WORLD Magazine / Prodigal Press / Chapter Eleven
Crusading on Social and Political Issues:
Personalization and Pesistence

Prodigal Press cover

According to the leading journalism history textbook, "The crusading spirit is as old as journalism, but never in American history had there been more opportunity for 'the people's champions' than in the years following 1900." Joseph Pulitzer's New York World, the textbook states, "commanded deep respect for its intelligent and fair-minded approaches to issues of public importance, for its progressive and hard-hitting crusades...." The textbook also praises Scripps, Steffens, and other "famous crusading liberals."

It is ironic that the words "crusade" or "crusading" should be used nine times in three pages to praise the efforts of atheists. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the word "crusade" (originally croisade) found its way into the English language around 1575, from the French. The word first was used in reference to the military expeditions in Palestine from the eleventh through the thirteenth centuries; then it was used to designate any war fought for supposed Christian ends; only in relatively recent times has it been generalized to refer to any movement against something considered evil.

The current usage is ironic for two reasons. The first irony lies in the history of the word "crusade," and its French connection with "croisement," being marked by the cross. The second and most important irony is that non-Christian editors who want to crusade against evil are unaware of where true evil resides: not in specific individuals or institutions, but in the nature of man apart from God.

Without understanding original sin, non-Christian crusaders may gain relatively rapid passage of new laws and eviction of old leaders, only to find, once victory is declared, that little has changed. With an understanding of man's nature, Christian crusaders find that reform takes longer to bring about, since the goal is not just the exchange of one leader for another, or passage of a government program. The goal is to make people aware that all of us are, to use Jonathan Edwards' phrase, "sinners in the hands of an angry God."

One practical outworking of this belief in changed hearts rather than (as a primary goal) changed laws is that Christian journalistic crusading does not emphasize the work of civil government: Use of the state is a last resort. Paul told the Christians in Rome to subject themselves to the governing authorities" (Romans 13:1)-plural. Parents, church leaders, employers, teachers, and so on are all representatives of different types of governing authority. There must be change in many different spheres for true reform to take root. Once accomplished, though, Christian reforms are likely to last longer, with God's grace.

How should Christian journalists today conduct crusades? Two of the outstanding nineteenth-century successes point the way.

The Boston Recorder's crusade against one early nineteenth century practice, dueling, was carried on within the context of its Biblical political views. Politically, the Recorder had argued that man's sin required diffusion of power and decentralization. Comparing God's holiness to man's depravity, Recorder writers concluded that man could hardly be trusted to rule himself politically, and could not be trusted to rule others; therefore, the less civil government, the better. The Recorder's goal was to bring the power of multiple governments to bear on manifestations of sin.

In developing an anti-dueling crusade, the Recorder first emphasized use of family. Since family was seen as one type of government, the Recorder argued frequently that potential duelists should respect the wishes of parents and spouses, rather than satisfying their own vanity. Many stories of parental request to avoid duels were given, and tales of mothers mourning over sons who had violated their wishes also were frequent. Dozens of family-stressing, anti-dueling stories appeared in the Recorder during the 1820s. A typical tale in 1823 began with one man challenging another to a duel. The challenged man accepted, on condition that they should breakfast together at his house before going out to fight. After breakfast, the challenger asked if the host was ready. "'No sir,'" replied he, 'not till we are more upon a par, that amiable woman, & those six innocent children, who just now breakfasted with us, depend solely upon my life for subsistence-and till you can stake something equal in my estimation to the welfare of seven persons, dearer to me than the apple of my eye, I cannot think we are equally matched.' 'We are not indeed!' replied the other, giving him his hand."

Second, the Recorder proposed voluntary associations, schools, churches, and businesses criticize duelists at every opportunity; newspapers, for their part, were encouraged to print names of all those involved in duels. Since entering into a duel was seen as an heroic act, the Recorder suggested that societal leaders should poke fun at duelists at every opportunity. One of its own stories told of a man awaiting his opponent's arrival, until "he observed some bushes near him shaking, and supposing it was his adversary skulking" fired. The man found out he had shot a cow.

Third, since all authority came from God, the Recorder argued that Christians governed by God's law, not their own, would avoid situations in which they might commit murder. The lesson of Admiral Stephen Decatur's fatal 1820 duel-"there is no honor, which is valuable and durable, save that which comes from God"- was stressed repeatedly.

