Ghosts in conservative documentaries

BreakingDVCodeBuried throughout this New York Times piece on the attempts of conservatives to get into the documentary film business is the question of whether these conservatives are motivated by something more than a political desire to promote conservative ideas.

This “uprising on the right in a world that leans left,” as the Times‘ headline puts it, goes deeper than what John Anderson was able to report when he talked to Jim Hubbard, Michael Wilson and Charles Sellier. The three are heavily involved in creating and promoting conservative films in an attempt to balance what they see as a dominance of liberal documentaries:

What the three acknowledge, however, is that something besides liberal bias is responsible for the striking shortage of conservative nonfiction cinema at a time when filmmakers on the other end of the spectrum are flooding screens with messages about global warming, the war in Iraq and the downside of Wal-Mart.

Mr. Hubbard, for one, is out to fill the void. He said a philanthropist, whom he declined to identify, had come forward with money to help finance a series of six documentaries that Mr. Hubbard wanted to produce, on various subjects, including the growth of government and whether it is “potentially a threat to our freedom.”

Mr. Hubbard traces his own passion for the hitherto missing conservative cinema to an experience almost five years ago, when he was attending the University of Arkansas law school. He and his wife, he says, went to their local art house, where the menu was “Bowling for Columbine,” “Frida” and “The Life of David Gale” — films, respectively, by a liberal, about a Marxist and against capital punishment. The Hubbards weren’t pleased.

Being “upstream of the culture” is a challenge that goes deeper than getting a few political films and launching a film festival. If Hubbard is simply trying to be a conservative antidote to Michael Moore, then this is a fine article. But I sense there is something deeper, a few questions left unanswered.

Check out this section of the article:

The notion that conservatism is essentially static would probably come as a surprise to some of the exuberant right-leaning thinkers who have upended the talk-radio world. Yet Mr. Sellier, with several religious documentaries to his credit, finds some truth in the idea.

“In order for a mind to soar at the possibilities and come up with someone no one ever thought of and making a film about it and showing it at a film festival — it means you’re out of the box,” he said. “And if you’re out of the box, you’re out of conservative thinking, aren’t you?”

Richard Peña, program director of the New York Film Festival and a member of the New Directors/New Films selection committee, similarly noted a dearth of strong conservative prospects. “For a number of years we received submissions from a Christian university of films that always looked like cheap sci-fi and were always about forced abortions,” Mr. Peña said.

Anderson casually mentions later in the article that Sellier describes himself as an evangelical Christian.

I don’t doubt that Wilson, Sellier and Hubbard want to make conservative films. I just want to know their motivations and if their mission goes beyond political wars and into cultural wars.

Perhaps these guys are interested in just throwing out political bombshells, but I suspect the six documentaries that Hubbard has been commissioned to make, supported by some mysterious donor, have something deeper to explore than mere conservative politics.

Print Friendly

That secretive Anschutz

Philip Anschutz A 6,800-word Los Angeles Times article by Glenn Bunting on the cigar-chomping, money-making, deal-cutting multibillionaire Philip Anschutz is a piece of journalism for which newspapers live.

Here is how it works. Newspapers want to cover people involved in their community. Usually this involves an interview, a nice photo and a couple of quotes. Controversial subjects are addressed (hopefully), but that’s routine since people typically know about the controversies.

There are those occasions when the person does not want to be interviewed, or involved in the article, but wants to be left alone. But when you are worth $7.2 billion, give to charities and own sports teams, venues, a movie company (think Ray and The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe), the nation’s largest theatre chain, and an aspiring newspaper chain in three major cities, you should expect to attract some attention. And if you don’t cooperate, a reporter is not likely to write as kindly.

Bunting did a very nice job hooking the story to Anschutz’s activities in Los Angeles to make it a relevant local story for the Times. But it quickly becomes a review of court documents and interviews with people who have had legal spats with Anschutz. It is not an article about religion, but religion definitely slips in there through Anschutz’s spokesman, Jim Monaghan:

Anschutz’s religious beliefs have been scrutinized, especially within the movie business, because he is regarded as a moral conservative who has invested heavily in films that appeal to families and Christians.

Although Anschutz and his wife have worshiped at an Evangelical Presbyterian church in suburban Denver, they no longer do so, according to Monaghan. He said that Anschutz considers himself “spiritual” and now attends services at churches of various denominations. When in Southern California, friends say, he prefers spending occasional Sunday mornings on the golf course.

