Are you an American Citizen and a Voter?

Check out the USCCB’s “Faithful Citizenship Quiz” if you haven’t seen it already.

 

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

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

29 Responses to Are you an American Citizen and a Voter?

  1. Clinton says:

    I scored 17 correct out of 20, which I guess isn’t too bad. I’d have liked to have seen a
    question or two regarding both the Church’s reasons for defending marriage and Her
    defense of religious liberty / objections to the HHS mandate.

  2. aquinasadmirer says:

    The quiz format is better than just a laundry list. When I wrote tests while teaching English, I would give point values to each question. This would help the kids prioritize when given limited time to take an exam. Are all these questions given the same weight on this quiz? It appears to be so, but in reality are they?

  3. chcrix says:

    Well, seems to be an interesting mix of sound moral reasoning and regurgitated (and suspect) government figures, and foolishness. Probably what one would expect from the USCCB.

    Glad to see them hitting torture.

    I dispute the value of many of the government supplied figures – way too much incentive for the bureaucracy to play with these.

    As far as global warming/climate change/whatever they have renamed it today/ as it sinks slowly in the west, I suggest that their Excellencies pay a visit (or even several visits) to Watt’s Up With That.

    Thank heavens they didn’t decide to talk about firearms – especially Berettas.

  4. HyacinthClare says:

    I’m down here on the front lines of illegal immigration, in southern Arizona. I love our bishops… I have a Fr. Z bumper sticker that says so! But they are not speaking for a LOT of us with their perfect willingness that all illegal immigrants should be welcomed and all this “illegal” business be forgotten, out of “charity”. They are perfectly happy to praise our president for ignoring the law to defend our borders, but have a lot of harsh things to say about his going around the First Amendment. The inconsistency isn’t helped by the tendency to label people like me “racists” and “unChristlike” when I defend a state’s right to defend its property from invasion… and it IS invasion. Am I going to be drummed out of the Friends of Fr. Z for this comment?

  5. Papabile says:

    I got 20 out of 20, and would begin by disputing several of them for their use of dubious statistics, etc.

    What I found ironic is they made sure to provide a link to a study, but when they get to torture, how hard would it have been to link to the relevant passage of the Catechism on the Vatican’s website? (http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a5.htm )

    There are so many problems with this, I don’t know where to begin….

  6. Skeinster says:

    Texas here, HyacinthClare. I concur.
    When you live in a state that has “no-go” areas caused by the criminal activities of citizens of ANOTHER COUNTRY, and the government is not handling the problem, you get a bit testy when accused of ‘being mean” b/c you are not welcoming illegal aliens (and why, in episcopalspeak, are the distinctions between legal immigrants and illegal aliens not made?)
    The absolute worst motive of bigotry, greed and lack of charity are ascribed to us. Having given this much thought, I think part of this is that the problem of illegal immigration involves some actions that are, in fact, harsh. Some people can’t bear to consider that, so they try to wish away the problem by questioning the motives of anyone with a counter opinion.
    Frankly, I would respect a bishop who simply said we have no moral grounds for keeping anyone who wants to enter the country from doing so, if that is what he believed, more than a bishop who
    waffles around the subject.

  7. gracie says:

    They lost me at #19.

  8. Sissy says:

    I’m with you, Gracie. Including #19 reduces whatever benefit of the doubt I was willing to give them over the questionable statistics.

  9. Charivari Rob says:

    Ummm…

    I think I have to go reread it.

    Are we supposed to believe illegal aliens are only cheerfully paying into Social Security, etc… on falsified identities/documentation but NOT drawing benefits?

    Is it okay because we’re profiteering?

  10. ml1948 says:

    We are to be stewards of God’s creation, but that does not mean we have to blindly accept the pronouncements of the climate change / AGW faction as infallible truth. The USCCB has grabbed a tar baby with this one, seemingly dismissing out of hand the prudential concerns of those who are less enamored with the conclusions of climate “science.” I put science in quotes because this is not like any other empirical science, but one based on unverifiable and inconsistent computer models, coupled with substandard data collection, management and distribution. As a software engineer, I see the model code as continuously hacked and rejiggered slop.

    Immigration is also problematic. Certainly the US should not shut off immigration, but it also shouldn’t privilege those who sneak across the border illegally (thus “illegal immigrants”) over those from more distant lands who play by the rules. What’s particularly sad is that the government of Mexico is propped up by remittances from these illegal immigrants, and consequently has no reason to establish anything like the legal protections of life, liberty and property we take for granted in the US, and which, at the core, are the framework for US prosperity.

