Friday, August 26, 2016

Clinton and Trump: both evil. One may be worse than the other.

I've got a lot I could say -- and have said, elsewhere -- about this election, but I'm going to save my fingers. Both Secretary Hilary Clinton and Mr. Donald Trump endorse grave moral evil. Both of them. If you want to argue one endorses more than the other, I won't dispute it. But first, let's be crystal clear: they both endorse grave moral evil.

Both support abortion -- one supports some abortions (rape and incest), the other supports abortion pretty much all the time, and with your tax money to pay for it. Mr. Trump supports blurring -- if not erasing -- the distinction between combatants and non-combatants, and deliberately killing terrorist's wives, parents, siblings and children. Mr. Trump supports the use of torture -- "worse than waterboarding," he has repeatedly said. Both of them support a war on terror that isn't too particular about the Constitution.

"But there's more," I hear you saying. Oh, I agree, there's a lot more, but my fingers can't type that much. The bottom line is, they both support grave moral evil.

Now, if you choose to vote for one of them, because you think that's the only way to stop the grave evil proposed by the other, I understand. I will not condemn you. But please don't let's have any pretense about it. You're voting for a lesser evil -- and a lesser evil is still...you know how that sentence ends.

This is a dismal choice. I can't remember such a wretched pair of candidates. It hit me this morning: this is divine judgment. Secretary Clinton's nomination is a judgment on the Democrats, and Mr. Trump's, a judgment on the Republicans.

115 comments:

Terrye Newkirk said...

Exactly on target, Father. I am weary of being told I am a bad Catholic because I refuse to vote for either one. It's not that simple, is it?

Mike said...

Agreed with Mrs. Newkirk. Father Z having purged my recent criticism of the rants posing as "discussion" on his blog, it may be that he thinks I'm a bad Catholic too. I don't care.

Thank you for courageously defending the truth, Father.

TJ Creech said...

I believe God works thru people and that He places certain of us in situatons that He can use the best in us.

HRC is an evil person, not just immoral, but truly evil. A Jezzabel type evil. Her abortion stance mentioned in this article is a perfect example. I cannot find an example in Christian history that God has used such a person.

DJT is immoral but has some of the same traits in his immorality found in King David. God used David in a special way and forgave his misdeeds. As a Catholic Church that is what we are supposed to do, forgive transgressors.

I am not a bad Catholic for voting for the lesser of two evils but rather believing that God has a plan and I am only following it.

Terrye Newkirk said...

Comparing Trump to King Saint David borders on blasphemy. David repented and asked God to forgive him, then served Him the rest of his life. Trump has never even spoken to God, much less admitted he was wrong.

This is the "reason" for voting for Trump that really makes me furious, and I hear it all the time, mostly from Evangelicals. If you're choosing to vote for Trump, God love you: I respect the privacy of your discernment. But I think we have to be at least honest about the deficiencies of the candidates.

Mr. C said...

No Christian, Catholic or otherwise, can truly vote for either candidate in "good" conscience. Period.

TJ Creech said...

Terrye, I would never presume to know what someone has confessed, or repented , to God. That is between God and the person. We Catholics do not have a market on what God does or does not hear.

I struggle with voting for either candidate but trust that God has a plan, just like Nathan trusted God with His plan for David.

My job is to try and assist Him with that plan by voting for the lesser of two evils in "good" conscience.

Anonymous said...

For anyone who refuses to vote for a president, they must at least vote for a rep or senator who will limit the new president's power.



But, from father's statements, it is not immoral to vote for Trump if it is a vote to exclude Hillary, and we do not intend the evils of Trump's policies.

Ok, I don't like the guy, but the known evils to be done by Hillary will transform the US into a state worse than the former Soviet Union, with massive persecution to the Church, clergy and laity; rainbow flags on every corner; intensified indoctrination in the public schools; elimination of home schools; nasty, nasty, nasty Supreme court justices, and last but not least,

THE NEW WORLD ORDER -- FOREVER.

EricOfManchester

Mike said...

The evils to which each candidate (or both candidates) subscribes are functions of a society devoid of God and of religion. If you conclude, as I do, that our present grasping, venal "two-party" system facilitates such a society, then it logically follows that a vote for either major-party candidate, at best, kicks the can down the road.

Is that what we signed up for at Confirmation?

To gird ourselves for battle with the forces of Hell requires that we stop conniving at evil. With God's help, and faithfully corresponding to His grace and the gifts of the Holy Ghost, we must be ready to undertake massive resistance now, as long as the Bishops do not have our backs; and to go on offense once they do. Working toward the dismantlement of our corrupt politics by supporting only principled third-party candidates is, to my thinking, a very mild -- but needful -- step in that direction.

Banjo pickin girl said...

Mike, You are right. The Church's teachings about cooperating with evil are being forgotten. There is no difference between the candidates, not enough to make a real difference. How can a few Supreme Court justices matter when our society has fallen so far? I was watching the discussion at Fr. Z's web site and was appalled (as I often am at the general holier than thou and insulting tone which has gotten much worse since a few years ago when Fr. Z himself decided to engage in childish name-calling). We have not had a real two party system for a long time now. Where this will all end is obvious (judgment day is here every day for somebody). We need to "stick to our knitting" as my mother used to say. Do what you must. Stick to the high road.

Anonymous said...

Jude 4

Sevesteen said...

There are other options, including voting third party as a protest. Luckily for me Gary Johnson matches my political views pretty closely. Not the ideal candidate for those who want the government to enforce their religion, but great for someone who doesn't want the government to enforce violating their religion, whatever that religion is.

mike dycus said...

"Both support abortion -- one supports some abortions (rape and incest), the other supports abortion pretty much all the time" This is the truth which has been rarely spoken in the past. Dole, Bush, Romney were all called pro-life by many Catholics. Perhaps the good our Lord promises to bring from evil will be Catholics united int the truth of the faith.

Mamat said...

In this election we have two choices. One or the other is going to be forced down our throat.
1st choice is a gallon of excrement!
2nd choice is a cup of excrement!

One way or the other you are going to have to choke it down. Make the better choice for the sake of ALL of us!
If you choose to wimp out and not vote for a cup you will be forced to choke down a bucket and so will I. That is NOT ok!
PLUS you will be liable for aiding and abetting mrs heinous killery hillary’s evil which included the slaughter of FULL TERM innocent babies that feel indescribable pain. Totally unacceptable for ANY Christian!

Trump isn't a saint but he is FAR better than HER. Now, if YOU are perfect then I suppose that gives you the right to wimp-out and let the rest of us suffer the consequences of your self righteous indignation. But I hope you have more sense than that.

The choice is clear, a cup is better than a gallon. The evil we know is NOT better than the evil we only suspect we might get. Trump will NOT do many of the evil things she will do and he might do some good things to protect us and help our economy.

Get over yourself and don’t let false pride rule in the critical election.

Patty said...

Mamat said it all and very well.

A cup or a gallon. The choice is yours. The repercussion will be everybodies.

And, "Comparing Trump to King Saint David borders on blasphemy," is absurd. Saints were sinners, too. Sinners who learned to come to Christ and pick themselves up after a fall by way of grace. Not by way of comparing themselves to others for the how-white-am-I-now-test. It is often the ones that sin who are those doing, not just sitting and doing nothing in an attempt to gain holiness.

Grace builds upon nature and this may be Trump's opportunity to engage. Ours, too!

David L Alexander said...

Notice how many of us justify our choice of Trump on the basis that "he's not Hillary." In two previous presidential elections, that was the best the Republicans could do: "Anybody but Obama." How's that working out so far?

