As the editor of a Catholic magazine, it may be in bad taste to criticize the editors of another Catholic magazine, but what the heck. Diogenes shows us an ad that appeared in the latest issue of America, published by the Jesuits. There’s a photo of the ad at that link, but it shows a statue of Mary covered with a condom. It is called “Extra Virgin” and is being offered for sale by the British so-called “artist” for $300 per copy. He includes his email address.
Diogenes notes that if Ignatius of Loyola were alive today, the headquarters of America would be a smoking crater on 56th Street in New York right now. If you doubt that, read the anecdote he relates about how Ignatius almost killed a Moor for daring to express the belief that the Blessed Mother was a virgin until the birth of Christ, but not after. Such was how sensitive to insult of the Mother of Lord was Ignatius. Any further doubts as to how he would react to this?
Whoever’s in charge of the Jesuits today, it’s certainly not St. Ignatius. Nor anyone in his mold.
Technorati Tags: anti-Catholic, culture, media, Jesuits
This is the email they are sending in response to complaints:
December 15, 2005
Dear Reader:
We too are offended and very much regret we did not catch the mistake prior to publication. We are returning payment for the ad and protesting the abuse to the artist.
The problem was not evident in the black and white proofs we have used to check final copy.We are taking a number of new steps to review advertising in advance of publication.
Thank you for being so attentive.
Sincerely,
Drew Christiansen, S. J.
Editor in Chief
Now this is almost plausable except the ad copy that accompanies the picture says:
“A stunning 22 cm high statue of the Virgin Mary standing atop a serpent wearing a delicate veil of latex”
So Black and White picture aside shouldn’t veil of latex have sent an alarm?
The advertiser will really be upset that they are sending the payment back considering that they already ran the ad. Sure they will complain about free advertisement.
Yeah, I’m not buying it either. What I think he’s saying is they would have advertised the item if the picture didn’t so clearly indicate what it really is.
At the library I took a look at the issue in question. It does seem to be something that a lazy or hurried editor could let slip, especially if he’s not on the lookout for artists or Howard Stern acolytes who get their kicks from planting subtle blasphemies in religious publications.
I don’t think the evidence here is conclusive. Michael Moore dedicated a chapter in one of his books to sending “gotcha!” donations to political candidates from questionable groups, like “Satanists for Buchanan,” and gleefully pointing out the hypocrisy because the donation wasn’t returned.
We don’t need to go the Michael Moore route. There’s enough already to hang the Jesuits.
But they could go a long way towards reform if they exhorted their readers to hold a novena to make reparations and to pray for the conversion of the “artist.”
The key difference is that this wasn’t sent in as a “gotcha!” by people then pouncing on them. Trust me that a Catholic publisher needs to carefulyl ads that come in, especially from unfamiliar advertisers or small specialty ads.
As editor I don’t approve the ads (although I could raise a concern if I saw one I didn’t like), but it’s certainly up to the publisher to clear them.
It’s also an interesting indicator of who America’s audience is.
The problem really is less obvious when you view the image in black and white. One has to look closely to see it.
Obviously somebody at America approved it, and that’s a sign of some problem, but I don’t think that’s a reason to take Fr. Christensen’s letter as anything but sincere and straightforward.
I don’t buy it either. How about a novena to pray for the conversion of the Jesuits?
(But if you happen to be a Jesuit, remember, novenas to the Buddah—-smiling or otherwise—-don’t count)
The magazine should have been proofed inside and out before going the press. The advertising manager is supposed to know exactly what ads are going on each page and doublecheck that. That’s standard procedure. So I find it hard to believe they hadn’t had a second looka t it in color before it went to the press. Whether they were crushed on deadline and missed it or whatever, this shows either incredible sloppiness on their part or intent to sneak it through. I’d like to think it’s the former and that it will never happen again.
– “delicate veil of latex”
– $300 for what looks like it should be $1.99 at the local Catholic book store.
If those two things don’t set your alarm bells ringing, I don’t know what does.
If Fr. Christensen is straightforward and sincere, it leads me then to ask what kind of publication gets these kind of ads? Who did the advertiser think was going to see this and why?
(Of course, I’m going to be extra vigilant so no one tries to slip one of these by me now.)
Does anyone believe that America freely and knowingly published this advertisement for the purpose of “spitting in Mary’s eye”?
I believe they published it because spitting in the eye of traditional piety is a favored pastime of certain progressives. An infamous “art” exhibition at Harvard Divinity a few years ago was entitled “The Sacred Condom” and included the draping of crosses and statues in condoms. This is nothing new.
Try reading some of the classifieds in the National Catholic Reporter once in a while too.
I do not know if certain Jesuits were actually “spitting in Mary’s eye”.
However, I do know that if I was a Catholic religious (not the same as a religious Catholic), all that I did concerning our sacred faith would be done with awe and reverence. And this for the simple fact that each night when I went to sleep I would have no certainty of waking. And with a belief in facing the Just Judge, I would not want to find myself in His presence with this type of sin on my soul.
Which leads me, perhaps wrongly, to speculate whether or not some of our dissidents and more heterodox Catholics (even those Princes of our Church) are simply not closet atheists with a neat capacity for opportunism.
I cannot judge what goes on in a man or woman’s mind and soul. I can, however, see that there seem to be a lot of thistles where figs should be growing. And lacking contrition and atonement, I might also assume a certain amount of wailing and gnashing of teeth in the not too far distant future.
More communication from the Jesuits, this time from the Provincial of New York.
If anyone thinks this was an innocent mistake from the pure-as-driven-snow Jesuits, I have a tropical resort in Grand Rapids to show you…
BTW, great picture on that site, Josephus. What a facial expression—I wouldn’t want him within a 100 miles of my family. LOL.