Fake News on Bad Bunny Halftime Ratings

Ever since Bad Bunny was announced as the headliner for the Super Bowl LX halftime show, segments of the MAGA community, conservatives, and right-wing commentators expressed significant discontent, often framing the choice as divisive due to the artist's Puerto Rican heritage and his performance entirely in Spanish. Critics launched online campaigns decrying the show as "woke" or un-American, with some promoting an alternative "All-American Halftime Show" hosted by Turning Point USA featuring Kid Rock. 

Despite these efforts to undermine the official performance through social media backlash and calls for boycotts, the Super Bowl drew 137 million at peak and 124.9 million viewers overall—making it the second-most watched in history, though slightly down from the previous year's record—while Bad Bunny's set attracted 137 million and dipped to 128.2 million at the end of the halftime at 8:15 PM, ranking best of all-time per the data. The game itself was widely regarded as lackluster, with a defensive slog that saw no touchdowns until the fourth quarter, but the halftime spectacle generated widespread buzz, eliciting praise for its celebration of Latino culture alongside sharp rebukes from detractors like President Donald Trump, who labeled it "one of the worst, EVER."

Ironically, footage from Trump's Super Bowl watch party at his Florida golf club showed the Bad Bunny performance playing on screens, rather than the TPUSA alternative, which peaked at around 6 million concurrent viewers on YouTube—far below the official halftime numbers and even outpaced by the Puppy Bowl's 15.3 million audience. In the aftermath, some right-wing outlets have circulated graphs and analyses purporting to show a steeper viewership decline than reported, often overlooking Nielsen's updated "Big Data + Panel" methodology, which incorporates more comprehensive out-of-home and co-viewing data for a more accurate count. This has fueled debates about measurement accuracy, but the event's cultural impact remains undeniable, highlighting ongoing tensions around diversity in American entertainment.

On social media, conservatives have been sharing a graph from Samba TV with mockery claiming that Bad Bunny was a failure and that their culture war is winning.  This is far from the truth if we look at the data and timestamps.  

Why the Samba TV Graph Is Inaccurate

The image provided MAGA and others claims to show a major dip in viewership during halftime, implying that the Bad Bunny halftime show caused a drop.

This is directly contradicted by official Nielsen Big Data + Panel ratings, which are the industry standard and were reported consistently across major outlets.

Below is the factual timeline based on Nielsen‑verified reporting.

The peak happened before 8:15 PM.

Bad Bunny’s Halftime Show Was Only 13 Minutes and began at 8:00 PM.

Bad Bunny’s actual performance length was 13 minutes shorter than previous years.

Because the show was short (13 mins) and the halftime was at 8:00 PM, the 8:00–8:15 PM window was still part of the 137M peak period, not the dip.

The Nielson report states:

The halftime show featuring Bad Bunny averaged 128.2 million viewers between 8:15-8:30 p.m. ET. Across the entire telecast, viewership peaked at 137.8 million viewers during the second quarter (7:45-8:00 p.m. ET).

Note the use of the word "averaged."  The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines it as "an estimation of or approximation to an arithmetic mean."   This is an estimation of the current trend, not an exact measurement.  An average (specifically, the arithmetic mean) is an exact mathematical calculation representing the sum of values divided by the count, but it is not necessarily an exact reflection of every individual data point.  

So, according to the data, the halftime show was part of the peak of 137 million and dipped after 8:15 PM, two minutes after the halftime show ended or was ending. Other factors show evidence that many were viewing.  According to NYC water, people held off on using the facilities until the Bad Bunny halftime show was over.  

NYC saw a significant reduction in water usage throughout the five boroughs during the Super Bowl’s #BadBunny halftime show yesterday, but in the 15 minutes right after the show ended, there was a spike in usage equivalent to 761,719 toilets flushing across town.#SBLX

— NYC Water (@NYCWater) February 9, 2026

So a recap:

Peak viewership: 137.8–137.9 million viewers from 7:45–8:00 p.m. ET (end of Q2, as halftime began).

Peak at Halftime Start (7:45–8:00 p.m. ET): 137.8 million.

This surge happened as halftime began, with viewers tuning in for Bad Bunny. Since the performance kicked off at 8:00 p.m. ET and was 13 mins (within the halftime window), this peak is directly attributed to the show.

Bad Bunny's peak of 137.8M, is explicitly tied to halftime anticipation, makes it the #1 most-viewed halftime in peak terms—proving unprecedented draw. Plus, it shattered other records: 4 billion social views in 24 hours (+137% from last year) and Telemundo's all-time high of 4.8M during the set. 

MAGA and conservative critics often cite niche data like Samba TV (26.5M households for halftime vs. 48.6M for game) to claim "half turned off," but that's a limited smart-TV sample—not the full Nielsen picture. They ignore the peak surge for Bad Bunny, the first all-Spanish halftime, which celebrated Puerto Rican culture amid political backlash (e.g., Trump's "disgusting" tweet). 

 

Game peak (137.9M) was highest ever; social views (4B in 24 hours) shattered prior marks by 137%; Telemundo peak (4.8M) set Spanish-language records.

Alternatives like TPUSA's show drew ~6M live viewers—a tiny fraction. 

The data substantiates that Bad Bunny's performance drew the largest peak audience ever, with the shorter set capturing that high right from the start. It wasn't just a show—it was a record-breaking cultural triumph that outdrew all others in key metrics. The "flop" narrative is agenda-driven fiction.

Therefore, Bad Bunny's halftime show still broke records and is number 1 per the date and timing.    Ironically, MAGA and their ilk love to point at others claiming "fake news," but they are the ones propagating it online.  

