You are not signed in as a Premium user; you are viewing the free version of this program. Premium users have access to full-length programs with limited commercials and receive a 10% discount in the store! Sign up for only one day for the low cost of $1.99. Click the button below.
No matter how hard they try, the Marxists simply cannot leave the Church alone — the Catholic Church. Speaking spiritually, it's easy to understand why. Satan runs the Marxist media with its support for all kinds of evil, propagating the horrors of the sexual revolution. And because Satan knows the Catholic Church is the only legitimate religion on the earth — in human history, in fact — he aims all his firepower at Christ's mystical body. It is not very hard to do the math there.
But what is curious is the question of his children here on earth. There is something in their psychology that draws them to the Church. They're practically obsessed with it. Check that. They are obsessed with it. It's almost always Catholic churches, Catholic families and so forth, in TV shows, movies, novels, you name it. There is something about the Church — magnetic, psychologically magnetic — where they simply cannot ignore it. So no one can be surprised when these periodic eruptions occur in the secular media, and it seems to be the case that these eruptions are becoming more frequent.
For example, within a 72-hour period, the Church was once again the subject of nonstop editorializing at major outlets. A few days back, The New York Times published a guest essay by Julia Yost from First Things entitled "New York's Hottest Club is the Catholic Church." It was a quaint piece on the increasing acceptance of Catholicism among the younger generations, in reaction to the increasing chaos in the world. It had a tinge of nostalgia sprinkled in with a touch of admiration for the cultural trend.
The piece focuses on a neighborhood in Manhattan called "Dimes Square," which has become something of a haven for those fed up with the zeitgeist, focusing on a blend between traditional Catholicism and Trumpism — a confident yet somewhat mellow approach to fighting back and resisting. It was certainly flattering and somewhat shocking on the pages of the New York Times, no doubt. But of course, anything even remotely favorable to Catholicism immediately brings out the boobirds.
In this case, it was the radical leftists at Slate who castigated the Times for publishing anything non-condemnatory of the Church. The most revealing line in the Slate piece was regarding "traditionalists," a word the author has no clue as to its meaning. She says, "many [traditionalists] are campaigning, sometimes quite vehemently, for the stripping of rights from women and queer people." And there you have it. Slate correctly intuits that any faithful Catholicism must rebel against the sexual revolution. Too bad the bishops haven't figured that out yet.
And if this wasn't enough (the Times/Slate coverage), a day or so later, yet another tête-à-tête broke out between The Atlantic and Fox News, again regarding Catholicism. This skirmish began with a heavily insulting piece written by a paid online "hate researcher" (whatever that is) who is employed by a Toronto Holocaust museum. The name of his piece — or, rather, the original title — was this: "How the Rosary Became an Extremist Symbol." Not very flattering.
The blowback was so severe that The Atlantic changed the name of the article so absurdly, that it didn't even reflect the content. It went from "How the Rosary Became an Extremist Symbol" to "How Extremist Gun Culture is trying to Co-Opt the Rosary." That is quite the difference. The young fellow who wrote it clearly has a next-to-zero understanding of Catholic theology as well as Catholic devotional and spiritual life. He conflates all kinds of things that are, in their essence, unrelated.
He doesn't know his Catholic vocabulary, doesn't know Catholic spirituality and doesn't know much about history. But hey, why would you need to know Catholic theology, devotions and spirituality to write a piece on Catholic theology, devotions and spirituality? What's important is that he is an "online hate researcher" and was casting about for something, anything, in the Catholic world to portray as "hate." Hey, Dan, you went barking up the wrong tree.
In fact, in a game of low-hanging fruit, we actually challenged the clueless kid to a debate or at least an interview. I sent him multiple tweets, a large number of which were retweeted, saying let's hash it out. In one, I pointed out to him that if he accepts, then he might want to bone up because we wrote a book, The Weapon, all about the Rosary. If you would like, it's available in our bookstore, and, on a personal note, of the four I have authored, this is hands down my favorite. Just click on the store link on the site to order a copy. Thank you in advance.
Young Dan is like so many his age, full of the narrative, with no ability to think clearly and absorb anything deeper. They set out to find some evidence of a preconceived story they are convinced is true and then just grab whatever they can and jam it into the storyline — even if it barely fits, or even doesn't fit. It's kind of like a cop being so convinced that Bob committed the crime that he just plants the evidence on him, convinced that he is justified in doing so because, you know, he's right.
The mainstream media refuses to admit they have a worldview. They are certainly allowed to have a worldview, even a wrong one, but they don't get to pretend they don't and then "investigate" things and "objectively" report on their findings. They aren't "findings." They're distortions, lies, fabrications and poorly reasoned positions, all at the service of the narrative, because the narrative is all that matters — kind of like having to break a few eggs to make an omelet. Unfortunate, certainly, but necessary.
What is it about Catholicism in these types of people's minds that must be "exposed"? Those sorts of questions — deeper questions are never even pondered in the minds of media critics — like the gang on Fox's noonday show, who did an admirable job of attacking The Atlantic for religious bigotry but completely whiffed on the larger point.
As we proceed even deeper into these darker times, you can bet the mortgage that the unthinking mob sitting atop the ivory towers will continue to remain on the attack. For the sake of the innocent and persuadable, they must be resisted. And no, Dan, we don't mean stringing you up from a tree by our beads, although we can imagine that's how you would interpret it.
You'd be wrong, just as your current article shows your ignorance. At least we think it's ignorance. Feel free, Dan, to reach out. We'd love to talk. And no, we aren't being cheeky or facetious. You need some schooling, as well as the humility to understand that. But humility isn't really the currency of the Left.