Trump trails among Catholic voters. His campaign’s new C.E.O. may make things worse.

One finds it "precious" that "...just 37% of Catholic's report hearing the issue (same-sex marriage) discussed by their priest.." The likely reason is because these studies are heavily skewed to "self identified Catholic's". Since the methodology doesn't change, statistically there isn't much statistical standard deviation. One wonders why they don't ask the Pastors if they broached the subject... Would be interesting... I'd love for one of these studies to change its reporting principles through statistical sampling on Site- at Parishes nationwide. This would adjust for Catholic's who actually go to Mass on Sunday's... But that's unlikely to happen so long as prominent Catholic publications like America Magazine continue to accept the status quo without reflection upon the consequences... Just my opinion, in Christ,

This poll is really not about the election but about LGBT items (majority of questions), such as same-sex marriage and the bathroom issue. Every question is skewed to get a liberal secular response. And once again, the way a Catholic (n-418) is identified is solely by self-identification, not by knowledge or belief, attendance or practice. So, 50% of Self-Identified Catholics (SICs) in this poll do not even know there is a conflict between the secular promotion of Same-Sex Marriage and the teaching of the Catholic Church! And only 37% of SICs say their clergy ever talk about homosexuality. Well, that could be because they rarely if ever attend Church. Even questions about Church attendance were not asked of Catholics (n=418), only of Protestants (http://www.prri.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/PRRI-August-2016-LGBT-Survey-Topline-1.pdf) On the bathroom issue, the question is asked to generate the politically liberal and anti-Catholic answer “Do you favor or oppose laws that require transgender individuals to use bathrooms that correspond to their sex at birth rather than their current gender identity?” The question that was conveniently not asked is “Should men or people who look like men be allowed to go into women’s bathrooms?” or, “Do you agree that a man or a woman is known by their biology or by their stated preference?” Or, "Do you agree that one cannot tell the difference between a man and a woman by their appearance." Similarly, the anti-religious questions are similarly biased in favor of liberal anti-Catholic results. The question that should have been asked is “Should a person be forced by law to participate or support a ceremony or event that goes against their religious beliefs?”

As a Catholic who attends mass weekly and engages in local parish social ministry, I fully support gay marriage. And the majority of my devout Catholic friends do also. It’s time that we stop looking for excuses in polls that Catholics support gay marriage. It’s time that we avoid labels and blame that it’s only liberals and progressives who support LGBT rights. It’s fathers, mothers, relatives and friends, who may be both politically and religiously conservative, who see that the Church must be more supportive of gays and lesbians. Are polls that only ask questions that reflect a bias against gays and lesbians to be considered ‘fair”? Should only polls that support one’s view ‘count’? This sentence from the report speaks volumes: “By a roughly two to one margin, Americans oppose rather than favor allowing a small business owner in their state to refuse to provide products or services to gay or lesbian people if doing so violates their religious beliefs (63% vs. 30%, respectively).”

My personal viewpoint is that secular marriage has lost all its sacred meaning. It is now just a legal and social contract. Otherwise, why do people have “prenup”? Why do people feel so normal to have a series and divorces and marriages, i.e. Donald Trump? Consequently, I believe that the majority of Catholics have that kind of marriage in mind when they are asked about gay marriage. I myself can support this kind of marriage. Families that are formed based on secular marriages, either straight or gay, can have a lasting, stable, and happy relationship. In the other hand, I strongly believe that sacred marriage, i.e. sacramental marriage as understood by Catholic teaching, can never be applied to gay marriage and I also suspect that the majority of Catholics also have the same understanding.

Maybe one interpretation of these polls is that people who identify as Catholic don't believe in Catholicism. It seems like a lot of people don't like what they believe Catholicism is and what to change it to be consistent with what they want. We had this trend before in the early to mid 1500's. Essentially it has continued to today. So nothing new here. This may describe a lot of the commenters here as well as many of the authors. One thing I can guarantee is if they succeed in protesting the old Catholicism what will happen is that there will be many variations of the new Catholicism and soon each one will not recognize the other.

“ …there will be many variations of the new Catholicism and soon each one will not recognize the other…” It has already happened. With the advance of information and communication technology, this trend will accelerate and irreversible. If old Catholicism is something as described by the Tridentine Catholic: http://www.tridentinecatholic.com Then this Catholicism seems very alien and is not recognizable by most Catholics today.

I have been happy married for over 40 yrs and I have no problem with Church precepts on the definition of a religious marriage. I support a gay or lesbian who wishes to have a civil marriage. When they become married they should have the same legal rights as those in a heterosexual civil marriage. in the 1950’s one smeared an opponent’s position by calling them a communist. Currently, one who supports civil marriage for gays should not be smeared by dismissing them as liberals or progressives, as if those were necessarily bad words. Regardless of their political or religious views, they are simply supporting their family.