Source:

Super Bowl LX Delivers 124.9 Million Viewers | Nielsen

Median vs Average - Know the Difference Between Them

3.2: Averages (What Is Typical?) - Mathematics LibreTexts

arithmetic - Is the average of the averages equal to the average of all the numbers originally averaged? -

 Mathematics Stack Exchange

arithmetic - Is the average of the averages equal to the average of all the numbers originally averaged? - Mathematics Stack Exchange

Even the 'Puppy Bowl' drew more viewers than TPUSA’s halftime show

Bad Bunny’s Halftime Show changed New Yorkers’ water use – NBC New York

Bad Bunny Wins the Super Bowl: A Halftime Spectacle That Redefined Unity and Artistry

Bad Bunny Wins the Super Bowl: A Halftime Spectacle That Redefined Unity and Artistry

The Super Bowl has always been more than just a football game—it's a cultural juggernaut, a spectacle where sports, advertising, and entertainment collide to create moments that define generations. But Super Bowl LX on February 8, 2026, at Levi's Stadium in Santa Clara, California, between the New England Patriots and the Seattle Seahawks, will be remembered less for the on-field action and more for the halftime show that transcended the event itself. The game itself was, frankly, a bit of a letdown—plodding drives, conservative play-calling, and a scoreline that never quite ignited the kind of drama fans crave. It was the sort of matchup where viewers might have found themselves scrolling through social media during timeouts. Yet, when the second quarter ended and the lights dimmed, Bad Bunny stepped onto the stage, and suddenly, the entire narrative shifted. Bad Bunny was the Super Bowl. His performance wasn't merely a halftime interlude; it was the explosive, unifying, culturally profound centerpiece that made the night unforgettable. It was lit in every sense of the word—as Gen Z would emphatically declare, he ate it up, devouring the stage with charisma, artistry, and a message that resonated far beyond the stadium.

Bad Bunny, born Benito Antonio Martínez Ocasio in Vega Baja, Puerto Rico, has long been a global phenomenon, blending reggaeton, trap, Latin trap, and heartfelt storytelling into a sound that dominates streaming charts worldwide. His rise from uploading tracks to SoundCloud while working odd jobs to becoming the most-streamed artist on platforms like Spotify is the stuff of modern legend. By 2026, fresh off making history at the Grammys with his all-Spanish album Debí Tirar Más Fotos winning Album of the Year—the first of its kind—he was primed to make an even bigger statement. The NFL's choice to have him headline the Apple Music Super Bowl Halftime Show marked the first time the performance was delivered entirely (or predominantly) in Spanish, a bold move that celebrated Latinx culture on America's biggest stage.

The show began with a breathtaking transformation: the field morphed into a vibrant tropical island scene straight out of Puerto Rico's lush countryside. Palm trees, projected ocean waves, colorful casitas (little houses), and a grassy field evoked the island's natural beauty and cultural heartbeat. Bad Bunny emerged dressed head-to-toe in white—the color of peace, purity, and new beginnings. His outfit, a custom Zara design styled by frequent collaborators, included a collared shirt, tie, chinos, sneakers, and a sport-inspired jersey emblazoned with "OCASIO" and the number 64 (a subtle nod to his mother's birth year in 1964). The simplicity contrasted with the explosive energy to come, setting a tone of serenity before the storm of rhythm and celebration.

He launched into "Tití Me Preguntó," the infectious reggaeton anthem from Un Verano Sin Ti that asks probing questions about love and family. The beat dropped, dancers flooded the stage in vibrant attire, recreating a lively marquesina (carport) party atmosphere that felt quintessentially Puerto Rican. The crowd erupted as Bad Bunny moved with effortless swagger, his voice cutting through the massive sound system. The energy was immediate and electric. He even sang bits of Daddy Yankee's "Gasolina" and Tego Calderon giving a nod to Reggaeton artists who came before him. 

One of the show's most theatrical moments came early: a choreographed "mishap" where Bad Bunny appeared to fall through the roof of a casita structure, tumbling dramatically into the stage below. Gasps turned to cheers as it was revealed as part of the performance—a high-stakes visual metaphor for life's falls and resurrections, echoing themes in his music about overcoming adversity. He emerged unscathed, transitioning seamlessly into tracks like "Yo Perreo Sola" and "NUEVAYoL," keeping the momentum relentless.

The guest appearances elevated the spectacle to legendary status. Cardi B joined for a fiery reggaeton collaboration, her bold presence amplifying the urban Latin vibe. Pedro Pascal, the Chilean-American actor beloved for The Mandalorian and The Last of Us, appeared dancing and hyping the crowd, adding a Hollywood-Latin crossover flair. Jessica Alba, Karol G, Young Miko, Alix Earle, Ronald Acuña Jr., and others were spotted in the casita party setup, partying alongside Bad Bunny and turning the field into a star-studded celebration.

Then came the major surprises: Lady Gaga emerged in a baby blue gown to perform a salsa-infused rendition of her Bruno Mars duet "Die With a Smile" (in English, blending seamlessly with the Latin rhythms), followed by intimate dancing with Bad Bunny. Ricky Martin, the pioneer of Latin pop's global explosion, joined for "Lo Que le Pasó a Hawaii," linking generations of Latin music icons. These cameos weren't gimmicks—they represented collaboration, evolution, and the shared power of Latin heritage on the world stage.

One of the most touching segments featured a real-life wedding that unfolded right on the field. A couple had originally invited Bad Bunny to their wedding, but with his Super Bowl commitment, he flipped the script and invited them to tie the knot during his performance instead. An officiant presided as they exchanged vows, signed the marriage certificate (with Bad Bunny as a witness), and shared a kiss amid cheers. Cake was even present for the celebration. This moment added a layer of personal joy and inclusivity, turning the halftime show into a communal event where love and commitment were honored in front of millions. It was a beautiful, unexpected gift from Bad Bunny, showing his generosity and connection to fans.