Paul Stratman said...

Where is this election's "Forming Faithful Consciences" by our illustrious USCCB?

Patty said...

...how that's working for us so far is throwing away votes on third party candidates at the final hour. That got us Obama. And that's not working. But that shame tactic sure helped the DNC.

And electing, "Well, he's not an advertised Satan in a pantsuit," is actually better than rolling over to elect the Devil by way of opting out of one's duty to make tough choices. The Devil often casts himself as an Angel of Light to make use of our "zeal" in order to bring about a bad end. (The beginning, middle, and end of actions must be taken into account.)

The repeal of the Johnson Amendment is a pretty good motivation, too. So is conservative justices on the Supreme Court. So is staving off the wholesale importation of those ideologically opposed to Democracy and absolutely opposed to Judaeo/Christian ethics.

But if you're into One World Government, full steam ahead. Be it voting for Clinton as the Social Justice warrior. Or voting for her by way of third order spoiler. The results are the same even if one's individual conscience feels clean for the moment.

Mamat said...

Well said Patty. It is a blatant cop out NOT to vote. And it is a slap in the face to all of us concervative Christians who are trying to fight off this "killary" crowning that will bring untold evil upon us.

Jesus said he will spit the lukewarm out of his mouth and those that sit back and let this women, "satan in a pants suit", take charge of our county are no better than fence sitting, lukewarm, useful idiots of the father of lies. They are enablers of every evil policy she and her administration plan to force down our throats and they will surely answer to Almighty God for failing to do whatever they could to stop her!

Anonymous said...

Prayer does work! As Fr. Fox said in one of his homilies that the rosary is the best weapon against evil!

Fr Martin Fox said...

The claim that when Jesus said he would spit the lukewarm out of his mouth, he meant all those who refuse to vote for evil, in preference to worse evil, is rather hard to believe. Clearly you've never read the book of Jeremiah.

Patty said...

....and the pretense that "I will not condemn you," as not being the implication that God will condemn those who vote for "evil" (i.e. Trump) is an obvious overreach into sanctimony.

Grace builds on nature and the current enemy is not the clear cut, uniform wearing variety that you wish they were, Father. With all due respect.

Perhaps the better analogy is the parable of the talents wherein the servant with the one talent (a vote) buried it for fear of the Lord instead of using it as best he could to bring benefit. Even if that benefit is not realized, the effort is acknowledged and rewarded.

In truth, the tossing off of one's vote is to, in short order, have one's ability to vote for any real difference of any kind will be - quite rightly - taken away.

Mamat said...

It is a sad day when a shepherd cops out on his sheep and leaves them to be ravaged by wolves, or by satan in a pants suit. hillary is evil as her agenda obviously attest. Trump on the other hand is imperfect, perhaps very imperfect. But who isn’t! Perhaps, you should cast the 1st stone!

His plan to limit abortions to 20 weeks and or when the child can feel pain WILL save many lives and spare many unborn babies a painful and savage death. That is by far THE central and vital issue for any Catholic that believes in a child’s right to life and that believes we must do what we can to combat this culture of death and the slaughter GOD’s innocent little ones.

If you cannot do “what you can do” to save GOD’s little ones because “you don’t like the choices” then perhaps it would be better if to have a large millstone around your neck and be tossed into the sea. By withholding your vote and or not voting for the person that can and might do some good AND encouraging others to do the same, YOU are causing many of God’s little ones to stumble. Woe to you who enable the killing of even on of God’s children! Like Jerusalem there will come a day of accountability.

Fr Martin Fox said...

Patty, Mamet:

Mr. Trump has endorsed a good share of evil. It's very hard for me to understand how anyone who cares about the dignity of human life, about the dignity of marriage, and about honesty and integrity, can simply wave this away.

I'll say it once more: if you believe voting for Trump is the necessary step to avoid a greater evil, I have no quarrel with you. But if you deny that Mr. Trump has grave, grave problems of his own, then if you are a faithful Christian, you are very confused.

I make NO apology for pointing out the truth about any and all candidates. I do not give any party a free pass.

Banjo pickin girl said...

Mr. Trump's activities as slumlord should give anyone pause, anyone for a dwelling full of broken glass? Pro-life is not only about abortion.

Patty said...

...it is not "simply waved away", despite your having difficulty understanding the **faithful** Catholic position of others, Father. That is why Mamet described downing a smaller portion of unsavory. (That's a pretty clear indication that one understands there are serious issues w/a candidate.)

Translated that means that faithful, practicing Catholics, serious people who love the Lord and care deeply about His gift of human life, the truth and beauty of marriage, and about honesty and integrity are voting for Donald J. Trump.

Why? Not because they are giving a "Party" a pass. Far from it. Trump is a condemnation of the GOP. Those who are voting Trump also do not perceive that he is the panacea answer to all our ills. No. God is the only answer. But while we're here in this vale of tears, we have human agency, human leadership. And that, no matter how much we may desire it, is always flawed.

And while an apology would be great for the real slights presented, what I'd expect moving forward is honesty. Not giving yourself a free pass for misrepresenting others by intimating that they just want to give Trump a free pass, or that they merely endorse a party. That's simply not true. And I think we all know that.

Fr Martin Fox said...

Patty - I suggest you read the book of Jeremiah.

Doug said...

I'm frustrated that this message was not made before the primaries. The information about Mr. Trump was known then and was not clearly made known widely enough to inform the flock. Nearly 50% of the voters in Ohio voted for Mr. Trump then over much more qualified and principled candidates. Those voters must bear the responsibility that we have the mess today that we are faced with.

Patty said...

Father, I suggest you read your own posts.

If you are positing that Faithful Catholics can no longer vote, in good conscience, for the lesser of two evils, please, just be honest and say so. Stand strong. This dance around with the suggestion that others read Jeremiah is cryptic and far less direct that what circumstances call for. (Coupled with your previous obfuscations about others giving a free pass or not caring, one could still read a distraction in your words. A rejection of looking at what "you" said and owning it)

Say exactly what you mean. Let that yes mean yes and that no mean no.

And then, subsequently, own what you are attempting to say: That, in your view, it is not okay for Catholics to vote for the lesser of two evils. One who truly held that position, if they were fully engaged in the righteousness of said position, wouldn't perpetually retreat into word smything to convey a point that is so easily made. But that point, made directly, may well bring a firestorm of reaction. A firestorm that is unwelcome.

So is that not, in a away, choosing the lesser? Choosing obscurity and throwing jabs from the corner wherein one feels themselves protected?



Fr Martin Fox said...

If you are positing that Faithful Catholics can no longer vote, in good conscience, for the lesser of two evils, please, just be honest and say so.

Patty:

I have read my own posts, including where I said the following, above:

Now, if you choose to vote for one of them, because you think that's the only way to stop the grave evil proposed by the other, I understand. I will not condemn you.

And:

I'll say it once more: if you believe voting for Trump is the necessary step to avoid a greater evil, I have no quarrel with you.

How many times do you need me to say this?

As far as why I'm recommending Jeremiah, I was simply waiting for someone to ask. I saw no reason to go into it if no one was interested. I shall answer that in a new post.

Mamat said...

Refusing to vote is a vote! What about that do people fail to understand? Standing on principle, in this case, is playing right into Satan’s hands. Saying, “I am too good (smart, proud, perfect) to vote for ANY evil” is saying I don’t care if not voting ushers in the WORSE EVIL and all my friends and family and countrymen have to suffer as a result! Is that the right thing to do? Satan must be jumping up and down with joy knowing he has convinced so many “good” conservative Christians to help him further is agenda.