  11. keithp says:

    Yipes. Lost me on the climate change and illegal immigrants. err. undocumented…

    *sigh* Oh how we so badly need the SSPX.

  12. capchoirgirl says:

    This was in our bulletin last week. I scored very well (almost perfect), but, as others have said, I found some of them dubious, namely immigration and “climate change”. These most certainly do not have equal moral weight with abortion, etc.
    I have no problem with immigrants that come here LEGALLY–after all, that’s how my family got here a bit under 100 years ago. But what’s happening now is not legal, at all.

  13. jkrich59 says:

    If more American voters believed healthcare professionals should be forced to perform procedures they find objectionable, would that be the right answer? Does a perceived benefit to social security justify the rape of land and people perpetrated on the citizens and landowners of the southwest? If embyonic stem cells had produced many cures, would killing the embryos be less evil? When was the last time a referendum in favor of torture was on the ballot? What is the governmental remedy for broken homes, shattered lives and no hope? The Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Christ are the only true answers to most of these questions that are not simply lies in the interrogative. But we’ll not likely hear that from the beskirted politicians at USCCB.

  14. mamajen says:

    *Facepalm*. And here I was beginning to feel optimistic about the USCCB due to their stand against the HHS mandate. WHY must they continue to harp on climate change? WHY is a privately-funded institution that has helped the poor and sick for centuries suggesting that it’s the government’s job? WHY must they defend illegal immigrants, when my husband and I had to make very big sacrifices in order to respect this country’s laws and have him immigrate legally AND respect the Church’s laws by marrying in a proper manner rather than the courthouse thing that most K-1 visa recipients do?

    This is how pro-abortion leftists keep getting elected by Catholics, because voters can’t see that certain issues trump others. I am so sick of the liberalism in the Catholic Church. There should be one question on this quiz. It should be about abortion. Any nominee that supports the murder of innocent babies cannot be supported. If we ever get to a point where we have two nominees opposed to abortion, then we’ll talk.

  15. mamajen says:

    CatholicVote.org summed things up pretty well in 2008:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61wj4tJICcc&feature=youtube_gdata_player

    “Some things are more important than others.”

  16. capchoirgirl says:

    mamajen, I was too…and then they do this.
    And with the addition of gay marriage support to the DNC platform, I don’t see how any Catholic can think about voting for one of them, ever.

  17. AnAmericanMother says:

    “All a political sermon tells you is which newspapers are taken at the rectory.”
    - C.S. Lewis

  18. wmeyer says:

    Mamajen, you nailed it.

  19. wmeyer says:

    The USCCB is never so disappointing as when they speak on political issues.

  20. Bea says:

    HyacinthClare and Skeinstar (Tex)
    AZ, here , I’m with you both.

    I had written a lllllloooooonnnnnnnggggggg post here, but thought I’d better delete it.
    Rant and Rave. Touched a nerve.
    Too much we see here on the border.
    Too much we hear here.
    Too much the rest of the country doesn’t see or hear.

    I wonder if this test was made up by Faithful Democrats?
    I flunked the test miserably
    In my opinion it was TOO political.
    Maybe they should make up a test about “Faithful Catholics”?
    I wonder how many Bishops, LCWR nuns, “Catholic” colleges, etc would pass it?

  21. nykash says:

    Climate change? Really? Why not base a quiz on the Catechism? With the increased attacks on the Church – particularly in the US – one would think that reorganizing the troops would be the top priority. To borrow a line from business author Jim Collins, it’s time to get the liberals off the bus! (Yes, you can get more mileage on this comment)

    From a technical perspective (my day job), the execution isn’t great. Could they not figure out a way to make this dynamic and engaging?

  22. EXCHIEF says:

    The USCCB has “a lot of problems”, not the least of which is they leave the running of the organization to way too many liberal lay employees who determine what is and is not a priority for the organization. This is perhaps the best illustration I can think of where a lack of leadership training among Bishops manifests itself. When it comes to prioritizing, setting rules, and communicating clearly the USCCB fails miserably–almost every time.

    Problem number two is the sickening focus on “social justice” and environmental issues. How about focusing on things, long neglected, that are much more directly related to the salvation of souls. It is the whole social justice mess that got the Church in bed with immoral, liberal politicians and parties in the first place. As for “global warming” it has been around much longer than man has occupied this earth. Man made global warming theories are junk science refuted by some of the top “real” scientists of the day. It is agenda driven by the same folks that on other issues likewise run afoul of morality. As for illegal immigration where is the justice there? The current administration unlawfully and in defiance of the will of the people and Congress grants amnisty to millions who have no legal right to be here….meanwhile those from foreign lands who have been trying to play by the rules and immigrate here legally are delayed and hung out to dry.