Mid-performance, Bad Bunny paused for a powerful message. He listed nations across the Americas—Mexico, Brazil, Colombia, Argentina, Chile, Puerto Rico, and beyond—reminding the world that "America" is a continent, not just one country. "Together We Are America," he declared, holding up a football inscribed with those exact words. In a climactic gesture, he slammed the football to the ground in a triumphant touchdown spike, arms raised in the classic celebration pose. It was a bold, playful reclaiming of the sport's symbolism—Bad Bunny scoring the ultimate cultural touchdown on America's biggest stage.

The symbolism continued with a heartfelt scene: a young actor portraying Bad Bunny as a child sat watching TV with his parents in a modest home, dreaming of stardom. Adult Bad Bunny approached, handed the child a Grammy trophy, patted him on the head, and said, "Believe in yourself. I always believed in myself." It felt like a time-travel moment, where the successful artist affirmed his younger self's dreams, closing the loop on perseverance and self-belief. Signs throughout flashed "What counters hate is love," a direct counter to the negativity surrounding the show.

Young Bad Bunny

Bad Bunny closed with "God bless America," an inclusive blessing that extended to all peoples of the continent. The 13-15 minute set was packed with hits like "Baile Inolvidable," "DeBÍ TiRAR MáS FOToS," and more, blending high-energy reggaeton with emotional depth. Critics called it revolutionary, a thrilling ode to Boricua joy that put Puerto Rican culture front and center. It was hailed as potentially the best halftime show ever—historic, joyful, and unifying.

Viewership reflected its dominance: estimates placed it over 100 million, with some reports citing a new record of 142.3 million viewers, surpassing previous highs. It drew massive Latino audiences and global fans, cementing Bad Bunny's cultural impact.

The ratings and viewership for Bad Bunny's Super Bowl LX halftime show (February 8, 2026) were massive, reflecting his global star power and the cultural significance of the performance. While official final Nielsen numbers (which typically include detailed breakdowns of average audience, peak moments, and multi-platform totals) were still pending as of early February 9, 2026—due to the new co-viewing pilot program Nielsen was testing during the broadcast—early reports and estimates painted a picture of a historic high.Multiple sources, including social media posts from fan groups, industry insiders, and preliminary reports circulating online, indicated that Bad Bunny's halftime performance drew between over 100 million and as high as 142.3 million viewers. One widely shared claim highlighted a new record-breaking figure of 142.3 million viewers, surpassing the previous high set by Kendrick Lamar's 2025 halftime show at 133.5 million viewers. Other early estimates placed it around 135.4 million, which would still top the 2025 record if confirmed. These numbers positioned the show as potentially the most-watched Super Bowl halftime performance in history.

Screenshot I took of the TPUSA livestream

Bad Bunny's numbers were boosted by strong appeal to Latino audiences, his massive streaming dominance (he was the world's most-streamed artist in late 2025 with billions of plays), and the inclusive, high-energy spectacle that drew both domestic and international viewers. The performance aired on NBC as part of the main Super Bowl broadcast (projected overall game viewership around 127-130 million or higher, factoring in streaming and the Nielsen pilot enhancements for group/co-viewing).

In comparison, the alternative "All-American Halftime Show" streamed by Turning Point USA (featuring Kid Rock and others) peaked at around 6.1 million concurrent viewers on YouTube, with averages hovering between 4-5.7 million during the show. While respectable for a livestream protest event, it was a small fraction of Bad Bunny's television audience—often described as a fraction or even a "flop" in direct head-to-head coverage. Some reports noted viewership dips on the TPUSA stream as people switched back to the official broadcast.

Yet, the triumph wasn't without backlash. In the weeks leading up and during the show, conservatives and MAGA supporters spread misinformation. 

AI fake image spread by Maga/Right wingers

Fake images showed Bad Bunny in a dress burning the American flag; phony clips circulated hours before the event claiming drag performances. Posts falsely claimed he wasn't American (ignoring Puerto Ricans' U.S. citizenship) or hated the United States. This vitriol exposed hypocrisy—Shakira (Colombian) and Jennifer Lopez headlined previously with Spanish elements without similar outrage, but a Puerto Rican U.S. citizen drew ire.

Turning Point USA (TPUSA) launched an "All-American Halftime Show" alternative featuring Kid Rock, Brantley Gilbert, Lee Brice, and Gabby Barrett as a protest. It peaked at around 6.1 million concurrent YouTube viewers but hovered between 4-5 million for much of its run—a respectable number for a stream, but a fraction of Bad Bunny's massive TV audience. Some reports noted dips to under a million as viewers switched back to the main event, labeling it a relative flop compared to the spectacle at Levi's Stadium.

The contrast was stark. While Bad Bunny promoted unity, love, and cultural pride, the backlash revealed xenophobia and selective patriotism. It's absurd: professing faith in Jesus while spreading hate and lies. Bad Bunny's inclusive message—celebrating diversity, self-belief, and continental America—stood in opposition to division.

In the end, Bad Bunny won the Super Bowl. He outshone the game, the controversy, and the alternatives with artistry, heart, and genius. The Bunny always outsmarts the redneck Elmer.

St. Martin of Porres & Racism in the Catholic Church

St. Martin de Porres: A Beacon of Charity Amid the Shadows of Racism in the Catholic Church

In the heart of Lima, Peru, on December 9, 1579, a child was born into a world that measured human worth not by the soul's divine spark but by the shades of skin and the accidents of birth. This child, Martín de Porres Velázquez, entered existence as the illegitimate son of Juan de Porres, a Spanish nobleman and knight from Burgos, and Ana Velázquez, a freed slave of African and possibly Indigenous Panamanian descent. From his earliest days, Martín embodied the colonial cruelties of the Spanish Empire, where racial hierarchies were etched into law and custom, relegating those of mixed heritage—mulattos, as they were derogatorily called—to the margins of society. Yet, in this very marginality, Martín would forge a path of radical love that challenged the Church's complicity in such divisions and illuminated a vision of universal brotherhood. Today, as the Catholic Church grapples with its historical and ongoing struggles against racism, the life of St. Martin de Porres stands as both indictment and inspiration—a testament to how one man's humility exposed the Church's failings while modeling the mercy it preaches.

Martín's childhood was a crucible of poverty and prejudice. Abandoned by his father shortly after his birth, he and his sister Juana were raised by their mother in the slums of Lima, a bustling viceregal capital where Spanish elites lorded over enslaved Africans and Indigenous peoples. Ana Velázquez, having bought her freedom, scraped by as a laundress, her earnings barely sufficient to shield her children from the streets' harsh realities. Martín, with his dark skin inherited from his mother, bore the visible mark of his "inferior" status. In colonial Peru, laws like the Limpieza de Sangre statutes demanded proof of "pure" Spanish blood for full citizenship, education, and social mobility. Mixed-race individuals like Martín were barred from universities, guilds, and even certain trades, condemned to servitude or menial labor. He received no formal schooling, his intelligence evident only in the quiet resilience that would later define him.

At age eight, Juan de Porres reappeared, publicly acknowledging Martín and Juana to spare them the full stigma of illegitimacy. He provided modest support, including an apprenticeship at twelve to a barber-surgeon named Nicolás de Herrera. Barber-surgeons in the era were not mere groomers; they were frontline healers, performing bloodlettings, extractions, and rudimentary surgeries. Under Herrera's tutelage, Martín absorbed the rudiments of medicine—herbal remedies, wound care, and diagnostics—skills that would become his lifelong ministry. But even here, racism shadowed him. Colleagues mocked his heritage, calling him a "mulatto dog" or worse, reminders that his talents could not erase his bloodline's supposed taint. These early wounds, rather than embittering him, deepened his empathy for the afflicted. He began surreptitiously aiding the poor, sharing food from his meager wages with beggars and orphans, acts of charity that foreshadowed his vocation.

By fifteen, Martín sought entry into the Dominican Order at the Convent of the Rosary in Lima, drawn by its emphasis on preaching, poverty, and care for the marginalized. The Dominicans, founded by St. Dominic in the 13th century to combat heresy through intellectual rigor and apostolic zeal, had a mixed record in the Americas. While some friars advocated for Indigenous rights—most notably Bartolomé de las Casas, who decried the enslavement of natives—others justified colonial exploitation under the guise of evangelization. Racial barriers persisted: Spanish law forbade those of African or mixed descent from taking religious vows, viewing them as unfit for clerical dignity. Martín entered not as a brother but as a donado, a lay servant bound by obedience but denied the habit. For eight years, he scrubbed floors, cooked meals, laundered habits, and tended the infirmary, all while enduring slurs from some confreres who saw him as an interloper in their "pure" order.

Yet, Martín's sanctity shone through his humility. He fasted rigorously, often on bread and water, and wore a single threadbare habit until it disintegrated, refusing replacements as luxuries unfit for a "poor slave," as he humbly styled himself. His prayer life was intense; witnesses reported ecstasies where he levitated before the crucifix or where radiant light filled the chapter room during his devotions. These mystical graces were not for show but sustained his service. In the infirmary, Martín's healing touch transformed suffering into solace. He treated friars and slaves alike, using barbering tools for phlebotomy and poultices for fevers. One account describes a friar dying of gangrene; Martín applied a simple apple, invoking faith, and the man recovered overnight—a miracle attributed to his intercession.

Martín's compassion extended beyond the cloister. He begged alms from wealthy Limeños, multiplying loaves to feed hundreds at soup kitchens he founded for the destitute. He established an orphanage for abandoned children and a shelter for cats, dogs, and even rats, preaching that all creatures bore God's image. Legends abound: mice obeyed his call to spare the granary, forming orderly lines like pilgrims; a dog and cat, natural foes, ate peacefully from his hand. These tales, rooted in eyewitness testimonies, underscore his harmony with creation, a counterpoint to the discord sown by racial strife. When plague ravaged Lima in 1624, Martín nursed victims door-to-door, contracting the illness himself but surviving to continue his work. His reputation as a miracle-worker spread; viceroys and archbishops sought his counsel, and even St. Rose of Lima, the first American-born saint, befriended him, collaborating in Lima's charitable networks.

Despite his gifts, racism dogged Martín. Superiors occasionally rebuked him for admitting "undesirables"—lepers, slaves, Indigenous folk—into the priory, fearing contagion or scandal. Once, when a dying beggar soiled his cell, a friar chastised him; Martín replied, "Compassion is preferable to cleanliness," washing the man with his own hands. Such rebukes echoed the Church's broader entanglements with racial injustice. The Catholic Church in the colonial era was both colonizer and conscience. Popes like Eugene IV in 1435 and Paul III in 1537 condemned the enslavement of Indigenous peoples, affirming their rationality and baptizability. Yet, enforcement lagged; bullae like Romanus Pontifex (1455) granted Portugal monopolies on African trade, implicitly sanctioning slavery under "civilizing" pretexts. Jesuits and Dominicans owned plantations worked by slaves, rationalizing it as paternalistic care. In Peru, the Church baptized millions but segregated sacraments: mixed-race faithful often barred from choirs or altars, their baptisms recorded with slurs.

Martín navigated this hypocrisy with obedience, once offering himself for sale to pay priory debts: "I am only a poor mulatto. Sell me. I am the property of the Order." His prior, moved, refused, granting him full vows in 1603—a rare dispensation. Even then, he remained a lay brother, barred from priesthood by race. His life exposed the Church's racial fractures: how a institution proclaiming Galatians 3:28—"neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free"—could embody division. Martín's response was not rebellion but redemptive suffering, uniting his cross to Christ's, transforming prejudice into pathways for grace.

St. Martin de Porres died on November 3, 1639, at sixty, after a year of fever and tremors. His funeral drew thousands; as his body lay in state, devotees snipped relics from his habit. Exhumed twenty-five years later, it remained incorrupt, emitting a fragrance like lilies. Miracles proliferated: healings at his tomb, bilocations aiding distant sufferers. Beatified in 1837 by Gregory XVI amid abolitionist stirrings, he was canonized on May 6, 1962, by John XXIII, who hailed him as "Saint of Universal Brotherhood." This timing, during Vatican II's push for ecclesial renewal, amplified his message against racism.

The Catholic Church's history with racism is a tapestry of complicity and contrition, woven from colonial threads to modern reckonings. From the 15th century, papal grants facilitated the transatlantic slave trade, which ferried 12 million Africans to the Americas, many baptized en masse yet treated as chattel. In 1537's Sublimis Deus, Paul III declared Indigenous peoples "true men," but loopholes allowed enslavement if "justly captured." African slavery, deemed perpetual by theologians like Francisco de Vitoria, flourished; by 1700, Church orders like the Jesuits ran slaveholding estates in Maryland, Louisiana, and Brazil. The 1866 instruction from Propaganda Fide condemned slavery outright, but U.S. bishops lagged, some defending it biblically until the Civil War.

Post-emancipation, Jim Crow entrenched segregation. In the U.S. South, Black Catholics faced "whites-only" pews, separate Masses, and lynchings without clerical outcry. Segregated schools persisted into the 1950s; African Americans were denied admission to most Catholic colleges until mid-century. Globally, the Church mirrored empire: in Africa, missionaries imposed European norms, erasing Indigenous rites; in India, caste-like barriers excluded Dalits from sacraments. Pius XI's 1937 Mit brennender Sorge denounced Nazi racialism as idolatry, yet Pius XII's wartime silence on the Holocaust drew accusations of indifference. The 1988 Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace document, The Church and Racism: Towards a More Fraternal Society, admitted: "The Church has been directly involved in the phenomenon of racism," citing slavery's theological justifications.

In the U.S., the bishops' 1979 pastoral Brothers and Sisters to Us called racism "a radical evil...dividing the human family," confessing the Church's "white Church" image and past prejudices. It urged examination of conscience, decrying tokenism in leadership. Echoing this, the 2018 Open Wide Our Hearts: The Enduring Call to Love lamented "spiritual lynching"—subtle exclusions—and demanded structural change. Yet, progress falters: Black Catholics comprise 3% of U.S. faithful but only 1.5% of clergy; parishes remain racially homogeneous. Recent scandals, like Georgetown Jesuits' 1838 slave sale funding the university, prompted 2016 reparations initiatives, but critics decry slow implementation.

St. Martin de Porres' legacy pierces these shadows. As patron of mixed-race people, social justice, and racial harmony, he embodies the Church's aspirational self. His canonization amid civil rights struggles inspired figures like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., who invoked Christian brotherhood against segregation. In Peru, his feast draws Afro-Peruvians resisting mestizo dominance; in the U.S., schools and clinics bear his name, from St. Martin de Porres High in Detroit to health centers in Philadelphia. Artists like Mary Lou Williams composed "Black Christ of the Andes" in his honor, fusing jazz with sanctity. Theologically, he exemplifies "preferential option for the poor," serving the "rejected Christ" in Lima's slums, challenging the Church to dismantle barriers he once breached.

Martín's miracles—levitation, bilocation, animal communion—symbolize transcendence over division. One tale: during prayer, he appeared simultaneously in Spain aiding a friar, proving charity's boundlessness. His rapport with beasts prefigures Laudato Si's ecology, but roots in racial healing: taming "enemies" like dog and cat mirrors reconciling races. In Quito, Ecuador, Afro-descendant "Martinas" novenas invoke him against segregation, affirming: "Racial discrimination is punishable by law; no one has the right to treat us badly." Programs like Oxford's Las Casas Institute study his "little stories"—hagiographic vignettes—as semiotics of culture, decoding how humility subverts hierarchy.

Yet, his legacy indicts inaction. As Brian Massingale notes in Racial Justice and the Catholic Church, racism persists as "institutional sin," from biased policing to wealth gaps tracing to slavery. The Church's 2020 response to George Floyd's murder—bishops' vigils, Pope Francis' Fratelli Tutti decrying "viral contamination" of hatred—echoes Martín's urgency. But as James Cone critiqued, U.S. Catholicism's justice for Latin America outpaces domestic anti-racism, questioning its commitment. Black Catholics, like those in the National Black Catholic Congress (revived 1985), echo 1893 cries: "How long, O Lord, are we to endure this hardship in the house of our friends?"

Martín teaches that fighting racism demands personal conversion. His self-offering—"Sell me"—mirrors Christ's kenosis, inverting power. In a era of "implicit bias," his broom—symbol of sacred menial labor—urges sweeping clean hearts of prejudice. As Franciscan Media reflects, racism is "a sin almost nobody confesses," a "sin of the world" demanding collective repentance. Martín, who multiplied food for all, calls the Church to redistribute justice: inclusive seminaries, anti-bias training, reparations funds.

Contemporary echoes abound. In 2020, U.S. bishops formed an Ad Hoc Committee Against Racism, pledging education and dialogue. Parishes host "racial healing" circles, invoking Martín's intercession. Globally, African synods address neocolonialism; Indigenous voices at the Amazon Synod reclaim dignity. Yet, challenges loom: rising white nationalism, clergy shortages in minority dioceses, cultural "othering" of migrants.

St. Martin de Porres reminds us: the Church is not a museum of saints but a hospital for sinners. His life, from Lima's slums to canonization's glory, proves grace redeems history's wounds. In facing racism—America's "persistent sin," as Shannen Dee Williams terms it—we honor him by building "pillars of mutual respect," per Deacon Harold Burke-Sivers. Let us, like Martín, sweep away division with charity's broom, embracing the crucified peoples as kin. For in unity, the Church becomes what Christ intended: a foretaste of heaven's banquet, where every face reflects the Father's love.

