Catholic Disillusioned by Confederate Flag Defense by Pro-Life Catholic Radio Folks

[DebChris]

I’ll be upfront, I tend to follow topics like this in order to increase my understanding, which I know is lacking. I’m a white northern guy, so the Confederate flag doesn’t evoke a lot of feelings for me either with regards to racial issues or “southern pride.” But I want to be empathetic to others because I think it’s an important part of living the Christian life. :grouphug:

I can understand the association of the flag with slavery and racism because of the connection to the Civil War. So I do understand (though I’m sure not completely) how it can be such a source of pain. I do wonder how it is that the flag is still flown in places today. I have a hard time imagining that all people (ignoring, of course, the white supremacists) fly the flag for racist reasons. There has to be some other reason. Whether that reason is strong enough to continue flying it at government buildings is a discussion that needs to be had. I can’t say I’d contribute anything meaningful to such a conversation.

I can understand being disillusioned. I wouldn’t assume lack of charity on the part of Patrick Madrid or any other Catholic radio personality. I don’t think it’s out of malice. I know for me, I have a knee-jerk reaction to put on the brakes when people start talking about taking things down in light of some recent tragedy. Perhaps that is why these radio personalities were pushing back a little on the idea. I don’t know.

Sorry if my ramblings aren’t very helpful. I’m still thinking through these things.

It is easy to become reactive when there is a major tragedy. That is one of the reasons it is important to slow down, and find out if there may be other ways to look at things.
Nobody is denying the evils of slavery as it was practiced by both states that seceded from the union, and a few that did not. Fredrick Douglas fought as much against the segregation of the Northern States as he did against that “peculiar institution” practiced below the Mason-Dixon line. He had difficulty understanding why a slave would take up arms against the North when his master died. Today we might attribute that to Stockholm syndrome, but could there be other reasons?
I am very selective about the sources I accept for information. I do like to read, and continue to learn what I can. I long ago discovered that the more I know, the less I actually do know. Are we willing to listen to each other without jumping to the conclusion that a person is lacking charity because he or she may hold a different point of view?

 

[jeannetherese]

Their babies? “Their babies”?

No - they’re OUR babies, all of us who profess to be pro-life. Much like how there’s no such thing as “illegitimate children” (only illegitimate parents), there’s no such thing as “their” babies - especially not in the context you none-too-subtly insinuate.

Hi randomuser,
You might want to take up the semantics argument with the O.P. She has self-identified as being a black woman and was describing other black babies as their babies. I was working with her quote (you might wish to look at post 49) so that she could see how a simple rephrasing of the argument would link the importance of freedom of speech for supporting the lives of the babies to whom she is referring.
I’m not sure what the none-too-subtle context is the you are noting. Perhaps you could bring her and myself up to speed?
I trust you will agree that freedom of speech may be a useful tool in educating others so that they might better support the marginalized?

 

[jeannetherese]

1. One has to go back to P Madrid Show archives in 2015, when the 9 black people were killed. I cannot locate those archives.
2. I discussed issue w/Mr Madrid on this same topic when he had a show about racism:
   ihradio.com/2017/01/patrick-madrid-show-jan-16th-2017-hour-2/
3. Shows from 8/14 also tackle this issue. ihradio.com/listen/audio-archives/

Hi Claire091166;
I checked your links. The last takes us to the Audio Archives for Patrick Madrid. I hop you can get much more specific than an archive list to support your complaint agains Mr. Madrid. A scholarly paper would include direct quotes, and much more detail on location of the material (date, time, page if applicable).
Your second link only goes to a blurb in which someone named Claire argues “Claire says pro-life Catholics are only concerned about black lives in the womb, but not after they are born”. This is a general argument.
You, yourself aknowledge that you have no archival evidence for your claims concerning 2015.
You complained about several Catholic people who operate in the public sphere, but have given no direct evidence to substantiate your claims and I’ve yet to see or hear any of those you have named defend the Confederate flag.
Can you provide better documentation? Any links to Ms. Tomeo?

