Last week, our Devilās Advocate, in his expected tongue-in-cheek manner, evoked āthe latest case of proposed canonization that has emerged in the past few days,ā that of political activists and entertaining debater, Charlie Kirk. It didnāt take long for someone in the canonization camp to cite the saintās first miracle, and a substantial one at that.
The New York Post featured an by author Anthony Blair with the title: āSurgeon calls Charlie Kirk āman of steelā ā reveals āmiracleā factor that likely prevented more from being hurt.ā This Tony Blair (not to be confused with a slightly more famous one in the United Kingdom) attributes an extraordinary claim to the slain manās camp in his opening sentence. āāMan of steelā Charlie Kirk likely prevented others from getting dangerously hurt when he was shot because the bullet miraculously failed to exit his body thanks to his strong bones.ā
The surgeon who attended to the stricken debater reportedly claimed it āwas an absolute miracle that someone else didnāt get killed.ā The article appears to claim that Kirkās ābone densityā stands as the equivalent of the grace of God. It fulfilled a noble purpose as it spared the lives of others who should have been killed by the same bullet. The canonization process has taken a leap forward.
Unfortunately, Kirk was a Protestant and cannot be canonized, although there is serious testimony he was preparing to convert to Catholicism. Perhaps we could make an exception in this case, based on intention. But in the United States, there is another form of sanctity according to a secular frame of quasi-religious reference that possibly trumps the plurimillennial Catholic tradition. Hereās the full quote that established this claim: āHis bone was so healthy and the density was so impressive that heās like the man of steel. It should have just gone through and through. It likely would have killed those standing behind him too.ā
All Americans know who āthe man of steelā is. Until this fatal historical moment, there was only one: Superman. The comic book character later immortalized in film is the ultimate American superhero saint. He isnāt simply virtuous, charitable and humble, like Catholic saints, but much more. He stands as an active āsavior,ā spending his valuable time ā when not masquerading as humble newspaper reporter Clark Kent ā saving people threatened by evildoers. God clearly designed Kirkās bone density to prevent innocents with less bone density from sharing Charlieās fate.
Contesting the miracle
Stepping into my role of Devilās Advocate, let me raise a first objection, typically a technical point. It turns around the question of whether itās possible, with a bullet of that caliber, that there would be no exit wound. One expert YouTube commentator judged such a thing possible but extremely, the chances being āone or two in a thousand.ā On the surface, this statistic would appear to validate the claim of a miracle.
But I have a more fundamental objection based on procedure. No autopsy report has been released and very little if any true forensic evidence made public. Some claim that what we are told is the entrance wound in Kirkās neck may actually be the exit wound. This would support the unexamined hypothesis that he had been shot from behind.
In other words, given the legal limbo we are in, Saint Charlieās canonization will have to be put on hold for the moment.
Nevertheless, Iāve noticed what could be deemed a second miracle that few have bothered to analyze. I would call it the divinely inspired conversion or at least epiphany of Erika Kirk that provided the ultimate highlight at Charlieās funeral.
If we are to believe the in The New York Times titled, āFor Erika Kirk, a Husbandās Life Cut Short by Violence He Seemed to Foresee,ā Charlieās wife unequivocally possesses the theological virtues we attribute to saints. She expressed them clearly while reflecting on the tragedy she has had to endure. āThy will be done. I surrender to it.ā Do I like it? No. That was the love of my life, my soul mate, my best friend. But Godās plan is always greater than ours.ā
The article concludes with a quote expressing Erikaās sense of the meaning of theological eternity. āIāve had so many people ask, āDo you feel anger toward this man? Like, do you want to seek the death penalty?ā Iāll be honest. I told our lawyer, I want the government to decide this. I do not want that manās blood on my ledger. Because when I get to heaven, and Jesus is like: āUh, eye for an eye? Is that how we do it?ā And that keeps me from being in heaven, from being with Charlie?ā
Erika Kirkās theology
This wasnāt just cheap sanctimonious piety, as she demonstrated during her performance at Sundayās spectacular funeral in Glendale, Arizona. What she delivered was not a eulogy but a powerful homily. Although she touched all the bases, she spent only a minimum amount of time on her husbandās personality and public record. The general perception most people have of Charlie is that of a political activist rather than a moralist or thought leader. Religion always lingered in the background but it wasnāt the foundation of his discourse. He was cast in the specific role of a powerful influencer capable of inciting the younger generation to identify with the ideals of the Make America Great Again movement. It was all about endorsing traditional values and especially voting for conservative Republicans. Erikaās funeral speech had the curious effect of subverting that standard perception of Charlieās mission. Instead, she presented it essentially as a spiritual quest.
