Deplorable and Deplorabler

Poor Fr. Fox.
For saying that a Catholic can, in good conscience, vote for either the lesser of two evils or abstain from voting, he is ripped by a crazy woman, (who makes her choice quite clear.)

evShe uses a tactic I am seeing more and more, not just from crazy commenters, and careless on-the-fly bloggers and conversationalists at parties, but from actual "journalists," and that is to repeat over and over the accusation that ones target has said something "amounting" to something deplorable, but steadfastly refusing to supply actual quotes, even out of context.
The tactic is used by both sides, of course, the Trumpite right winger against Fr Fox, the liberal Twitter over-lord against a Breitbart gadfly.
Too much reading of Jane Austen, and her free indirect speech!
All I need to do is vaguely describe what I want people to think you said, and damn you for my words, I needn't actually quote you and be honest about it.

You'd think Catholics especially would balk at such dishonesty deception, lies, this method having been used against the Church for.... well, forever.
(Soon to be saint,) Fulton Sheen, anyone?

“There are not one hundred people in the United States who hate The Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they wrongly perceive the Catholic Church to be.”

The devil's having a grand old time this election.

Same Old Same Old?

The fringe on the left oft circles around and is discovered to be not all that different from the fringe on the right, have you noticed?


"We’re very interested in revealing the truth...and yes we have some material... that will be published"


"I have in my I have here in my hand a list of names that were made known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping policy in the State Department"

Hate giving them clicks, but I feel compelled to follow links with damning headlines shouting that "so-and-so said/confirmed/claimed that....!" only to find (usually,) that any actual quotes from said person in the know, as opposed to the wishful-thinking gloss of the author, says/confirms/claims nothing of the sort.

I'm not even really disappointed any more, even when it's someone on "my side" doing the prevarication lying.

I admit, it's a little different, it's still painful when the selective quoting and dissembling comes from certain quarters.

Christian Britain?

(My Republican, in the Irish sense, sister would have fits that I used the word Britain, which she says does not exist - it is part of the "Celtish Isles.")
Interesting piece recently, can't remember where, that says the dire "fact" that everyone "knows" about the faith fading away in the UK is based on faulty and agenda-driven reading of statistics.
But now comes this, in the Economist:

Well, "gates of hell" and all that....

"Jesus Betrays His People"

(I know this is grossly out of date, blame Facebook's algorithms, which somehow decided this should be linked to something current I was reading today.)

As the Lord concludes his meeting with His apostles this week, He reveals Himself as grossly out of touch with both grassroots Judaism and with the Sanhedrin. While there were certainly some who objected, He set forth an agenda that has little to do with the Huffington Post's wishes, and is opposed by the majority of Huffington Pot's readers.

I realize poor Miss Duddy-Burke supports certain sins, perhaps because she herself is unable to resist their temptation, or from mistaken notions of mercy toward others who are drawn to them.
And it is undoubtedly true that many sins are almost universally committed.
But where would anyone with even the most tenuous grasp of what Jesus and His Bride teach get the idea that the morality or immorality of an act or attitude,  of, yes, its fidelity to the Gospel of Jesus, is determined by majority vote?
Most people lie, for instance - is that evidence that it isn't wrong?

What about that survey, (probably deeply flawed and inaccurate,) that purported to show that one third of college men would commit rape given a consequence-free opportunity?
HAD the number been higher - would that have somehow made rape a morally permissible choice, and signal a "betrayal" by those who were still ag'n' it?

Use your brains, people, if you won't use your souls, at least use your brains!

Back From the (Day of) the Dead, to Yet Another Correction From Poor Fr Lombardi

(No posting or polemics or presumptuous punditry, a day of fasting of a sort.)

When I read that yet again poor Fr. Lombardi had to make a statement, no he didn't say that, no he said that but what he meant was, yes he said that but it doesn't mean anything, no he said that but only to her not to you it doesn't count, yes that is what he said and I can't explain it...

