This is an article I wrote for the Irish Catholic last year-- I've also discovered, just now, that somebody also referred to it in a letter to that newspaper.
It came to my mind again today because, it being Easter and all, I decided I would look at some Catholic videos on YouTube. I gave up after a while, because I couldn't find anything that wasn't old hat to me a long time ago.
Now, don't get me wrong. I realize the Faith is not about intellectual stimulation-- I really do. It's about salvation.
But...does Catholic stuff have to tread the same ground over, and over, and over, and over?
I think this is especially irksome when it comes to argument. You know-- even when I was an agnostic, it occurred to me that Christian faith couldn't be based on Scripture alone, because where did you get Scripture in the first place, and who decided which books were included in the Bible?
Why are there endless hours devoted to making the case against Protestantism on Catholic media? Can't it be assumed that most people watching get it already? Can't we get past square one? Can't this just be revisited every now and again?
And even if the case against Protestantism has to be continually made...does it have to concentrate on the basics all the time? Can't it branch out into some of the secondary debates?
Whenever I watch Catholic TV or listen to Catholic radio, I feel I am being hectored to agree with something I already agreed with a long time ago. It's draining.
Why are they so many lectures about Cardinal Newman? I love Newman, but why can't there be some lectures or panel discussions or interviews about Cardinal Wiseman or Monsignor Ronald Knox or somebody like that?
Why are St. Padre Pio and Mother Teresa, and a handful of others, apparently the only saints that have ever existed?
Why can't there be documentaries or magazine articles about Catholic writers such as Coventry Patmore or Compton Mackenzie-- rather than always being about Flannery O'Connor or Evelyn Waugh or G.K. Chesterton?
And so on, and so on, and so on....