There is a poll in the liberal US Catholic.
Remember their nasty article and poll about Summorum Pontificum?
Now they have a poll on the upcoming Visitation of Women Religious, asking if you think it is
- necessary,
- reasonable and justified,
- unnecessary,
- insulting and unjustified.
What do you think?
I think the Visitation is necessary.
I voted Necessary because EXTREMELY NECESSARY wasn’t available.
At 6 Oct 1650 GMT:
I suggest that you keep your comments – if you comment – which I don’t suggest – extremely concise and very cordial when making points. Don’t descend to the level of the liberals. Show them some class.
I think you can only vote once, because of cookies.
UPDATE 1711 GMT:
Apparently some people’s votes count more than others.
A reader posted in a comment below that there is a note on US Catholic under the poll that the poll is now "under attack" because I posted about it here!
LOL!
It seems that when they ask for people’s opinions, only the right kind of people should be allowed to vote!
Is US Catholic working with ACORN?
UPDATE: 1858 GMT:
The liberals are getting pretty nasty over there, very personal. Sad and predictable.
UPDATE: 2307 GMT
The top two choices (in favor of the visitation) are now at 90% of the vote.
I see that a little moderation has been done over there now.
UPDATE: 7 Oct 0224 GMT:
UPDATE: 7 Oct 1309 GMT:
People are still freely expressing their views.
In the top two categories, both favorable toward the Visitation: 91%
In the lower categories, both opposed to the Visitation: 8%
Loading ...
Oops, an alert US Catholic reader has sounded the alarm just under the poll!
“This poll is under attack
By Dave Waters (not verified) on Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Please be aware that John Zuhlsdorf at wdtprs.com has alerted his site’s followers to the presence of this poll. This normally means that the poll is about to be bombarded by traditionalists.
I thought you would like to be aware.”
So voting in a poll about issues in the Catholic Church is an “attack”? Wow.
Obedience is not optional. There are way too many liberties being taken by religious and much of it is not in communion with the Church. Unfortunately, this is what is public and provides a confusing view of what being a Catholic is (nuns are on the “front lines” a lot).
There are many wonderful orders of solid teaching and obedience with Rome. What is there to be afraid of if nothing is wrong?
If you call yourself Catholic and are to be in-line with the Holy See, then it is reasonable for there to be oversight.
I think the only problem is if people are not in-line with Rome and want to be left alone, viewing it as an annoyance. *cough*”pro-choice” Catholics and Obama supporters*cough*
“Please be aware that John Zuhlsdorf”?
Presumably referring to a priest as “Fr” is the sort of thing that only crazy poll-bombarding traditionalists do? Or maybe this guy isn’t Catholic – in which case, why does he have more right to vote than a “traditionalist”?
“I thought you would like to be aware.”
Sure, thank you that man. But presumably over the next few hours many of the visitors to the site will already be aware of this, no?
Surely with the discussion of a “Marshall Plan” for one facet of the Church we could consider an “Anaconda Plan” for some of these pubs.
It seems that when they ask for people’s opinions, only the right kind of people should be allowed to vote!
Is US Catholic working with ACORN?
There are now also an entire array of required questions (I guess those were there before too?), making poll-taking a bit more cumbersome
I found that when I went to the page that Fr. Z linked to, I had to click on the home page to vote.
I’ll bet there’s an ACORN connection! Wink.
Mike
Jayne K – amen!
At least the moderator deleted the nasty personal attack some anon commentor made about Fr. Z. That is to U.S. Catholic’s credit.
Wow, that they are so afraid of the new Trads…Father Z is now the official leader of the new liturgical movement….
ALL: The fact is that this blog probably has a lot more readers than US Catholic. Were all the readers of WDTPRS to vote in that poll, that would be plenty of votes!
And you would think that US Catholic would appreciate the attention and extra traffic, no?
After all, if you have a poll, the more people who vote the better the picture you get of what people think, right?
Wow, me thinks they doth protest too much. Talk about defensive. I did vote, and I only vote once in polls.
Supertradmom: Father Z is now the official leader of the new liturgical movement….
I think that would be Pope Benedict.
Oh dear, oh my! The “evil” Fr. Z and his “minions” are going to spoil the poll!
Excellent….
I voted, once.
DEAR READERS:
PLEASE stop talking about ME in the comments on that poll. Just stick to the topic of the poll. I don’t need a defense. Let them say what they want. They reveal their hearts and minds by what they say.
Interesting how some who read that site immediately begin with ad hominems such as that Father tells his readers to all vote a million times to skew the poll, the poll only has just over 300 people voting it does not need anyone to vote twice, but baseless defamation against a Catholic Priest it justified when he doesn’t agree with your pov it seems.
As if the poll would sway the sad reality that we are a deeply divided community…
I just voted…67% “necessary”.
Thanks for the alert Father.
I noticed one post that used the term “Stepfor Wives” [sic] to describe those who stick with following the Church and tradition. Apparently it is okay to be a Stepford Wife and follow the liberal crowd but NOT if you follow the Magisterium.
Sorry, Fr. Z., before reading your posting, I already mentioned you in my comments to U.S. Catholic. All I said was that you were doing them a favor by advertising it.
Onward Christian Soldiers
To its credit, U.S. Catholic hasn’t complained.
Of course, this is marketing on their part–the poll itself is not valid scientifically–and U.S. Catholic is wise to be glad for more visitors.
It also seems that the person who created the poll slanted it by using the word “insulting” in their description of the #4 choice while not using strong language in the first three. Although “necessary” implies “needed without qualification,” it could have been equally graced by supporting vocabulary.
I voted, of course.
And I agree, Luke–it seems like the vocab was definitely slanted.
How fun! I enjoy being a troublemaker in a safe, legal and rare way…as the pro-aborts would say.
Thanks for the opportunity, FATHER Z. I voted. If I had had the oportunity to vote in a similar poll 50 or 60 years ago I would have voted exactly the opposite of how I voted today. That would have been in the halcyon days of the Catholic Church.
I voted, once of course, and it is now 78% voting “Necessary”. There must be wailing and gnashing of teeth there at US Catholic.
AngelineOH: Good!
I voted once and desisted from making any comment there. The “necessary” vote is overwhelming now.
I voted “necessary.” It’s now 78%.
Wow. The comments are pretty ugly over there. I don’t get it. Sad. They need to come here and get educated.
LOL “Oh no! The trads are coming! The trads are coming!”
“Oh no! The trads are coming! The trads are coming!”
Of course, they have their own peculiar jargon and lingo. I take it that by “trads” they mean “real Catholics”.
Father, I admire your attitude in allowing these people to attack you without defense. However, I did leave a brief response shaming the gentleman who omitted your title. That was not in your defense. It was in defense of the priesthood itself, which demands respect.
Thank you for alerting us to this poll. We have every bit as much a right to vote in it and comment upon it (with civility and dignity) as any other Catholics.
p.s. Just to see if it was possible, I went back a second time to submit a vote, and it was not counted. There are apparently mechanisms in place to prevent multiple votes from either the same IP address or using a tracking cookie.
faithfulrebel: You would think that the moderator over there would take care of some of these things.
Apparently that is not going to happen.
I voted
Suzanne: Good job!
And my vote is in…not once but twice! Oh yeah!!! :D
I voted (once).
Was tempted to post “I hear those trads even have their own language!”, but refrained…
It’s interesting that they capitalize Trads, I wonder if they realize the difference between Tradition and tradition?
A wonderful quote from the comments – so true:
So…if the majority of people who voted in this poll read Fr. Z’s blog…and not the “US Catholic”…then who’s out of touch? Put another way: what does it say that more people ‘actively participated’ in this poll from reading about it on Fr. Z’s blog than did from reading the “US Catholic” directly?
Someone appears to be climbing the invisible ladder.
Publius: and may their number increase! Praise Jesus!
Father Z,
Sorry, of course, you are correct, but representative in America????
There is also a longer survey: http://www.uscatholic.org/sistersurvey
It might be helpful if people fill that out as well. This survey includes the same questions as the poll – so it would be good if we could ensure that the two agree. Some of the questions are clearly meant to set up “straw men”, so the comment boxes could prove particularly useful in making distinctions.
Look, frankly, that other “How’s Your Sister” survey is built around purely humanistic principles.