Make no mistake about it. If you fail to vote you are betraying all conservative Christians that have prayed and worked to end abortion, and to preserve the sanctity of marriage. WE have NO hope of reversing gay marriage or ending abortion, at any stage, if hillary wins. AND you know that!

It is like saying I know the Catholic Church is the true Church started by God Himself but I can’t be part of it because of gay priests, because priest sexually molested little boys, because it has been corrupted by evil and I will not be part of that evil!

We are ALL part of the evil. There is NO escaping that fact and putting your hands in your pockets rather than casting a vote for the lesser of two evil is turning us all over to the greater evil and that is just flat out WRONG.

Perhaps it makes you feel better but I hope that feeling sustains you when that “satan in a pants suit” follows through on her promise to force Christian’s to “change” their nasty values by outlawing ALL the morals values that made us a Christian nation.

Remember, we sin NOT only by what we do but by what we fail to do!

Fr Martin Fox said...

Mamat:

What you claim is contrary to what the bishops teach. Never do the bishops teach that any Catholic has a duty to vote for any particular candidate.

If you claim to have greater teaching authority on this matter than the bishops, please tell us where this authority comes from.

Patty said...

@Father Fox

"...Now, if you choose to vote for one of them, because you think that's the only way to stop the grave evil proposed by the other, I understand. I will not condemn you.

And:

I'll say it once more: if you believe voting for Trump is the necessary step to avoid a greater evil, I have no quarrel with you.

How many times do you need me to say this?"

**********

Father, thank you for rereading what you WROTE, but you still miss what the message of your words say to others. For I can continue to tell you again and again, ad nauseum, that I am not merely vaulting over the serious issues with Trump and yet you do not listen to what is being said to you. You make up your own excuse and throw that out as a diversion.

Saying, I don't condemn you means absolutely zero if your other words imply that God does condemn what you cast as the "expediency" of seeking aid from Egypt.

In other words, your writing that you have "..no quarrel with those who opt to vote for the lesser evil" is seen as merely covering your bases so that you will not be called on the carpet by perhaps the USCCB for contradicting Church teaching. It's like the requisite apology of Ted Cruz who apologized to Ben Carson, not once, but twice, not because the actions of his ground crew in Iowa were not what they should have been, but merely offered because "Ben was upset."

That's placating, Father. That's an empty gesture for the sake of avoiding push-back. That is using doublespeak in order to hopefully influence without crossing a line that would get one in trouble with the lawful authority.

If that's not the "expediency" of Egypt, then I don't know what is.

Patty said...

You write to Mamat, "If you claim to have greater teaching authority on this matter than the bishops, please tell us where this authority comes from."

This is precisely what you are doing, Father, by undermining the teaching of voting for the lesser of two evils. And yet, instead of speaking boldly that you reject said teaching, you shinny behind an empty statement of non-condemnation while doing nothing but with your other words.

So while you believe you have the requisite disclaimer necessary to cover your bases, others understand exactly what you wrote as taken in full context.

This is why your abrading Mamat for apparently taking on more authority that the bishops is so untoward and out of hand.

Mamat said...

Dear Banjo pick'n girl .. Of course, pro-life is about more but abortion is seriously at the top of the heap by a long shot. All other "social justice" issues pale by comparison to beheading babies, pulling off their tiny legs and arms, and burning their flesh off with poisioness saline injections. These things are equal to ISIS beheading people, burning them in cages and disembodeling captives.

We can easily confuse the issue by throwing in all the ills of society but that helps no one and is a lame excuse for doing NOTHING to stop the major evil doer in this election. If voting for Trump can, and it very likely will, save innocent babies from unthinkable deaths then the choice for a good christian should be obvious. Save the Babies, even ONE rather than sit out and complain about how bad both candidates are !

Terrye Newkirk said...

Patty:

When you said, "This is why your abrading Mamat," did you mean "you're upbraiding"?

I confess I have a hard time following your meaning. You have what a friend calls a" scattershot" approach to word choice.

But that's small stuff compared to your refusal to accept the plain meaning of Father's words. When he explains, repeatedly, that voting for Trump *may* be morally limit if one's conscience dictates, he is not speaking in code.

In any election, a Catholic is free to vote for a candidate on the ballot (excepting those who promote abortion), to write in another candidate, or to abstain. ALL of these may be morally licit choices, according to Catholic teaching.

What is NOT permissible is to impugn others because they don't make the choice YOU think is right.

Anonymous said...

Should be morally *licit, * of course.

Patty said...

Terrye,

"What is NOT permissible is to impugn others because they don't make the choice YOU think is right."

You're absolutely right. That's my issue with Fr. Fox as he tries to position himself as not taking issue with those who support a Trump presidency in lieu of Clinton while indicating that those who vote Trump are voting "for" evil. That was a distinct shot across the bow of others. A low blow if you will, Terrye. Beneath any Catholic, but most especially one who posits that he is full accord with the Catholic teaching about voting for the lesser of two evils in situations such as these.

As for a scattershot approach to word choice, I use those words I find appropriate. Thank you for correcting my usage of abrading. That said it is "morally licit" not morally limit. So we're even.

That is why when one posits as Fr. Fox has, in addition to his commentary here, that he is choosing Christ over Trump, that has a definite meaning. There is absolutely no "code" involved. And it is Father's shinnying away from having used that very clear messaging with which I take issue. Especially as a serious minded Catholic who, like a great many, are seeing the need to vote Trump and not toss all good to the wind by allowing Clinton to reign supreme.



Fr Martin Fox said...

Patty says:

while indicating that those who vote Trump are voting "for" evil.

I concede the the single word in quotes, "for," is accurate. I did use the word "for." The rest of the words of that sentence (not in quotes, thankfully), are not my words. I never said that. You are railing against me, not for what I said, but for an intention you suppose lurks behind them. Sorry, it doesn't work that way.

Mamat said...

OK Guys, how about listening to one of the big guys, say for instance Cardinal Burk?

ROME, Italy, August 30, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) — Cardinal Raymond Burke, one of the most outspoken defenders on Catholic teaching regarding life, marriage, sexuality, and the family, weighed in on the upcoming U.S. election, telling reporters that the faithful must vote for the candidate who will do the most to “advance” the protection of human life, defense of the family, respect for freedom, and care for the poor.

Mamat said...

Cardinal Burke says the "Faithful" MUST vote for the candidate who will do the MOST to advance the protection of human life! That would be Trump. Yes, imperfect, immoral (like us all) egotistical, big mouth, stepping in it constantly Donald Trump! His imperfections are NOTHING compared to Hillarys pure evil. For the sake of us all please don't sit on the fence! Get out and vote for TRUMP!

Terrye Newkirk said...

Cardinal Burke is my hero. In this case, he is not enunciating Catholic teaching, but his own opinion, valuable as it is.

A Catholic may think that greater good will come from voting for a candidate who is 100% prolife. Or spending his energy working in Congressional elections, affecting our laws far more than a presidential election.

It remains the fact that he is not obliged to vote for a particular office or candidate.

Fr Martin Fox said...

Mamat --

I have the greatest respect for Cardinal Burke, but I would point out several problems with your argument. First, you don't actually quote Cardinal Burke, you are quoting LifeSiteNews, very different. You quote their opening paragraph, which restates what they understood to be Cardinal Burke's point. If you want to claim Cardinal Burke said something, quote his own words, not someone else's account of what he said.

