ALERT: poll update!

Check this poll:

Remember the entry More wymynpriest pretend ordaination B.S.?

Get out there folks!

The tides have turned toward the dark (and dopey) side.

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in SESSIUNCULA. Bookmark the permalink.

30 Responses to ALERT: poll update!

  1. Trevor says:

    They’re tracking IP addresses, Father! You can only vote once!!!

    I thought we had a good lead on that poll. The other side is rallying supporters somewhere…

  2. Fr. Dan says:

    How sad this is that the poll is more “yes” than “no”, God help us!

  3. Would not one expect a yes vote in a secular paper? or even at times in a Catholic paper? After all, many find the way to destruction and few find the way to life, according to a popular preacher of first century Jerusalem.

  4. Subvet says:

    God must love stupid people, He’s made so many of them.

  5. Warren says:

    Whenever I see a poll of this sort I thank God for rescuing me and bringing me to the certainty of the Catholic Church. Were I a member of one of those “democratic churches”, such a poll might mean something. I’ll take God’s hierarchy over “doctrine by democracy” any day.

  6. Geoff says:

    Online polls are meaningless nonsense, showing nothing about what any proportion of people really believes.

  7. “But, Father !”
    Less than 3000 votes so far…I KNOW Fr. Z’s faithful readers can blow those mushy-headed liberals away. Get to voting, people !

  8. Mary Conces says:

    Well, I was hoping to ignore the whole sickening thing, but I went over and voted. I gather that anyone can vote, even if they can vote only once. Presumably that includes atheists, Hottentots, children, monkeys learning how to get bananas by keyboarding, witches and warlocks, and anyone who happens to see that there’s a poll. So much for informed opinion gathering. Must be pretty easy to run a newspaper nowadays.

  9. Hidden One says:

    Yes 1666
    56%
    No 1314
    44%

    The heretics are winning. :(

  10. Sekman says:

    Lets us flog the editor clarifying that these simulated ordinations do not result in a woman being a priest, let us bring the truth to the readers of this paper along with this “religion writer” who wrote this ridiculous article.

    http://www.kentucky.com/369/ (page for letters to the editor)

  11. Terry says:

    How nuts – the yes votes are exceeding the no… Thank God we do not elect presidents by popular vote. We are screwed anyway.

  12. Tzard says:

    While I’m all in favor of voting (I did) – I second the comment that yes/no is not the right question. I have reservations on voting in polls about such things – even well-designed polls.

    Even if we “won”, it would not mean what it purports to (deagraphics aside). It would perpetuate the claim that the truth of such things are dependent on the majority vote, or that the majority vote counts for something (besides a count of who needs remedial teachings in the existence of abolute truth).

    OR so it seems to me.

  13. Father Bartoloma says:

    Why are we even voting? I think that it is a bit frivolous to “vote” on something like this on a web poll when at one time or another, we who read this blog have proclaimed that the Church is NOT a democracy. (Yes, I did vote though.)

  14. Anne says:

    I just voted. Tried to vote again but…:)

    I spent some time over at the women priest site yesterday replying to their lying threads. As I was posting my 9-10th response the whole thread disappeared. They’re such cheats.

  15. BCatholic says:

    Father Bartoloma,

    My reason for voting is that if the poll is even close or the truth wins, then people MAY reconsider their position.

  16. Cory says:

    I find it interesting that guests are only by invitation to this faux ordination….perhaps they do not want any visitors from the Diocese?

  17. Gerry Kuts says:

    Why does every one call ordained women priests? Call them correctly PLEASE. They would be PRESTESSES if ordained. Calling them what they are may change the motivation.

  18. Andy Lucy says:

    As a resident of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, I can only say that… well, I really can’t say anything. These women playing at being priests… and the media actually taking them seriously. It boggles the mind.

    BTW, I noticed that in the stats for the organization, it listed 6 male priests… can they correctly be referred to as womenpriests? Or is there some term du jour for them, as well?

  19. Sue Sims says:

    OK – the No side is ahead again.

    I’ve found that one can vote twice (I just did) by using different browsers: I’ve voted once via Opera and once via Explorer. I shall go upstairs in a minute and use Firefox on the desktop…

    Yep, cheating.

  20. Al says:

    Just voted NO. Current totals: Yes 1687 49%
    No 1791 51%
    Total Votes: 3478

    I agree with Father Bartoloma, this is a bit frivolous in a way. If the yeses win, they will shout it from the rooftops, But, if the nos win, & we all know they should, it will be blown off by the Pro-(faux)ordination gang.

  21. Jane says:

    The looney liberals have lost big time in every poll of this sort. BIG time! I’ve seen the results of more than several and was not surprised by any of the results. For this poll to show a drastic rejection of ALL THOSE OTHER POLLS just proves it is a fake. There are not that many idiots in the all of Protestantland let alone The Church. It just seems that way because they are always in our faces and holding a microphone. But thank the good God, they are but few. Big mouths. Media darlings. But few.