Other Christian newspapers, and some non-Christian ones, joined the anti-dueling crusade, first in the North, later in the South. Like the Recorder, they did not merely quote Biblical verses against murder and preach an abstract sermonette; instead, they used specific detail to make their points. They did not emphasize governmental action. Dueling already was against the law, but anti-dueling laws, like others, were regularly breakable unless they were written in men's hearts.

As the early nineteenth-century Christian newspapers became less vigorous, the crusade was carried on by others. Social changes contributed to the demise of dueling, but newspaper coverage seems to have had an effect. By the late nineteenth century dueling pistols were still very much in demand, but as collector's items.

It is no accident that the abortion story comes into play in several chapters of this book. Abortion is not only a major manifestation of sin in our age, but a deadly fad whose rise and fall and rise again and prospective fall is interwoven with the history of American journalism.

Part of Chapter One discussed the role of one newspaper, the New York Times. Segments of Chapters Two and Eight noted treatment of one aborting mother, Sherri Finkbine. The goal in this chapter is to learn a lesson from the way in which abortionists themselves were treated. As Pulitzer and his contemporaries knew, personalization is vital to a successful crusade: To keep readers' or viewers' attention throughout a long campaign, they must be able to see a bad guy rather than an abstraction. Christian crusaders must learn how to personalize in a way that spotlights the activity and its reprehensibility, and does not ignore the nature of original sin.

In the nineteenth-century abortion battle, the chief bad guy for forty years was a woman, Madame Restell. Born Anna Trow in 1812, she worked in New York as a seamstress and occasional midwife, and married a printer. In the late 1830s she opened an abortion business and took the name Madame Restell (the French were considered most up-to-date in such matters).

Madame Restell found that word-of-mouth would take her business only so far. Hoping to get her message on abortion availability to thousands of pregnant women and desperate men, she began to advertise in New York's newspapers. She had to be careful, because abortion was illegal by statute in New York; she did not have to be too careful, because anti-abortion laws rarely were enforced. She ran euphemistic ads in non-Christian newspapers, such as this one in the New York Sun:

MADAME RESTELL FEMALE PHYSICIAN, office and residence 148 Greenwich Street, between Courtlandt and Liberty St., where she can be consulted with the strictest confidence on complaints incidental to the female frame. Madame Restell's experience and knowledge in the treatment of cases of female irregularity, is such as to require but a few days to effect a perfect cure. Ladies desiring proper medical attendance will be accommodated during such time with private and respectable board.
Madame Restell also publicized her "FEMALE MONTHLY REGULATING PILLS" that would cure "all cases of suppression, irregularity, or stoppage of the menses, however obdurate." This was accurate in that the leading cause of menstrual stoppage among women of child-bearing age was pregnancy.

According to contemporary observers, "every schoolgirl" knew what references to "female irregularity" and "perfect cure" meant. While no financial records of her business are known to exist, response to her advertising was so great that she soon was able to open up a chain of abortion offices in New York, Boston and Philadelphia.

Other abortionists began advertising their "willingness to treat the private ailments of women" in terms that clearly indicated the availability of abortion services. Advertising of generally ineffective abortifacients, like that of patent medicines, also boomed. "Dr. Peter's French Renovating Pills" were sold as "a blessing to mothers . . . and although very mild and prompt in their operations, pregnant women should not use them, as they invariably produce a miscarriage." Dr. Monroe's French Periodical Pills displayed prominently the "precaution" that they were "sure to produce a miscarriage." Dr. Melveau's Portuguese Female Pills alerted consumers that they were "certain to produce miscarriage."

Those whose "blockages" were not removed by medication were likely to turn next to surgical methods. By the mid-1840s doctors were noticing a great upsurge in abortion. Amos Dean of the Albany Medical College, Medical Jurisprudence editor R. E. Griffith, and many others wrote of a dramatic increase. Changes in the intellectual and social climate had an effect on the abortion rate, but advertising clearly was important. When abortionists occasionally were arrested, pregnant and unmarried young women testified that they had seen abortion advertisements and had begun thinking about what appeared to be an easy way out of trouble.