Second, on the supposition that Cardinal Burke's actual statement was equally as emphatic about the necessity of people voting in favor of a particular candidate as you seem to think, what is the magisterial authority of such a statement? If he went even further, and were to say, "Catholics in the U.S. must vote for Mr. Trump," what authority would such a statement possess? The answer is as Terrye Newkirk says: it would be his own opinion.

Cardinal Burke is nothing if not very careful. He is fully aware of what the Church has taught in moral theology, and what the U.S. bishops in particular have taught about faithful citizenship. If you go to my main page, the latest post includes a lengthy quote from that document. Now, it is true that a document from a conference does not have binding authority, either, but it bears consideration. And the key thing here -- which you seem to be overlooking -- is that the bishops have not, and will not, ever tell Catholics, they MUST vote for any candidate. That will never happen.

If you want to know why, ask.

Patty said...

"...You are railing against me, not for what I said, but for an intention you suppose lurks behind them. Sorry, it doesn't work that way."

I am not railing against you, Father, although it makes one more of a victim to speak in such terms. I am simply calling you out for what you implied. Again, you cover your bases, to be sure.

As for "things not working that way" or your "sorry" I take neither from you. Why? Because your one can absolutely imply the wrongdoing of another which is what you have done. And while you state that it is simple to cut and paste, yours is simply, just another attempt to hide behind the letter to ignore the spirit of your previous posts.

But that too sends another message. Take that how you will. I'll fully expect another posting wherein you polish the outside of your cup.

Mamat said...

Terrye, if we are NOT "obliged" to do what is the best, right and good thing we can do in a situation what the heck are we obliged to do as Catholics. Nothing?

That seems to be the going "opinion". That is the false doctrine of the "the almighty me and the truth as I perceive it" given to us via the reformation and heretic luther! As a result we have a mind set that says anything goes; I have my own truth and everyone is their own little pope.

Most of our leaders have wimped out and speak of nothing but love, love, love gobbledegook. If we hear Catholic teaching from the pulpit it is something short of a miracle! Where are the real men that stand up and speak clear honest truth and tell the people, "It is a SIN to assist in the abortion of a child by voting for a candidate that supports unlimited abortion and it is a vote for that evil when you sit on the fence and refuse to vote because you are too pious!"

Cardinal Burke tells it like it is. Everyone please read the entire article.
Not sure how to vote in the U.S. election? Here’s Cardinal Burke’s advice | News | LifeSite

Patty said...

....and now we have further mincing regarding the prudential statements of Cardinal Burke. Get out the Brasso and black rags! Polish that cup. Make it shine so as to blind others and blind oneself. Use the right words to send to make the letter line up with "magisterial" teaching while sending your own not-so-secret views about who is voting for....I won't say it. I'll just posit that when one is choosing between the lesser of two evils that one is "still" voting for...whoops.... I'm not allowed to say that because I might cross that line of the letter.

Thank you once more for your very clear message, Fr. Fox. It is received. But your hands are squeaky.

Mamat said...

Father, you can justify the evil you do until the second coming and it will still be evil to sit on the fence and aid the election of Hillary Clinton. The fact that you encourage others to do the same is double the evil. May God have mercy on your soul.

Mamat said...

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/cardinal-burke-to-u.s.-voters-consider-candidate-who-defend-life-family-fre

Please listen to Cardinal Burke. He is a true Shepherd of Christ's flock.

Fr Martin Fox said...

Mamat said:

Father, you can justify the evil you do until the second coming and it will still be evil to sit on the fence and aid the election of Hillary Clinton. The fact that you encourage others to do the same is double the evil. May God have mercy on your soul.

I've been very patient. You accuse me of doing "evil." Really. When my mother was alive, had I said such a thing about a priest, she would have slapped my face.

You accuse me of doing "evil" when I am advocating doing that which the U.S. bishops affirm all Catholics may do:

36. When all candidates hold a position that promotes an intrinsically evil act, the conscientious voter faces a dilemma. The voter may decide to take the extraordinary step of not voting for any candidate or, after careful deliberation, may decide to vote for the candidate deemed less likely to advance such a morally flawed position and more likely to pursue other authentic human goods. (From Forming Consciences for Faithful Discipleship.) So it would seem you are accusing the U.S. bishops, who approved this document, of doing "evil."

I've asked you to show where you derive the authority to stand in judgment of me -- and now, of the bishops. You have cited a news article. A news article! A news article! Astounding.

I dare you to write to Cardinal Burke, and ask him if he agrees with you. I double-dare you. In fact, to make it worth your while, I will make a $1,000 donation to the Catholic charity of your choice, once you produce a response from his Eminence.

And, further, I may just write him myself. If he agrees with me -- namely, that he was giving his own, personal view, not giving authoritative teaching in contradiction to what I have quoted -- will you apologize? Will you?

Patricia La Duca said...

What is astounding is the rejection now of Cardinal Burke's prudent admonition to not inadvertently - out of a misguided zeal - aid in electing a manifest evil. (By way of writing in a candidate or choosing one that has zero chance of winning.)

The media lies, Father. The media lies to make easy work of those who would be Christian.

http://www.wnd.com/2016/08/proof-media-lied-about-trump-mocking-disabled-reporter/

This is why we do need to be innocent as doves, but "wise" as serpents.

My mother would have slapped me in the face for doubling down on pretended ignorance when I knew what I'd implied was not what it should be. Why? Because such an action would be beneath me. Even without the grace of ordination.

And for all your outrage, Father, you do nothing more than cite news articles when you seek to paint Trump as being wholly evil. Astounding. Astounding. Astounding!

Perhaps you should write to him and ask for clarification because, as you have seemingly implied yet again, the news media CANNOT BE TRUSTED. And thanks yet again for hiding behind the mantra of "my own personal view".

Perhaps you could lead the flock by example in apologizing, Father. For whether or not you own it or believe it to be so, you have given offense.

Patricia La Duca said...

"...I've been very patient. You accuse me of doing "evil." Really. When my mother was alive, had I said such a thing about a priest, she would have slapped my face."

This is also indicative of a world wherein grotesque scandal within the Church was still being covered up, Father. And, to put it plainly, I make no accusation against you. But my background consists of having grown up in a parish wherein the pastor abused my classmates - male and female - from 2nd-8th grade. And those children who did venture to speak to their parents were shouted down (not slapped). Why? Because the aura of the priesthood was such that parents couldn't conceive a priest doing evil or being so woefully misguided.

We know, however, especially with the ongoing crisis within the Church that those who receive Holy Orders are far from immune. That is why vetting one's priest is so very necessary.

One doesn't just snap back to the, "How dare you say that!" mode. One cannot. This, sadly, is the result of an abused flock. A ravaged flock.

So if you take umbrage at how you are treated, look to the reason why the flock is hesitant. Look to the root cause of why you are being tagged for what you're saying. Look to the reality that, yes, the MEDIA is biased. And, unless you have sought a personal relationship with Donald Trump, much of what you're saying goes back to media spin and nothing but.

Those who have been burned on a regular basis by such spin - even from priests - recognize it. That is why we are cautious and not about to give a segment of the population - even priests - especially priests - a FREE PASS. And lest you think that position uncharitable, keep in mind that even priests need to be goaded to think more deeply about even their own personal views.

Fr Martin Fox said...

Mrs. La Duca/Mrs. Malley said:

What is astounding is the rejection now of Cardinal Burke's prudent admonition to not inadvertently - out of a misguided zeal - aid in electing a manifest evil. (By way of writing in a candidate or choosing one that has zero chance of winning.)

