Why Can't the Media Talk about Dangerous Religious Groups

Actually, I had heard of this group before, back during the Bush years when I read articles that informed me that The Apostolic Congress had a straight line into the White House and were consulted on middle east policy. I found this to be horrifying. There is a very good reason why far-out religious leaders (like end-timers and Dominionists) should not be consulted on any policy, much less foreign policy. Policy regarding Israel and the Palestinians should not be influenced by religious people who have visions of Armageddon and the end of days dancing in their heads , period.

My theory of why the media may not be picking up on this involves: A) the medias' discomfort with talking about religion in our pluralistic society and B) A basic ignorance about how very dangerous these types of ill defined groups can be to our national principles.


These people feel that they are fighting for their very souls in a society they consider to be vastly pagan. This would be a shock to most everyone else who sees America as highly religious. Nevertheless, we, as a people, must find a way to drag groups like this out into the light of day.


Maybe Maddow can be the one to contact. Is there a connection between the NAR and the "Family on C-Street?"  


BILL BERKOWITZ

The New Apostolic Movement uncovered … and un-covered.


The mainstream media has plenty of time and space to devote to Sarah Palin’s Hollywood hi-jinks, but apparently has little interest in delving into her fantastic religious connections. 

A few weeks back, I interview Rachel Tabachnick about a movement of religious conservatives called the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR). The story, which appeared at Alternet on Monday, March 1, was given the rather tantalizing title, “Heads Up: Prayer Warriors and Sarah Palin Are Organizing Spiritual Warfare to Take Over America”. The subhead was also a juicy tease, advising that the NAR was likely “the largest religious movement you’ve never heard of.”

All-in-all, the piece was probably the most extensive article/interview yet published on this movement. While the piece didn’t go “viral,” it did provoke an interesting response. Within a few days, it became one of the “Most READ,” “Most EMAILED” and “Most DISCUSSED” articles at Alternet.

It is safe to assume that before the publication of the piece, most readers had little to no familiarity with the New Apostolic Reformation. This, despite the fact that according to Tabachnick, the New Apostolic Reformation is more than merely another strange conservative religious operation in a crowded universe of strange and unusual conservative religious movements; it is a fully operational political/social/economic movement. 

Reactions to the piece varied from readers that added interesting observations and “thanks for the research,” to the piece “made me puke,” and “what’s so new?”

A number of websites and blogs linked to the story, including such popular sites at The Huffington Post, Daily Kos, TruthOut, and Beliefnet. A host of lesser-trafficked blogs including God’s Poetry Factory, God Discussion, End Bigotry in Venango County [Pennsylvania], The Oread Daily, and “The Christian Radical,” also linked to – or ran --  the story.

There were tweets, Reddits, and Diggs.

The mainstream media, however, didn’t pay it any mind.

Neither I nor Tabachnick expected producers of CNN’s “The Situation Room” or the staff at the New York Times would come running. But we hoped it might spark an investigative blaze or two. It still may, but as of this writing (March 16), it hasn’t.

I asked Rachel Tabachnick why she thought the mainstream media wasn’t paying attention to the New Apostolic Reformation. Is it too complex a movement to get a grip on?

“There are a number of reasons that the New Apostolic Reformation hasn’t garnered much attention from the mainstream media,” Tabachnick told me in a series of emails. “I think that in part it’s a question of branding; the movement escapes notice because they don’t have a recognizable name.  If they had a label that was used every time there was a news story about an apostle or other leaders, they probably would have drawn more attention by now.”

She pointed out that “Nondenominational churches don’t get the press that Southern Baptists might receive, for example, because the SBC is a well known entity, and nondenominationals are not identified as a group.

“There are advantages to claiming to be simply ‘Christian’ with no other label, something that Sarah Palin did during the elections.”

“We need more and better descriptions for our conversations about religion. For instance, the word evangelical covers many millions of people and a broad array of beliefs just as in found in the broad spectrum of Roman Catholicism or in Judaism. Both Roman Catholicism and Judaism include people with many diverse religious and political views, and so does evangelicalism.  I cringe every time I see writers refer to evangelicals as if they are all the same. Christian Zionist leader John Hagee, for instance, does not represent all evangelicals and neither does C. Peter Wagner, the Presiding Apostle of the NAR.  In fact both are quite controversial in many sectors of the evangelical world.”

Tabachnick also noted that “the NAR structure is different from what we expect from a religious denomination and there has been no quick or easy way for journalists to get information about them.” During the election, Tabachnick spent time on the telephone “with journalists who had questions about the NAR and Palin, but it was difficult for them to accept that there could be a religious movement on this scale that they could not identify or recognize the leadership.”

Interestingly enough, “One of the curious outcomes of that work was that conservative Christian groups who oppose the NAR were posting our articles [which appeared at the Talk2Action blog], while the mainstream media did not get it,” she added.

“I remember reading an article by a writer from a major paper that was very condescending about the attention given to the video of Thomas Muthee anointing Palin. She claimed that it was understandable that he would talk about witchcraft, since he is Kenyan, and therefore there was no story. This journalist totally missed the more important point that Muthee was a well-known religious figure, a leader in the NAR, and a superstar in a series of movies shown to churches around the globe."

Tabachnick posited that getting information in the mainstream press might “continue to be a problem.” Since “journalists can not access a textbook description of the NAR it basically doesn’t really exist for many of them. And this is also increasingly difficult with many denominational churches. For example, during the campaign many journalists assumed that Wasilla Assembly of God, where Sarah Palin was raised, would have specific beliefs because they are a member of the Assemblies of God.  But this particular church had openly embraced NAR ideology years ago and no longer fit the stock description of AOG.”

But there is another reason that might provide a clue as to why the NAR escapes notice; “they don’t fit the stereotypical picture of religious fundamentalists.” With the “Religious Right constantly reinventing themselves, it appears that it is taking considerable time for this new facade to be recognized.”

That may be because the “NAR welcome women leaders, are truly multi-racial, and are gaining access through extensive involvement in charities and faith-based programming,” Tabachnick pointed out. ”It takes a lot of time to dig into their ideology and find that their so-called openness is not necessarily a matter of altruism, but a well planned assault on religious pluralism and a strategy for taking ‘dominion.’”

Another problem that Tabachnick said she has encountered while trying to publicize information about the NAR is accusations by some that she sounds like a conspiracy theorist. “My primary area of work has been in End Times narratives which are the source of many of the ‘New World Order’ conspiracy theories percolating through our society,” Tabachnick pointed out.

While she “share[s] the concern of those who are careful not to be taken in by irrational and paranoid narratives,” she recognizes that “some traditional fundamentalists actually do view the NAR as the apostate church of the end times and a conspiracy of the anti-Christ. “Since the NAR is poaching on a lot of other people’s churches, their animosity is understandable. However, my problem with the NAR is that the movement is a very real and human assault on separation of church and state.”

Tabachnick maintained that “Those of us who do this research and writing are fighting for religious pluralism which allows Baptists to be Baptists, Jews to be Jews, Presbyterians to be Presbyterians, and so forth. There is nothing anti-religious about our work.   However, in the progressive world I think we often allow the Religious Right to bully us into thinking this means we can’t speak out without being anti-religious.

“Gary North, one of the leaders of the openly theocratic Reconstructionist movement, has explained how they take advantage of “the dilemma of democratic pluralism” because pluralists must by definition tolerate the agendas of those who would eliminate pluralism. True, but we also have the right and the responsibility to educate the public on threats to religious pluralism, and I believe that one of the great threats at the moment is the dominionist agenda of the New Apostolic Reformation.”

Let The Sun Shine In......