Some doctors fought back. Dr. Gunning Bedford, in The New England Journal of Medicine, called Madame Restell "a monster who speculates with human life with as much cruelness as if she were engaged in a game of chance." He wrote of one patient who told him that "Madame Restell, on previous occasions, had caused her to miscarry five times." The patient also described one Restell abortion in which the aborted baby "kicked several times after it was put into the bowl." Bedford wrote angrily that Restell's "advertisements are to be seen in our daily papers.... She tells publicly what she can do; and without the slightest scruple, urges all to call : on her who might be anxious to avoid having children."

In the 1840s the New York Times was not yet in existence, and other Christian newspapers seemed reluctant to become involved. One newspaper, the National Police Gazette, did begin an anti-abortion crusade; its name came from a willingness to specialize in news of crime at a time when other newspapers often refused to get their hands dirty. Later the Gazette went through several changes of ownership and began to glamorize crime rather than expose and oppose it. In the 1840s and the 1850s, though, the Gazette was the only newspaper consistently attacking abortion.

The Gazette began its great crusade in 1845 by proclaiming that it would publish articles about abortion "because we believe that full expositions of the infamous practices of abortionists will tend to present these human fiends in a true light before the eyes of those who may become their dupes. We shall follow up this business until New York is rid of those child destroyers." Even though Madame Restell originally saw such attacks as part of a day's work, and even claimed they were good publicity-those who wanted abortions would definitely know where to go-the Gazette persisted.

The Gazette emphasized community action; it complained in February 1846 that "Restell still roams at large through the influence of ill-gotten wealth and will probably still continue until public indignation drives her and her associates from our midst." Week after week the Gazette kept after Madame Restell, predicting that a "day of vengeance" would arrive for her and other "fiends who have made a business of professional murder and who have reaped the bloody harvest in quenching the immortal spark in thousands of the unborn." Week after week the Gazette attacked "Restell, the murderess paramount in the dark scheme of professional destruction, openly defying decency and the statute, and proclaiming to the world to stifle human life at so much per deed."

With authorities still not acting, popular hostility fueled by Gazette accounts and anti-Restell handbills erupted. At noon on February 23, 1846, a crowd of perhaps seven hundred gathered in front of Madame Restell's house to "publicly protest the inertness of the authorities." Reporters quoted cries from the crowd of "Haul her out," "Where's the thousand children murdered in this house!," "Hanging is too good for the monster." The New York Morning News, describing "a universal cry for vengeance and retribution," made comments about "wholesale female strangler. . . vital spark of the unborn . . . rude and savage butchery."

Under great pressure, police finally arrested Madame Restell in 1847 for procuring an abortion. At the trial a young woman, Maria Bodine, testified that during the abortion Madame Restell "hurt me so that I halloed out and gripped hold of her hand; she told me to have patience, and I would call her 'mother' for it."

Found guilty, Madame Restell was given a one-year jail term, but political connections preserved her from great misery. She was allowed to put aside the lumpy prison mattress and bring in her own fancy new featherbed instead. Madame Restell also brought into the "prison suite" her own easy chairs, rockers, and carpeting. Visiting hours were altered so that her husband was able to visit at will and "remain alone with her as long as suited his or her pleasure," according to Warden Jacob Acker.

After release from such a jail, Madame Restell proclaimed that the trial and imprisonment were easily worth $100,000 to her in advertising. She moved to larger and better offices and in the 1850s was said to be spending $20,000 on advertising per year, at a time when eggs were six cents a dozen and decent apartments in New York City cost $5 or $6 a month. Madame Restell also became known as the favorite abortionist of the wealthy and powerful. She boasted that mistresses of senators, governors and other high officials used her services. One 1850 newspaper editorial explained her lenient treatment by police: "She held in her keeping the dread secrets of many a high-toned family, and fear of exposure led those people quickly to defend her when she got into the toils "

Some newspapers would have given up, but the Gazette kept at it. Popular pressure led to a rearrest of Madame Restell in 1856; this time, though, her political connections were so strong that she was released at once. Growing still wealthier and continuing to expand her clientele, she moved to a mansion at Fifth Avenue and 52nd Street which, according to the New York Times, "never fails to attract the attention of the passerby, on account of its architectural beauty and magnificence." Madame Restell traveled the avenues behind a pair of matched grays and a driver with plum-colored facing on his coat lapels. According to one writer, she also carried a small muff of mink in which she hid her hands, much like the ones "famous pianists or violinists used to protect their hands from harm."