False. I didn't "reject it," I disagree with the point that Mamet made, based on what s/he read in a news item. I don't know what Cardinal Burke actually said. And I will be happy to write Cardinal Burke. Do you have an address? I can't find one.

aid in electing a manifest evil...

False. Refusing to vote for a candidate -- I refuse to vote for Secretary Clinton -- is not "aiding" her. That's plainly illogical. I likewise refuse to vote for Mr. Trump, because he endorses various evils as well. Again, your reasoning is illogical. I must not -- you say, support Clinton because she supports evil (and I agree with you, thus far); however, you MUST vote for Trump...ignoring his endorsement of evil. Nonsense.

And for all your outrage, Father, you do nothing more than cite news articles when you seek to paint Trump as being wholly evil. Astounding. Astounding. Astounding!

False, two ways. First, never did I "paint Trump as being wholly evil." That's a false statement. I have pointed out ways he -- and Mrs. Clinton -- endorse grave evil. That is not the same as saying he -- or she -- is "wholly evil." That would mean I think each of them is, in effect, Satan. Quote me saying it, or else stop putting words in my mouth. God does not ask you to do dishonest things in his service, so stop it.

Also, false, when you say all I cite are "news articles." I actually watched and listened to the debates earlier this year. And I have viewed videotapes of what Mr. Trump has said. I am not merely relying on news articles.

I have one question for you, Mrs. La Duca/Malley: Do you believe God wants me to vote for Mr. Trump? There are, I believe, only three valid answers: Yes, no, or I don't know.

Which is your answer?

Mamat said...

It seems it is up to the laity to call a spade a spade because the so many of our clergy have gone soft. You keep saying, father, you are following the law so therefore you are going the right thing. But the CCC said “MAY" decide not to vote and yes you are free to assume that means this or any election in which YOU determine by your "opinion" both candidates are too evil to be worthy of your vote. Sorry but "your letter of the law" remains nothing more than an excuse to cope out.

You have self righteously judged that Mr. Trump is SO evil he will not do any of the right and good things he says. He is NOT the evil power hungry career politician hillary is. He did not need to get into this pot of boiling water and largely spend his own money to do so. He is NOT perfect or polished or as good at lying as hillary and yes, he hasn’t learn to control his tongue, so you refuse to support him in his desire to STOP hillary's PROVEN evil because the CCC says you MAY. Pathetic! We may do allot of things, father, but that doesn't mean we should.

hillary is an enemy of Christ's Church and she will continue the obama effort to end our religious freedom, force Catholics out of business, shut down religions orders like the "Little Sisters of the Poor" and push an evil secular agenda that threatens the sexual mental health of our children, puts little girls and boys in danger in gender neutral bathrooms where predators can easily find them and pushes for laws and court justices that will help her!

Oh but, seriously, as long as she has Catholic Clergy helping her what more could she need! You may not be evil father but you are aiding her evil and basically encouraging others to “stand down" and aid her evil also.

Mamat said...

Patricia La Duca, you are very well spoken. I could not have said it that well or that nicely. Thank You.

Patricia La Duca said...

Father Fox,

"...God does not ask you to do dishonest things in his service, so stop it."

Why don't you stop it? Seriously.


You feel snug in your position, nothing more. But your intimation that you watching the debates is the same as others having to meet the standard of writing Cardinal Burke - (have you got an address? Really?) - is setting a standard YOU can't meet.

Your painting others as being "dishonest" in order to keep your cup polished fools nobody. Moving forward, sadly, because of this exchange, I cannot help but take any further assertions of what you deign displeasing to God as suspect. Filtered through your own bias, not the truth.

Take your statement: "...That would mean I think each of them is, in effect, Satan." What is that, Father Fox, but you extrapolating a deeper meaning out of the words I used. You cannot quote me saying that. And yet you attempt to imply that that's the natural fruit of what I said.

But again, you seem to feel yourself fully vested in having the right to interpret and put words into the mouths of others. And yet you staunchly insist others QUOTE you. A simple cut and paste.

Again, if you don't want others to intuit meaning from your words, watch their meaning more carefully. If you don't want others to intuit meaning from your words, and decry them as lying if they do, if they cannot "quote" you, then do not, in turn, attempt to brand others as lying or doing "dishonest" things. For then you are guilty of precisely that which you accuse others of doing, Father.

Like pretending that Trump voters are just wanting you to give the GOP a "pass" while expecting nothing but a "pass" yourself. And I know you understand exactly what I'm saying.





Patricia La Duca said...

Mamat, you express yourself just fine!

God bless.

Fr Martin Fox said...

Mamet, Mrs. La Duca/Malley:

I ask you again. Do you claim that God wants me to vote for Mr. Donald Trump?

It's an easy question, to which there are three answers: yes, no and I don't know.

What is your answer?

Patricia La Duca said...

"False. Refusing to vote for a candidate -- I refuse to vote for Secretary Clinton -- is not "aiding" her. That's plainly illogical. I likewise refuse to vote for Mr. Trump, because he endorses various evils as well. Again, your reasoning is illogical. I must not -- you say, support Clinton because she supports evil (and I agree with you, thus far); however, you MUST vote for Trump...ignoring his endorsement of evil. Nonsense"

Again, you imply that other are merely ignoring Trump's serious issues. You are arguing against your straw man figure, one who merely ignores Trump's serious issues.

Your statement above also implies that Cardinal Burke is illogical in his cautioning the flock against inadvertently abetting the more manifest evil by throwing away their vote on one who has no hope of winning.

This is why your statements, Father, are illogical. This is why your reasoning as to what standards others must meet while you do not represents hypocrisy.

So bandy on with your straw man argument and ignore the reality of what others, including Cardinal Burke are trying to communicate.

... that said, all I ever wanted from you is the honest cease and desist of implying that those who vote for Trump are voting for....(I won't say)


Patricia La Duca said...

The easy answer is that which Cardinal Burke gave, Fr. Fox.

Write to him for clarification.

Fr Martin Fox said...

I am not asking Cardinal Burke, I am asking you. Why do you evade my question?

Do you believe God wants me to vote for Trump? What is your answer? "Yes," "No," or "I don't know"?

Third time I'm asking for an answer.

Patricia La Duca said...

...and I am answering you, Father. Maybe you just don't like what I've said. Perhaps because you do not want to review the unassailable logic in what Cardinal Burke has to say on the subject. I am not your judge to be sure, but can only discern by what you write to include what your writing implies.

Third time, fourth time, you can attempt to defame my attempts to draw logic and fair play from this discussion however much you like. Say that "everyone here can see" all you'd like. Repeat that my actions here are fill-in-the-blank.

As for why I evade your question - and I am not saying that I have - perhaps you should look at the mastery lesson in evasion you have demonstrated here for all to see. Then maybe you will have the answer you seek.... or perhaps not.

You'll have my continued prayers.

Fr Martin Fox said...

I am not asking you what Cardinal Burke believes. I'll ask Cardinal Burke that.

I am asking what "Patricia La Duca" believes -- only "Patricia La Duca" can answer that.

Do you believe God wants me to vote for Donald Trump? Yes, no, or I don't know.

If you give any other answer, I will delete it. You've had ample opportunity for commentary. Answer or don't answer.

Mamat said...

Father, I do not care to speak for God but since you insist I will have a go at it. I believe, if He is the God the Catholic Church has taught me to love and respect He would want you to vote for Trump. WHY, because if a vote for Trump will save any innocent unborn babies from the slaughter hillary will do NOTHING to stop it is the right and good and moral thing to do! She not only won't stop late term abortions she will to all in her power to force everyone to PAY for these murders. YES I believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that God would want you and every Catholic to vote for Trump, if for no other reason than to save some of His precious children from this legal holocaust.