That’s about as deep as the article goes in trying to understand Anschutz’s faith. This article is about money, power and scandal, but I think a more thorough look at Anschutz’s faith would have been compelling. That’s difficult because Anschutz obviously does not want anyone writing about his life, let alone his faith. For more on Anschutz and his faith, see Ross Douthat’s report for The Atlantic.

Anschutz’s press-averse ways make it difficult to do a balanced report, particularly regarding alleged improprieties with his Qwest telecommunications company and the gutting of the California State Teachers’ Retirement System:

Paula Smith, 56, a Denver mother of two teenagers, said she faces the prospect of working “until the day I die” after losing nearly $240,000 in retirement savings and $220,000 in the value of her Qwest stock.

Smith was hired as a technical writer for Mountain Bell in 1980 and took a buy-out in June 2001 — exactly one year after Qwest acquired the company.

It infuriates her that Anschutz has moved on to make spiritual films laced with moral messages.

“The thing I resent most about Anschutz is that he never steps up to the plate and holds himself accountable,” Smith said. “Funding ‘The Chronicles of Narnia’ is not going to exonerate him in the eyes of the Lord.”

Ouch. Knowing that Anschutz is a Christian, I believe he would agree with Smith’s statement based on basic Christian doctrine. Nothing we do on Earth will save us in the eyes of God. But how does one fit that into a newspaper article when the guy isn’t talking?

One of the more interesting segments of the article deals with Mel Gibson and a lawsuit his movie company filed against a Anschutz’s theatre chain, claiming that the company cheated the actor’s distribution company out of payments for The Passion of the Christ:

Testimony in the case disclosed that Anschutz’s theater group charged church groups a $500 “worship price” on top of the normal admission to attend special screenings of “The Passion of the Christ.” Regal routinely levies an administration fee to cover marketing and overhead costs for private screenings.

Gibson became so upset that he ordered his company to issue more than $500,000 in refunds to churches and Christian groups.

“Icon was shocked and disappointed that this additional fee (which was never reported to us) was being charged to faith-based organizations,” Icon wrote in a letter accompanying the refunds.

Worship prices for churches and Christian groups? Why the term “worship” and not the more routine “administrative fee”? That smells fishy.

Finally, as a person fascinated by the life of Howard Hughes, I am not persuaded by the article’s comparing Anschutz to Hughes.

Print Friendly

Watching that circle go round and round

phelps2Fred Phelps is getting help from the American Civil Liberties Union. Phelps, of the Topeka, Kansas-based Westboro Baptist Church, is suing in federal court, challenging a Missouri law that prohibits protesting at military funerals.

I’ve held in the past that Phelps’ attempts to get into the news should be avoided by journalists. But when laws are enacted to prohibit the stunts pulled by his group, you can’t help but write about him. And journalists should. But now the ACLU is on his side, and that makes this an even bigger, and profoundly ironic, story.

For some background, this is the same ACLU that Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell said was responsible for the 9/11 terrorist attacks. But let’s not forget the “pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way,” Falwell said on The 700 Club.

So now we’ve come full circle:

KANSAS CITY, Mo. — A Kansas church group that protests at military funerals nationwide filed suit in federal court, saying a Missouri law banning such picketing infringes on religious freedom and free speech.

The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit Friday in the U.S. District Court in Jefferson City, Mo., on behalf of the fundamentalist Westboro Baptist Church, which has outraged mourning communities by picketing service members’ funerals with signs condemning homosexuality.

The church and the Rev. Fred Phelps say God is allowing troops, coal miners and others to be killed because the United States tolerates gay men and lesbians.

God and gaysIt’s tough to deny the ACLU a level of credibility based on its attempts to act on principle. It’s certainly making for some interesting copy. Falwell and Robertson certainly made news for their comments after the terrorist attacks. Thankfully Phelps does not have that type of bully pulpit and following, but he is in the news again for legitimate reasons. Some loaded comments slipped into the AP story, and I’ll use this as an opportunity to highlight why journalists must be careful about how they cover this guy:

“I told the nation, as each state went after these laws, that if the day came that they got in our way, that we would sue them,” said Phelps’s daughter Shirley L. Phelps-Roper, a spokeswoman for the church in Topeka, Kan. “At this hour, the wrath of God is pouring out on this country.”

