« Prayers for Cardinal George | Main | Now it works »
July 26, 2006
Truthiness, continued
A reader let me know that Colbert was tres Catholique last night. I'm working on watching parts of it (I have a hard time getting stuff to download from Comedy Central, so I search elsewhere).
Bill Donohue's interview (about 9 minutes) -
"A Formidable Opponent" - Colbert debating himself on embryonic stem cell research.
I watched the second, but haven't had time to watch the first. Let us know what you think!
Posted by Amy Welborn | Permalink
Comments
Interesting that there's an actual discussion going on in the YouTube comments section. Usually people just post to say they liked the video.
Posted by: Jason at Jul 26, 2006 9:50:30 PM
What an unfortunate and inaccurate characterization of evolutionary theory Donohue gives at the beginning (sigh).
Posted by: Ian at Jul 26, 2006 9:52:26 PM
The first ninety seconds of "Colbert vs. Colbert" was actually interesting and -- in the best sense -- provocative. The bit about "potential cures" or "potential lives" was interesting. But then it degenerates into smarmy silliness.
Posted by: Rich Leonardi at Jul 26, 2006 10:14:40 PM
I almost fell over in my chair, when at around 4 minutes into the Bill Donohue interview, Colbert asks him, "Who began the Catholic Church." My friend who is a catechist asks this to her 8th graders on the first day of catechism every year! No one has got it right yet. UGH.
Posted by: carrie ryckman at Jul 26, 2006 10:20:40 PM
The bit about "potential cures" or "potential lives" was interesting.
Are you allowed to excerpt yourself? "Clever" is a better word than interesting. It reminded me of something Reagan once said about abortion(paraphrasing): "If you stumbled upon a burlap sack in an alley and noticed that something moving inside it -- perhaps you even hear something -- would you kick it?"
Posted by: Rich Leonardi at Jul 26, 2006 10:28:46 PM
Who do the 8th graders say did establish the Church?
Posted by: marc at Jul 26, 2006 10:37:05 PM
Bill Donohue is insane. Did you see his anti-evolution tirade from the video clip at the beginning? Sounds like a raving fundamentalist, not a Catholic.
Posted by: Morning's Minion at Jul 26, 2006 10:45:37 PM
Donohue could have taken it down a notch, but he was pretty funny and a bit self-efacing. The "secular Jews" controlling Hollywood bit was a little cringe worthy, though he's spot on when it comes to lapsed Catholics.
Posted by: paul zummo at Jul 26, 2006 11:36:00 PM
I'm with Morning's Minion completely on the anti-evolution tirade. This has nothing to do with Catholic catechesis on Creation. Has Bill read the Catechism?
Posted by: Tom Haessler at Jul 27, 2006 12:03:26 AM
I found Donohue's comments about guilt over treatment of American Indians, (let alone evolution!) strange. He mentioned no specific cases of anti-Catholic discrimination or persecution going on around the world. He threw away an opportunity, even a limited one.
Colbert's analysis of stem-cells was brilliant. It had to communicate with his mainstream audience and force them to think.
I admire Colbert's intellect. His mention of Mamonides and Aquinas alone were enough to prick my ears.
Posted by: Consanescerion at Jul 27, 2006 1:43:09 AM
"Now did you not like the DVC because you're pro-Opus Dei, or anti-crap writing?" -Colbert
Pretty funny, though I agree Donahue tried to compete with Colbert's humor, and didn't come off as well.
I'm a bit annoyed at Colbert's (presumably feigned) persona of a young-earth creationist, but then so many Catholics seem to believe just that. Donahue's pre-recorded comments didn't do much to disabuse the audience of the notion that anti-evolutionism is de fide, so poor impressions of Catholicism are likely strengthened. I hope some other future guest can correct Colbert's audience on that point.
Posted by: Kevin Jones at Jul 27, 2006 3:24:38 AM
"Traditional Catholics, Evangelicals, & Orthodox Jews...."
This holy trinity has no need to "impress" since we're a majority!
Posted by: inhocsig at Jul 27, 2006 6:05:56 AM
I also have problems with the Comedy Central site downloads. I wonder why. Thanks for digging up the ones on YouTube.
Posted by: John Henry at Jul 27, 2006 6:16:09 AM
Fascinating. Vampiric is a good word to apply to the debate. And the "potential lives" vs. "potential cures" thing was very interesting, especially when he brought it all back again with the doctor example at the end. He also recognized the complexity of the issue vis a vis the decision to accept treatment that was the result of such research. I wonder if Colbert knows about embryo adoption.
Posted by: Ryan C at Jul 27, 2006 8:15:38 AM
Ah, that most beloved of religious curse words--"fundamentalist" (scare quotes helpfully supplied).
