Bye Bye, Crux



Crux Magazine, an enterprise of the Boston Globe, will soon kick the bucket. 


I am sure all those who have participated in this obscene venture will find new occupations at some point. Not saying they deserve it, though. 

Crux had a huge problem from the start. It was the attempt to create a Catholic publication made by people who don’t believe in Catholicism.  It’s not that easy.

My impression is that, with the usual stupidity of the liberal, those responsible for this waste of money thoughts something along the lines of: “most Catholics do not believe in what the Catholic Church believes. Let’s make a magazine aimed at them“.   

It does not work that way. people who do not believe what the Church believes may tell you they are “Catholic” whenever it suits them, buy them will not really care. They will not buy a magazine helping them to believe what is wrong, because they never needed any help to do it in the first place. In a world in which vast part of what they see on TV, hear on the radio, and read in printed publications helps them to go to hell, they do not need to spend extra time on just another outlet doing just the same. 

I also found the explanation given by the money-wasting idiots for the closure to be just as funny. They never got access to the big Catholic advertisers, they say. You don’t say? A publication promoting dissent at all times does not find big ticket Catholic advertisers? I can barely believe that…

Crux is the perfect example of what happens when people who do not understand jack of Catholicism decide they want to write about it: a flop born of the purest arrogance.

In the meantime the vastly heterogeneous, by highly motivated troop of Catholic bloggers (the real ones) gets more and more traction; is read by those who care; is mentioned by Cardinals in Synods; and – last but not least – is putting a bad papacy to shame. 

The foundation of anything Catholic must always be Catholic Truth. If a publication is not based on this foundation, at some point it will crumble. Lapsed and dissenting Catholics are not interested in Catholicism. They are not even interested in publications helping them to remain lapsed Catholics; which is why these publications only reach a tiny fractions of their potentially immense audience.  

Ditch Crux. Choose Cruz… 

Bye bye, Crux. 

You will not be missed. 



Posted on March 14, 2016, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. 15 Comments.

  1. “Ditch Crux. Choose Cruz… ”
    No, thanks (on the second half of the statement).
    Not after he blamed violent anti-Trump protests in Chicago on “Trump’s violent rhetoric”. This was the final straw for me. This man is nothing but a typical “conservative” surrender monkey. If he had any principles (or maybe he has, but lacks spine), he would have come out with a strong statement in support of Trump, something like condemning leftist violence against a fellow Republican, talking about free speech and how he himself could have been the target as well, because he agrees with Trump on all the issues that enrage the violent left, while being solidly conservative on many other topics, too – then shifting to criticism of Trump’s formerly liberal politics. It would have been right on principle and politically shrewd. Instead, subservient to his donor class masters as always, who have instructed him to attack Trump this week, he blamed Trump for “creating a violent environment” in which “escalation was inevitable”. He campaigns on Christianity, but he has no honor. Cruz had my support – though with some reservations. If I were American, I would now be voting for Donald Trump. Cruz plays the role of Huckabee 2008 and Santorum 2012 – two “Christian conservatives” who have never been anything but the evangelical establishment fail-safe to keep Christians on the party reservation.

    Even with Cruz, abortion, “sad” marriage and all the rest will stay anyway. He will not change anything, nor would his owners want him to. But even if he had the opportunity, he would immediately back down as soon as he got a taste of the violent reaction from the left that Trump gets to endure every day since he started his run. Cruz is a good lawyer and could make a passable Scalia replacement, but he is not cut out to be President. Politics is downstream from culture anyway, and until the culture is changed – something that starts with families taking their children out of the “school” (read: leftist indoctrination camp) system and inculcating actual Western, Christian attitudes and behavior again – no President will manage to stop the degeneration. Trump could at least, if he stops mass immigration, buy Americans more time for said change before the decline into Third World Hellhole is complete.

    If Cruz were to win the nomination, I would still prefer him to Clinton, of course. But the same goes for Romney, Kasich, Susan Collins, Jimmy Carter, Rubio (in that order) and any other eligible citizen.

    • Heavens, catocon.. I thought you were learning to be more concise…

      Feel free to disagree, but i still think that with Cruz we are better off than with Trump. There is a fundamental difference in making an embarrassing mistake in the heat of a hard political battle and projecting one mistake to the rest of Cruz’ political life. The man does not deserve this.


    • “Embarrassing mistake”? Really? If Cruz were on our side, his instinct would have told him not to side with violent leftists over his fellow Republicans. His very honor and character would have compelled him to – at the very least – remain silent. He would have been personally outraged at what the organized left is doing to America (and the rest of the West, too), very much including violence against political opponents.

      Instead he spouts far-left platitudes in service to his owners. It was a very revealing moment. If a lot of other things were different, maybe I could have seen it as merely a “mistake”. But if it was, why not simply own up to it? Is he so full of himself that he can’t admit to having been wrong in “the heat of battle”? Seems unlikely to me.

      As to the “concise” part, I was never very good at it, though I shall continue to try. In my defense, I tend to get very passionate about the issue of political violence against conservatives and critics of Islam and immigration, because this is happening regularly to supporters and activists of the AfD and other conservative/right-leaning groups in Germany. The typical media reaction is almost word for word identical to the Cruz statement: “Of course, political violence is not optimal, but hey, what do you expect if you dare to use harsh rhetoric and contradict organized leftism, you crimethinking evil bigot!!”

      I could not support anyone who could even dream of talking that way without dying of shame.

    • I refuse to throw away many years of integrity, and a solid faith, for one episode. If one episode is enough to throw Cruz overboard, you will be very disappointed in Trump.
      (look: two short sentences)

  2. I thought that it was the arch-official press office of the very faithful Cardinal Dolan, where he was frecuently invited to make smart assertions like this one:

    Cardinal Dolan: ISIS is Muslim like the IRA was Catholic

    I guess the homosexualist Archbishop of new faggotland will have to find a new venue to spill his oral garbage. Too bad.

    Another failure of big ole liberal media. The Boston Globe and its “inverted Crux” should be relegated to the ash heap of history, along with the NYT, the Ford Pinto, the Sea Monkeys and uncle Joe Stalin.

    You should play this video to John L. Allen, Jr.

  3. “It was the attempt to create a Catholic publication made by people who don’t believe in Catholicism. ” How can you blame them? They’re writing about an institution that’s RUN by a group of cardinals and bishops who don’t believe in Catholicism. They just thought they were following a trend!

  4. Patrick Button

    I hope that anti-Catholic Catholic publications are doomed to fail but how does NCR keep going?

    • They don’t make money, or they burn money. Survival is still possible, one way or the other, to some.
      The same happens with leftists newspapers. Many have been losing money for a long time, but they don’t want to die. There are always people hoping against hope they will become profitable, or accept they aren’t because they move public opinion.

    • They have had some generous donors along the way.

  5. Astonishing news…the Knights of Columbus are going to partner with Crux to keep it afloat! I’ve heard the Knights have lost their way and indeed have caused scandal by prominent members casting votes in favour of sodomite “marriage” when it was put to a vote, I believe in New York State.

    • Oh, they are basically using the name to promote the outlet they already have, and which no one knows.
      It’s nothing new, it is evident that the name “Crux” has some value to them.

  6. “They never got access to the big Catholic advertisers, they say.”

    I guess I am curious just who the “big Catholic advertisers” really *are,* in their minds.

    The ones I can think of are not that…big. Certainly not well heeled enough to chip in for THAT level of advertising, enough to sustain the staff they have at CRUX.

  1. Pingback: “Small Fry” Pew Sitter Takes Down Crux Goliath | The Deus Ex Machina Blog

%d bloggers like this: