B16: Pope’s pallium (and red shoes)

April 18, 2008 By

PopesRedShoesMajor props to Michelle Boorstein of the Washington Post for a wonderful story on the front page of yesterday’s Style section analyzing the significance of Pope Benedict XVI’s papal garments.

Boorstein talks to people who love the ermine collars, taller mitres, velvet mozzettas and embroidered chasubles, noting that they hearken back a few centuries. Traditional Catholics see his clothing as a message of the unchanging message of the church. She presents all sides, nothing that the sartorial message worries those Catholics who hope to change the teaching of the church. And she gets the official word:

One day last week in his office overlooking St. Peter’s piazza, Benedict’s top liturgical official played down the gossip, saying Benedict isn’t trying to bring the church back into the Dark Ages. Monsignor Guido Marini, formally known as “Maestro delle Celebrazioni Liturgiche Pontificie,” or the papal master of ceremonies, said through a translator that Benedict simply wants Catholics to see the full range of their worship tradition.

“These aren’t new things,” sniffed Marini, a tall, elegant man who wears a black cassock with buttons from neck to the floor.

At Ghezzi, one of several shops on Via de’Cestari in Rome that sells elaborate clerical garb, manager Maria Ardovini said bishops and priests pay close attention to this stuff.

“When he’s wearing some specific vestments, a bishop might say, oh, ‘I saw him wearing that the other day, can you make it?’ He’s a trendsetter, you could say that,” said Ardovini, a short, smiley woman who has been working on clergy fashion for 40 years. “Benedict is very much a traditionalist.”

You simply must check out the accompanying video report filed from the Vatican a few weeks ago. Boorstein has a fantastic voice and eye for detail as she takes viewers into Marini’s office and Ghezzi. Back to the print story, she notes that Benedict’s keen interest in liturgical wares has ecumenical implications, too:

The buzz this has created can’t be underestimated. [Rev. Keith Pecklers, a Jesuit professor of liturgy at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome,] notes that he was once approached by an Orthodox bishop who said “you have no idea what it has meant to us” that Benedict is wearing an ancient form of pallium, or woolen cloak. The bishop told Pecklers that the clothing change, in the bishop’s eyes, means Benedict wishes to unify the Eastern and Western churches.

Boorstein covers the nitty-gritty as well as the big picture, pointing out details about Gothic and Roman vestments. Elsewhere in the Style section was what at best could be described a fun and offbeat article about waiting for a chance to see the pope. At worst, it was arrogant and utterly devoid of news or substantive content. And to think I just praised reporter Hank Stuever yesterday. Here’s how he begins:

Stood for three hours to see the pope go by. Saw him for 20 seconds, max.

You say: How come? Why?

We say … well, who can really say? Because aren’t kooky, devoted people the best? Jammed up here together behind two rows of barricades, in a mess of a few thousand believers on a perfect Wednesday afternoon on Fourth Street NE? They just seem to have this privileged, sunburned glow. They know something we don’t. They sing “alleluia” over and over until we think our heads will burst. It’s not just about popes. You see the same thing when the “bleacher creatures” wait for hours to watch movie stars walk the red carpet on Oscar night. Who can account for fervor? Who wants a T-shirt?

If the story is about answering the question “Why?” and you don’t even come close, it’s kind of a failure. Instead Stuever just pokes fun at the various faithful. And then he goes after the people who are protesting the pope:

The meanies show up. They’ve got giant banners and megaphones and “King of the Hill” wardrobes. Their banners say “Your Priest Is Lying! Where in the Bible [Is]: Penance? Praying to Mary? Purgatory? Rosary?” The neocatechumenal bands crank it up a notch and move in on the haters and sing louder alleluias. It’s a battle of the bands. “You worship little statues,” screeches a voice over a megaphone. “Do you really think Mary walked around with a little halo over her head?”

So I guess it’s totally cool when the Style section disdains the pope. But not when those dumb, crazy hicks do it!