By the mid-1860s she was said to be a millionaire. Other New York abortionists also had, in the words of the British Medical Journal, a "large and lucrative business," one in which they were "never in want of engagements." One anti-abortion doctor, J. H. Toner, had to admit that abortion "has become a regularly established, money making trade." Some opponents of abortion gave up, just as some give up now: The opposition seems too strong. And yet, the Gazette kept at it.

In the 1860s the great crusade finally began to make real progress with the coming aboard of the New York Times, as described in Chapter One. Following the exposes by the Times, even the Greeley-edited New York Tribune ran anti-abortion editorials, examining the business aspects of "an infamous but unfortunately common crime-so common that it affords a lucrative support to a regular guild of professional murderers, so safe that its perpetrators advertise their calling in the newspapers, and parade their spoils on the fashionable avenues."

The Tribune called for an end to newspaper advertising of abortion services: "Abortion at any period is homicide" and should not be "allowed to flourish openly as a recognized industry." Non-Christian newspapers, even the New York Herald, bowed to public pressure and at various points during the 1870s began refusing to run ads for known abortionists. Madame Restell's business began to decrease, but as revenue slackened she seemed to spend more and more, putting part of her savings back into the Fifth Avenue house.

Increasingly though, her house itself became known as a symbol of ill-gotten gains. With newspapers attacking her personally, as a way of focusing attention on the issue, a new generation of officials did not automatically protect her. Assistant District Attorney Fellows complained that "Every brick in that splendid mansion might represent a little skull, and the blood that infamous woman has shed might have served to mix the mortar." Community pressure increased, and Madame Restell became isolated. Loud cries against "Madame Killer" would sometimes follow her carriage down Fifth Avenue. With anti-abortion laws not only tightened but, due to public sentiment, enforced, she began to lie low.

Early in 1878, personalization and persistence finally paid off. The New York Times could report, "Mme Restell Arrested" for "selling drugs and articles to procure abortion." The Times noted that "The residence of Mme Restell is one of the best known in New York.... Her wealth is entirely the proceeds of her criminal profession. Her patrons are said to belong to the wealthiest families." But Madame Restell's patrons were not able to protect her from newspaper reporters who followed every detail of her arraignment and trial.

Some of the developments were low comedy. Madame Restell could not immediately raise bail from her own funds, since her investments in bonds and real estate were illiquid. Bondsmen said they would put up sufficient funds only if the judge would order reporters not to print the bondsmen's names in the newspaper. The judge refused and the bondsmen refused. Madame Restell's lawyer turned to one bondsman and asked him to help out, saying, "Will you not allow a Christian feeling to govern you?" But there was nothing Christian about Madame Restell, the Times suggested, as it quoted the bondsman refusing not from opposition to abortion but from dislike of publicity: "I've got a wife and a family of girls, and I'll be hanged if I'm "going to have my name in the papers as a bondsman for an abortionist."

Madame Restell eventually left jail, but she could not leave behind newspaper attacks. She had lived by the press and was now dying by it. She asked her lawyers if there was some way to suppress the newspapers, but was told that nothing could be done, for the press was without standards. One of Madame Restell's colleagues complained angrily, "Money! We've plenty of that. But what good is it with the newspapers against us?" Madame Restell's lawyer asked both judge and editor to have mercy on his client, a "poor old woman," but he was laughed at. Madame Restell could not seem to understand the causes of the judgment she was facing: "I have never injured anybody," she complained: "Why should they bring this trouble upon me?"

Madame Restell at age sixty-five became an avid newspaper reader, but she found no peace. The New York Times described how she was "driven to desperation at last by the public opinion she had so long defied." At night she paced her mansion halls like a latter-day Lady Macbeth, looking at her hands and bemoaning her plight. Early on the morning of the day trial was scheduled to begin, Madame Restell was discovered in her bathtub by a maid, with her throat cut from ear to ear, an apparent suicide.

The end was sad; there is no evidence that Madame Restell ever repented. But she served during her life as the symbol of evil. She had flaunted wealth gained through murder. Just as the New York Times seized on the death of a young woman to drive home its abortion lesson, so the Gazette and then other newspapers concentrated on Madame Restell. Was the treatment of Madame Restell compassionate? Her only hope was to realize that abortion was wrong and to change, as Dr. Bernard Nathanson and many other former abortionists have done in recent years.

