Reuters and divine inspiration

GetReligion's Mollie Ziegler Hemingway ponders the media's use of titles and honorifics for religious leaders, noting a concern recently expressed by a reader regarding Reuters' use of the term "the Prophet Mohammad."

I’ve just noticed recently that Reuters is following in the footsteps of AP and AFP in designating the Islamic prophet Mohammad as “The Prophet Mohammad”. I as a Christian don’t consider him my prophet, and neither do, I’m sure, Jews, atheists, Hindus, Buddhists, etc.

Why then have all the mainstream news outlets decided to treat us all as if we are Muslims? Rightly, he should be described as “the Islamic prophet Muhammad” rather than “The Prophet Muhammad”.

The response by Religion Editor Tom Heneghan is pretty much what any careful reader of religious news copy would expect.

In the religious sphere, we use official titles and honorifics that are common in the faith concerned and widely understood across religious boundaries. We refer to Jesus Christ, even though non-Christians would dispute his honorific “the Annointed One.” The same goes for Buddha, a title (“the Enlightened One”) for Siddhartha Gautama that non-Buddhists could also contest.

The explanation sounds reasonable on the surface. But drawing an equivalency between the titles and honorifics used by various religions for their particular leaders is a somewhat perilous task. Absolute consistency would oblige Mr. Heneghan and his reporters to refer to the leader of the Christian faith as "the Lord Jesus Christ." But, of course, such a lofty title can only be conferred upon Jesus by persons writing or speaking under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.