"The great Father Zed, Archiblogopoios"
- Fr. John Hunwicke
"Some 2 bit novus ordo cleric"
"Rev. John Zuhlsdorf, a traditionalist blogger who has never shied from picking fights with priests, bishops or cardinals when liturgical abuses are concerned."
"Father John Zuhlsdorf is a crank"
"Father Zuhlsdorf drives me crazy"
"the hate-filled Father John Zuhlsford" [sic]
"Father John Zuhlsdorf, the right wing priest who has a penchant for referring to NCR as the 'fishwrap'"
"Zuhlsdorf is an eccentric with no real consequences" - HERE
- Michael Sean Winters
"Fr Z is a true phenomenon of the information age: a power blogger and a priest."
- Anna Arco
“Given that Rorate Coeli and Shea are mad at Fr. Z, I think it proves Fr. Z knows what he is doing and he is right.”
"Let me be clear. Fr. Z is a shock jock, mostly. His readership is vast and touchy. They like to be provoked and react with speed and fury."
- Sam Rocha
"Father Z’s Blog is a bright star on a cloudy night."
"A cross between Kung Fu Panda and Wolverine."
Fr. Z is officially a hybrid of Gandalf and Obi-Wan XD
Rev. John Zuhlsdorf, a scrappy blogger popular with the Catholic right.
- America Magazine
RC integralist who prays like an evangelical fundamentalist.
-Austen Ivereigh on Twitter
[T]he even more mainline Catholic Fr. Z. blog.
-Deus Ex Machina
“For me the saddest thing about Father Z’s blog is how cruel it is.... It’s astonishing to me that a priest could traffic in such cruelty and hatred.”
- Jesuit homosexualist James Martin to BuzzFeed
"Fr. Z's is one of the more cheerful blogs out there and he is careful about keeping the crazies out of his commboxes"
- Paul in comment at 1 Peter 5
"I am a Roman Catholic, in no small part, because of your blog.
I am a TLM-going Catholic, in no small part, because of your blog.
And I am in a state of grace today, in no small part, because of your blog."
- Tom in comment
"Thank you for the delightful and edifying omnibus that is your blog."- Reader comment.
"Fr. Z disgraces his priesthood as a grifter, a liar, and a bully. - - Mark Shea
Mitt Romney wouldn’t be able to participate with a straight face:
This oughtta be good. I wonder if Ron Paul will get any grief a la the American Right to Life piece that called him pro-choice because he disagreed with a part of their tactic. An attorney sort of responded to that attack here–long story short, Paul doesn’t believe we should violate the Constitution to end abortion, he thinks he has a better plan (jurisdiction-stripping). ARTL’s President, Mrs. Lolita Hanks, stated: “Either Ron Paul will use governmental authority to stop the slaughter of children, or he is just another worthless politician.” Ouch!
The whole exchange re tactics for ending abortion kind of reminded me of the famous dialogue between St. Thomas More and his son-in-law William Roper from A Man for All Seasons, which illustrates the danger of a zeal that focuses on the short-term victory at the expense of valuable, long-term protections we Christians might desperately need–as our founders envisioned–if and when the tide turns against us:
Should be a really interesting debate! Santorum’s bona fides are clear; he has a good answer for the Arlen Spector debacle (he supported Spector because Spector controlled judicial nominations). Gingrich makes me wonder–thoughts, anyone? Perry has been good in Texas, if erratic, but he’s an Exceptioner (life, health, rape, incest, etc.). Romney’s truly a “worthless politician,” as the video above demonstrates.
One thing’s for sure: I am not voting for another candidate who treats abortion like a carrot-on-a-stick issue, riding the pro-life donkey into election after election but never giving us our carrot, a la George W. Bush the Exceptioner who had majorities in BOTH houses and did nothing and wouldn’t even show up at a March to Life!
Wait, turns out Perry isn’t a Total Exceptioner. He’s only a mother’s-lifer now.
Poor Ron Paul—imagine trying to Sound Bite this in the debate!
(Sorry, Fr. Z, my GYOB lunchbreak is now over.)
Thank you for publicising this event, Fr. Z. It is absolutley crucial that we vote for pro-life candidates, on every level. The stuff that goes on is truly evil. Int’l. PP wants to increase by 82% the number of abortions in Africa. Our money is being used to kill the most innocent of all God’s children both here and around the world. We must vote this administration out of office. We must. St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle.
Perry lost me a long time ago when he tried to piggyback the mandatory HPV vaccine onto the pro-life platform in the gubernatorial race. Bringing in other battles to fight doesn’t help in the fight against abortion, and confuses the issue of what it means to be “pro-life.”
I’m hoping I can watch! Should be good. Santorm and Paul are the only two that seem to have anything of real pro-life substance on their campaign websites. The issue doesn’t seem that important to the others.
I hope there is some discussion about the anti-life nature of the phony “war on terror” which is completely contrary to Catholic social principles.
I could not glean from the website the particulars of the forum topics. Will this forum only cover abortion, or other pro-life issues such as unjust wars, the death penalty, euthanasia, and embryonic stem cell research?
@Athanasius: I recognize that picture! Excellent article on catastrophe preparations.
Thanks. I’ve got another one coming out on the same subject sometime soon.
I think you are right about Paul and Santorum being the most pro-life (in the anti-abortion sense) candidates in the debate. It’s a shame Santorum spends so much time criticizing Paul via straw man arguments, and supporting the killing of civilian scientists.
In my mind, unless he has changed his mind, that makes him less pro-life than Paul, by far.
The Romney file: I think, especially after viewing this, that Romney is little different from Obama, as his funding seems to show us.
As far as a reasoned argument in favor of Paul over Santorum, I would offer the following brief video by Catholic historian Thomas E. Woods, Jr.: http://tinyurl.com/7nwtv8z.
Father Z, I am somewhat surprised at a more recent comment by you in re:
But I do thank you for the qualifier, as those of us who find his arguments compelling are not all unreasoning individuals.
Pax et bonum,