Print Friendly

Filed Under: Academia, Catholicism, Creeping Fundamentalism, Godbeat, Humor, Journalism, People, Pop Culture, World, Worship

Praying for better coverage of prayer

April 17, 2008 By

football prayerWriting about a court’s opinion in a lawsuit should be easy. At least you may think it would be. The court’s opinion typically contains all the relevant facts, important quotes, the history of the law and how it applies in the particular case. For example, you’d expect that news reports of a opinion finding a coach’s participation in pre-football game prayers unconstitutional would include the words of the prayer, right?

At least that’s what I would be looking for as well as many other people in America who participate in some form of high school sports. Alas, such is the case of legal reporting in the mainstream media, where reporters routinely avoid getting into the depth of opinions that often have huge impacts on the way people and communities deal with religion.

For example, here are a few of the paragraphs from the coverage from The New York Times of a recent controversy involving a football coach bowing his head while a member of the football team prayed before games. This controversy took place, by the way, right next door to the NYT in New Jersey:

Marcus Borden, who has been the head football coach at East Brunswick High School since 1983, sued the district in 2005, saying its policy violated his rights to free speech and due process, as well as to academic freedom and freedom of association.

In July 2006, the United States District Court for New Jersey ruled that Borden could bow his head and bend his knee when the team captains led the players in prayer, but three judges of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit overturned the lower court’s ruling Tuesday, citing Borden’s history of leading prayers in the past.

Judge D. Michael Fisher wrote in his opinion that “the conclusion we reach today is clear because he organized, participated in and led prayer activities with his team on numerous occasions for 23 years.”

“Thus,” Fisher continued, “a reasonable observer would conclude that he is continuing to endorse religion when he bows his head during the pre-meal grace and takes a knee with his team in the locker room while they pray.”

In case you were curious what one of the prayers said, here it is from the court’s opinion. As for the difficulty in acquiring and reporting this information, it was as easy as cut and paste:

“[D]ear lord, please guide us today in our quest in our game, our championship. Give us the courage and determination that we would need to come out successful. Please let us represent our families and our community well. Lastly, please guide our players and opponents so that they can come out of this game unscathed, [and] no one is hurt.”

Also included in the court’s opinion are the juicy details like the school’s policy on coaches and teachers praying and the controversy leading up to the lawsuit.

Are there word counts on the Internets that I’m unaware of prohibiting reporters from including this excellent background information in a story about prayer? Or how about at least a link to the PDF of the court’s opinion?

That kind of information, that takes less effort than writing this sentence, should be standard in stories like this. It doesn’t even take up the news organization’s bandwidth since the document is hosted on the appellate court’s servers.

Above is a photo of one of these prayer sessions taken conveniently from the court’s opinion on the matter, in case you were curious about that minor major detail.

While the NYT may deem itself above and beyond covering this issue, other than its mere 10 paragraphs, the Associated Press at least touched upon the significance of the ruling and why it is likely that the Supreme Court will take up the matter.

The story does a good job giving the background of the case, which is easily accessible in the court’s opinion, and the significance, even if it did come from the coach’s attorney:

Borden’s lawyer, Ronald Riccio, said he would ask the U.S. Supreme Court to consider the case to clarify what he says is murky law — especially given Tuesday’s decision — about student-led prayer.

“As the matter now stands, some coaches can bow their head and take a knee,” Riccio said.

As we’ve said many times before, when dealing with First Amendment legal issues, there are dozens of law professors out there that would love to spout off about the legal background of the case. It is frustrating that stories like this don’t deal with any of the legal precedents that are involved. It would be like writing about the 2004 election without mentioning who won in 2000.

Lastly, neither of the news stories bothered to mention a rather significant fact about the case: The district court agreed with the plaintiff/coach in finding that the school’s policy on prayer was unconstitutional. However, the appellate court in ruling against the coach didn’t just find that the school could implement this policy. The court found that the act itself was an unconstitutional violation of the Establishment Clause.

In other words, public school athletic coaches within the Third District: bowing your head with your athletic team is violating the Constitution.