A reporter with a decent level of knowledge of religion will understand that Phelps-Roper’s comments are religiously loaded, and follow-up questions should abound when someone makes that type of statement. A comment included in a story as if it were just a normal quote — with no background or context — fails to explain the shaky theological foundation on which this group stands.

Any reporter who believes Phelps represents anything close to a fraction of the diverse religious landscape in America needs to do more research. So fine, quote Phelps and his daughter, but do it in a way that provides proper context and understanding.

Print Friendly

Please explain the divide?

hezbollah fighterThe good news is that The Boston Globe corrected its mistake when it said that Jesus Christ was born in Nazareth. It took a few days, but the article has been updated and a correction posted at the end. But I doubt we’ll see posting a retraction anytime soon.

Let’s move on to more significant issues. Mainstream media reports continue to ignore the ideological factors that play into the raging violence between Israel and Islamic militants and what has become essentially a civil war in Iraq. We dwell on this so often because until American voters properly understand the issues, how can we expect our leaders to make informed decisions?

See Exhibit A, here in the July 24 edition of Newsweek magazine:

Iran’s clerics have deep ideological differences with the nettlesome Shiite leader Moqtada al-Sadr. Even so, Tehran supports him and his Mahdi Army militia, which has repeatedly been linked to ferocious death-squad killings. “I used to fight for free,” a former member of Sadr’s forces told Newsweek, “but today the Mahdi Army receives millions of dollars every month from Iran in exchange for carrying out the Iranian agenda.” Part of the program: assassinations of prominent Sunnis and former Iraqi military officers who fought against Iran in the 1980-88 war. The United States would not like to confront, again, the kind of simultaneous Sunni and Shiite insurrections it faced in 2004, but tensions are fierce. “The government is unable to do anything to control the Mahdi Army,” says Sheik Abu Muhammad al-Baghdadi, a well-connected figure in the Shiite holy city of Najaf. “This Army is a bomb set to go off in the near future.”

I guess we should give Newsweek credit for mentioning that there are “deep ideological differences” between Iranian clerics and al-Sadr. I kept flipping around the print version trying to find that elusive sidebar that would outline the differences, but I’m still looking.

Early this week, Comedy Central’s Daily Show did one of its fake news reports, and while I haven’t been able find the link, I remember it clearly because it was such an effective demonstration of the pathetic nature of American’s broadcast news, both cable and network. The fake correspondent took out a notepad and began reading from a script that was clearly out of date. Host Jon Stewart quickly mentioned this fact, and the correspondent lamely stated that she was reading from a form, which he had failed to update from a previous Middle East conflict. In other words, reporters are stuck in a rut when it comes to covering Middle East conflicts.

israeli fighterTake, for instance, this New York Sun article pointing out that a silent Arab majority does not believe that “Neanderthal Muslim imams who have never read a book in their dim, miserable lives” should rule the roost in the Middle East. Does this fit the mainstream media reports’ typical characterization of Muslim and Israeli conflicts? I don’t think so:

The Arab League put it succinctly in its final communique in Cairo, declaring that “behavior undertaken by some groups [read: Hezbollah and Hamas] in apparent safeguarding of Arab interests does in fact harm those interests, allowing Israel and other parties from outside the Arab world [read: Iran] to wreck havoc with the security and safety of all Arab countries.”

As for Hezbollah and its few supporters, who have pushed for an emergency Arab summit meeting, the response could not have been a bigger slap in the face. …

All in all, it seems that when Israel decided to go to war against the priestly mafia of Hamas and Hezbollah, it opened a whole new chapter in the Greater Middle East discourse. And Israel is finding, to its surprise, that a vast, not-so-silent majority of Arabs agrees that enough is enough. To be sure, beneath the hostility toward Sheik Nasrallah in Sunni Muslim states lies the deep and bitter heritage of a 14-century Sunni-Shiite divide, propelled to greater heights now by fears of an ascendant Shiite “arc of menace” rising out of Iran and peddled in the Sunni world by Syria.