Fr Martin Fox said...

Mamat -- thank you for answering.

Now, a follow up question. There is a candidate for president, Darrell Castle, of the Constitution Party, who is 100% pro-life, no exceptions. Meanwhile, Mr. Trump supports abortion in the case of rape and incest.

So, to clarify, do you believe God opposes me voting for Mr. Castle, but insists I vote for Mr. Trump?

Mamat said...

Seriously? Darrell Castle WHO? There is NO chance he will be president so any good he could do is irrelevant!

Honestly father, do you even care about the babies that are being butchered in the womb? If you throw your vote away on a sure looser you won’t save a single unborn child’s life!

WHAT? Either save them all or let them all be slaughtered. It is a good thing the heroes of WWII, that saved one, ten, fifty Jews from certain death, didn’t think like you do!

SAVE BABIES from unspeakable deaths! Save any that you can! A vote for Trump is a vote for the life of thousands of unborn children. There is NO greater issue in this election than that.

Father come down out of the clouds and face reality. We have to do the best we can to save people that are sure to die if Trump does NOT win.

Mamat said...

To clarify, YES, I believe God would prefer that you vote for Trump to save lives. No I don't believe he "insists" on it. However, he surely won't be pleased if his children die because his clergy encouraged people to stand down or throw their vote away.

Fr Martin Fox said...

Mamet - why would God "prefer" a vote for a sometime pro abortion candidate over a 100% pro life candidate? Surely you don't believe God shares Mr. Trump's view that it should be legal to kill babies conceived via rape and incest? If not then, what could possibly be the reason God would prefer that's? I cannot think of a good reason. Please tell me what you think that reason would be?

Doug said...

Marmet/Fr. Fox,

It seems to me that if more priests, bishops, cardinals, that is – the whole church- in the USA would actively preach about these issues on a regular basis (and point out that there is, in fact, a 100% pro-life candidate) that Catholics would become a united voting bloc and could actually have a real influence on the elections in this country. Of course, those messages would have to be very specific (NOT generic) in their meaning to achieve the desired results.

Of course, it would mean that those same priests, bishops, and cardinals would first have to get onto the same page, but as we’re talking about the true teachings of the Church, it shouldn’t be that difficult.

The USCCB, in their document Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship tell us to vote according to a well-formed conscience. Where are we to obtain this well-formed conscience if not from the shepherds that are put in place to lead His flock? In our world of today, there are many cultural influences competing to get into the mix. There are many, many good tools to help us form, but they must be reinforced by the consistent, fresh, innovative and, if necessary, uncomfortable messages coming from the pulpit.

This would have the added benefit of leaving no doubt that when a prominent Catholic like VP Joe Biden, or Rep Nancy Pelosi says they are a “devout Catholic”, it is clear that the positions they espouse are contrary to Church teaching.

It won’t happen overnight, and it’s likely too late for this year’s election, but I believe that this is a critical requirement if we are to take our country back and lead it toward our Creator.

Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Mamat said...

"why would God "prefer" a vote for a sometime pro abortion candidate over a 100% pro life candidate?"

Seriously father? I answered that quite clearly but you choose not to hear. You sound a bit like a robot repeating what it has been programed to say, in spite of the reality presented it. God wants us all to do all we can "realistically" do to save the lives of the unborn. There is a legal genocide going on, Father, and we must vote to save as many children as we realistically can. A vote in this election for anyone other than Mr. Trump or a "stand down" WILL result in thousands of deaths.

Are you saying that God wants that? Voting for the 100% pro-life person that CAN'T get elected, will most likely, give hillary the power to continue the policy of killing the unborn right up to birth. That is unconscionable! Apparently, your almighty principles are more important that saving lives!

Now IF, like Doug said, ALL the clergy were doing their job and teaching something of value from the pulpit Catholics might be able to amass a voting block that could put a 3rd candidate in office. But we don't have a clergy that is in any way capable of fighting the good fight. They have mostly folded and refuse to address even the most minor of issues. It is beyond sad but that is the reality. At this point in time all wise, God fearing people can hope to do is to vote for the candidate that will decrease the slaughter. I am sorry you are not in that number.

Mamat said...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgw4X7Dw_3k

Perhaps, Father, you should watch a video of what happens to a baby during an abortion. Or better yet watch a sonogram of the real thing in progress if you have the guts and or courage!

Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Fr Martin Fox said...

Mamat -- I asked because I was chastised several times for attributing beliefs to people that they, themselves, had not expressed. So I wanted to be sure to let you speak for yourself.

As I understand you, you are saying that God chooses "electability" over fidelity. He not only understands that we make such calculations (I agree with that), but that, in fact -- you insist -- that God demands such compromises.

How else to understand your insistence that God prefers that I vote for a partly pro-abortion candidate, in preference to a fully prolife candidate? How else to understand when you said, "Father, you can justify the evil you do until the second coming and it will still be evil to sit on the fence and aid the election of Hillary Clinton. The fact that you encourage others to do the same is double the evil. May God have mercy on your soul?

Seriously, my friend, do you not see the absurdity here? Do you truly think God is influenced by what human beings deem "realistic"?

Fr Martin Fox said...

I have read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. I cannot think of an example where God rebuked any of his followers for choosing faithfulness over what seemed feasible. Can you cite any example?

On the other hand, I can think of quite a lot of examples of the precise opposite, where God told his faithful people, don't worry about numbers, don't even measure this by human standards of success. Be faithful.

In Exodus Chapter 14, we read of the chariots of Egypt charging upon the Israelites, and they were frightened by their power. What did Moses say? That God agreed, the Egyptians were too numerous, and Israel too few, for God's cause to prevail?

When God called Gideon, Gideon made a point that sounds like Mamet:

But he answered him, “Please, my Lord, how can I save Israel? My family is the poorest in Manasseh, and I am the most insignificant in my father’s house” (Judges 6:15).

Was God's decision influenced by small chance of success? Is there any evidence, at all, that he considered it? On the contrary, consider what God told Gideon to do.

The LORD said to Gideon: You have too many soldiers with you for me to deliver Midian into their power, lest Israel vaunt itself against me and say, “My own power saved me.” So announce in the hearing of the soldiers, “If anyone is afraid or fearful, let him leave! Let him depart from Mount Gilead!” Twenty-two thousand of the soldiers left, but ten thousand remained.

The LORD said to Gideon: There are still too many soldiers. Lead them down to the water and I will test them for you there. If I tell you that a certain man is to go with you, he must go with you. But no one is to go if I tell you he must not.

When Gideon led the soldiers down to the water, the LORD said to him: Everyone who laps up the water as a dog does with its tongue you shall set aside by himself; and everyone who kneels down to drink raising his hand to his mouth you shall set aside by himself. Those who lapped up the water with their tongues numbered three hundred, but all the rest of the soldiers knelt down to drink the water.

The LORD said to Gideon: By means of the three hundred who lapped up the water I will save you and deliver Midian into your power. So let all the other soldiers go home
(Judges 7:2-7).

Or we might recall King Jehoshaphat, who when told that “A great multitude is coming against you from across the sea, from Edom," proclaimed a fast, and went into the temple of the Lord. And as he and the people prayed,

...the spirit of the LORD came upon Jahaziel, son of Zechariah, son of Benaiah, son of Jeiel, son of Mattaniah, a Levite of the clan of Asaph, in the midst of the assembly, and he said: “Pay attention, all of Judah, inhabitants of Jerusalem, and King Jehoshaphat! The LORD says to you: Do not fear or be dismayed at the sight of this vast multitude, for the battle is not yours but God’s (1 Chronicles 20:2, 14-15).