Would that it still meant something, and had not degenerated into a thought substitute that says more about the utterer (e.g., as an amulet against social embarrassment) than it does about the accused.
That, and it disparages a whole lot of good Christian people who live holy and decent lives, regardless of how screwed their scientific method is.
Sad that this side of them never seems to count. It's always "Inherit the Wind" meets "Elmer Gantry" meets "American Gothic."
Posted by: Dale Price at Jul 27, 2006 10:20:07 AM
Just to let you know:
Internet at our house is unusable, after a storm last night, and for some reason, I can't log onto Typepad here at the library. Don't know if it's Typepad or what. So no blogging for a while, at least until the home internet gets fixed.
Posted by: amy at Jul 27, 2006 10:24:06 AM
The funny thing about the Catholic League is-- we need a Catholic League. They are right about the anti-Catholic prejudice out there, that would never apply to other religions. But Donohue is totally the wrong man for the job. His attitude, I think, actually feeds into the very anti-Catholicism he is trying to dispel. His stuff on evolution, secular Jews, and his alignment with James Dobson and other fundamentalists is proof of this.
Posted by: Morning's Minion at Jul 27, 2006 10:35:39 AM
What's wrong with Donohue's association with fundamentalists? Asides from all the trouble associated with the (mis)use of the term that Dale alluded to, one of the great developments of the past generation is that Eveangelicals and Catholics have learned to work together - to the consternation of folks on both sides. I have to believe that the ever dwindling anti-Catholic fervor of the Evangelicals and other Protestant groups is due in large measure to the dialogue that has taken place between us. Dobson happens to be one of the more recognizable figures, and working togather with him has done much to extinguish the fames of anti-Catholicism, at least among the religious. There's still a lot to do with the secularists.
I agree that Donohue can come on a little strong, and he has a tendency to hyperbole. But, all in all, he's a strong defender of the faith, unabashed to shatter pc pieties, and a better spokesman than not.
Posted by: paul zummo at Jul 27, 2006 10:51:33 AM
"But Donohue is totally the wrong man for the job. His attitude, I think, actually feeds into the very anti-Catholicism he is trying to dispel. His stuff on evolution, secular Jews, and his alignment with James Dobson and other fundamentalists is proof of this."
I think this overstates the case, which is not to say that Donohue is the perfect man for the job. His stuff on evolution, unless taken out of context, was just flat out goofy. The alignment with Dobson et al is perfectly sensible in the areas of life issues, sexual morality, and the right of people of faith to participate in the political process, which are still today's chief social battlegrounds. Donohue's reference to secular Jews is flat out correct as far as it goes, but it (this little truth) really is not terribly important; and mentioning it is imprudent and unhelpful to his cause. He does not seem to have much of a filter between brain and mouth, which is a problem. On the other hand he is not ashamed to express outrage when outrage is appropriate, and all too many more "sophisticated" Catholics either don't understand when it is approriate or see themselves as far too "intellectual" to express outrage on behalf of Christ or His Church.
Posted by: Mike Petrik at Jul 27, 2006 11:00:21 AM
I'm surprised that no one here seems to have qualms about the use of copyrighted material on YouTube.
Posted by: James Kabala at Jul 27, 2006 11:05:37 AM
Mike:
Very well said.
Posted by: Dale Price at Jul 27, 2006 11:09:31 AM
I agree with what the people in this thread are saying regarding Donahue. I haven't seen him speak live yet, but even in his writing his rhetoric can be over the top. No sense in giving away ammunition to one's opponents.
I also have to echo the concerns other commentators have about evolution. A lot of young Christians (like this commentor) have their faith challenged when they go to college. Catholic common sense in regard to the relationship between science and faith can be illuminating here, and can even encourage conversion. This light shouldn't be obscured by attempts to attack Darwinism.
Colbert, on the other hand, is scintillating.
Posted by: Ryan C at Jul 27, 2006 11:10:43 AM
I'd just like to add that I also agree that we need The Catholic League, and even someone like Donahue swinging for us. But he does need to tone it down. That goes for the ruler too.
Posted by: Ryan C at Jul 27, 2006 11:13:00 AM
James,
Probably because most of us know very little about it, James.
Posted by: Mike Petrik at Jul 27, 2006 11:15:21 AM
The thing with Donahue is that you never know what you're gonna get. I've seen him display moments of brilliance. We need to see more of those and less of the moments of cringe.
I agree with Paul Zummo that, overall, he is a good defender of the faith. Sadly, I also agree with others that he may sometimes undermine his own efforts.
Posted by: Sue T. at Jul 27, 2006 11:18:48 AM
