Faith and the problem of limitations
Why faith-based journalists should embrace and celebrate covering limitations as part of solutions reporting
by Bekah McNeel
For me, faith and solutions journalism have always been a natural fit. I want to leave people with hope, even in the darkest times. I believe holding powerful people accountable can be part of a redemptive arc. Solutions journalism focuses on communitywide answers to our most pernicious problems and human suffering.
I have had a lot of luck pitching solutions journalism to faith-based outlets, because I wasn’t looking to villainize the churches and ministries in the stories. But one of the key components separating rigorous solutions journalism from puff content can also make faith-based outlets wary: limitations.
Solutions journalism rests on four pillars: a response to a problem; insight into how others might apply or replicate the solution; evidence of how well the solution worked; and limitations. No response is perfect, and solving one problem doesn’t solve all problems. In solutions journalism, when a solution speaks to one part of the problem, but not others, we call this a limitation.
Limitations can be the most difficult part of any solution story, religious or not. You’ve just reported on an inspiring step forward for a community … and then you have to talk about how it’s not enough. Or there’s a cost. This might include talking to detractors who think the cost is too high, or to people who feel they were unfairly left out of the solution. We have to talk about what problems, or elements of a problem, remain to be solved. As humans, we know there are no silver bullets. We know things that sound too good to be true usually are. But it still chafes to point that out.
As a reporter and a person of faith, I often sigh when it’s time to address the limitations of faith-based solutions. I know I’m likely going to spend some time in tension between people who have experienced the power and beauty of a faith-based solution, and those who have been hurt or disillusioned by that very same faith or solution. Adding this important element of realism to any solutions piece can be challenging, and when a reporter is working on a story for a faith-based outlet, it can get extra messy.
But here’s the surprising insight: If reporters and editors connect to the core values of faith, they might find acknowledging limitations to be essential to their mission. After all, our faith never promised us an easy life, full of wealth and good weather. While we do our best, and share a common hope, we know that “this side of heaven” we won’t see all made right. We will face limitations.
Why limitations can be a challenge for faith-based outlets:
- The pressure to prove our value or relevance
Often, in faith-based media, we feel we are filling a gap, or responding to a challenge from the mainstream press. Traditional journalism’s focus on what’s wrong with the world has led to a lot of coverage about what’s wrong with religion. One-dimensional stories about church scandals, extremism, divisive politics and more have created the perception that the media is anti-faith.
In response, many faith-based outlets have taken on the role of defending the faith.
Amid this meta-debate about the value of religion, it can be hard for people of faith to admit that our institutions have flaws, limitations or shortcomings that suggest vulnerability. Outlets that have readers, funders, advertisers and even leaders who have been influenced by the decadeslong, politically-driven divide between liberal secularism and conservative Christianity will likely experience extra pressure not to show vulnerability.
- Faith as a solution
It’s common for faith-based outlets to report stories about the benefits of faith itself. So a “problem” might be a rise in teen anxiety or isolation. The “solution” offered might be a youth group or evangelism ministry. It can be difficult for a faith-based outlet to include the limitation of what faith itself can do to help these teens, communities or society at large — because that’s seen as tantamount to declaring the fallibility of that faith.
Where limitations and faith overlap
If we step back from the discourse and politics that have muddied faith’s role in the public sphere, we see that limitations are actually inherent to faith, religion and spirituality. The triumphal presentation of a particular belief system as the cure-all for poverty, crime, illness and anguish is simply not in line with the religious traditions that have supported humanity for millennia.
- Hope and suffering
Even though people of faith often have hope based on the concept of an eternal future, they are still prone to suffering in the present. Comfort derived from a belief in God’s care and future deliverance is different from a unique silver bullet for the problems we face living in a “fallen” world. People of faith are often called to live out their faith in the context of limitations, problems, even disaster. Jesus taught about eternal life, but he also specifically addressed the sickness and hunger around him, and instructed his followers to do likewise. Jewish rabbis have had to reconcile God’s promises and the atrocity of the Holocaust. Buddhist monk Thich Nhat Hanh connects suffering and hope as one of his 14 Precepts of Engaged Buddhism: “Do not avoid contact with suffering or close your eyes before suffering.Do not lose awareness of the existence of suffering in the life of the world. Find ways to be with those who are suffering by all means, including personal contact and visits, images, sounds. By such means, …awaken yourself and others to the reality of suffering in the world. If we get in touch with the suffering of the world, and are moved by that suffering, we may come forward to help the people who are suffering.”
- Devotion and imperfection
Living in line with the teachings of a religion might bring good things to our lives — we might have more peace and fewer conflicts; we might benefit from being honest, dutiful and content — but all faith leaders understand that humans will never live perfectly. We will always find ourselves in trouble one way or another. In Christianity, this is the doctrine of sin; in Islam, it is the weakness and forgetfulness of man; in Buddhism, it is misplaced desire. If we had to live perfectly in order for faith to be effective, it wouldn’t be effective at all.
In solutions journalism, if a proposed solution works only in theory, it’s not a solution at all. When we have evidence that something works, but the real world of funding constraints, human quirks and environmental variability interferes with its effectiveness, we call that a limitation. It’s just part of the package.
How to embrace limitations without cheapening faith
Limitations allow us to write about faith without presenting it as a product or a political plan. It’s not a way to win at life. Limitations remind our audiences that we do not practice our faith primarily to escape the problems of the world, or to get material blessings. At the same time, a limitation points to continued work to be done — the need for more healing, more compassion, more care. In addition to sharing beliefs and eternal perspectives, the great faith communities have always concerned themselves with the multifaceted problems of a wounded world.
For instance, we can acknowledge the efficacy and compounding benefits of churches paying off medical debt, while explaining that this kind of charitable solution doesn’t inherently fix the country’s health care system, which still leaves millions with insurmountable debt.
One of the trickiest stories I ever reported for a faith-based outlet was about migrant farm workers and the Christians ministering to them across the country. It was clear that for some of the pastors, sharing the Christian message was the extent of their ministry, while others believed it was important to advocate for fairer workplaces and wages. Many of my evangelical Christian readers believed that spiritual encouragement and the hope of eternal life were real benefits, real solutions to the spiritual and emotional challenges many of these workers faced as they navigated brutal economies and labyrinthine immigration systems. (Some of the migrant workers agreed.)
I addressed that limitation by highlighting Christians who, through labor organizing and not pastoral ministry, tended to the material and social situations the workers faced. I was able to show what more could be done for workers without undermining the value of what the pastors were doing. I didn’t have to criticize them — something that was not my place as a reporter, and which might have alienated my readers — to show that migrant workers, like all of us, have flesh-and-blood needs, and that our shared faith is sensitive to those needs.
When we report on faith as a solution — for instance, faith as a source of hope amid tragedy — we need to acknowledge the parts of the problem that coexist with faith. When we report on solutions motivated by faith — clinics, debt relief, food pantries, mentoring programs — we acknowledge that, like all solutions, they have limits, but faith motivates people to continue expanding and improving their efforts to bring hope and healing.
Bekah McNeel is a freelance news and magazine journalist, solutions journalism trainer and author of the book Bringing Up Kids When Church Lets You Down. She lives in San Antonio with her charming husband and madcap children.
To learn more about SJN’s work with faith-based media, contact Keith Hammonds (keith@solutionsjournalism.org). To join a webinar where you can connect with other faith-based journalists around solutions-focused reporting, sign up here.
