It would appear that the Associated Press has a computer hard drive somewhere full of stories about annual religion events that the editors don’t care that much about. Maybe it’s just a folder up in an AP data cloud.
Anyway, when this unworthy event rolls around on the calendar someone goes into the files and copies language from old stories to save time. Apparently, it isn’t important whether some of the file language is tired, inaccurate or assumes the worst of religious believers involved in this ritual.
Do you believe in miracles? Hold that thought.
This brings us to one of the most interesting, inspiring (for millions) and controversial moments linked to the holiest day on the liturgical calendar of Eastern Orthodox Christianity — Pascha.
In the churches of the West, Pascha is known by another name — Easter. To further complicate things, Christians in the East and West use different calendars that, on most years, put Easter and Pascha on different dates. Click here for more on that old story.
With all that in mind, consider this paragraph in this year’s AP and Religion News Service story about a key Pascha rite in Jerusalem.
Many countries will be restricting normal Orthodox Easter celebrations. Neighboring Lebanon for example went into a round-the-clock curfew to curb the spread of coronavirus, from Saturday until Tuesday morning. Churches will be allowed to hold Easter mass and prayers only at 30% capacity, and require special permits.
What is “Orthodox Easter”? That is Pascha, of course. It would only take a few words to say that.
Then look at this reference — “Easter mass.” Actually, the Orthodox do not have “Mass.” Our ancient Eucharistic rite is called the Divine Liturgy. Also, the “M” in “Mass” is upper case. Thus, an AP copyeditor managed to allow three mistakes in a mere TWO WORDS. That’s a hard trick hard to pull off!
Now let’s look at the “miracle” angle of this story. We will start with the overture:
JERUSALEM (AP) — Hundreds of Christian worshippers made use of Israel’s easing of coronavirus restrictions Saturday, packing a Jerusalem church revered as the site of Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection for an ancient fire ceremony a day before Orthodox Easter.
The faithful gathered at The Church of the Holy Sepulchre, waiting for clergymen to emerge with the Holy Fire from the Edicule, a chamber built on the site where Christians believe Jesus was buried and rose from the dead after being crucified. Only a few people in the church wore masks, and there was no distancing. Entry was restricted to those who were fully vaccinated.
What kind of “ancient fire ceremony” are we talking about?
As bells rang and the top clerics from different Orthodox denominations appeared, the worshippers scrambled to light their candles and pass the fire on. Within a minute, the imposing walls of the old church glowed. The source of the flame is a closely guarded secret.
Actually, the Orthodox have — for many centuries — claimed that this event is mysterious if not miraculous. Entire books have been written about the phenomenon and there are, as is always the case with miracle claims, strong voices and believers on both sides of that debate.
AP editors, at least those of good will, might want to obtain a copy of “Holy Fire: The Miracle of the Light of the Resurrection At the Tomb of Jesus. Seventy Historical Accounts (4th – 16th C.)” by Haris Skarlakidis
Trust me: There are plenty of people who will openly say that the Holy Fire rite is a matter of fraud or deception. They have their points to make. Then there are people who can offer details about why they believe the miracle is real. They have their points to make.
However, the file stories used by the Associated Press are not interested in history, debate or doctrines. As I have written about in the past, the “closely guarded secret” — which assumes that Orthodox leaders have been telling lies for centuries — as become part of the click-and-paste AP rites connected to the writing of this story.
This year’s story was even more shallow than some in the past. Consider this passage from a 2016 GetReligion post on this subject:
“During the annual ceremony, top Eastern Orthodox clerics enter the Edicule, the small chamber marking the site of Jesus’ tomb. They then emerge to reveal candles said to be miraculously lit with “holy fire” as a message to the faithful from heaven. The details of the flame’s source are a closely guarded secret.”
No, it wasn’t the “said to be miraculously lit” language that struck me. The assumption, readers can only assume, is that church leaders explained the rite and the AP team then reported their claim that a miracle takes place in that holy sanctuary. The implied attribution is pretty clear, although it would be nice if a reporter took the time to quote someone by name.
But what are readers to make of this statement: “The details of the flame’s source are a closely guarded secret.” Who is being quoted here, in effect stating that insiders actually know that this rite is a fraud?
The bottom line is:
This information is simply stated as fact and that is that. There isn’t even a vague, “critics of the ancient churches claim that” wording.
Obviously, everyone knows that miracles are not real. Correct?
Actually, millions and millions of people in various world religions disagree with that assumption. So, as I asked in that earlier post: “What, pray tell, are journalists supposed to do when people report miracles?” I’ll close with this:
This question isn’t as simple as it sounds. For example, here are two statements to compare: (1) Every year, X-number of people are miraculously healed. (2) Every year, X-number of people pray for healing and they say that they have been healed.
Wait, let’s add another: (3) Every year, X-number of people claim they have been healed and doctors report that, in some cases, there is no simple explanation for the changes in their symptoms and health.
OK, that first statement is a statement of faith. The second is a statement of fact, in that it is accurate that these believers said this and that they believe it. This “they believe it” construction is common in news reports about this kind of thing. The third statement, however, involves information from outside sources — a medical journal, perhaps — that in some way support (or at least do not contradict) the faith claim. In other words, this is a belief statement PLUS some additional reporting.
Of course, there is another option when covering stories of this kind: Journalists can simply say that the believers are liars.
In the case of Pascha and the Holy Fire, AP editors appear to have turned that option into a dogma.
FIRST IMAGE: Screenshot from video report on the Holy Fire rite.
ybvdadminuser