 Citations

1. Wikipedia. "Martin de Porres." Accessed November 2025.   

2. St. Martin de Porres Parish. "Our Patron Saint." smdphiladelphia.com.   

3. Letters from the Saints. "St. Martin de Porres and the Miracle of Healing the Bishop." lettersfromthesaints.com.   

4. Journeys of Faith. "The Life of Saint Martin de Porres." journeysoffaith.com. 2021.   

5. Catholic Online. "St. Martin de Porres - Saints & Angels." catholic.org.   

6. Dominican Friars, Province of St. Martin de Porres. "St. Martin de Porres." opsouth.org.   

7. Catholic Mom. "Saint of Miracles and the Everyday." catholicmom.com. 2016.   

8. Britannica. "St. Martin de Porres | Biography, Patron Saint Of, History, & Facts." britannica.com. 1999.   

9. My Catholic Life! "Saint Martin de Porres, Religious." my catholiclife.com. 2024.   

10. New World Encyclopedia. "Martin de Porres." newworldencyclopedia.org.   

11. V&A Blog. "St Martin de Porres." vam.ac.uk. 2018.   

12. FaithND. "St. Martin de Porres." faith.nd.edu. 2023.   

13. Deeper Truth Catholics. "The Catholic Defender: Saint Martin de Porres." deepertruthcatholics.com. 2024.   

14. Franciscan Media. "Saint Martin de Porres." franciscanmedia.org. 2020.   

15. Catholic Digest. "St. Martin de Porres: The Perfect Saint for Our Troubled Times." catholicdigest.com. 2024.   

16. Wikipedia. "Catholic Church and Race." en.wikipedia.org. 2025.   

17. USCCB. "What Must Never Be Forgotten." usccb.org.   

18. Boston College. "The Church and Racism." bc.edu.   

19. JSTOR. "Catholic Racism and Its Opponents." jstor.org.   

20. U.S. Catholic. "We Need to Talk About Racism in the Catholic Church." uscatholic.org. 2021.   

21. USCCB. "Brothers and Sisters to Us." usccb.org. 1979.   

22. Catholic Answers. "Racism for Catholics." catholic.com. 2021.   

23. Notre Dame Church Life Journal. "Race in the Catholic Imagination." churchlifejournal.nd.edu.   

24. The Jesuit Post. "Catholic 101: Church Teaching and the Anti-Racism Movement." thejesuitpost.org. 2023.   

25. MSNBC. "Opinion | Black Catholics Are Leaving the Church. An Archbishop’s Remarks Show Why." msnbc.com. 2021.   

26. Roman Catholic Diocese of Westminster. "1 Racial Justice, Equality and Diversity." rcdow.org.uk. 2022.   

27. Boston College. "Race on the Catholic Imagination." bc.edu.   

28. St. Columba Catholic Church. "Timeline of Black Catholic History." stcolumba-oak.com.   

29. Notre Dame Church Life Journal. "Why Does Catholic Teaching Have a Hard Time Explaining How Racial Injustice is Perpetuated by Non-Racists?" churchlifejournal.nd.edu.   

30. Catholic Profiles. "Institutional Racism and the Catholic Church." catholicprofiles.org. 2022.   

31. Mississippi Catholic. "Reflections on St. Martin de Porres and Racial Reconciliation." mississippicatholic.com. 2022.   

32. Encyclopedia.com. "Porres, Martin De, St." encyclopedia.com.   

33. Archdiocese of New Orleans. "Feast of St. Martin de Porres." nolacatholic.org.   

34. Original Botanica. "Saint Martin de Porres: Patron Saint of Racial Harmony." originalbotanica.com. 2024.   

35. Wikipedia. "Martin de Porres." en.wikipedia.org. 2025.   

36. Franciscan Media. "Saint Martin de Porres." franciscanmedia.org. 2020.   

37. Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Anthropology. "Saint Martin de Porres 'The Black Saint of the Afro-descendant Community in Quito-Ecuador': Between Segregation, Racism, and Black Resistance." anthrosource.onlinelibrary.wiley.com. 2024.   

38. Catholic Saints Day. "Martin De Porres." catholicsaints.day. 2023.   

39. Catholic Faith Corner. "Saint for Black History Month, Martin de Porres." kathleenglavich.org. 2025.   

40. Black Catholic Messenger. "Born 442 Years Ago, St Martin de Porres Is a Man for Our Times." blackcatholicmessenger.org. 2021.   

41. Franciscan Media. "Saint Martin de Porres." franciscanmedia.org. 2020.   

42. Wikipedia. "Martin de Porres." en.wikipedia.org. 2025.   

43. Original Botanica. "Saint Martin de Porres: Patron Saint of Racial Harmony." originalbotanica.com. 2024.   

44. BAME Anglican. "St Martin de Porres, a Legacy for People of Colour." bameanglican.wordpress.com. 2018.   

45. Mississippi Catholic. "Reflections on St. Martin de Porres and Racial Reconciliation." mississippicatholic.com. 2022.   

46. Catholic Charities Diocese of Cleveland. "Black History Month Saints: St. Martin de Porres." ccdocle.org. 2022.   

47. Encyclopedia.com. "Porres, Martin De, St." encyclopedia.com.   

48. Catholic Fire. "St. Martin de Porres: Patron of Racial Harmony." catholicfire.blogspot.com. 2016.   

49. BlackPast.org. "Martin De Porres (1579-1639)." blackpast.org. 2009.   

50. USCCB. "Brothers and Sisters to Us." usccb.org. 1979.   

51. Catholic Charities Twin Cities. "Racism, Inclusion, and Diversity." cctwincities.org. 2025.   

52. Wikipedia. "Catholic Church and Race." en.wikipedia.org. 2025.   

53. The Jesuit Post. "Catholic 101: Church Teaching and the Anti-Racism Movement." thejesuitpost.org. 2023.   

54. Jesuit Social Research Institute. "Catholic Social Teaching (CST) and Racism." jsri.loyno.edu.   

55. A Faith That Does Justice. "Catholic Social Teaching (CST) and Racism." faith-justice.org. 2019.   

56. Benedictine College. "The Catholic Response to Racism." benedictine.edu. 2020.   

57. Catholic World Report. "A Catholic Response to Racism." catholicworldreport.com. 2020.   

58. Catholic Answers. "Racism for Catholics." catholic.com. 2021.   

59. CAPP-USA. "Racism in the United States and Catholic Social Teaching." capp-usa.org. 2024. 

Racism in The Catholic Church

Racism in the Catholic Church is a serious and persistent problem that violates the dignity and unity of the human family. The Church has condemned racism as a sin and has supported the struggles for racial justice and equality, but it has also been complicit in perpetuating racism through its history and actions. Some examples of this are: 

