Nailing Cornwell's "Hitler's Pope."

Mark Judge makes an argument for a certain kind of public discourse, and, then, summarizes John Cornwall's book:

In 2004 Hitler's Pope author John Cornwall himself admitted he had been wrong. "I would now argue," he said, "in the light of the debates and evidence following Hitler's Pope, that Pius XII had so little scope of action that it is impossible to judge the motives for his silence during the war."

In other words, Hitler's Pope uses truths, half truths and lies; omits information selectively; simplifies complex issues and ideas; plays on emotions; advertises a cause (the iniquity of the Catholic Church), attacks opponents (ditto) and targets desired audiences.

It is, in short, a prime piece of propaganda. And the way to fight propaganda is to slowly, calmly, day in and day out, itemize the errors, omissions, and outright lies of the side telling the lies. The Catholic Church needs a smart and centralized website to do just that.

For what it's worth, here is my review of the book on the Amazon site, which attempts to do that.

Well, I don't know about the "calmly" part.

Mark Judge asks, "Who is truly counter-cultural? Who is authentically transgressive and threatening?...

Dawn Eden or Dan Savage?"

When the story broke, I was at the National Shrine in Washington, D.C., seeing my old friend Dawn Eden. Dawn is a genuine countercultural figure. She grew up Jewish in New York, became a journalist and rock music writer (she wrote liner notes to a lot of great records), and then converted to Catholicism. She is the author of the books “The Thrill of the Chaste” and her new one, “My Peace I Give You: Healing Sexual Wounds with the Help of the Saints.” It is a magnificent and moving work of great spiritual power and grace.

At this point I could offer a comparison between the enslaved and enraged Savage (who is a wonderful advocate for marriage; he’s only cheated on his partner nine times) and the free and joyful Dawn. But I actually feel sorry for Savage — and for the gay community, which has to suffer him as a representative. Because the truth is, gay kids do get bullied in school, and the change in consciousness and seriousness about the issue that, yes, Savage and others have initiated is valuable and worth encouraging. Somewhere out there is a kid who won’t take his life tonight, and Savage may be responsible for that.

Yet the same righteous fuel that made Savage launch his anti-bullying campaign seems to also work as a poisonous toxin. It’s like that episode of “Seinfeld” where a woman dislikes George Costanza and he simply can’t stay away from her. He chases her down, carries her bags, flags a taxi for her. He even dumps his own girlfriend to pursue her. Dan Savage cannot stand the idea that there is one person in this world who disagrees with him about homosexuality. Even people who think that homosexuality is innate and have no problem with civil unions but maintain that there is a difference between the male body and the female body are haters, outcasts, intolerant. He won’t rest until the last holdout is showered in condoms.

Savage’s insecurity runs so deep that any dissenter from his free love orthodoxy automatically becomes a hater, a bully, a Nazi. But beneath all of his rage may be an attraction to those same people — thus his declaration that he wanted to have sex with Rick Santorum. This hate-love dynamic seems to be common on the left. Liberals can’t deny the attraction of purity even as they attack it. When conservatives express desire for liberal women, it’s usually the actors — Jennifer Anniston, Angelina Jolie — and not the politicians.

When I saw the video of Savage attacking the Bible and bullying his audience, I immediately thought of Big Brother. Savage’s image, broadcast on what looked like a JumboTron, was cold, harsh, punitive. It was the book “1984” and he was our dictator announcing time for Two Minutes Hate. And the subject was the Christian. Contrast his granite visage with the smiling, almost carefree faces of the kids who were walking out.

Indeed, their faces were like Dawn Eden’s. They didn’t seem outraged or offended as much as bemused and bored. They’ve heard it before. It is the unchanging, utopian-demanding screed of the liberal in desperate need of therapy. Perhaps he needs to read Dawn Eden’s books.