Reporters should note that this includes Pennsylvania, and last time I checked, there is a rather significant primary election going on in that state. Anyone want to ask candidates Obama and Clinton about how they feel about coaches bowing their heads with their athletes?

Print Friendly

Filed Under: Journalism, Politics, Religion, Sports, Worship

Music for the Masses

April 17, 2008 By

picture 20With Pope Benedict XVI in town, the media are running with every angle imaginable on the Catholic Church.

While the playlist for today’s mass at Nationals Park has been looked at in detail, the Washington Post took it a step further by looking at the worship wars being waged in masses across the country. And most notably, the article is good. Particularly considering it’s in the often dreadful and or snarky Style section.

Here’s how the piece by Hank Stuever begins:

Catholics don’t argue about abortion or the death penalty nearly as much as they argue about what music is sung (or not sung, or used to be sung) at their local Sunday Mass. It was ever thus — at least since the 1960s, when Sister first shortened her habit, strummed a G7 chord and, to hear some Catholics tell it, all heck broke loose.

It is true that music can be a hotter topic in Catholic parishes than the hot-button political issues that get reporters all jazzed up.

Stuever says Benedict isn’t a big fan of irreverent music but neither is he married to the 10th century either. The playlist for today’s pre-Mass festivities includes African hymns, something called a “celebratory merengue” and even some Mozart (this pope is a huge, huge Mozart fan). The Mass itself will have the Kyrie in a gospel-style and traditional Latin chants.

Stuever brings the story back to how the worship wars are played out throughout the country:

Imagine a bizarro world where all the 25-year-olds want Mozart and all the 60-year-olds want adult-contemporary. The kids think the adults are too wild. The backlash against “Kumbaya Catholicism” has anyone under 40 allegedly clamoring for the Tridentine Mass in Latin, while the old folks are most sentimental about Casual Sunday (even more rockin’, the Saturday vigil Mass), and still cling to what’s evolved from the lite-rock guitar liturgies of the 1970s. The result, for most parishes, has been decades of Masses in which no one is entirely satisfied, and very few enjoy the music enough to sing along.

CatholicsNoSing 01Like I keep trying to tell my parents, everything is the baby boomers’ fault.

Just kidding. Anyway, the article is funny and very engaging. Because it’s in the Style section, it is not surprising that the article completely shortchanges the substance of the debate — that is the many theological questions underlying discussions about appropriate music and the degree to which the “worship wars” in a Catholic context link in to debates at Vatican II, inclusive language and other hot-button issues. (For an engaging critique of the piece along those lines, go visit Amy Welborn.)

Another problem is its very stark characterizations. You’re either a hippie or you rock the Gregorian chants. The fact is that there are people who are in neither camp.

Another problem is that the piece quotes Jeffrey Tucker (of the New Liturgical Movement) and Thomas Day (of Why Catholics Can’t Sing fame) but doesn’t provide any balance from a contrasting viewpoint.

Still the article provides a fun and engaging look at an important issue. It’s a good sidebar topic to the larger stories that are dominating page one, offering a pew-level look at Catholic life today.

I stole the headline, by the way, from Gene Edward Veith. He stole it from Depeche Mode.

Print Friendly

Filed Under: Catholicism, Godbeat, Humor, Journalism, Music, Pop Culture, Worship

B16: Is this pope a Universalist?

April 17, 2008 By

Benedict English ColorHistorian Martin Marty once told me that many people have a definition of “ecumenism” that goes something like this: “I don’t believe very much and you don’t believe very much, so we must have a lot in common.”

The same thing, of course, goes for interfaith dialogues as well. There are people involved in these kinds of talks whose point of view, as an Episcopal lawyer who researches religious liberties issues once told me, could be summed up with another old saying: “You know, there are people out there who just don’t love everyone the way that they should, and I hate people like that.”

Needless to say, Pope Benedict XVI has a reputation for not fitting into either of those camps. And the Baltimore Sun does not seem to be very happy about that. However, hang on, because we need to look at a Sun story that includes a very fitting twist that offers a glimpse of actual religious tolerance. So keep reading.

