Enter your email address to receive updates by email:

subscribe in a reader like my facebook page follow me on twitter Image Map
Podcast Message Line: 512-222-3389
Logos Catholic Bible Software

« But This Looks Frightening | Main | God Debate On Hugh Hewitt Today »

May 31, 2007


Matthew S

I have a feeling that Catholic's could end up in a hard spot this coming presidential election. I seriously hope not but you never know. Hopefully, someone will step forward....I have someone in mind but I don't want to jinx it. We all should keep up the good work. I even blogged about Rudy on my blog.

Under the Mercy,
Matthew S

Catherine L

I think Steve Dillard did great in that appearance. It must be hard not to react to lead ins such as "we know there are so many Republicans among the heirarchy, particularly bishops and above."

Who knew that Chris Matthews looked over the bishops' shoulders in the voting booth?


Chris Matthews must be the most ill-informed Catholic on Earth. Why is abortion an election issue? Why would slavery be an election issue!

He calls Steve Dillard a "self-described Catholic" but as opposed to what? A REAL Catholic like yourself, Chris?

The type of Catholic who cannot distinguish between the opinions of popes and infallible doctrine? He likes to force the issue by making it sound like if you agree with one infallibly defined Church doctrine, then you have take every statement by every pope throughout history as God-breathed revelation.

His liberal indoctrination is clear in his inability to make distinctions on essential matters like the death penalty. The Church is not anti-death penalty. To do so would be to interfere with the state's right to self defense which, under the doctrine of just war, is a right the Church has never denied to states. Or to individuals, for that matter. The Church is anti-death-penalty-so-much. Which is different.

It requires a nuanced understanding that something good can be misused (overused in this case) in a manner that makes it evil. Just like science and just like hammers.

But Chris cannot make such distinctions. He paints in such broad strokes that hammers can be confused with science, but self-defense and the right to life are unrelated and alien concepts.

I wonder if it bothers Chris that he willfully spreads misinformation to the faithful from his seat of power and that one day God will hold him eternally accountable for his actions.

He may demure and say no real faithful Catholic would ever be dumb enough to get his teaching from a hopelessly misinformed non-expert.

But obviously he was dumb enough to do just that at one point in his life.

Ken Crawford

I'm really glad that Steve Dillard is leading this charge. Unfortunately I think his interview suffered from the satalite feed that clearly introduced quite a delay and makes it difficult to respond to rapid-fire questioning. There is so much more he could have done in an in-studio interview.

Some of the lines of questioning were ridiculous and often poorly informed like the 'Church against Iraq war' and 'bishops are Republicans' (which if you ask me it seems more bishops are democrats). But oh well, I think overall Mr. Dillard got a fair shake and a chance to answer the questions asked of him, particularly later in the interview when the host seemed to realize the effect the delay was having.


I hope this is successful in getting the message across: VOTERS TO RUDY: STOP WORSHIPPING THE MIRROR.


I've seen serial interuptor Matthews get revved up on this issue and its always the same play:

1) Act incredulous that any sane voter would place the issue of baby killing on a higher plane than, say, "poverty" (as defined by liberals like Matthews as how much government treasure should we throw at poor folks).

2) Haul out the old saw question about whether or not those who oppose baby killing would have those mothers who choose to kill their own children thrown in jail...his favorite gotcha question, as though the simple asking of that question disqualifies any other debate.


This was on "Hardball"? So 14 people saw it?

David B.


...and all of them were MSNBC employees!



Yes, Chris, you incredible moron. The same Bishops that stood up against John Kerry's record on abortion will stand up against Rudy Giuliani. It is unfortunate that they are not the majority of our Catholic Bishops. However, Burke, Bruskewitz, Chaput, Finn, Tobin, Olmsted and, I believe, Jackels will not flinch. (This does not mean that they will threaten those of us who may vote for Giuliani [for another reason] with dire consequences--just that they will stand firm against the idea that you can profess to be a faithful Catholic and still accept abortion as a "necessary evil" or a human being's choice. Life belongs to God alone, period. God Bless these Bishops for their faithfulness and forgive me for not knowing more of the names of our faithful Bishops. Out of charity, I will not point out those who will not stand up for God and the Faith--also in hope that they will remember Who it is that they serve.