 

[jeannetherese]

Thanks for your encouragement. I listen Immaculate Heart Radio and right after the events in Charlottesville, I heard defense of the flag by Patrick Madrid and Jesse and Terry. I tuned out after last Monday’s episode because I couldn’t take it anymore. Patrick Madrid also stood up for the flag after the Church shooting of 9 black people in 2015. Also heard a defense by Doug Keck on Teresa Tomeo’s EWTN show last year.

Waiting for the quotes from Jesse and Terry and the defense by Doug Keck (with links and times for checking context and substantiating quotes. Without direct evidence, we may be verging on slander. Please provide times with your links.

 

[Claire091166]

Waiting for the quotes from Jesse and Terry and the defense by Doug Keck (with links and times for checking context and substantiating quotes. Without direct evidence, we may be verging on slander. Please provide times with your links.

1. Please listen to the audio archives from the week of 8/14. Also the week of 8/22. Jesse and Terry sat in for Mr Madrid on Monday and Tuesday of that week. Doug Keck’s discussion was around 2015 and the archives do not go back that far.
2. Hmmm, thought that the blurb had the actual archive. Was mistaken. The online audio archives apparently don’t go back as far as 1/17. It seems it’s just for one month.
3. This is a forum and I was not seeking to write a scholarly paper. To do that, I will need to to order the archives and invest sometime in putting the paper together. If you hurled me to court, I would have a lawyer subpoena or get copies of the archives to prove my case.
4. As a serious Catholic, I take very seriously the charge of slander or ruining someone’s good name. Everything I said originally is the truth and I will swear on a stack of bibles if you took me to court for slander.

 

[dmelosi]

1. Please listen to the audio archives from the week of 8/14. Also the week of 8/22. Jesse and Terry sat in for Mr Madrid on Monday and Tuesday of that week. Doug Keck’s discussion was around 2015 and the archives do not go back that far.
2. Hmmm, thought that the blurb had the actual archive. Was mistaken. The online audio archives apparently don’t go back as far as 1/17. It seems it’s just for one month.
3. This is a forum and I was not seeking to write a scholarly paper. To do that, I will need to to order the archives and invest sometime in putting the paper together. If you hurled me to court, I would have a lawyer subpoena or get copies of the archives to prove my case.
4. As a serious Catholic, I take very seriously the charge of slander or ruining someone’s good name. Everything I said originally is the truth and I will swear on a stack of bibles if you took me to court for slander.

If you click on the calendar link, I believe it does go back.
catholic.com/audio/calendar/201507

I went back to 2015 and they showed. When on calendar, click on previous month to go back.

 

[DebChris]

The Church is made up of sinners. Although agnostic, Rhubarb was not far from the mark when he suggested not overlooking the spiritual and Universal nature of the Church.
Our Lord told each of us, when we see the speck in our brother’s eye, not to overlook the plank in our own. That is why we have the beautiful Sacrament of Reconciliation.
When we begin to look for perfection in one another, we are bound to become disillusioned. We are not always going to see everything the same way.
We are each on a journey, each on a step along that journey. I mentioned Patrick Madrid’s book Where is that in the Bible? in an earlier post. We see on CAF all the time how easily words can be misconstrued and misunderstood, a point that he illustrates with a single sentence.
Does not agreeing with one another mean not working for social justice? Or for the pro-life movement because I may not agree with some individuals?
Instead of focusing on those individuals and where they stand, what does the Catholic Church teach about social justice, individual dignity, and the sanctity of life?
For those answers I can always go to the Catechism of the Catholic Church. I’m not going to copy all the references from the CCC. It’s all of Part Three Chapter Two with a focus on Article Three. I trust each of us has enough intelligence to read for themselves.
Article Five deals with Life issues.

St. Paul writes in Corinthians 12 about the different parts of the Body of Christ. The Church works very much in this way. One person may be focused on protecting life in the womb. Covenant House works with youth who have run away or been tossed from their homes and are living on dangerous streets. There is Food for the Poor and other ministries working under the umbrella of the Catholic Church, not to overlook those sisters whose Faith is being challenged by current health insurance mandates as they give of their time and talent to care for the elderly.