Learning from their successful treatment of Madame Restell, and going with/contributing to the changed flow of opinion, many newspapers in the 1870s and 1880s emphasized the large monetary rewards many abortionists had received. They thus suggested "murder for profit" rather than an offering of professional services. Abortionists who were arrested were almost invariably described as rich. At one abortion inquest, a "Madame Ihl" was dressed handsomely in black silk." Another abortionist was "plainly but richly dressed in a costume of black silk."

Always, the motto was personalization and persistence. In 1890 the New York Times wrote that an arrested abortionist, Dr. McGonegal, "has the appearance of a vulture.... His sharp eyes glitter from either side of his beaked nose, and cunning and greed are/written all over his face." McGonegal's accomplice, Fannie Shaw, was described as "wholly repulsive in appearance, vice and disease having made her a disgusting object."

The Times even sent a reporter to McGonegal's neighborhood in Harlem to learn how he was regarded by the people he said he was trying to help. The reporter concluded, "To the good people of Harlem, and especially to the poorer class, this grizzly old physician had long been an object of intense hatred. They were certain of his unholy practices, although he had escaped conviction, and when he drove through the streets in his old-fashioned, ramshackle gig, they hooted and jeered at him in derision."

By 1900, though, the New York Times and other newspapers were not paying much attention to abortion. The practice had been driven underground, but it was far from ended. Magazine articles occasionally discussed abortion and abortionists, and slowly the slant of personalization began to change. Time magazine in 1936 called the pro-abortion gynecologist Frederick Taussig "a handsome man" who performs "strict and meticulous clinical work." Eight years later Time was more forthright, reporting that "one of the best abortionists in the U.S. went to jail last week." "Best" was not just a slip of the pen; Time called the imprisoned abortionist a "good practitioner."

By the end of the 1950s, with sweeping changes in the religious and intellectual climate, and in attitudes of doctors and many journalists, pro-abortion forces could reemerge. Conferences installed the intellectual carpeting. Then the techniques of persistence and personalization were used to sell abortion. A typical Newsweek article on abortion in 1960 was laced with quotations by pro-abortionist Alan Guttmacher, described by the magazine as a "strong-faced outspoken crusader." Guttmacher's book, Babies by Choice Or by Chance, was excerpted in the January 1960 Reader's Digest.

The next step for pro-abortion personalization was television. In April 1962 the CBS show "The Defenders" aired an episode entitled "The Benefactor," with an abortionist as the hero of the title. This "benefactor" had become an abortionist not for profit but merely to help young women in trouble. The idea that altruists could honorably kill unborn children was part of American popular culture. Shortly afterwards, the Sherri Finkbine incident hit the headlines.

To combat the perverse equation of abortion and altruism, Christian journalists and allies have to be willing to give offense when needed. Some Christians are uncomfortable with attempts to shock readers by providing unpleasant descriptions of the abortion itself, and sometimes even "bloody pictures" of aborted infants. There is also discomfort about the plastering of abortionists' names on billboards: Attack the institution but not individuals, some say.

The history of effective crusading shows the importance of personalization. So does the work of the best current anti-abortion newspaper in the United States, the National Right to Life News. One recent issue provided examples of all four types of stories useful in a persistent crusade: Bad news, good news, exposure of institutions, and exposure of individuals.

The bad news story, "Murder Trial Set for Man Accused of Fatally Injuring Unborn Child," reported the follow-up to the death of a baby girl born prematurely after the accused man allegedly beat the baby's mother when she would not get an abortion. A California judge ordered the man to stand trial and rejected the defense attorney's motion to limit the charges to no more than second-degree murder. This case seems like one taken almost directly out of Exodus 21:22, 23: In those verses, if a man hits a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious-injury, a fine is in order; but if there is serious injury, more severe penalties go into effect, even up to life for life.

The good news story was of an operation in which doctors opened a mother's womb by cesarean section, removed her baby for three minutes to correct a urinary tract infection, and put the baby back in the womb. Nine weeks later a healthy baby named Mitchell was born. Doctors did not publicize the operation until a year after it took place. By then, according to Mitchell's mother, the baby could "walk holding on to the couch and he smiles all the time. We've decided he's an angel."

The institutional expose was of a cozy relationship between the most powerful pro-abortion group, Planned Parenthood, and the supposedly objective National Academy of Sciences; the Academy had just published a pro-abortion report, Risking the Future. NRL News showed how the report came about: Planned Parenthood employees and allies "produced much of the 'research,' wrote the evaluation (of their own research), and critiqued their own findings and conclusions. Nice work, if you can get it."