Here is the top of the daily story in the Sun by Matthew Hay Brown, which very much blazes its own trail from the rest of the daily coverage:

With his visits to a synagogue and a mosque, his acknowledgment of the sins of Christians against Muslims and Jews, and his decision to establish diplomatic relations with Israel, Pope John Paul II won the appreciation and trust of believers of other faiths the world over.

His successor, meeting today with leaders of other faiths during his first American visit, is developing a very different kind of reputation. In his three years as spiritual leader of the world’s 1.1 billion Roman Catholics, Pope Benedict XVI has alienated other Christians with his repeated assertion that his is the one true church. A 2006 address in which he quoted a 14th-century Byzantine emperor who linked Islam and violence set off riots in Muslim countries. And Jews continue to protest his endorsement of a prayer for their conversion.

To some Catholics, those are the forthright moves of a stalwart defender of the faith. But critics, inside the church and out, say his words and actions may be complicating already delicate relations with other religions.

“He has a very, very high Christology, which is to say there is only one way to God, and that is through Jesus Christ. And the only path to Jesus Christ is the Roman Catholic Church, ” said Catholic scholar Rosann Catalano, associate director of the Institute for Christian and Jewish Studies in Baltimore. “If that’s your starting point, it seems to me, there is not an openness to the possibility that the other — the one who is not you — can be a blessing.”

There are all kinds of nuances missing in that, especially the fact that the lede focuses on issues that are not directly linked to either Christology or salvation. It’s the same old framework that pits Pope John Paul II against his close associate, the former Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. For a really good look at the complexities of that issue, see the Atlantic Monthly cover story entitled “The Year of Two Popes.”

The Sun has, however, raised the right issue — which moves us right into the heart of the dreaded “tmatt trio.” (Cheers!) For the pope, the first two questions would be relevant:

(1) Are biblical accounts of the resurrection of Jesus accurate? Did this event really happen?

(2) Is salvation found through Jesus Christ, alone? Was Jesus being literal when he said, “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6)?

Do NOT reach for the mouse yet, to click “comment.”

Trust me, I am well aware that the Roman Catholic Church’s teachings on other world religions have evolved a bit in the past generation or two. This issue has come up before here at GetReligion. I know who Karl Rahner is, thank you, and the meaning of the term “anonymous Christian.”

The folks at the Sun can rest assured that Benedict XVI knows who Rahner is, too.

rainbow vestments 03The question, for the pope, is how he can reconcile ancient Christian teachings with a strong commitment to religious liberty and tolerance. I predict we will hear more about that at the United Nations this week.

It’s amazing, to me, that there are journalists and other public critics who are convinced that Benedict needs to slash away at the doctrines of his faith, yet they would freak out if he made the same demands of the leaders of other world religions.

There are, of course, other religious leaders who have spotted this paradox. To the credit of the Sun team, one of them shows up in this analysis piece — let’s call it what it is — about the pope’s visit. Here is a crucial passage. See if you can spot the dynamic that is at work here, a dynamic I am not sure if the reporter realized was there.

Jewish and Muslim participants in today’s meeting say their conversations with the church remain productive.

“We’ve seen an utter transformation in this critical relationship in just four decades without parallel in the 2,000 years prior,” said David Michaels, director of intercommunal affairs for B’nai B’rith International. “We’ve seen so much progress in such a relatively short period of time that I think the Catholic-Jewish relationship can and should serve as a model.”

Still, he called Pope Benedict’s approval of the prayer for the conversion of the Jews for the Latin Mass on Good Friday “a cause for real hurt and concern. … We will be raising it, moving forward, with our Catholic partners at various levels.”

Not all Jews are as concerned. Rabbi Tzvi Hersh Weinreb, who will be representing the Orthodox Union at the meeting, sees the prayer as an internal matter.

“We would not be so brazen as to tamper with another religion’s liturgy, and we would expect that other religions would not tamper with our liturgy,” the former leader of Congregation Shomrei Emunah in Baltimore said.