FYI: Mission statement of my parish…“a welcoming multicultural community centered on the Eucharist, Scripture and Sacraments. We strive to live the Gospel through action, education and service to those in need. We celebrate the presence of Christ by worshiping faithfully, serving willingly, and growing spiritually, sharing our time, talent, and treasure.”

 

[Claire091166]

If you click on the calendar link, I believe it does go back.
catholic.com/audio/calendar/201507

I went back to 2015 and they showed. When on calendar, click on previous month to go back.

Great! January 17, 2017, hours 2&3, I believe for starters. Apologies, but I haven’t time to wade through the 2015 archives after the church shootings. Feel free to do so if you’d like. But if JeanneTherese’s lawyer subpoenaed me, I would absolutely make time!

Meantime, my conscience is crystal clear that no slander has been committed.

 

[jeannetherese]

I heard defense of the flag by Patrick Madrid and Jesse and Terry… Patrick Madrid also stood up for the flag after the Church shooting of 9 black people in 2015. Also heard a defense by Doug Keck on Teresa Tomeo’s EWTN show last year.

Hi Claire091166,
Still waiting for you to post specific quotes from Patrick, Jesse and Terry and Doug Keck so that forum readers may see exactly what you consider to be “defense of the flag”. Exact words and the context will be most helpful.
Suggestions that viewers take the time to research this for you, when you are the person complaining about the quotes you are not posting, is less helpful.
May God bless you.
jt

 

[johnnyc176]

I am a black woman who listens to a lot of Catholic Radio. In the past few years, I have been surprised by the vociferous defense of the Confederate Flag by my fellow passionate pro-life Catholics, so much so that it seems that the only folks defending the flag are the Catholics who listen to catholic radio and White Nationalists.

This has made me disillusioned with the pro-life movement to the extent that I did not attend last year’s Walk for Life West Coast. I have attended every walk since it’s inception and was even instrumental in inviting one of the past speakers.

Of course, I am still and always will be pro-life, but I just cannot bring myself to listen to Catholic Radio or participate in any pro-life events.

White folks often ask me about the dismal lack of African American participation in the pro-life movement (Alveda King, Pastor Hoy et al not withstanding) and I explain that the movement seems more “concerned” with black people in the womb, but not when they are attacked by police or killed in a church in the name of the Confederate Flag.

Nazi flags are not flown in public because of the hatred it signifies for the Jewish people. Why can’t the same courtesy of not displaying the confederate flag/monuments be extended to black people?

And no, black lives matter is not representative of black folks. I mention that because I know someone else will.

So you think that we should erase history? Your from California. Many in your state want to erase Fr.Junipero Serra.

 

[randomuser]

So you think that we should erase history?

Some history belongs in museums and cemeteries and…books. Nobody, anywhere, will EVER be able to remove Fr. Junipero Serra from history - he’s already in books so people can learn about him.

 

[Joe_5859]

Let’s not give Claire too hard a time about not having quotations and exact time stamps for what she heard. It’s an internet forum, not a thesis paper. I agree that it can be helpful for discussion if we can go to the source she is referring to and see exactly what was said, but I can hardly blame her for not doing so. We all have other things to do in life outside of the forum.

I think we need to avoid getting defensive and accusatory in conversations like this. We should be able to have civil conversation about these issues. I’m certainly no fan of vigilante iconoclasm under cover of darkness. But if someone is truly offended by a certain symbol or statue, I think we need to hear them out and consider solutions. Shifting some of these things from government buildings to museums or private property seems like it could be a fair compromise in many situations. That wouldn’t necessarily be “erasing history.” There is a difference between studying something as history and putting it in a prominent place of honor.

That said, those who want to see these flags and statues remain should also be given a chance to make their case. I think the argument about “erasing history” is one of the weaker arguments to make, primarily for the reason stated above that there is a difference between placing something in a historical context versus a place of honor. If someone can give a compelling reason for keeping them in place, I’m open to hearing it. I haven’t heard anything particularly convincing with regards to the Confederate flag. For the statues, it’s different. For example, I’ve heard people make the case that Robert E. Lee was a huge voice for unification after the Civil War. That strikes me as being quite honorable and worthy of putting forth as a model. That would be a much stronger case.