    This poll is a farce, meant to sway public opinion as though it would make a lick of difference anyway. And all they did to change the numbers was to put out the call to their friends and to their friends’ friends. There is one thing that evildoers do faithfully and well, and that is to rally to the aid of their own kind.

    By the way, IPS addresses are easy to change. Just do an internet search and you’ll see.

    These poll results are an absolute lie. Shows just how desperate they really are.

  22. Michael says:

    I think these poor women are better left in peace, rather than given publicity they want; otherwise, they will never cool down and will find even new “vocations”. After all, they are a product of, male, priests-theologians. Aristotle, if among us today, would claim to have an empirical evidence of “misbegotten males” – an insight to be considered by professors in seminaries, and seminarians, who support them – surely, there are some at least. And it is these that should be chased out and given publicity.

    Wafers and sherry they use, remain wafers and sherry; those “absolved” are nor absolved etc…but, with rare exceptions, our Bishops do not bother: they will take no action with regard to those from their respective dioceses, who participate in these ceremonies.

    And I wonder whether the Holy See has an adequate policy when enquiring about suitability of candidates for episcopacy. Is the question about their views on this matter raised at all? Surely, it is also at least reasonable to suggest that some bishops too, support these, misguided creatures.

    The SSPX Bishops go, admittedly, over the top with their attack on the “New Church”, but it is this state of affairs which gives them the case.

  23. grega says:

    “I found that one can vote twice (I just did) by using different browsers: I’ve voted once via Opera and once via Explorer. I shall go upstairs in a minute and use Firefox on the desktop…

    Yep, cheating.”

    Not a very proud moment really Sue – is that what you would teach your children?

    Of course a sound majority in the West is rather comfortable with female ordination.
    In a time when women serve as soldiers in the army it does not exactly makes sense to come up with faux theological arguments to suppress the genuine desire of very unspectacular devout average catholics.
    My pious and very value conservative mom surprised me last year when she said – ” You know, they should allow women to be Priests”
    The catholic church is so stale these days – they should allow Priests to marry and women to be 1005 included. And no this is not liberal lunatic talk – this is actually rather boring mainstream thinking.

  24. Brian C. says:

    grega wrote:

    Of course a sound majority in the West is rather comfortable with female ordination.

    How, exactly, is this relevant to the case? A sound majority in the West is comfortable with fornication, too, but you’ll forgive Christ’s Church for not embracing such evil because of that! (Hint: appeal to popularity = textbook fallacy. Good and evil are determined by comparison to the holy Nature of God–not by scraping together a plurality of ballots.)

    In a time when women serve as soldiers in the army […]

    Aside from this being a sheer appeal to the gallery (which is also a classic fallacy), this begs the questions (yet another fallacy) of, “is that a *good* thing?”, “is that a mandatory thing?”, or even “what on earth do the policies of the U.S. military have to do with the doctrines of Christ’s Church?” Your argument might have a bit more weight if Christ had instituted the U.S. Army as a sacred order, allowed women, and then explicitly taught that His Church’s priesthood was to follow suit. As it is, I don’t see how secular popularity proves much of anything.

    […] it does not exactly makes sense to come up with faux theological arguments to suppress the genuine desire of very unspectacular devout average catholics.

    This assumes that: (a) the arguments are “faux”, (b) the desires of “very unspectacular (!) devout average catholics [sic]” have anything especially to do with the discernment of Church doctrine, and (c) that this comparison to the U.S. military is in any way relevant (see above).

    It sounds as if you’re trying out some colorful rhetoric, here–well and good, so far as the attempt goes–but the logic in your statement is really wanting, I’m afraid.

    My pious and very value conservative mom surprised me last year when she said – ” You know, they should allow women to be Priests”

    I don’t blame you for being surprised, given that you’d been under the impression that your mother was “pious” and “value conservative” (whatever that means), but then let loose a heterodox liberal opinion. Has your mother read the Church’s reasons for Her doctrine in this matter?

    The catholic church is so stale these days – they should allow Priests to marry and women to be 1005 included. And no this is not liberal lunatic talk – this is actually rather boring mainstream thinking.

    I’d add one correction: “this is actually rather boring mainstream liberal lunatic talk”. These appeals to the gallery (which don’t even appeal to any clear gallery, very well) are really not advancing your case.

    In Christ,
    Brian

    P.S. I don’t mean to sound insulting–I used to think very much as you do (and your mom does). But please believe me that I was (with every good intention) mistaken, then… just as you and your mom are (with every good intention) mistaken now. Please try to look at this sensibly, and not simply “feel” and “emote” your way through these issues!

  25. Amy P. says:

    Mind you – this is just a poll in a newspaper. “No” is still in the lead, but not even the “will of the people” will dissuade the Church from maintaining her correct teaching and tradition of the male-only, celibate priesthood.

  26. Is there something wrong with that poll site now?

  27. Yes – 1707
    No – 2082

  28. Polls says:

    Everything seems to work fine. The no’s are winning! Great.

  29. telcontar says:

    1711/2133!

  30. Mairead says:

    56@no 44@ yes