What is the subtle point? Note that Weinreb is from the Orthodox Union, which means that he is used to having believers on the left — Jewish and otherwise — tell him that his fellow Orthodox believers need to edit their rites and practices in order to fit into modern life.

Does Weinreb agree with Benedict on these theological issues? Of course not. But, clearly, the rabbi is committed to religious tolerance. His voice was an essential part of this story.

Print Friendly

Filed Under: Academia, Catholicism, Islam, Journalism, Judaism, World Religions, Worship

Media rules for Obama’s church

April 13, 2008 By

media IDThere is something unfortunate when a church creates limits on whether or not journalists can attend its religious services. How are journalists supposed to understand religion if they are limited or prohibited from attending what is generally considered the most important and frequent public event in that religious tradition’s week?

Fortunately, the recent media excitement hasn’t resulted in an all-out-media-ban at Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama’s Trinity United Church of Christ. Instead of some sort of draconian ban, the church has created some rules and requires reporters to register a few days in advance.

Here is The Chicago Tribune‘s Manya Brachear in a first person account of what the new rules mean and how she feels about them:

Recent media scrutiny of Trinity United Church of Christ, where Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has worshiped for more than 20 years, has raised new questions about 1st Amendment rights, in some ways pitting freedom of the press against the freedom to practice religion.

Should reporters, like the rest of the public, have full and unfettered access to houses of worship? Or is there a time when churches should guard their gates to protect their flocks?

At a news conference Thursday, Trinity’s leaders laid down the law for reporters who want to cover the church in the future. Permission must be granted on Thursday for reporters to attend Sunday worship services. All media must check in, wear a badge at all times and refrain from interviewing members on church property.

Though journalists may carry a notepad, they may not send text on their BlackBerries nor use recording devices or cameras anywhere on the church campus. Audio and video recordings of the sermons are available for purchase immediately after the services at the church bookstores.

Brachear goes on to say that the new policies force her to send e-mails and make phone calls from the restroom in an effort not to “disrespect members during the worship experience” and make deadline.

Is this really a first amendment versus the journalists issue? If the church wanted to keep journalists from covering their worship services, would anything in the law stop them? The bigger question is whether these types of rules are intended to lower the church’s profile.

It would be interesting to compare these policies with other church’s policies on journalists. I am sure there are more than a few stories regarding media coverage of the Episcopal Church battles. Were there policies at Ted Haggard’s former church? How do they all compare and how did it effect the news coverage?

Print Friendly

Filed Under: Journalism, Politics, Religion, Worship

Finding God on the Internet

April 11, 2008 By

kneemailAssociated Press writer Hillary Rhodes filed an interesting piece about how pastors are turning to the Internet to answer theology questions. One of the pastors she spoke with was Mark Driscoll of Seattle’s Mars Hill Church:

Driscoll is part of a new breed of Christians who are putting themselves up to the task of tackling hard questions online from doubters, skeptics and churchgoers, on YouTube and at destinations such as idoubtgod.com.

Church loyalty might be wavering – as concluded in a recent survey by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life – but there is still vibrant public dialogue about big existential questions on the Internet. Driscoll’s videos cover a variety of topics, from the philosophical (“Can God judge me?”) to the controversial (“Is aborting a pregnancy from rape wrong?”) to the downright uncomfortable.

“If God does actually exist, how would we know that he is a good God and not a demon or a ‘clock-maker?’ ” posted one contributor to idoubtgod.com, hosted by Next Level Church, in Charlotte, N.C.

I actually think the story idea is great. So much religion news is happening on the Web and yet there is relatively little coverage of same. But I have a couple of complaints. What in the world is uncomfortable about that last question? It seems like a question I might have asked my parents in elementary school.

And the Pew Forum gauged denominational loyalty, sure, but why position that against “vibrant public dialogue” about big questions? If anything, all the denominational switching might indicate an engaged public and a very vibrant dialogue.

Pastor Todd Hahn of Next Level Church is also in the story. Someone asks him why bad things happen:

His answer? That unlike other religions, the Christian god has himself experienced human pain, but from that pain came the greatest good (resurrection). So maybe there’s a meaning in our earthly suffering as well, Hahn says.

