The History Channel Shows

Does anyone else get the sense that the History Channel has a little bit of anti-Catholicism in some of their shows such as Banned from the Bible & the new one they will be having on Opus Dei, not to mention the DaVinci code shows?:nope:

I happened to catch part of Banned from the Bible last night and just the way that the “scholars” act toward things makes me think that they have an anti-Catholic or at the least a huge disagreement with the Church.:mad:

Has anyone else noticed that?

A “little” anti-Catholicism? I think that would be an understatement.

I guess I was trying to be nice :o

But I agree that it is an understatement. And the thing is, I’ve only recently noticed it since they started airing the DaVinci code shows a while ago. Now it seems that every religion show that they have seems to be anti-Catholic!!:mad:

I just wish my husband didn’t like the History Channel so much. I told him we shouldn’t watch it anymore.

I saw that the were doing a show on the “Banned books” from the bible…and of course they do it on easter sunday right? i too am starting to wonder if the history channel is slanted. They do good history anyalsis stories but when it comes to religion they don’t seem to hold a even the middle of the road anyalsis. It’s nomrally pretty christinity is wrong or baed on false hoods and never give time for rebutalls.

When will they be running the show on Opus Dei? I visited the History Channel website but I didn’t see any information. I probably missed it, so would appreciate a link if you have one. :slight_smile:

i have noticed it myself, to their defense they did show Jesus of Nazareth, and the greatest story ever told over the weekend also. they are all over the place.

I can’t remember the day it is supposed to air but I think it may be the same one that aired last summer b/c you can buy it on DVD from their site. If I hear the date on TV I’ll post it so you can know.

Yep.

From the Catechism:

2477 Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury.He becomes guilty of rash judgment who, even tacitly, assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor. . .

2478 To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way:

“Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another’s statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. And if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved.” (St. Ignatius of Loyola)

Since they also have programs that are fair to Catholics, the evidence is that they do not have a unified agenda. It is apparent that they have a non-Catholic perspective. Anti-Catholic bias implies something more sinister. Thus, it would be charitable and more correct based on the entire body of work that they don’t have a Catholic perspective. Additionally, I think there are places where they make assessments of “historical fact” for which there is debate about its factualness. This is a fault not exclusively The History Channels and doesn’t necessarily prove “anti-Catholicism.”

For history exclusively from a Catholic perspective and context, we should look to EWTN.

Ohhhh link please! Or at least whats the title of the DVD so I can look at it.

It appears some peoples idea of “Anti-Catholic” is if there is even one word of criticism, whether it’s true and constructive arguments or not. In that case I have seen plenty of “Anti-Catholic” material on EWTN and in my own parish!

Sorry if you think that but that is not what I meant. The history channel is always on in my house b/c that is all my DH watches. He even puts it on to go to sleep to at night. I’ve watched almost every religion program they have on and with the exception of only a few, they did seem to be very anti-Catholic. Many things they show were blatantly against the Church and a lot of the people that they interview on there have nothing good to say about the Church. They usually only show one side of the issue and don’t have anyone there to defend the Church. IMHO, if you are going to be historically accurate in your portrayal or your discussion of something, you should have both sides. They seldom do in their shows. Like I said though, just my opinion.

I watch that channel often myself also, but I rarely see the religious shows. May I ask if you think the other non-religion oriented programs are accurate or not?

AngelRose,
You are absolutely on the mark. I have carpal tunnel syndrome from all the letters of complaint I’ve written to the History Channel. The poster who claimed that one needs to look at the entire body of work obviously hasn’t because the H Channel’s fair and balanced treatment of Catholics is confined to the once a year airing of an “Easter” type religious movie (one year, it was the Last Temptation of Christ). I have been watching the HC for years, long before I came back to the Church. One of the things I LOVED about their religion programs (pre rmy eversion) was how they always denigrated the CC. Now, when I can bear to watch (more in a watch-dog capacity), I recognize all the usual suspects that they drag out to “represent” the Catholic interpretation (can anyone say John Dominic Crossan??). You will almost never see an actual Catholic priest who speaks to the Catholic doctrine. You would never see an actual faithful Catholic theologian (Scott Hahn not available?) speaking to issues of controversy. The closest the HC will get is an Episcopalian or Eastern Orthodox. And these are folks chosen to speak about Catholic doctrines in shows about Catholic History! The show they aired during Lent about how the Church doctrinally legislated the most minute details of the sex lives of the faithful was a disgusting misrepresentation of our theology. I could go on and on, but I can unequivocally state that the HC has an agenda.

And don’t even get me started on CNN!:eek:

If you truly think they are that bad with representing Catholicism, then has anyone seen how off the mark they are with other faiths in their programs?

Well, I can tell you that the series they did on the Crusades portrayed the Muslims and the Jews as the innocent victims of Christain slaughter. Is that accurate?

Well thank God Catholics dont get their theology from the History Channel, but unfortunately many people probably do. The most decent program I saw regarding faith on the History Channel was a series they had recently called Drive Thru History, the host/narrator who was driving through Rome, Greece, Turkey, etc. and was obviously a Christian and I thought he was very traditional minded and seemed to do a nice job of giving the history of early Christianity without one negative word toward Catholics or Orthodox, not that I noticed anyhow. The rest of it is just junk, especially the million and one shows about Da Vinci code and gnostic gospels. But the show called Naked Archaeologist really does it for me, that guy is on a mission to debunk any Christian belief as far as Im concerned. I just quit watching religious topics on that channel.

depends which crusade you are talking about. Plus I don’t think any of the crusades were black and white in any sense. and sometimes there was more involved than just liberation of the holy land.

Actually a lot of them aren’t very accurate lately. My husband would tell you the same thing. We were both history majors in college and we’ve actually pulled out our old textbooks to check on some little facts on things they’ve stated. But of course no one’s perfect! :shrug:

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.