It occurred to me, if Scalfari is publishing a book of his... fantasies? mistakes? whatever - shouldn't we all publish an anthology, "My Most Memorable Phone Call From the Pope"? 
(It would be too easy to debunk a claimed interview, since most of us have never met him, they could check passports and stuff, but who's gonna deny that he picked up the phone on a whim and gave me a ring? No, not on a Vatican account, the Holy Father used a burn phone.) 

We could invent anything we want, say that it's "fictionalized truth," or some such, in the Dunham/Scalfari makingcrapupandthenmakingexcusesonceyouarecalledonyourlies mold. 

I, for instance, remember well, (albeit not accurately,) that surprising day when Pope Francis got me on the horn, (sory, I dind't take notes or record it.)
The Holy Father told me not to worry about anything I might hear that he said, he's just stirring the pot but is planning to come out very soon with a three word, unequivocally magisterial encyclical -

 "Sin? It's Sinful." 

What did he tell you, when he called you?

Com'on, let's get these submissions in, there maybe be money to be made!

To What Should We Attribute Americans Increased Support for the Protection of Unborn Human Life?

A K of C/Marist survey seems to show a bump in pro-life leanings in the US.

Pope Francis’ visit to the United States has given a boost to Americans’ stated support for the pro-life cause, the results of a survey conducted this month suggest.
About 62 percent of Americans voiced support for life at every stage of its development, including the unborn, according to a Marist Poll conducted this month. The survey shows an increase of six percentage points since August.
Among practicing Catholics, about 81 percent agreed, an increase from 76 percent.

I would have guessed that the realization that the unborn are baby human beings deserving of our love and care and protection instead of our poisoning and burning and dismemberment of them had at least as much to do with the release and dissemination of the Center for Medical Progress sting videos as with Pope Francis's undeniable popularity.
But either way, God be praised.

Battles, at Nafpaktos, in Souls, and in Synods

I have been having trouble dragging my carcass out of bed in any timely fashion, but today I did arrive for Mass in time for the Rosary.
And I was even called upon to lead a decade, for which I was glad - and besides almost righteously so, snarkily, as well.
Two Turks parishioners came in to the church and thought they would have a conversation.

Not today, boys, not today.
I am the youngest "regular" by a couple miles, and there is some serious hearing loss distributed amongst my fellow pray-ers.
Do the hearing impaired think it might behove them to sit nearer the front, from which intentions are read, congregants called upon to take a decade?
No, they do not.
I think all priests and ushers and other lay ministers come to terms with this reality, eventually- people gonna sit where people gonna sit. (I knew a wonderful pastor twho once tried strategically turning out various lights in the transepts and near the back to heard the daily mass people into a closer grouping - after a week, with no success, one man who had sat in near total darkness the entire time dropped in to the confessional after mass -Father, I don't have a confession, I just want you to know that a bunch of the lights in the back that must be burned out.)

Anyway, I know, because I am approached at the supermarket, in the church parking lot, at restaurants, (on the rare occasions,) that people love it when I read at Mass or lead part of the Rosary.
They can hear and they can understand.
I have good diction, (thank you, Lord, and thank you, Dorothy Tree/Dorothy Uris,) and I am loud.
And I can always get louder.
Or even LOUDER.
Without shouting.
So don't think you're gong to come in and converse loudly enough to hear each other, boys - ain't gonna happen.
Take it outside.
Anyway, a good day for the Rosary - and a visiting priest, so I'm also looking forward to confessions this weekend.
And the celebrant was beautiful!
I don't mean good looking, but gestures so perfect and reverent, I didn't even notice them until i thought back on them after Mass.

The way the orans posture changed so smoothly into hands folded in prayer into the sign of the cross was art.
Gentle, (yet somehow in retrospect almost shocking,) art.

It was so wonderful, not having to fight distractions to Be In the Liturgy.

