Who’d believe that???

It’s easy to look back on the people who believed Awful Disclosures as prejudice and ignorant, and alot of them probably were. Just like we are. Sensationalism didn’t end with Pulitzer and Hearst, and many people today base incredibly important decesions and even support wars based off of false, exagerated, or misrepresented information. More specifically, there’s still lots of prejudice against the Catholic Church in the modern U.S. When we hear about a priest molesting kids, most of us are inclined to believe it reflexively. Although there might be compelling incriminating evidence (and I’m not trying to say that this doesn’t really happen, I’m sure most of the cases are legitimate) we react as soon as we see the headline, not because of evidence. Still, even after saying that I think that there are many policys of the Catholic Church that are repressive and lead to or exacerbate problems.
Even though what I’m about to say may be oversimplified and come from the same prejudices which spawned Awful Disclosures in the first place, I think that there was more to this then just anti-Catholisism. The men who were responsible for these lies were motivated by their own religions. They were acting against what they saw as an over dogmatic and oppressive religion, and ironically revealed themselves to be just as bad. Though they were also motivated by fear of European dominance, things in America back then (and now) are more intwined in and caused by religion then we like to think. So even though Awful Disclosures may read like a cautionary tale against intolerance of religion, it actually shows us how fanatical prejudice from religion influences us

Comments are closed.