Back to Iraq for a moment. As civil war breaks out, it will be interesting to see if the media cover the divide between Sunnis and Shiites in a serious way. I would think they would be forced to do it. But if this New York Times article is any indication, I am not getting my hopes up:

BAGHDAD, Iraq, July 19 — Gunmen kidnapped as many as 20 employees of a government agency that oversees Sunni mosques on Tuesday and Wednesday, grabbing them on their way home from work at ad-hoc checkpoints north of Baghdad, an official said.

Throughout the country, at least 49 people were killed or found dead on Wednesday, including an Interior Ministry official who was shot in his car at 8 a.m.

Most of the attacks appeared to be sectarian-related, and they came a day after a suicide car bomber killed at least 53 people and wounded more than 100 in the Shiite holy city of Kufa. On Wednesday, the Mujahedeen Shura, an insurgent umbrella group that has often directed attacks against Shiite civilians, posted Internet messages claiming responsibility for that bombing.

We have Sunni mosques, 49 people dead and a Shiite holy city in the first three paragraphs, but little explanation of the group’s differences, similarities or histories.

Print Friendly

The upside to Hezbollah

raptureI know Harper’s is on a mission to destroy Christianity or something, but remember what a great and interesting magazine it used to be, before it began its bizarre jihad?

Anyway, some of the articles Harper’s has published during its campaign have been insightful and involved real reporting. And I rather enjoyed a simple bit of blog reporting that Ken Silverstein did for the magazine’s Washington Babylon blog:

It turns out there’s an upside to the current conflict between Israel and Hezbollah — if you’re waiting for the second coming of Christ. Here’s a selection of excited messages spotted over the last few days on the Rapture Ready/End Times Chat online bulletin board.

Praise God! We are chosen to be in these times and also watch and spread the word. Something inside me is exploding to get out, and I don’t know what it is. Its kind of like I want to do cartwheels around the neighborhood.

* * *

In another thread, someone brought up the fact that the kidnapping of the first Israeli soldier that started this whole thing was on June 25th and if you count from that day to August 3rd … it is *EXACTLY 40 days!!!!!*

I find that to be a HUGE coincidence.

* * *

Whoa! I can sure feel the glory bumps after reading this thread!

My favorite comment is the second one. Anyway, I know that Harper’s is covering this so as to mock these rapture-ready, rapture-excited Christians but I think it would be great for mainstream reporters to talk to these folks. You can find stuff here and there. But most of it is laughably bad coverage.

I’d like to see more, particularly of those Christians who may not be getting ready for August 3 but are having their views of foreign policy shaped by their doctrinal views.

Photo via Marcn on Flickr.

Print Friendly

Jesus Christ was born where?

Jesus born in, one of the most heavily visited news sites on the Internet, posted these headlines this morning in an attempt to cover the rapidly developing cycle of violence in the Middle East:

  • Israeli soldiers battle Hezbollah inside Lebanon

  • A Hezbollah rocket attack on Nazareth, revered as birthplace of Jesus, kills two people, Israeli army says
  • Israeli soldiers battle Hezbollah fighters in southern Lebanon near Avivim, Israel
  • Orient Queen leaves Beirut carrying about 800 U.S. and British citizens to Cyprus

Note to editors and producers at Jesus Christ was not born in Nazareth. Nazareth was his hometown. He is often referred to as “Jesus of Nazareth.” But he was born in Bethlehem. Like in the Christmas carols. It may sound like a minor error, but it is actually quite significant theologically. A Nazarene being born in Bethlehem was a bit unusual at the time, as people did not travel much, and it fulfilled key biblical prophecies.

What does this say about CNN editors’ knowledge of religion and their ability to present the news of a conflict that has ancient roots in religion?

The good folks over at Christianity Today noticed this error and one of their interns, Jason Bailey, a Wheaton College senior, was smart enough to take a screen shot. The error was quickly fixed, but not corrected. A correction requires admission of a past wrong. We in the print media know that an error requires a retraction. This makes us quite careful in what we publish. Apparently those standards do not apply to cable news websites.

Jason would like to refer CNN editors to this map for future reference, and maybe they could search their own archives to fact-check their headlines in the future.

Update: One of our readers, Michael M., noted that The Boston Globe did the exact same thing in an article on Monday:

Last night, Hezbollah rockets fired from Lebanon penetrated farther than ever into Israel, hitting Afula, 33 miles south of border, and landing on the outskirts of Nazareth, revered by Christians as the birthplace of Jesus. Israeli officials said Hezbollah possessed rockets that could fly more than 40 miles and warned residents of Tel Aviv, the country’s metropolitan hub about 70 miles from the border, to be alert.