And the Rosary was especially powerful today, our Lady, hearing our pleas, watching over us - us all, the Church, her Son's Bride.
And evidence of her protection, and the Holy Spirit sorting things out?
A corrective, when goings on, (at the Sin-Odd? ;oD) take more effort than you might think, to make public.
God bless Edward Pentin!

reliable sources have shared with me a few of the subjects covered by other synod fathers, helping to provide a more rounded picture of what was discussed: 
* A number of synod fathers spoke in support of Cardinal Peter Erdo’s introductory speech, including one who underlined the importance of keeping fidelity to truth about marriage, the family and the Eucharist.
* A synod father asked “What are we doing here?” and stressed the synod is about the family, not other relationships such as homosexual ones. He also stressed that if the synod accepts the divorced-remarried issue, the Church effectively “supports divorce”.
* Another said the emphasis should be the sacrament of marriage, so the spiritual beauty of marriage is brought to the fore. Often the Church is not united around the “positive vision” of marriage and family. He said instability around marriage is “against its nature”.
* A synod father referenced St. Augustine, saying some of the baptized living in “irregular situations” don’t want to approach the Sacrament of Penance; he said the crisis of the family is a crisis of faith. He quoted 2 Timothy 4:2-5
* Another intervention noted the flock are too few, and that one should show respect for families which battle and try to remain faithful, those who in particular remain faithful to their marital vows given before God, although there are controversies and difficulties.
* A further intervention stressed that the Church has to defend that which God revealed about marriage and family and that the work of prelates is to support healthy families. A danger for families are “certain cultural currents,” as well as a sociological approach. In order to serve the family one has to take as the point of departure the word of God.
These were just some of the interventions the press didn’t hear about from [the English language press spokesperson] among the 72 delivered to the synod on Monday afternoon and Tuesday morning.

Queen of the Rosary, and Victor of Lepanto, pray for us!

Catholics More Catholic In Their Thinking If Practicing Catholicism, Survey Shocker!

So says a Knights of Columbus/Marist poll.

Both practicing and non-practicing Catholics see the following issues as important, although practicing Catholics are more likely to see the value of these issues:

• Daily prayer (96 percent/practicing vs. 79 percent/non-practicing).
• Following the teachings of the Church (93 percent/practicing vs. 70 percent/non-practicing).
• Receiving the sacraments (93 percent/practicing vs. 61 percent/non-practicing).
• Attending Mass regularly (89 percent/practicing vs. 42 percent/non-practicing).

In addition, 83 percent of practicing Catholics think it is important to belong to a parish andabout half of non-practicing Catholics (48 percent) see this as important. About three quarters of practicing Catholics (72 percent) believe it is important to go to confession at least annually, and about four in 10 (39 percent) of non-practicing Catholics say the same.
A more notable contrast was in beliefs about the Eucharist. About two-thirds of practicing Catholics (65 percent) say the Eucharist is the true presence of Jesus Christ. On the other hand, a similar number of non-practicing Catholics (64 percent) say it is just “a symbol.”

I'll tell you, the only faintly surprising thing, at least if you follow his coverage by either saecualr or Catholic media, is about the Holy Father.

If you took newspapers and Catholic bloggers at their word, you would "know" that "conservative" Catholics hate Pope Francis.

But I think it is safe to say, that what are termed "conservative" Catholics, you know, the ones who were thought to be clutching their pearls at Laudato Si, are more faithful regular in their Mass atendance, reception of the sacraments, etc.
(No, I don't have a poll or survey to cite just now.)
But guess what? approval of Francis goes up among  the practicing.

Among all Americans, Pope Francis enjoys an approval rating of nearly six in 10 (58 percent). Among non-practicing Catholics the number grows to seven in 10 (70 percent), but among practicing Catholics, the number jumps to more than eight in 10 (83 percent).

That's right. Sorry to disappoint you neo-con Catholic newsmen and rabid anti-Francis bloggers on the one hand, and the never-saw-a-heresy-you-didn't-give-equal-time-to progressive presbyteral talking heads on the other, in other words, all you bemoaning "papal positivism," for one reason or another.