Why isn't Bill O'Reilly fuming over Glenn Beck's 'War on Easter'?
March 19, 2010 11:46 am ET by Eric Boehlert
For somebody who has spent the last several Christmas seasons waging a vigilante war against secularists and their devious plan to strip American culture of Christianity at Christmas (aka the War on Christmas), why hasn't Fox News' O'Reilly been raging against Beck's unsightly smear campaign against "social justice" during this year's holy season of Lent?
Of course, I use the 'War on Easter' phrase in the headline facetiously, since Beck isn't specifically waging war on Easter Sunday. Then again, liberal's haven't been crusading against Christmas, but that hasn't stop Fox News from manufacturing the claim each yuletide season.
That said, you'd think O'Reilly would at least raise his voice to object to Beck's bizarre attack on Christianity and what appears to be his mini-crusade against Catholicism, the religion most closely aligned with the teachings of "social justice." (Beck claims it's a code phrase for Nazism and communism, don'tcha know.)
Yet for more than a week O'Reilly sat on his hands, not bothering to say boo, while Beck's swung wildly, and irresponsibly, urging parishioners to leave their church during the Easter season. What could possibly be more inappropriate and offensive to Fox News' church-going viewers?
Question: Is it because O'Reilly is so cowed by Beck's ratings prowess that he won't raise loud objections?
Finally last night, O'Reilly had Beck on as a guest and gently raised the issue of Beck's crusade against Catholics.
Why is FOX funding research to discredit an American minister?
Clearly Beck knows that he doesn't stand a chance of winning this debate about the proper application of Christian principles to the public square on Scriptural or theological grounds. And he clearly has no intention of following St. Paul's command, found in Ephesians, that Christians "not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with which you were sealed for the day of redemption. All bitterness, fury, anger, shouting, and reviling must be removed from you, along with all malice." No, sir. Beck is on a mission to discredit and destroy the pastor who dared to question him... and he's using FOX staff and resources to do so.
FOX needs to be called to account for this. They need to explain how a news organization can possibly justify funding an opposition research effort that has the stated purpose of destroying the credibility of an American pastor?
Bad mental image. Bad!
I'm sure the teabaggers would applaud...
~
The thing is, as with 99% of what he says, Beck isn't exactly wrong with his argument, but he is NEVER exactly right. It's always a kernel of truth expanded to ridiculous ends. That's why this war on Easter, as it's called here, inflamed so many. There's a deeper, complicated, informational discussion that Beck never took the time to hash out. So, of course the next step is the"let me explain" backtracking. It's what he should have done at the start. Explain.
Moreover, the base of Beck's audience which is in the south and the western states of the USA, already have enclaves of prejudice against the Roman Catholic church. This idea that RC's are commie apostates goes back decades. This kind of shooting from the hip inaccuracy from Beck only enforces those old stereotypes. In other words, these rants from Beck are retreads of decades old proclamations. That's why it's easy to say we've seen Beck before. We have. He's just the latest incarnation doing the same damage all over again.
Social justice, in Catholicism, is not just limited to the Jesuits - O'Reilly has it wrong that only those who practice (not sure if that's the right word) "liberation theology" engage in social justice.
Since it is an integral part of the gospel, as well as the rest of Bible, old and new Testaments, Catholic churches of all stripes engage in some form or another of social justice. Beck's more than just 1% wrong about this.
Right, that's why I said "especially" the Jesuits. Who limited it just to the Jesuits? I wasn't excluding the rest of the Roman Catholic faith, but was saying in particular the Jesuits as an example.
No kidding? Thanks for the info. I wasn't saying Beck is wrong on the Roman Catholic religion 99% of the time, I was saying he's wrong in general 99% of the time, or at least not accurate. You may want to read what I wrote in total before correcting me on what I actually said.