The blast in Haifa, Israel’s third-largest city, brought the Israeli death toll to at least 24, half of them civilians. Israeli airstrikes have killed at least 148 people in Lebanon, most of them civilians.

So not only did CNN get it wrong — CNN got it wrong in what looks a lot like a cut-and-paste job from the Globe. The wording is nearly identical.

I should also note that others have heard the same mistake over the radio.

It’s time to call for a correction, folks. I’ll let you know when we get it.

Second Update: If you want to help us out in getting the Boston Globe article corrected, go here. It’s a basic error. Let’s see how long it takes the Globe to fix it.

Print Friendly

Prostitution at the World Cup

A Time to Make FriendsOn a more ominous side of religion-morality coverage of the World Cup, the most obvious and glaring case is the legalization and promotion of prostitution in Germany. The New York Times did a somewhat wishy-washy piece dealing largely with the business of prostitution while failing to give proper attention to the horrors of sex trafficking:

BERLIN, June 30 — On the night before Germany was to play Argentina in the quarterfinals of the World Cup, the prostitutes who work at the Artemis Sauna Club here were putting on their game faces.

With tens of thousands of soccer fans piling into Berlin for the game on Friday, this was going to be one of the women’s last big chances during the tournament. The mood in the club, however, was as subdued as the lighting.

“The last time Germany played, not that many men came here,” said Luna, 33, a Serbian woman who came here from Bavaria to work during the four weeks of the tournament. “Maybe they went out to a pub and drank instead.”

To the list of pernicious things that have not happened at this World Cup, add one more: a spike in the sex trade. While clubs like Artemis have been busier than usual after games, the tournament has generated nowhere near the surge in demand for prostitution — or the influx of temporary prostitutes from Eastern Europe and Asia — that many experts predicted.

“Our business is O.K., but it’s not great,” said Egbert Krumeich, the public relations manager for Artemis. “We get 250 to 260 customers on a game day. We’d be happier getting 600 a day.”

Soccer and sex, it appears, do not mix very well — even in Germany, where prostitution is legal and the World Cup organizers have pushed the slogan “A Time to Make Friends.” There are plenty of friendly fans here, most of them male and many pie-eyed by alcohol. The bad news for the sex trade is that they would rather guzzle another beer than go looking for a prostitute.

I wonder what the editors at the Times thought in coming up with the angle for this piece. I’m sure the paper has written extensively in the past about the subject of legalized prostitution, so now that’s it legal, they might be thinking, “What’s the big deal? We’ll just cover it like any other industry.” Other suggestions, anyone?

The German government says it’s well-regulated, but forced prostitution and sex trafficking are known to occur. I noticed that the piece put heavy weight on the statements of government authorities (hmm, where have we seen this from the Times before?) and failed to deal with the well-documented horrors of the sex trade. The reporter was too busy explaining why the brothels are getting less business to shine any light on the trade’s moral degeneracy.

The Kansas City Star took a slightly more serious look at the matter, and for that it deserves praise:

Here in Germany, prostitution is legal. Here, there are no pimps. They are sex businessmen, supported by the government with the benefits of a legitimate profession. With a climate like this already in place, it was widely predicted in the months before the World Cup that tens of thousands of women would be trafficked to Germany to fill the brothels.

“Trafficking is a major worldwide problem,” the Rev. Carrie Pemberton, CEO of Churches Alert to Sex Trafficking Across Europe, wrote to The Star in an e-mail. “We are aware that there are (nongovernmental organizations) in Germany and the German police themselves who have been very (concerned) about this problem during the last few weeks.

“We have been working with this issue since 2003 and know of definite examples where sporting events have been used for trafficking women into and across Europe for sexual exploitation.”

For those reasons, human trafficking has become a hot-button topic at the World Cup, as the U.S. State Department, the European Parliament and countless nongovernmental organizations pleaded with the German government to implement a plan to stop the traffickers.

Rather than seeing the sex trade as just another business, like gambling or the local beer store, Star reporters attempted to report the true nature of the trade: a form of modern-day slavery. One may ask: As long as the business is legal and women are willing participates, what’s the fuss? All I have to say to that is look at the history of slavery.