Kirkās widow appeared to have already begun redefining a highly partisan political movement, which she has now accepted to lead, as essentially a religious mission. With her insistence on forgiveness and humility, it even appeared closer to the Catholic mysticism than militant and militaristic Protestantism so characteristic of US religious culture. If Charlieās case for canonization fails, Erikaās appears to have a better chance of succeeding, especially if, like Candace Owens, she converts.
Many have remarked that the most astonishing takeaway from Erikaās speech is its utter contrast with the content delivered by the array of political speakers that followed, most of whom preached the need to hate and actively combat a nebulous population of enemies, each of whom is accused of contributing to Charlieās murder. White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller was the most violent, an adept Manichean (and notable militant Zionist). US President Donald Trump, as is his wont, chose to contradict Kirkās widow with the following words: ā[Charlie] did not hate his opponents. He wanted the best for them. Thatās where I disagreed with Charlie. I hate my opponents and I donāt want the best for them. Iām sorry. I am sorry, Erika.ā
The future battle lines involve Israel
Charlie Kirk has been celebrated for his ability to generate soft power. Trump and his cohort, in contrast, focus on hard power and exploit every occasion to express their determination to use it to achieve their ends. The battle lines ā as defined by Miller, Trump and āSecretary of Warā Pete Hegseth ā are clearly drawn. Miller has his own . His message differs radically from Erikaās: āThe day that Charlie died, the angels wept, but those tears had been turned into fire in our hearts. And that fire burns with a righteous fury that our enemies cannot comprehend or understand.ā He directly contradicts Erika when he affirms: āErika is the storm. We are the storm. And our enemies cannot comprehend our strength, our determination, our resolve, our passion.ā Even without a brown shirt, Miller is a true.
The banner of Trumpās army displays the words hate and retribution; Erikaās, love and forgiveness.
As we learned in the immediate aftermath of the assassination, one of the battle lines concerns the question of Israel and Gaza. Erika, Turning Pointās new CEO, appears to have enrolled for the new Turning Point USA (TPUSA) program conservative commentator Tucker Carlson, attorney Megyn Kelly and commentator Glenn Beck, while apparently excluding commentator Ben Shapiro, who had initially and assertively to āpick up that blood-stained microphone.ā Erika invokes TPUSA Faith, which āwill add thousands of new pastors and congregations.ā Will TPUSAās traditional Israeli-sourced funding disappear as Kirkās project becomes specifically Christian?
The question of possible Zionist/Israeli implication in Kirkās murder is still a moot question. No concrete evidence exists for it, but Kirkās of the pressure put on him in recent months by the contingent, including from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu himself, appears well documented. And for that matter, the concrete evidence for Tyler Robinson as the lone gunman appears very weak for the moment. Who might his eventual accomplices be?
On our side, weāll keep all the potential canonization dossiers open as investigations proceed and rivalries develop. At the same time, we refuse to exclude the hypothesis that, as the drama unfolds, new martyrs may appear.
*[The Devilās Advocate pursues the tradition 51³Ō¹Ļ began in 2017 with the launch of our āDevilās Dictionary.ā It does so with a slight change of focus, moving from language itself ā political and journalistic rhetoric ā to the substantial issues in the news. Read more of the 51³Ō¹Ļ Devilās Dictionary. The news we consume deserves to be seen from an outsiderās point of view. And who could be more outside official discourse than Old Nick himself?]
[ edited this piece.]
The views expressed in this article are the authorās own and do not necessarily reflect 51³Ō¹Ļās editorial policy.
Support 51³Ō¹Ļ
We rely on your support for our independence, diversity and quality.
For more than 10 years, 51³Ō¹Ļ has been free, fair and independent. No billionaire owns us, no advertisers control us. We are a reader-supported nonprofit. Unlike many other publications, we keep our content free for readers regardless of where they live or whether they can afford to pay. We have no paywalls and no ads.
In the post-truth era of fake news, echo chambers and filter bubbles, we publish a plurality of perspectives from around the world. Anyone can publish with us, but everyone goes through a rigorous editorial process. So, you get fact-checked, well-reasoned content instead of noise.
We publish 3,000+ voices from 90+ countries. We also conduct education and training programs
on subjects ranging from digital media and journalism to writing and critical thinking. This
doesnāt come cheap. Servers, editors, trainers and web developers cost
money.
Please consider supporting us on a regular basis as a recurring donor or a
sustaining member.
Will you support FOās journalism?
We rely on your support for our independence, diversity and quality.








Comment