BTW, great job by Mr. Dillard. Illegitimi non carborundum -- pardon the bad Latin!


On Relevant Radio yesterday morning, the morning show, they were talking about politicians and their support for various positions in the public and they quoted from the Catechism on what 'Scandal' really means (hint: It has nothing to do with Britney Spears and her wardrobe deficiencies).

Here's what the Catechism says, and I believe it applies to Rudy and all those seeking or holding office:

2284 Scandal is an attitude or behavior which leads another to do evil. The person who gives scandal becomes his neighbor's tempter. He damages virtue and integrity; he may even draw his brother into spiritual death. Scandal is a grave offense if by deed or omission another is deliberately led into a grave offense.

2285 Scandal takes on a particular gravity by reason of the authority of those who cause it or the weakness of those who are scandalized. It prompted our Lord to utter this curse: "Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened round his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea."[85] Scandal is grave when given by those who by nature or office are obliged to teach and educate others. Jesus reproaches the scribes and Pharisees on this account: he likens them to wolves in sheep's clothing.[86]

2286 Scandal can be provoked by laws or institutions, by fashion or opinion.
Therefore, they are guilty of scandal who establish laws or social structures leading to the decline of morals and the corruption of religious practice, or to "social conditions that, intentionally or not, make Christian conduct and obedience to the Commandments difficult and practically impossible."[87] This is also true of business leaders who make rules encouraging fraud, teachers who provoke their children to anger,[88] or manipulators of public opinion who turn it away from moral values.

2287 Anyone who uses the power at his disposal in such a way that it leads others to do wrong becomes guilty of scandal and responsible for the evil that he has directly or indirectly encouraged. "Temptations to sin are sure to come; but woe to him by whom they come!"[89]


He did a great job, but he should seriously lose the bow tie! Yikes!



You wrote, “Why is abortion an election issue? Why would slavery be an election issue!” Great way to put it, StubbleSpark. It is amazing that Chris Matthews is Catholic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!???????? If we Catholics had/would value apologetics more, we probably would not be listening to Matthew’s tragic ignorance.


I think you can count Bishop Aquilla of the Diocese of Fargo as being stridently pro-life. Honestly, I think there are a lot of bishops in places that still have common sense left, they're just too small to show up on the radar. Meanwhile, the ludicrously anti-life ones that seem to land the huge dioceses get the lion's share of the attention. What a mess.


WHat I'm wondering is what JImmy Akin's been up to, since he ain't posted in a while.


Hey, anyone check out Zenit?

Says the Trinidine mass is.... "coming soon". :o )


I know that every Catholic conversation has to turn into a Latin-mass debate sooner or later (unless it's mantillas), but could we please . . . not?


Haul out the old saw question about whether or not those who oppose baby killing would have those mothers who choose to kill their own children thrown in jail...his favorite gotcha question, as though the simple asking of that question disqualifies any other debate.

The problem with us Christians is that sometimes we act too much like sheep in a wolf world. I can't wait for someone to answer the proverbial "Do you propose to throw unwed mothers in jail?" question in the same manner that a politician would. You can't reason with a loaded question like that, just run away with it and tip the tables in your favor. Something like:

What I propose is to prevent anyone from taking the life of an innocent person. What I hope is for Americans to recognize that every life is endowed with a basic human dignity from our Creator. This is a truth that can unite our country. It is written on the hearts of all men and women regardless of religious creed or political party. Let's stop lying to ourselves and return to the simple truths on which our Forefathers founded this great nation. God Bless America!

The comments to this entry are closed.

January 2012

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31