 

[DebChris]

Let’s not give Claire too hard a time about not having quotations and exact time stamps for what she heard. It’s an internet forum, not a thesis paper. I agree that it can be helpful for discussion if we can go to the source she is referring to and see exactly what was said, but I can hardly blame her for not doing so. We all have other things to do in life outside of the forum.
…

That said, those who want to see these flags and statues remain should also be given a chance to make their case. I think the argument about “erasing history” is one of the weaker arguments to make, primarily for the reason stated above that there is a difference between placing something in a historical context versus a place of honor. If someone can give a compelling reason for keeping them in place, I’m open to hearing it. I haven’t heard anything particularly convincing with regards to the Confederate flag. For the statues, it’s different. For example, I’ve heard people make the case that Robert E. Lee was a huge voice for unification after the Civil War. That strikes me as being quite honorable and worthy of putting forth as a model. That would be a much stronger case.

I definitely did not quote chapter and verse for everything that I referenced. I do know people who have never traveled more than 15 miles from their homes and have set views of history. Everything does need to taken in context. There is a difference between a swastika flown on a flag as a symbol of Nazism and one used in the Middle East or India by Hindus. There is a difference between the Confederate flag as a symbol of defiance against what was seen as an invading force by the South, and one joined with that those of the Neo-Nazis. There is also a historical difference when that same flag of defiance is united with that of the United Sates, painted on the sides of American planes that flew against Germans in WWII.
Books are meant to open the mind, to increase curiosity. Robert E. Lee was honored by Northern and Southern leaders. He is mentioned in Andrew Carnegie’s Gospel of Wealth.
The War Between the States was not a single issue war. The tensions that led to the war did not just erupt overnight. The scars took years to heal. Living in WI, a great deal was made about the healing of those scars when Southern states helped with the floods that devastated many Midwestern states as the Mississippi overflowed during the 1980’s.

I have not lived very long in my current city. People remember the downtown race riots of 1967, and have no desire of returning to that era.
One of the ways that California honors its history is by the missions that people visit. Once people visit the missions, they go back and learn more about California history. Curiosity and minds are opened to different ways of seeing.

 

[pnewton]

A lot of what you’re talking about is “pro-birth,” not truly pro-life.

It’s not ‘pro-life’ to essentially deify losers - literally losers - at the expense of decency and compassion to all Americans.

This confuses me. What you are describing is idolatry, as deifying anyone is idolatry. Whether one fought and died in a losing cause or a winning cause has little to do with the character of the person. In any case, none of this is a pro-life issue.

 

[pnewton]

1. As a serious Catholic, I take very seriously the charge of slander or ruining someone’s good name. Everything I said originally is the truth and I will swear on a stack of bibles if you took me to court for slander.

I do not understand exactly what the topic of abortion has to do with flags, but I accept what you say at your word, as it seems reasonable. I do believe that having a Confederate battle flag and a pro-life rally is very inconsiderate to the feelings of others. By now, I would think if clear that it is highly offensive to some people. So it is out of context and offensive. How can it be defended?

That said, let me go a little into the feelings people have and how it relates to Catholic teaching. Patriotism is good. This would apply not only love of country, but love of one’s state, town or community. There is a patriotic bond that the South shares that may well be unique in the country. I don’t. I identify more as a Texan than a Southerner. But I do identify as a Texan as well as an American.

So, while patriotism is good, nationalism is not. When we elevate our affection of out homeland, as neighbors, over people, be it the people we live around or those elsewhere, we cease to practice the Golden Rule. It is not enough just to make American great, but to make America supreme; or as in the case of the South, not just love of Southern culture, but the supremacy of Southern culture. There are those that believe promoting the culture of the South is so important that it supersedes the immediate offense to those who are offended but the symbol of that promotion. The flag that once was raised in battle will not accomplish anything but offend.