The individual expose was the most gripping story on the front page. "Malpractice Result of 'Burnout,' from 2,600 Second Trimester Abortions, Garrett Claims" told of a New Jersey abortionist who pleaded "no contest" to malpractice charges involving forty patients, including one fourteen-year old girl who died. The abortionist, E. Wyman Garrett-NRL News published his picture-blamed his action in the cases on stress caused by performing twenty thousand abortions, 2,612 of which were dilation and evacuation (D&E) abortions done in the second trimester. (In a D&E, the unborn child is crushed and dismembered before being removed from the mother's womb.)

In at least one case, Garrett allegedly left the head of an aborted baby in the woman's body. Another abortionist, testifying in Garrett's defense, said he "could have predicted" that Garrett would suffer burnout from doing abortions because most doctors who specialize in obstetrics and gynecology (as Garrett did) do so to be part of the "life and birth" process, making abortion-especially D&E abortions-stressful.

Did NRL News lack compassion to spotlight one particular individual? Did nineteenth-century newspapers lack compassion when they hounded Madame Restell? First, of course, we have to remember the mountain of tiny skulls on which abortionists stand. Second, we must pray for the abortionists: They also have souls which will never die, souls which are scarred anew when each abortion is performed. Trained to save life, they are taking it. They know, deep down, that what they do is wrong (Romans 1:32).

The best thing that could have happened to Madame Restell would have been for her to stop doing abortions; she kept on, and ended up committing suicide. The best thing that could happen to today's abortionists, for their own good as well as for the good of children, would be for them to cross over from death to life, physically and spiritually. Newspapers that pressure them could aid in the process.

In any case, compassion is not the only question worth considering. Augustine's emphasis on truth-telling is fundamental to good reporting. While we are concerned about the ultimate fates of Madame Restell and E. Wyman Garrett, truth and God's justice cannot be neglected. The inspired author of 2 Kings did not write with gentleness of the death of Jezebel, Ahab's queen: "They threw her down, and some of her blood spattered the wall and the horses as they trampled her underfoot." As Elijah had predicted, dogs quickly ate Jezebel's flesh: "When they went out to bury her, they found nothing except her skull, her feet and her hands" (2 Kings 9:33, 35).

The four NRL News stories cited represent part of one issue. Every two weeks another issue is published, full of specific detail and personalization, not sermonettes and abstraction. Some Christian publications that style themselves newspapers are not: They present opinion, sometimes well-stated, but not much news. The essence of newspaper crusading, though, is news: Showing, not just talking about, the evil amidst us and the need for change.

The willingness to be specific, even if feelings are hurt, is based on some theological discernment. It is not enough for us to go around saying, "God loves you." He does, but Christ's sacrifice, the greatest love of all, can only be fully understood in terms of Adam's fall. Grace is a meaningless concept if sin is not taken seriously and condemned by journalists and others.

Crusading requires certain cautions, both in selection of issue-are we exposing something the Bible defines as evil, or just something we do not like?-and in method; carelessness may lead to ethical and legal problems, as indicated in Chapter Six's discussion of libel. Today's law allows some reporters to get away with character assassination, but Christians have a higher standard. A Christian journalistic crusader should never go to print unless his accusations are confirmed by the testimony of two witnesses.

Reporters must also remember that personalization is a dramatic technique; we should never think that if we depose one individual we have disposed of sin. Personalization, just like sensationalism, can be misused, if we do not remember that "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23). God's holiness and God's redemptive love go together. Paul's verse of bad news is followed by the Good News that we "are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus" (Romans 3:24). Christian journalists who keep both verses in mind can avoid distortion while crusading.

The latter half of this chapter has given examples of crusading against abortion, one manifestation of sin. The same principles of specific detail, persistence and personalization may be applied journalistically in other social and political areas, and on economic issues as well. In every situation, it is vital to stress news rather than sermonettes, and to banish thoughts of easy victory.

Whenever we see ourselves as weak, we should not concentrate on our own frailty, but should gaze-both eyes-up God's glory.

-John Calvin

NEXT » A Christian Journalism Revival?
« PREVIOUS Coverage of Sensation and Disaster: The Gaining and Keeping of Audiences