suzie got to help out at the altar. I would imagine that most everyone I know — outside of my congregation and larger church body — would think this was a non-issue. They would say that it’s not even debatable whether churches should let girls serve as acolytes and lay readers. But didn’t Caryle Murphy and Michelle Boorstein have any curiosity why the Arlington diocese made this change or why the altar servers used to be exclusively male? There are serious Roman Catholic arguments for a male-only acolyte corps. They should have been mentioned and treated respectfully.

Assuming the reporting duo isn’t trying to be biased, they should really try harder to explain complex and nuanced religious issues next time.

Apostasy in the Muslim world

abdulrahmanAn Afghan court dismissed the case against a man facing possible execution for converting from Islam to Christianity, according to various reports. His release date has not been announced but could be very soon.

It is worth noting that Abdul Rahman’s case was not dismissed because of any sudden stated change of heart on whether the penalty for apostasy is death — at least among those who were in a place or position to do him in. It was dismissed on a technicality. An Afghan Supreme Court spokesman said there were problems with the prosecutor’s evidence. With some of Rahman’s next of kin testifying that he was mentally ill, he was deemed unfit for trial.

We began the conversation about media coverage of Rahman’s fate last week. One issue I highlighted was the need for reporters to understand that Rahman was facing death not for being a Christian but for being a Christian who once had been Muslim. In that previous discussion, Muslim reader Maryam, a.k.a. Umm (mother to) Yasmin, commented:

Actually (and I have memories of pointing this out before here) “sharia, or Islamic law” does not stipulate death for apostasy, and it would be nice if GR journos could take their peers to task for mindlessly repeating this mistake. Various scholars, jurists and thinkers (medieval and modern alike) vigourously disagree on the topic.

Radio Free Europe — which is funded by the United States government — made Maryam’s point. In an article about Rahman, it compared penalties for converting from Islam to penalties for committing treason against the United States:

The key issue for Muslim thinkers grappling with Islamic law and modernity revolves not around whether apostasy is a heinous crime, but how to deal with it. Islam Online, a Qatar-based site that attempts to explain Islamic issues, quoted the well-known Islamic scholar Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi as acknowledging that there is a difference of opinion on the issue even if most support the death penalty.

“All Muslim jurists agree that the apostate is to be punished,” al-Qaradawi said. “However, they differ regarding the punishment itself. The majority of them go for killing; meaning that an apostate is to be sentenced to death.”

The Christian Science Monitor‘s Rachel Morarjee and Dan Murphy provided more context. They highlight religious tension between Muslims and Christians in Egypt and Pakistan, the killing of Muslims who convert to Christianity by their own family members, attacks against Christian churches for alleged sympathy for America, etc. They point out that Afghanistan is 99 percent Muslim and that the 10,000 Christians who practice there do so in secret:

The issue of religious freedoms is one in which, as in Afghanistan, modern laws are clashing with ancient traditions. Rahman’s case illustrates a glaring contradiction between Afghanistan’s constitution, which upholds the right to freedom of religion on one hand but enshrines the supremacy of sharia law on the other.

Most mainstream schools of Islamic jurisprudence call for converts to be executed. Though the Koran promises only hellfire for apostates and also says “there should be no compunction in religion,” Islamic jurists have typically argued that execution is mandated, citing stories of comments made by the prophet Muhammad.

“The prophet Muhammad said that anyone who rejects Islam for another religion should be executed,” said Mr. Mawlavezada, the judge.

Though some liberal Islamic scholars disagree, pointing out that no such rule exists in the Koran, they have been largely silenced in Afghanistan. Last year, Afghan writer Ali Mohaqeq Nasab spent almost three months in jail last autumn for an article questioning the traditional call for execution.

So Rahman’s case has been dropped. But with so many Muslims viewing conversion from Islam to be a crime punishable by death, his future might be interesting. The issue of how Muslims deal with apostasy is not going away. Let’s hope reporters don’t forget the larger story.

Lying and stealing

plagiarismWhen I was a junior in high school, I took an independent study from the resident journalism teacher. I was supposed to study something about feminism and write a lengthy report on it. Well, I was also the yearbook editor and involved in a gazillion other things and I never really understood my assignment so when I still had another few pages to write and a deadline looming, I plagiarized significant passages from one of the textbooks I was using. It took her months to figure out where I stole the words from, but when she did, she promptly changed my grade to an F and called my parents. My mom was a fellow public school teacher and my dad was a pastor in our small town.

It was excruciatingly embarrassing to go through and my parents and siblings were deeply ashamed. This probably helps explain why my parents — in the section of the yearbook where other parents placed ads gushing over and praising their children — wrote “Mollie Kathleen — you have certainly made life challenging.

The incident left a deep impression on me. Where I had been a stellar and confident student, I became much more cautious and reserved. I realized that I was copying or plagiarizing regularly and that the deception had creeped into other areas of my life. My parents punished me, talked to me at length about the Seventh and Eighth Commandments, and told me to take the time I needed to turn my life around. Getting busted and being forced to come clean affected where I went to school, how much time I spent on my work, the career path I chose and even how I interacted with people.

Almost 15 years later, my past is not completely escapable. Editors frequently tell me I source too much information in my stories. My quotes never read as nicely as other reporters because I take them down word for word instead of cleaning them up like most folks do. And feel compelled to be very open about this incident because it seems only fair that editors and reporters know they are dealing with someone who was capable at one time of stealing someone else’s words.

And the thing is — getting busted for plagiarism was one of the best things that ever happened to me. I can not tell you how thankful I am that someone caught me and cared enough about me to hold me accountable. I can not tell you how thankful I am that my parents not only punished me but helped me overcome my problems. I became a much better student in the long run and much more honest.

I’m writing all this because today the Washington Post accepted the resignation of a blogger they had hired only a few days ago. Ben Domenech, who has written for a number of media outlets, has, it seems, repeatedly and brazenly plagiarized. And journalists get busted every few days or months for this. As the Post says:

Plagiarism is perhaps the most serious offense that a writer can commit or be accused of. Washingtonpost.com will do everything in its power to verify that its news and opinion content is sourced completely and accurately at all times.

Journalism is unique in that it relies on trust between the reader and writer. And when that trust is destroyed, the quality of the relationship suffers horribly. We also forget that, for a profession that tends to ignore or deemphasize religious influence, our journalism standards are indelibly linked to religious values of telling the truth, taking care of our neighbors, not coveting the work of others, etc.

Ben Domenech needs to take full responsibility for his errors, repent of them and change his behavior. But the good news, which he needs to hear and probably won’t hear much of as people attack him in the next few days, is that he can be forgiven for what he has done and he can rebuild trust with his colleagues, family, friends and the public.