Print Friendly

Roundup of World Cup religion coverage

world cup prayerLast week found me stumbling around trying to write about religious issues in the World Cup. The event is one of the most significant worldwide. Certainly there were more religious issues than merely an immature head-butting, we thought.

Here in America, we struggle to understand the significance of the World Cup. International rivalries go deep, and there is less of the East vs. West theme that we are so used to seeing at the Olympics.

GetReligion reader Discernment sent us a bevy of stories dealing with religion at the World Cup.

I’ll start with this New York Times article from June 24. It’s nothing special but I am impressed that the Times ran it:

The message at yesterday’s lively service at the Full Gospel New York Church in Flushing, Queens, was essentially, Know Christ through soccer — specifically, World Cup soccer.

”We support Christ and we love soccer,” said the Rev. Ben Hur, an assistant pastor.

About 700 fervent fans in red T-shirts streamed into the church yesterday to watch South Korea take on Switzerland on two large screens in a cavernous worship space. Mr. Hur, 46, led them in a pre-kickoff prayer in Korean. Then, traditional Korean drummers stoked the cheers, and Promise to Praise, a female dance troupe, gyrated to songs praising both Jesus in heaven and South Korea on the field.

Actually, yesterday’s service was more like a full evangelical production with soccer as its basis.

Mr. Hur and the other pastors at the church are big soccer fans, and in their quest for new missionary methods, they have organized the viewings of games in this year’s tournament in the hope of drawing new members to the church, and to Christ. Some of the games have drawn more than 1,000 fans, they said.

”All the world is watching the World Cup, and God will use this opportunity to grow his kingdom,” Mr. Hur said in English. ”I prayed that God will use this opportunity to accelerate the evangelism around the world.”

If the line between religion and sports is blurred in the parts of America where the Church of Football holds dominion, the same was true yesterday at the Church of Soccer in Queens.

This Religion News Service article deals with the church aspect within Germany and this article from The Vancouver Sun deals with the all too familiar issue — for sports fans at least — of whether it is right to pray to God for a given team’s success. It’s somewhat more serious than the Times piece, and digs into the issues:

The triviality of calling on divine intervention for a win for your team instead of praying for world peace or an end to child hunger isn’t lost on religious fans.

“We don’t pray for one team to win,” said Father Firmo Mantovani of Our Lady of Fatima Catholic Church with mainly Portuguese-language masses, including one this morning at 11:30, a half-hour before Portugal is scheduled to play the Netherlands in a quarterfinal.

“If we ask God’s assistance to pray for one team, it’s not important. We have more important things to pray for,” he said.

Mantovani follows a strict separation of church and sport.

“During the celebration [of Mass], we don’t mention soccer at all because religion and soccer are separate,” he said. “And we cannot mention [a specific team] because people are from different countries.

On the flip side, here is a most enjoyable Telegraph article dealing with the unique Christian/Muslim dynamic of the tiny African country that had amazing success at the tournament:

On Friday, the English-language Ghanaian Chronicle carried a fascinating report of the country’s hysterical celebrations following the national team’s 2-1 victory over the United States, describing how the triumph had broken down religious barriers and brought together the different faiths in a spontaneous “explosion”.

The same is true of the 23 players on duty in Germany, four of whom are Muslims and the rest practising Christians. Ratomir Dujkovic, the team’s Serbian-born coach, is convinced that his players’ deeply held religious beliefs have become an important psychological weapon, fostering a unity within the ranks that makes motivational team talks redundant.

“This is something special,” he said. “In this group of Ghana Black Stars we have Christians and Muslims and both groups pray together. One player leads the prayers and the rest follow him. If it’s a Muslim who is leading the prayer, all the group will pray with him. If it’s a Christian, they do the same.”

So Muslims are praying with Christians and Christians are praying with Muslims, all over a soccer match? There is certainly something special about soccer if it has the ability to bring people of different religions, religions that often clash violently, together spiritually.

Tomorrow, I will write a post on Germany’s legalization of prostitution and how that played in the media during the World Cup.

Much thanks to our friend Discernment for sending these articles to us. Feel free to leave us comments on your favorite World Cup story dealing with religion.

Photo by Seeding-Chaos on Flickr.

Print Friendly