Check out this article http://www.uscatholic.org/church/2009/09/priests-pedestal
Holiness is the answer. Only as holy men and women can we bear the cross after Christ.
Pope Benedict knows this well as shown in his Year for the Priest where the whole Church
is called to pray in a special way for the spiritual strength needed by our Priests.
The linked article denies this.
Pater OSB, I did the more detailed survey and took the time to fill in the appropriate comment boxes. Thanks for pointing us toward that poll.
MareD,
Rather than brag about voting twice, consider what conclusions some people will draw from it. They will think this is evidence that traditional Catholics lack integrity. They will think that the overwhelming poll results in favour of the visitation do not represent the beliefs of many people. Comments of this sort have actually appeared with the poll.
If I may point out that the particular person who stood accusing Catholic men and women from this sight of having questionable moral standards if they voted more than one time, later posted about his own love for contraception. Another person equated it in this manner: do you prefer that a man use a [famous Greek horse] or that an abortion takes place? These comments were not deleted either, while name-calling was deleted in some cases.
These facts amount to extremely sad delusion about fundamental issues. Let them think that we swayed the vote, but let us pray for them to know God–to truly know God and so overcome their indulgent passions.
It appears that the voting buttons have been removed. I guess they’ve heard enough.
Bill: I am not sure about that. It looks like the voting is still open.
Or they didn’t like the results because they wanted to present them as the final word of the cHURCH. Please note the sMALL “c” in church.
“This poll is under attack
By Dave Waters ”
You know, this means we have spies among us. :)
Hello spies, hope you enjoy your stay. But you might not want to stick around for too long at any one time. You might get converted. Bwahahaha.
You know spies are like getting a award from liberals for having the scariest blog. Oooooooo, spooky.
Congratulation Fr on the scariest blog award. :)
I just voted ten minutes ago.
And I dislike the term “trads”….the term should be, rather, faithful Catholics.
Orthodox is the word I prefer. Anyone else in our midst is dissenting…
I am very impressed by the uprising the post on this poll has created! I hope that there are some people who didn’t know about Father Z’s blog and are journeying over here to get a good read!
Luke,
You wrote,”If I may point out that the particular person who stood accusing Catholic men and women from this sight of having questionable moral standards if they voted more than one time, later posted about his own love for contraception.”
While this person is very wrong about contraception, I agree with him about the voting. People who do this are giving him an excuse to dismiss the views of orthodox Catholics. If we wish to convince people of the rightness and desirability of following Church teaching, we have to back up our beliefs with our lives. We should be models of charity, truthfulness and integrity. Obviously we should be praying for him (and all in dissent) as well, but we have a part to play in showing people what is right.
Someone scolded a liberal by saying “That’s *Father* John Zuhlsdorf to you. Bless you, Bill!
and bless Dr. Eric too!
JayneK, Voting twice on a blog poll is not a sin under normal circumstances. Willful disregard for Church teaching on morality equals the loss of our friendship with God. They’re not even on par. Besides, I wasn’t arguing that voting more than once is a great idea, but only the sad disgrace that Humanae Vitae was brought up within the context of a poll about the Visitation. If I saw that man in public I would tell him the same thing to his face, because it counts as an act of mercy. Kindness is not the only way to show love, of course, but words come into play in these situations as a sign of loving concern. If this man decides to continue turning away from God and abusing his marriage, then it’s his own choice. Praying for people isn’t always enough. We need to speak truths as well. If I’m willing to suffer for this man (as we all contribute by the sacrifice of our lives I hope to the Body of Christ I mean) then I will have no problem pointing out his blatant error. The very nick name this person chose is a sign of arrogance before God. I would rather have a discussion with him than see him continue on the wrong path. If you go back and read the comments I did call him back in a simple way.
Luke,
Voting in a blog poll may be a little thing, but we are to be faithful in little things. I agree that presenting the truth to people is an act of kindness. I too posted comments there to encourage him to see the value in Church teaching.
You may not have understood that my major purpose for writing what I did was to express my dismay at the open dissent among our brothers and sisters. I do not disagree with you. Living the gospel requires totality of effort “to be sure.” It was fairly clear that he was projecting his own “self” onto others. You might look up psychological projection in “Wiki” because it’s a fascinating subject. Thank you for your comments.