- the enslavement and killing of indigenous people by Christopher Columbus with the backing of the church; 

- the issuance of papal bulls that authorized the conquest and exploitation of non-Christian lands and peoples ; 

- the opposition and threats that white Catholics in Chicago and other cities made to the archdiocese for its support of desegregation  ; 

- the lack of representation and inclusion of Black, brown, and other marginalized Catholics in the leadership and decision-making of the church ; 

- the silence and indifference that many white Catholics have shown to the ongoing issues of police brutality, mass incarceration, and economic inequality that disproportionately affect people of color ; 

- the denial and dismissal of the experiences and perspectives of Black Catholics and other Catholics of color by some white Catholics who claim to be colorblind or not racist ; 

- the failure to address the root causes of racism and injustice in society and within the church, such as white supremacy, colonialism, and privilege.      

The Church has a moral responsibility to confront its own racism and to promote a culture of encounter and solidarity among all people, following the example and teachings of Jesus Christ, who came to bring good news to the poor and oppressed.

The Catholic Church teaches that racism is a sin that violates the dignity and unity of the human family, created in the image and likeness of God and redeemed by Christ. The Church condemns all forms of racism, including racist ideas, acts of racial discrimination, and systemic racism. The Church also calls for personal and social conversion to overcome the evil of racism and to promote justice and solidarity among all people.

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, "Every form of social or cultural discrimination in fundamental personal rights on the grounds of sex, race, color, social conditions, language, or religion must be curbed and eradicated as incompatible with God's design." [1]

Pope Francis has denounced racism as a "virus that mutates and instead of disappearing, goes into hiding, and lurks in waiting." [2] He has also expressed solidarity with those who protest peacefully against racism and injustice. [3]

The U.S. bishops have issued several pastoral letters on racism, such as Brothers and Sisters to Us (1979), What We Have Seen and Heard (1984), and Open Wide Our Hearts (2018). These documents acknowledge the history and reality of racism in the United States, especially against African Americans, Native Americans, Hispanics, and other ethnic minorities. They also offer pastoral guidance on how to combat racism through education, dialogue, advocacy, and action. [4]

The Church also recognizes the role of systemic racism in perpetuating racial inequalities and injustices. Systemic racism refers to the policies and practices of institutions that have the effect of favoring one racial group over another, whether intentionally or unintentionally. Examples of systemic racism include segregation laws, voter suppression, mass incarceration, educational disparities, health care gaps, and economic exploitation. [5]

The Church urges Catholics to examine their own attitudes and actions that may contribute to racism, as well as to challenge the structures and systems that foster it. The Church also invites Catholics to listen to the voices and experiences of those who suffer from racism, to learn from their wisdom and witness, and to work with them for racial healing and harmony. [6]

References:

[1] Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 1935.

[2] Pope Francis, General Audience, June 3, 2020.

[3] Pope Francis, Angelus, June 7, 2020.

[4] See https://www.usccb.org/committees/ad-hoc-committee-against-racism/pastoral-letters-and-statements

[5] See https://thejesuitpost.org/2020/07/catholic-101-should-a-catholic-be-an-antiracist/

[6] See https://www.usccb.org/resources/practical-steps-eradicating-racism

Hate & Unfairness at The Fight on The Fence Facebook Group

I run into many crazy people on and offline.  Because of this, I think it is necessary that I post warnings to my followers so that they will not have to face the same crazy people.  In this post, I will detail my experience with a Facebook group a young Greek man added me to.

The group claims to be about discussions regarding theism and atheism. However, most of the content is hateful against religious people.  Administrations do not follow their own rules and side with trolls. The group is a cesspool of trollish behavior and bigotry against Christians.  They even targeted gay members with homophobia.

Avoid and report this group https://www.facebook.com/groups/TFoTF to Facebook.  Facebook will remove it when it gets enough reports regarding its content.

I was added to it by young Greek Orthodox amateur apologist George Argyris a few months ago and did not become active in it until recently. When I posted, accounts which claimed to be atheists attacked me. I ignored it and reported abuse to admins. Some were deleted, others not.

Last week, someone accused me of turning off comments. I defended myself with civility and was met with more attacks. One member named Brian Ballard began to threaten me and cursed at me. I reported it to the admin. Jared replied and warned Brian.  Here is Brian Ballard

(https://www.facebook.com/brian.ballard.982) 

However, Jared then began to target me. He also accused me of turning off comments and claimed they broke the rules.

Moreover, I wrote that I would ask Facebook as to whether or not owners/admins can order members not use to turn off comments. He got upset and felt challenged and attacked me more. Eventually, he could not handle me and removed me from the group.

Here is the exchange. The rules are here. NO such rule exists. See the exchange here and the rules themselves.  Note that no rule regarding comments exists. Jared lied:

Here is a photo of the admin Jared M. Russell: https://www.facebook.com/jared.m.russell
Jared appears to be a White supremacist posting images of the Confederate flag which is considered by many today as a symbol of hate and racism.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1218542948167485&set=picfp.100000353741094&type=3&theater



We can see now why this individual is power-hungry. White supremacists are typically emotionally immature males who feel powerless and have a superiority complex.