And then there are the lives of the saints. How many come to mind who were chastised for being "foolish" and "unrealistic." Saint Paul, who was a "fool for Christ." Saint Lawrence of Brindisi, who rode into battle against the Ottoman Turks, armed with nothing but the cross. Saint Francis of Assisi, who gave up all his wealth, and who even crossed the battle lines and delivered himself into the hands of the enemy, to be brought before the Sultan to preach the Gospel? Or how about Saint Clare, who faced down an invading army with nothing but the Eucharist in a monstrance? Or Leo, who went out to meet Attila?

Please tell me, Mamat, what example from the Scriptures, or from the lives of the saints, can you cite where God rebuked any of his servants for choosing full fidelity to his law, rather than choose compromise of the truth, precisely because it wasn't "realistic"?

Mamat said...

Shame on you for deleting Patty's post.

Shame on you for turning a blind eye to the consequences of your choice. Consequences matter, especially when the most vulnerable will die because of people like you. The Germans, in towns surrounding Nazi death camps, chose to stand down and ignore what was happening; thousands upon thousands died as a result. They, like you, will be held accountable for such choices! But because you are part of the clergy your judgement will be 100 times as severe because YOU are to shepherd Christ's Children NOT kill them!

I will do my best to pray for you, because I know that is what God wants me to do.

Fr Martin Fox said...

Mamat:

Well, sorry, but this is my blog, and I asked Mrs. La Duca to answer the question, without commentary, and she declined. She's had plenty to say. No one has a right to post comments here, particularly when they are abusive and insulting and drown out other voices.

I am very sad that you persist in attacking me for being faithful to God. I am very sad that you ignore everything I took the time to quote from Sacred Scripture. I asked you to cite a single instance, a single example, from Scripture, or from the lives of the saints, that supports your claim that God demands I compromise my fidelity to him, for the sake of being "realistic."

I have cited, at length, Sacred Scripture, the teaching of the United States bishops, and the examples of specific saints. If you showed even a little interest, I would be happy to cite still more. You ignore it all.

I asked you on what authority you attack me and denounce me. You refuse to provide a single citation from the Catechism, from Scripture, from the lives of the saints, to support your attack on me, your accusation of me doing "evil." All you can cite is a news article.

Shame on me?

Do you attend a Catholic church regularly? Do you consider that priest an upright man? I invite you to show him everything you have written here, denouncing me, and show him what I cite in my own defense. Ask him whether he agrees with you, that it is sinful and offends God to choose a 100% pro-life candidate in preference to someone who endorses abortion part of the time. Ask him if he agrees with you that I am doing "evil," and I am like "The Germans, in towns surrounding Nazi death camps."

Shame on me?

Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Terrye Newkirk said...

Father is right. The hubris and ignorance of abusing a holy priest who, after all, is only advocating voting for a candidate who is 100% prolife, is astonishing.

In the past, this would have been understood as sinful and scandalous. It still ought to be.

Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Fr Martin Fox said...

Terrye:

To be very clear, I haven't actually said I'll vote for Mr. Castle, although I'm inclined to. He isn't without his problems too. For example, I'm dismayed that he advocates pulling out of NATO, which -- while that's a very different sort of issue from abortion, and torture, and advocating "taking out" non-combatant relatives of terrorists, it's still a very important issue. And, I don't know enough about Mr. Castle's character, also relevant.

What I do know is that Mr. Castle has the best position on abortion, which is terribly important.

Terrye Newkirk said...

Patricia LaDuca: Laughable that you call Fr. Fox illogical. He's the only one who has *been* logical.

He is 100% correct about Church teaching and the magisterial weight of Cardinal Burke's reported statement (none). He's the one asking germane questions, not hurling accusations.

But since you think priests "hide behind their collars," I don't expect you to grasp this. I wish you could wear one of those collars for a day and see how much cover it gives you. Hint: none. You become the target of everyone's criticism, Catholic and non-Catholic. QED.

Mamat said...

Terrye, have a heart for the children that will not get a chance to live because Catholics stood down and failed to vote for the one candidate that could and would change our governments present evil policy. We can't save all the children but we can save some and we can begin the reversal of polices that make this culture a culture of Death!. Listen to Cardinal Burke who is far wiser than Fr. Fox. Oh my but I just realized how appropriate his name is. He is a fox in sheep clothing (clerical) so beware of him. Unfortunately, we have many such false shepherds and it is the duty of the laity to call them out and fight the good fight for the sake of our children, grandchildren and the entire next generation.

PS Thank you Patty for your support in this fight. God bless you!

Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Patricia La Duca said...

Terrye, while I appreciate your zeal, protecting Fr Fox from the WISDOM of His Eminence Cardinal Burke is to facilitate downfall. That is not wise, but narrow minded in giving too much credit to one for his efforts.

"He (FR Fox) is 100% correct about Church teaching and the magisterial weight of Cardinal Burke's reported statement (none). He's the one asking germane questions, not hurling accusations."

Again, if true weight were given to the Magisterial teaching then Fr. Fox wouldn't, by the transitive property of equality, imply that a vote for Trump is a vote against Christ. That, despite your opinion, is what he has done.

If I could wear the collar for even one day, I hope I would wear it in the fullness of truth, taking the brunt of standing up for the fullness of truth and the spirit of the law and magisterial teaching instead of feinting and parrying to defend pride of position.

But until we suffer bloody persecution in this country, I suppose we will not understand fully what we invite by facilitating Clinton's rise to power.

Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Fr Martin Fox said...

Mrs. La Duca/Malley:

I am deleting your comments (with one exception*) because I told you I would, until you answered the question I asked you. And that answer was to be a "yes," "no," or "I don't know." So I am simply doing what I said I would do.

If you care to post a relevant comment on another thread, past or future, no problem. But this thread is closed to you, unless of course you decide to answer that question.

* The exception was the one comment directed to Terrye Newkirk. I left it as a courtesy to her.

Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Mamat said...

Patty he is baiting you so if you say yes he can hit you with another quesiton that he apparently thinks support his position. It didn't work with me but I understand that you don't want to play his little game.

Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Patricia La Duca said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Mamat said...

Father Z tells it like it is and yet people still say hillary and Trump are "equally" problematic! That is beyond a doubt insane. Trump in not perfect, hillary is evil. Trump is not polish at politics, hillary is polished at lying and saying whatever she thinks her "useful idiots" want to hear! Trump in an outsider that is unpoisoned by the political Washington machine, hillary drank the poison long ago and is playing the Washington game of "get the power at all cost!" Trump doesn't need to be president to fulfill a life long dream, hillary would sell her soul to get back in the white house!(and probably HAS!)

Catholics! WAKE UP! The points made by Father Z are critical! There is NO comparison, no equality, no both candidates are problematic where these issues are concerned! "Trump says that he will lift Obama’s contraceptive mandate; she promises to enforce it. Trump says that he will appoint justices who would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade; she promises to protect it. Trump says that he won’t force taxpayers to pay for abortions; she promises to ensure that they do. She is implacably opposed to every tenet of the natural moral law"... and will force her godlessness down our throats!

Furthermore as Father Z says, "Putting aside her lying and playing fast and loose with National Security and the integrity of the State Department, etc. etc., etc., think about the long-term consequences for this nation and for the world were Hillary’s picks to pack the SCOTUS."

