{"id":437,"date":"2008-02-22T09:23:37","date_gmt":"2008-02-22T09:23:37","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blog.beliefnet.com\/viamedia\/2008\/02\/defensive.html"},"modified":"2008-02-22T09:23:37","modified_gmt":"2008-02-22T09:23:37","slug":"defensive","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/2008\/02\/defensive.html","title":{"rendered":"Defensive"},"content":{"rendered":"

One of the most irritating thing about discourse, something that gets exaggerated, it seems, on the Internet (like anything else) is hyper-defensiveness. That is to say that to critique any aspect of any phenomenon amounts to a full-scale attack on that phenomenon.
\nFor some, it seems, it is all or nothing.
\nOr perhaps there is just a fear that if one aspect of a phenomenon can be critiqued, that means that the whole enterprise is called into question.
\nThis is just bizarre to a writer, who in the course of writing one project, gets elements of it critiqued approximately 13,798 times before publication. If publication happens.
\nSo what am I talking about? Specifically I’m talking about critiques of Catholic media, in which the suggestion that, say, EWTN is not perfect, or all things to all people, even Catholic people, is met with an almost frantic, “But EWTN saved me and everyone I know and they’re such good people and the programming is great and why are you tearing this ministry down?”<\/em>
\nSame with the Catholic Channel – it’s silly, one commentor below said, to trash an entire channel based on one incident.
\nUh…well, yes, that would be true. But that’s not what happened, at least in what I said. A couple of other posters expressed dissatisfaction with the Catholic Channel, but not because they’ve featured Chopra uncritically on a couple of programs, but because of the way the overall feel of the channel doesn’t grab them.
\nSo?
\nI just really don’t get the defensiveness.
\nOf course <\/em>EWTN could probably improve. The people who work there would probably tell you that themselves. Of course<\/em> the Catholic Channel isn’t for everyone.
\nI repeat: So? <\/em>
\nWho in the world, in their work or ministry, isn’t always, continually, trying to serve more faithfully, to spread the message to more people in more authentic ways?
\nLet’s make a list of other Catholic media entities that could 1) improve and 2) aren’t for everyone.
\nCan’t do it. Because the list would include every Catholic publisher, radio station and other media apostolate, every blog, ever Catholic writer, every Catholic apostolate. Period.
\nThere are a lot of things hampering the growth of Catholic media (and I use that in its broadest sense) in this country. Money. The ideological divide. The mess in Catholic publishing, which is just an echo of the mess in the publishing world period (the mess? No one knows what books people are willing to spend money on anymore and no one knows how to market these mysterious books to the people who may or may not be willing to buy them.) Various individual Magisteria, on both “left” and “right.” Fear. Money.
\nBut one of the more subtle factors, I believe, is an unwillingness and perhaps inability to engage in self-criticism or even mutual criticism. If every suggestion that an entity might be missing out on something is taken as “an attack on the ministry” or driven by nothing but ideology…all of that just drives us back into our bunkers.\u00a0 If people are afraid of voicing even gentle disagreement or critiques of something for fear of losing bookings or publishing contracts or having our articles rejected, there we are, back in the bunkers, nodding politely because everything’s all right.
\nMany years ago, I attended a teacher in-service day. It was in another city, I had to go, and I had to go through incredible hassle to get child care for my kids. I got to the in-service day, and this was the schedule: 1)Welcome\u00a0 2)Mass\u00a0 3)Sharing on some reflection questions or other\u00a0\u00a0 4) lunch\u00a0\u00a0 5) go home.
\nSo yes, we got evaluation forms, and yes, I wrote a negative evaluation, in which I voiced what I thought was probably a common opinion, which culminated in the point:\u00a0“You want to give me an inservice day? Let me stay at school and grade papers. ”
\nA few days later, I was called into the principal’s office. Yes! Called into the principal’s office!
\nHe had a fax of my evaluation on his desk and said that the Superintendant had been very displeased with what I had said.
\n“How,” he asked, “Would you feel if someone criticized something you worked hard to plan?”
\nI thought…I’m a teacher. Welcome to my life!<\/em>
\nI also thought about my years as a DRE, getting criticized from all sides on every score: Too much content, not enough. Too much parental involvement required, not enough. Etc., etc.
\nI thought, in conclusion…isn’t that just …life?<\/em>
\nI’m a huge Flannery O’Connor fan. Her life, vision and art inform me at a very deep level. I love her.
\nBut some people..even (gasp) Faithful Catholics \u00a9 can’t stand her. Are turned off by her.
\nWhat do I say to that? That they’re unenlightened (well, maybe) or stupid? Bad Catholics? Even worse than me?
\nNo. They’re just not moved by Flannery. The way she expresses her worldview doesn’t grab them. Doesn’t resonate.
\nThat’s okay. <\/em>
\nWhat a garbled post – what do you expect when I’ve been thrown off my routine by a 2-hour delay because of two inches of snow!
\nMy point: I wish there could be more adult-level mutual support and criticism of Catholic media, whether that be CNS, EWTN, the Catholic Channel, the NCR’s, Catholic internet sites, publishers, etc.\u00a0 When it comes to Catholic media, there are some elements\u00a0 that I find helpful and some that drive me crazy – even within the same entity. I don’t know why that sort of perspective can’t be expressed without being met so often with responses that begin with, “Well, what do you expect, it’s XXXX you’re talking about. ” or “Well, they’re just ultra-conservative, they’re just dissenting” or – in terms of the entitites themselves, “Oh, sure – sure <\/em>we’re open to all points of view. What are you talking about?” or “No, we’re not under any pressure from X, Y or Z. Not at all!”