Why is “god” not capitalized here? I found the lowercase completely unnecessary. Was there a stylebook change?

I never knew how good I had it as a pastor’s kid when it came to theological discussions. In my home, theology was the topic du jour. When I moved thousands of miles away, I began spending quite a bit of time on the Internet to answer the questions I might have normally asked my parents. I found a wealth of information, including a ton of pastors who put out on online shingle for people like me.

I mention this to point out that this story struck me as too narrow. It didn’t put the three online theology forums in context of the larger world. The three emergent/evangelical groups profiled were good sources, but so are thousands of other groups and pastors from all across the theological spectrum.

Image via stopchurchsigns.com

Print Friendly

Filed Under: Creeping Fundamentalism, Evangelicals, Humor, Journalism, Pop Culture, Web/Tech, Worship

B16: “Give eternal light and peace to all who died”

April 10, 2008 By

231006spet11We are beginning to see some interesting advance stories based on the texts that Pope Benedict XVI will use during his upcoming trip to Washington, D.C., and New York City.

This is very tricky territory, as any reporter will tell you who has covered one of these trips — the Olympics of Godbeat writing. Here is an example of why.

While in New York, Benedict will visit Ground Zero. Rest assured that one of the tmatt trio questions will come into play, as journalists cover this event. Which one? In this case, watch out for controversies linked to No. 2:

(2) Is salvation found through Jesus Christ, alone? Was Jesus being literal when he said, “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6)?

Now, here is the full prayer text as released by the Vatican:

O God of love, compassion, and healing, look on us, people of many different faiths and traditions, who gather today at this site, the scene of incredible violence and pain.

We ask you in your goodness to give eternal light and peace to all who died here — the heroic first-responders: our fire fighters, police officers, emergency service workers, and Port Authority personnel, along with all the innocent men and women who were victims of this tragedy simply because their work or service brought them here on September 11,
2001.

We ask you, in your compassion to bring healing to those who, because of their presence here that day, suffer from injuries and illness. Heal, too, the pain of still-grieving families and all who lost loved ones in this tragedy. Give them strength to continue their lives with courage and hope. We are mindful as well of those who suffered death, injury, and loss on the same day at the Pentagon and in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.

Our hearts are one with theirs as our prayer embraces their pain and suffering. God of peace, bring your peace to our violent world: peace in the hearts of all men and women and peace among the nations of the earth. Turn to your way of love those whose hearts and minds are consumed with hatred. God of understanding, overwhelmed by the magnitude of this tragedy, we seek your light and guidance as we confront such terrible events.

Grant that those whose lives were spared may live so that the lives lost here may not have been lost in vain. Comfort and console us, strengthen us in hope, and give us the wisdom and courage to work tirelessly for a world where true peace and love reign among nations and in the hearts of all.

So where is the controversy in that text?

Here is the lede for a Reuters report by Philip Pullella about this prayer:

Pope Benedict will pray for the conversion to love “of those whose hearts and minds are consumed with hatred” when he visits New York’s Ground Zero, the site of the World Trade towers destroyed on September 11, 2001.

A prayer he will read also commemorates those who died or were injured in the other September 11 attack at the Pentagon and on United Flight 93, which crashed in Pennsylvania after passengers fought off hijackers. Nearly 3,000 people died in the September 11 attacks, including the 19 hijackers.

9 11storyThere are several questions here. For example, what, pray tell, does “conversion to love” mean?

The crucial phrases to be used by the pope are the following. First, there is the prayer to “give eternal light and peace” to all who died, which would, naturally, include the 19 hijackers. Later, the pope will pray for God to, “Turn to your way of love those whose hearts and minds are consumed with hatred.” This is interesting language, since “turn to” is a phrase that, in New Testament language, is, literally, the meaning of the word “repent.”

The headline for the Reuters report jumps on this angle: “Pope Ground Zero prayer seeks terrorists’ redemption.” At first I thought that was a bad headline, but now I think that it does capture the essence of the text.