    Sorry but there is little if anything the USCCB has to say on any subject that either interests me or binds me to obedience. If they start talking about sin and salvation I’ll listen. Until then, not so much. I have no respect or use for the organization.

  23. Gratias says:

    For answer #19 let me say that climate change is caused by solar activity, not human activity. The Bishops forgot to explain that.

  24. Kerry says:

    Did anyone else have difficulties trying to contact the USCCB to ‘splain’ to them that Gore-ball warming is a hoax? My long “How could you not know?” reply generated nothing but, “Oops, this link appears to be broken”. How could that not know, at least, that any data inputted into Michael Mann’s programming spits out a hockey stick? Did a former question#19 ask about Piltdown man?

  25. Skeinster says:

    Bea, I imagine I could have written your comment, word for word.

    In order to control the discussion, I never use the term “immigrant”, when speaking of illegals. It is too emotionally loaded with good connotations, calling up memories of people crowding the ship rail with little American flags in their hands, waving as the Statue of Liberty appears on the horizon.
    And I never use the term “undocumented” either. You don’t have documents, b/c you’re here illegally.
    I had to give up reading a well-known Catholic blogger due to their tone-deafness on the subject. Their attitude seemed to be that it couldn’t possibly be that bad and that we were making up bogey-man tales out of the xenophobic hardness of our hearts. And being bad Catholics.
    And I’ll admit that there’s a thin line between legitimate self-preservation and uncharitableness, and I do try not to cross it. But either the rule of law means something, or it doesn’t.

  26. monmir says:

    USCCB? I have a good dose of disregard for it. What are USCCB priorities?
    How about a test relating to the Freedom of Religion battle and what being a catholic is all about, what it requires of us, which is still current until it becomes a fait accompli in November?
    Very little interest.

  27. Bea says:

    Hi Skeinster
    My husband used to work on the border.
    The illegals did what is now viewed as a “flash mob” (not in a good sense)
    The illegals would run as a mob into the US. The workers on the line couldn’t leave their posts and even if one or two did, they would only catch one or two illegals. By the time the Border Patrol arrived, the illegals would have been assimilated into the general population or picked up by their waiting “coyotes”.
    “Coyotes”? thats another story.
    Broken windshields etc. from rock throwers from across the fence, that’s still another story
    Some years back our Diocesan “newspaper” ran an article on these poor, poor, “pathetic” illegals who only wanted to come in to work. There was a picture of them and those in charge of the newspaper probably couldn’t read Spanish. One of them had a t-shirt that said :
    “Soy Vago
    Y Que?”
    Which translates loosely into:
    “Soy Vago” : “I’m a vagrant/I’m an idler/I’m a tramp/I’m a lazybones
    “Y Que” : (literally) “and so what?”/(or in the common Spanish idiomatic expression) “Want to make something of it?”

    I’m Mexican/Spanish descent, myself, and I know how they think. My parents (from Mexico) and my husband’s parents (from Ireland) came here legally. Actually my father worked in Mexico but we lived in the US.
    I heard a person say she had had an operation done in the US (with our tax dollars) by giving her sister’s address on the US side. This is just one incident but, multiply it by ???? times
    They know how to play the system.
    We’re just taken as a bunch of chumps. This has nothing to do with charity.

  28. Bea says:

    Exchief
    I totally agree with you and especially your last paragraph. As far as my husband and I are concerned. Our Bishop is in Rome. I don’t pay too much attention to the USCCB, either, unless as you say it is something spiritual and I make sure that even THAT spiritual direction is in accord with The Pope.

    16 Documents of Vatican II/ Constitution of the Church/ Chapter III/ Article 22/ 2nd paragraph states:
    “But the college or body of bishops has no authority unless it is understood together with the Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter, as its head”

    That is why I always read first of all what the Pope has to say on any given subject, then (if I feel inclined) I’ll go to read (not often) what bishops have to say and weigh in to see if they are in accord with Rome.
    I’m afraid many have lost their credibility with me.
    Fortunately there are a few totally awesome, courageous bishops here and there across the country, but not in my neck of the woods.
    And donations? forget it. After the CCHD/Campaign for Human Development and CRS/Catholic Relief Services donating our hard earned money to works that are against our own beliefs and values, I would even consider it sinful to donate to them.

  29. BillyHW says:

    Just what is this quiz supposed to accomplish?