However, try to understand that not everyone gets this problem. Most I know that have some sort of Rebel flag decal do not do it to offend, but are ignorant of just how offensive it is. Yes it is as symbol of the South fighting in a doomed cause. But after that, it was a symbol of oppression, torture, lynching, and hatred, far longer that the short span of the Civil War. That is the real legacy of the Rebel flag. Most people are blind that this is how the flag appears to those whose descendants were oppressed, tortured, lynched and hated.

 

[pnewton]

Some history belongs in museums and cemeteries and…books. Nobody, anywhere, will EVER be able to remove Fr. Junipero Serra from history - he’s already in books so people can learn about him.

And tee-shirts bought at museums.

I say that because I have a T-shirt from Fredericksburg, VA (gray). It has flags of both sides on it, but used the real Confederate States Flag, not the battle flag that has been used to symbolize so much evil during Reconstruction and beyond.

 

[Claire091166]

Let’s not give Claire too hard a time about not having quotations and exact time stamps for what she heard. It’s an internet forum, not a thesis paper. I agree that it can be helpful for discussion if we can go to the source she is referring to and see exactly what was said, but I can hardly blame her for not doing so. We all have other things to do in life outside of the forum.

I think we need to avoid getting defensive and accusatory in conversations like this. We should be able to have civil conversation about these issues. I’m certainly no fan of vigilante iconoclasm under cover of darkness. But if someone is truly offended by a certain symbol or statue, I think we need to hear them out and consider solutions. Shifting some of these things from government buildings to museums or private property seems like it could be a fair compromise in many situations. That wouldn’t necessarily be “erasing history.” There is a difference between studying something as history and putting it in a prominent place of honor

This is the crux of the matter.

 

[Claire091166]

I do not understand exactly what the topic of abortion has to do with flags, but I accept what you say at your word, as it seems reasonable. I do believe that having a Confederate battle flag and a pro-life rally is very inconsiderate to the feelings of others. By now, I would think if clear that it is highly offensive to some people. So it is out of context and offensive. How can it be defended?

That said, let me go a little into the feelings people have and how it relates to Catholic teaching. Patriotism is good. This would apply not only love of country, but love of one’s state, town or community. There is a patriotic bond that the South shares that may well be unique in the country. I don’t. I identify more as a Texan than a Southerner. But I do identify as a Texan as well as an American.

So, while patriotism is good, nationalism is not. When we elevate our affection of out homeland, as neighbors, over people, be it the people we live around or those elsewhere, we cease to practice the Golden Rule. It is not enough just to make American great, but to make America supreme; or as in the case of the South, not just love of Southern culture, but the supremacy of Southern culture. There are those that believe promoting the culture of the South is so important that it supersedes the immediate offense to those who are offended but the symbol of that promotion. The flag that once was raised in battle will not accomplish anything but offend.

However, try to understand that not everyone gets this problem. Most I know that have some sort of Rebel flag decal do not do it to offend, but are ignorant of just how offensive it is. Yes it is as symbol of the South fighting in a doomed cause. But after that, it was a symbol of oppression, torture, lynching, and hatred, far longer that the short span of the Civil War. That is the real legacy of the Rebel flag. Most people are blind that this is how the flag appears to those whose descendants were oppressed, tortured, lynched and hated.

This gets to the heart of the matter. This is brilliant. And you just “dropped your mic”!

 

[on_the_hill]

I did not know that by statute Confederate soldiers are now considered veterans.
.
.

Sorry but that is incorrect. The federal statutes that are often cited as proof of this did not, in fact, make confederate veterans U.S. veterans. The enactments did two things. The 1959 (?) law allowed confederate vets, their widows, and children to receive veterans benefits but it absolutely did not grant them U.S. military veteran status. The 1929(?) law authorized he Secretary of War to erect gravestones on gravesites of confederate veterans.

Neither law granted Confederate vets U.S. military veteran status. I’ll be happy to provide all of the legal citations if anyone is interested.

 

[pnewton]

This gets to the heart of the matter. This is brilliant. And you just “dropped your mic”!

A quick encore. I use to decorate with the Rebel flag, like many others, but then I made it to sixth grade and studied history.