So the pope is praying for the eternal salvation of terrorists, including the leaders and followers in the Al-Qaeda plot. This may offend Muslims, since it can be read as a prayer for the conversion of some Muslims — in this life or the next. It will certainly raise eyebrows among Christians who believe that it’s impossible for non-Christians to find salvation after death, and certainly after the non-Christians in question have flown passenger planes into towers full of defenseless people. Both sides of that coin are controversial.

Stay tuned. And let us know about the other interesting pre-visit stories that you see in the mainstream media.

Print Friendly

Filed Under: Catholicism, Godbeat, Islam, Journalism, World Religions, Worship

Sacred seizure

April 10, 2008 By

FLDSbookYesterday I raised some of the journalistic questions surrounding coverage of the raid on the Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints in Texas. And I was happy to see I wasn’t alone in being intrigued by those questions.

In the comments to the post, reader Joel asked:

Did you notice that when the temple was searched, there was little or no mention of the taboo-ness of gentiles entering it? I wondered about that, and I still haven’t seen anything that mentions the FLDS reaction to having their sanctum sanctorum violated.

Enter Miguel Bustillo’s story in today’s Los Angeles Times.

Authorities searching a remote polygamist compound for a 16-year-old girl who had claimed she was sexually abused discovered a bed inside a towering limestone temple and were told by a “confidential informant” that men used it to have sex with underage girls, according to a court document unsealed Wednesday.

The Associated Press ran a video report on the raid, that puts the size of the temple and the ranch in context.

Some folks wondered how it was possible that the group’s sacred temple and the contents therein could be subject — rather easily it seemed — to a search and seizure by law enforcement officials. Here’s the Times, again:

The allegation that sex between adult men and underage girls was occurring inside the monolithic white temple came Saturday from a confidential informant who formerly belonged to the religious sect and who had been cultivated over several years by Schleicher County Sheriff David Doran, according to the affidavit.

In addition, Texas Ranger Leslie Brooks Long disclosed in the affidavit that investigators had interviewed numerous underage girls who were pregnant or married to men with multiple wives. While inside the compound, Long saw a document “indicating marriages between one man and more than 20 wives, all of whom resided in the same residence” as of last August.

When an investigator asked one girl her age, the affidavit states, the girl turned to her husband, Lee Roy Jessop, who said, “You are 18.” The girl then told the investigator that she was the fourth wife of Jessop, 33, and that “he was still married to the other three wives” in the eyes of the sect.

The initial search warrant does not appear to have been executed solely due to one complaint from a 16-year-old girl who said she had been raped and beaten. The Texas officials had been working with a confidential informant who had, on more than 20 previous occasions, given information that had been corroborated. The affidavits for search warrants have been unsealed so I hope the media report the further details.

Reading through the search warrants, some of the girls with children of their own claim not to know their age. So clearly law enforcement officials are looking for records which establish precisely how much statutory rape is going on among the FLDS. That presents concerns not only related to religious freedom but also attorney-client privilege. FLDS attorneys are arguing they have the right to review the seized material:

“The church has rights. Entry to the church is a sacred area,” said Gerald H. Goldstein, an attorney for church elder Lyle Jeffs. He argued that seized texts and genealogies considered holy by the FLDS should not become part of any court cases if they don’t directly relate to crimes.

Tom Green County District Judge Barbara Walther agreed that with help from an independent special master, the group should have the right to review evidence — for example, to ensure that attorney-client privilege is not violated if the evidence contains correspondence between attorneys and members of the sect.

I think Bustillo did a great job with the story, answering so many of the legal questions that have been raised. One minor point is that the temple had multiple beds, not the singular one that he mentions in the lede. Bustillo wrote an engaging story without falling into some of the overheated langauge we’ve seen in other reports.

For those still wondering about whether the term “compound” is appropriate, read the search warrant and let us know what you think.

Print Friendly

Filed Under: Journalism, People, Politics, Religion, World Religions, Worship