Those who actually want to understand the issues proposed in this work need to take Moczar’s approach with a giant grain of salt. I think the core of her problem is presenting all of these discrepancies as LIES, essentially calling every group throughout history who does not believe her point of view as LIARS.
This felt like it was written by a Catholic high school debate team or political speech, not a historian! There is some last minute redemption in the Afterward where she lists her primary sources and explains in two or three sentences why each one was helpful & what it brings to the conversation, but this fact based approach is mostly lost throughout the meat of the work because she doesn’t cite her sources properly.
Making sweeping generalizations about scientists, for example, instead of recognizing the ways in which Catholic or other Christian religious scientists are using their faith to inspire their work, is completely unproductive. She blows over feminist concerns with the church by saying that because there have been some helpful women in Catholic history, that desire to have women more involved in contemporary church leadership is stupid. Moczar descends to name-calling, accusing non-believers as “heretics, ignorant, base, immoral, idiotic, atheists, liars, sadistic, cruel,” etc.
This work was really disappointing and off-putting to myself, as a Catholic, because I wanted to hear an informed historical background on common misconceptions…. and this is not worthy.