\nOne more story. Related to that last point.
\nYears ago, I was writing a weekly column for the Florida Catholic<\/em>, which is the diocesan newspaper for six out the seven dioceses in Florida. I had a conflict with them over a column – I had just read David Lodge’s The British Museum is Falling Down<\/em>, and I was struck, in this story of a British Catholic couple in the late 50’s or early 60’s, about the anxiety over contraception- of the struggle over the morality of contraception. What to do? What to do? And so what I wrote was simply a column about how striking it was that in forty years or so, that moral quandery had disappeared for most Catholics. The question of whether or not to contracept seemed to have lost its moral dimension (this was in the mid to late-80’s.) I think I mentioned that a couple involved in marriage prep at a university Catholic community had estimated that about 80% of the engaged couples they worked with were cohabitating, and we can presume, probably not using NFP. As they cohabitated.
\nThey refused to run the column, saying that it wasn’t true. That of course Catholics still saw contraception as a moral issue – their NFP teachers told them so. Etc.
\nI was griping about this to an editor at another diocesan paper, one who ran another, different column of mine.
\nHe said, “How many bishops are involved in that paper?”
\nI said, “Six.”
\nHe shrugged. “It’s a miracle they get a paper out at all.”
\nSorry for the mess. I’m sure someone out there can make some more sensible points and do me the great favor of clarifying my thoughts for me. Because, you know, I’m open to correction!
\n(Most of the time)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

One of the most irritating thing about discourse, something that gets exaggerated, it seems, on the Internet (like anything else) is hyper-defensiveness. That is to say that to critique any aspect of any phenomenon amounts to a full-scale attack on that phenomenon. For some, it seems, it is all or nothing. Or perhaps there is…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":180,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-437","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"yoast_head":"\nDefensive - Via Media<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/2008\/02\/defensive.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Defensive - Via Media\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"One of the most irritating thing about discourse, something that gets exaggerated, it seems, on the Internet (like anything else) is hyper-defensiveness. That is to say that to critique any aspect of any phenomenon amounts to a full-scale attack on that phenomenon. For some, it seems, it is all or nothing. Or perhaps there is…\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/2008\/02\/defensive.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Via Media\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-02-22T09:23:37+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"awelborn\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Defensive - Via Media","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/2008\/02\/defensive.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Defensive - Via Media","og_description":"One of the most irritating thing about discourse, something that gets exaggerated, it seems, on the Internet (like anything else) is hyper-defensiveness. That is to say that to critique any aspect of any phenomenon amounts to a full-scale attack on that phenomenon. For some, it seems, it is all or nothing. Or perhaps there is…","og_url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/2008\/02\/defensive.html","og_site_name":"Via Media","article_published_time":"2008-02-22T09:23:37+00:00","author":"awelborn","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/2008\/02\/defensive.html","url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/2008\/02\/defensive.html","name":"Defensive - Via Media","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-02-22T09:23:37+00:00","dateModified":"2008-02-22T09:23:37+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/#\/schema\/person\/aea2dcda1635c9c2d6030d9c7595725a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/2008\/02\/defensive.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/2008\/02\/defensive.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/2008\/02\/defensive.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Defensive"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/","name":"Via Media","description":"Amy Welborn","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/#\/schema\/person\/aea2dcda1635c9c2d6030d9c7595725a","name":"awelborn","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/wp-content\/wphb-cache\/gravatar\/9f2\/9f2100183464289fedc5b8a621c15110x96.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/wp-content\/wphb-cache\/gravatar\/9f2\/9f2100183464289fedc5b8a621c15110x96.jpg","caption":"awelborn"},"description":"Amy Welborn was born in 1960, the only child of a now-retired professor of political science, a teacher-librarian-artist mother,deceased since 2001, was a teacher, librarian and artist. The Catholicism comes from her side. Amy grew up in a number of places - Indiana - Washington, DC - Lubbock Texas - Arlington, Virginia - DeKalb, Illinois - Lawrence, Kansas - and Knoxville, Tennessee, where the family settled in 1973. She attended Knoxville Catholic High School, then the University of Tennessee where she majored in history. She received an MA in Church History from Vanderbilt University, where she wrote a thesis on the changing role of women in 19th century American Protestantism, and the ways Scripture was used to justify those changes. She worked as as a teacher in Catholic high schools and a Parish Director of Religious Education and started writing for the diocesan press - the Florida Catholic - in 1988. Amy has written columns for Our Sunday Visitor and Catholic News Service at times over the past twenty years. Her articles have been published in venues ranging from Our Sunday Visitor to the New York Times to Commonweal. She has written 17 books. 18, if you included the as yet tragically unpublished novel. Amy has five children, ranging in age from 26 to 4 and was married to Michael Dubruiel, who died unexpectedly in February 2009. She lives in Birmingham, Alabama.","url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/author\/awelborn"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/437","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/180"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=437"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/437\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=437"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=437"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/viamedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=437"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}