He is now lying to the owner and others stating that I said I would not follow the rules.  Notice in the above exchange that I never stated that I will not follow the rules.  Jared lied.

An atheist friend in the group recently defended me and was also met with abuse and eventually removed as well. They even told him I was him!

Again, no admin took action against the bullies. Instead, they just booted my atheist friend just for asking for fairness. The evidence is clear. I did nothing wrong and was removed for no reason other than I emasculated an admin by questioning.

As a former atheist, I knew questioning is a principle of atheism. If an atheist cannot question, then atheism cannot exist. IF this group claims to allow the free speech of atheists and theists, then questioning is a must. A member cannot be booted just for questioning. It is clear that this group is just a playground for trolls. Also, note that Brian and others were never removed. They targeted me and got scot-free.

It is clear that this group is created by trolls and for trolls who hate Christians. Facebook needs to ban this group as it violates its hate speech policies.

Furthermore, I even messaged the owner of the group, Stacey Struckman.  She pretended to show concern and then made it clear that she would turn a blind eye to the situation and even wrote that she will "wash her hands."  She, in turn, blocked me. This demonstrates her lack of moral compass and lack of fairness.  Stacey has no interest in being objective or honest. She lied and accepted lies told to her as truth.  It seems to me that she may be mentally abused as well. When I tagged her with the evidence, she was concerned that her husband would see her name tagged on another male's account. This is extremely odd and indicative of someone in an unhealthy, controlling and abusive behavior.  We must pray for her and contact the police to do a wellness check on her.


Here is her photo followed by the exchange I had with her: https://www.facebook.com/stacey.struckman

Lastly, I contacted another admin named Ajunte Burns who is African American and claims to be a Christian apologist. I was hoping he would be honest and fair, but he too failed in those areas. Like Stacey, he sided with the lying trolls and had no interest in being fair. He claims a vote was taken and the admins declared that they do not want me in the group. Well duh, this was my point. The admins are biased and unfair to Christians.  I did not need a vote to know this. That was my main concern, to begin with.

However, instead of siding with honesty and truth, Ajunte simply accepted the majority and did not protest it.  A real Christian does not follow the majority when they are in the wrong.  Like Dr. King, who was African American, a Christian challenges the majority when they are in the wrong. As Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI stated, "Truth is not determined by a majority vote."

Here is Ajunte Burns and our exchange:
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100010006955047

Again, I warn all theists and atheists to avoid this group on Facebook and report it. It violates Facebook's policies and simply exists to harass and abuse Christians.


Facebook is clear on what it considers hate. This group and its members are violating this policy, see:

11. Hate Speech
Policy Rationale
We do not allow hate speech on Facebook because it creates an environment of intimidation and exclusion and in some cases may promote real-world violence.
We define hate speech as a direct attack on people based on what we call protected characteristics — race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, caste, sex, gender, gender identity, and serious disease or disability. We also provide some protections for immigration status. We define attack as violent or dehumanizing speech, statements of inferiority, or calls for exclusion or segregation. We separate attacks into three tiers of severity, as described below.
Sometimes people share content containing someone else’s hate speech for the purpose of raising awareness or educating others. In some cases, words or terms that might otherwise violate our standards are used self-referentially or in an empowering way. People sometimes express contempt in the context of a romantic break-up. Other times, they use gender-exclusive language to control membership in a health or positive support group, such as a breastfeeding group for women only. In all of these cases, we allow the content but expect people to clearly indicate their intent, which helps us better understand why they shared it. Where the intention is unclear, we may remove the content.
We allow humor and social commentary related to these topics. In addition, we believe that people are more responsible when they share this kind of commentary using their authentic identity.
Click here to read our Hard Questions Blog and learn more about our approach to hate speech.

Do not post:
Tier 1 attacks, which target a person or group of people who share one of the above-listed characteristics or immigration status (including all subsets except those described as having carried out violent crimes or sexual offenses), where attack is defined as
Any violent speech or support in written or visual form
Dehumanizing speech such as reference or comparison to:
Insects
Animals that are culturally perceived as intellectually or physically inferior
Filth, bacteria, disease and feces
Sexual predator
Subhumanity
Violent and sexual criminals
Other criminals (including but not limited to “thieves,” “bank robbers,” or saying “all [protected characteristic or quasi-protected characteristic] are ‘criminals’”)
Mocking the concept, events or victims of hate crimes even if no real person is depicted in an image
Designated dehumanizing comparisons in both written and visual form
Tier 2 attacks, which target a person or group of people who share any of the above-listed characteristics, where attack is defined as
Statements of inferiority or an image implying a person's or a group's physical, mental, or moral deficiency
Physical (including but not limited to “deformed,” “undeveloped,” “hideous,” “ugly”)
Mental (including but not limited to “retarded,” “cretin,” “low IQ,” “stupid,” “idiot”)
Moral (including but not limited to “slutty,” “fraud,” “cheap,” “free riders”)
Expressions of contempt or their visual equivalent, including (but not limited to)
"I hate"
"I don't like"
"X are the worst"
Expressions of disgust or their visual equivalent, including (but not limited to)
"Gross"
"Vile"
"Disgusting"
Cursing at a person or group of people who share protected characteristics
Tier 3 attacks, which are calls to exclude or segregate a person or group of people based on the above-listed characteristics, where exclusion is defined as:
Explicit Exclusion which includes but is not limited to "expel" or "not allowed".
Political Exclusion defined as denial of right to political participation.
Economic Exclusion defined as denial of access to economic entitlements and limiting participation in the labour market,
Social Exclusion defined as including but not limited to denial of opportunity to gain access to spaces (incl. online) and social services.
We do allow criticism of immigration policies and arguments for restricting those policies.
Content that describes or negatively targets people with slurs, where slurs are defined as words commonly used as insulting labels for the above-listed characteristics.
https://www.facebook.com/communitystandards/hate_speech