Anyone that calls himself a Catholic and does not vote to STOP hillary will be guilty of being an accomplice to all her crimes and moral evil! The weight of all those sin will crush your soul. Trump not nearly so! NO comparison! Trump is our only hope to roll back SOME of the evil obama and hillary and the last 8 years have inflicted on us! My God help you make the right choice for our country's future.

Fr Martin Fox said...

Presidential campaigns typically hit full stride after Labor Day in an election year. But 2016 is a year in which two prominent Catholics – a sitting vice president, and the next vice presidential nominee of his party — both seem to publicly ignore or invent the content of their Catholic faith as they go along. And meanwhile, both candidates for the nation’s top residence, the White House, have astonishing flaws.

This is depressing and liberating at the same time. Depressing, because it’s proof of how polarized the nation has become. Liberating, because for the honest voter, it’s much easier this year to ignore the routine tribal loyalty chants of both the Democratic and Republican camps. I’ve been a registered independent for a long time and never more happily so than in this election season. Both major candidates are – what’s the right word? so problematic – that neither is clearly better than the other.


That was Archbishop Chaput's assessment a few weeks ago. ( http://catholicphilly.com/2016/08/think-tank/archbishop-chaput-column/some-personal-thoughts-on-the-months-ahead/) Is he "insane"? Will you attack him as doing "evil," as you have me? I hope not. But if not, why not?

Mamat said...

You think, "Both major candidates are – what’s the right word? so problematic – that neither is clearly better than the other." Obviously you are not well informed on what each candidate plans for our country, our religious liberty and for the lives of innocent unborn children. If you did you could NOT say such a thing!

Did you read my last post and the comments made by Father Z? I would think his words on top of CARDINAL Burkes excellant advice would be adequate to bring you to your moral senses but standing on the fence seems to suit you more than deciding to do the best you can to save innocent lives!

Or perhaps you just don't care that thousands of MORE babies will be slaughtered under a Hillary administration? How callous you are! These are human beings created by YOUR God and you don't care enough to vote for them to live. May God have mercy on your soul because you are going to need it.

Fr Martin Fox said...

Mamat -

In your overflowing rage, you failed to notice it was Archbishop Chaput who said that, not I. So when you attack me, believing I said it, you are, in fact, saying about Archbishop Chaput that he is not "well informed," it is Archbishop Chaput who you think needs to be brought to his "moral senses." It is Archbishop Chaput, of whom you say, "Or perhaps you just don't care...you don't care enough to vote for them to live. May God have mercy on your soul because you are going to need it."

Congratulation no, instead of consigning me to hell, you damned Archbishop Chaput. Have you no shame?

Mamat said...

Dear Fr. FOX, by posting archbishops statement you post YOUR opinion, YOUR view, YOUR lack of concern for the unborn who will die. Chaput has not heard my words and perhaps he hasn't heard Fr. Z's or Cardinal Burkes so I can not judge his actions. AND we are CALLED to judge the actions of others, especially our brother Catholics. Your repeated refusal to hear and respond to the GOOD Trump will try to do versus the evil we all KNOW hillary will most certainly continue and expand on, plus your calous lack of compassion for the thousands of babies that will die under a hillary administration is evidence enough to judge your intention to do what is wrong and sinful. I canNOT, of course, judge where you will spend eternity and do not even desire to do so but I can speak to your intentioned actions and call you out for planning to help hillary rain down untold evil upon all Americans. Have you no shame?

Doug said...

Mamat,
I don't know you but your continuing tirade against Fr. Fox seems to be a bit excessive. He simply pointed out that neither Hillary Clinton nor Donald Trump are without flaw, and that both have indicated support in some way for abortion. True, Mrs. Clinton advocates for unlimited abortion while Mr. Trump indicates support in rape and incest, but as Fr. has pointed out, both stances are against the teaching of the Catholic Church. This clearly indicated that he is concerned with ALL life (yes, those who will die under EITHER of their presidencies.) Why don't you cede this point?

To continuously beat the drum that not voting FOR Mr. Trump will enable Mrs. Clinton is simply your opinion. There is no concrete evidence for this point, and continuing to state it over and over again does not make it so.

Of course, when citing others to support our opinion, it does little more by definition than to support our opinion. That's why in an earlier comment, I lamented that the church become united. As evidenced by the various different articles and blog posts by various church leaders, this is far from the case. At the risk of repeating myself, unless and until the message is united, the members will continue to be confused by the messages coming from these leaders.

I beg all of us to take the time to contemplate this in prayer, refrain from name calling and innuendo, and come together to build the church.

Mamat said...

Doug, I simply cannot comprehend how anyone, much less a Catholic, could do anything that might remotely aid hillary clinton to occupy the white house. Her record is deplorable. Any other person that did what she has done would be behind bars.

She is clearly going to push all things immoral on the American people and appoint justices who will support her evils and aid her in inflicting more and more "extremely problematic" policies and laws on the people. The last 8 years have done more to destroy liberty, free speech, morality and common sense than any pervious period in my life or in the life of this country.

The rapid acceleration of immorality and the indoctrination of our youth AGAINST our country is unprecedented. Seriously, we have "safe zones" on college campus' because the poor babies might get their feelings hurt. College is the place we are supposed to learn how to deal with a variety of ideas NOT be told what ideas and thoughts are acceptable!

We are fighting a battle for decency and respect for women while this administration forces gender neutral bath and locker rooms on our children against our will. Sodomy and other forms of illicit gratification have been raised to the status of the SACRAMENT of Marriage. AND hillary is all for these evils! Furthermore, she promises to tear down even more moral boundaries and make Christians change their values. She can’t do that because some will go to the lions before they obey! But many will fold or be tranquilized to the evils infecting them while they go about their carefree, unconcerned lives thinking it won’t affect them.

The evils taking over do and will affect us all! And by the way I did concede to the reality that babies will die under a Trump administration but only those of rape, incest and to save the mother’s life. I pointed out that those numbers are minuscule compared to the unthinkable number of abortions that will take place if hillary is president. The fact that Father fails to comprehend the magnitude of the difference in the number of lives at stake here is bewildering and yes infuriating!

So much is at stake that it is unthinkable that these thing do not matter enough people to man up and do whatever they can to prevent hillary from invading the white house. Father’s stand on this is, in my opinion, inexcusable because of his power to influence others.

Fr Martin Fox said...

Mamat:

I've allowed you to have your say, and I've tolerated some abusive and offensive things directed against me, and most recently, against Archbishop Chaput.

I want to apologize for one thing: I should not have let it go on. I was hoping you'd come to your senses, but at some point, I knew that wasn't likely to happen, and I ought to have shut you down, for everyone's sake, including your own. Well, I'm shutting you down right now.

You are welcome to post on this site, but nothing more like what you've posted here.

I asked you, above, to show this thread, with all your comments, to your pastor, and see what he would say. Have you done this? I'd like to know. If your pastor is a Catholic priest in communion with Rome (including the SSPX, for our purposes here), I don't believe he would approve of either your accusations, your reasoning, or your claims about Cardinal Burke.

Now, if you can prove me wrong, post a comment. That is to say, come back and tell me just what your pastor said, when you showed him the entire thread. If you do that, without invective, I'll publish it. But that, or an apology, is all that I'll let you post in this thread.

And if you carry on this abusive attack on any other thread, I'll delete your comments. If you think that's unfair, you can always create your own blog, where you can say whatever you please. But when you visit someone else's "house," you have to mind your manners, or out you go.