Like so many Catholics on this blog who are faithful, attend weekly Mass and serve in various ministries, I also support a permanent, faithful and loving civil same-sex marriage and a non-Catholic Christian same-sex Church marriage. As long as married same-sex couples agree to follow the same responsibilities and obligations that heterosexual married couples follow, and are sincere in loving God and neighbor, then they should not suffer any discrimination or derogatory language that tend to disenfranchise them from the Catholic Church. We are already seeing a reform of certain teachings that for centuries were believed to be non-reformable. A case in point is Holy Communion for the divorced and remarried. Many bishops interpret Amoris Laetitia (AM) very differently compared to other bishops. For example, some bishops believe that some divorced and remarried Catholics who meet certain conditions can receive Holy Communion without the need for an annulment or the requirement for the couple to live as brother and sister. Of course, this involves a process of discernment and the internal forum or informed conscience under the guidance of a priest. On the other hand, other bishops interpret AM differently and will not allow Holy Communion unless an annulment is granted or divorced and remarried couple refrain from sex. Time will tell how AM is implemented, but is clear to many Catholics that we will see a significant division among worldwide bishops on it's implementation. While a same-sex Catholic sacramental marriage is not allowed at the present time, a same-sex civil marriage or non-Catholic Christian Church marriage may not carry the stigma of 'evil' or the subjective guilt of mortal sin in the future. One of my priestly confessors did not believe in a Catholic sacrament same-sex marriage, but also did not believe that a same-sex marriage was necessarily 'evil'.

Michael and Martin - I interpret your comments as a hope or expectation that the Church will discover sometime in the future that it was completely wrong on insisting for over two thousand years in its teaching that homosexual sex is incompatible with a moral Christian life and that homosexual unions, civil or otherwise, are in no way consistent with marriage as taught by Jesus, the Holy Scriptures and the Church. For, it is illogical to think it can bless homosexual unions and not homosexual sexual activity. However, to be honest with your hope, you should also recognize that, to date, there is absolutely no indication from the Magisterium that such a thing will ever happen. Therefore, to act as if these unions are blessed is to directly contradict the real Church, as it is now in our lifetime. Now, I realize that many people live their lives today (and throughout history) directly contradicting the Church on many spiritual-life-threatening issues (on abortion, divorce, and a host of other issues) and many still say they are devout Catholics. But that would seem to make a mockery out of the idea of a teaching Church preserved by the Holy Spirit. Don't you think it is more honest and moral to say the Catholic Church is a false Church, because it makes false claims in its teaching, than to think one can be loyal to an imaginary future teaching directly opposite its present teaching? I for one would have to conclude that if she reversed her teaching so radically, either before or after they made that switch, they were teaching false doctrine - and not on a small item, but on a core moral teaching - the central relationship in our human societies. Since the dominant culture (politicians, military, business, academia, etc) all strongly support homosexual unions, there is surely no courage needed to take that stance. It is the default position of the dominant culture. Homosexual parents are now thought superior to religious ones (many states have turned away Catholic adoption agencies), and religious freedom is forever being narrowed in its application (see the fights to abandon poor students at Catholic colleges, or the attempts to withhold grant money from Catholic charities and hospitals). As to your willingness to assume anyone who accepts the Church's teaching on this issue is to be labeled a bigot, a discriminator or a social outcast, think of where spiritual courage is needed today - to live with the Church or with its opponents.

As Augustine pointed out: "If you believe what you like in the gospels, and reject what you don't like, it is not the gospel you believe, but yourself." Polls of "Catholics" who invent their own faith mean nothing except that a schism may be on the horizon.

At the end of the day, America might actually thank God for Wikileaks. Assange has been promising a bomb shell for some time now. He has a reputation to keep.

Who am I to judge non-Catholics who enter into heterosexual or homosexual civil marriage? Who am I to judge Catholics who enter into civll marriage and discuss their situation in the confessional? Who am I to judge individuals who lead good, charitable lives and who live in a committed gay relationship? Does one shun such a neighbor or relative, or does lone look at the goodness in that individual? I pray that’s “God’s will be done” in helping gays and all people to lead good lives. I do not pray that my views, or my interpretations of God’s will, be done. Wouldn’t this be a nice Prayer of the Faithful: “Every person, regardless of sexual orientation, should be respected in his/her dignity and received with respect, while carefully avoiding “every sign of unjust discrimination.” We pray to the Lord. Lord, Hear Our Prayer. I believe that at this point more of my time should be spent helping the less fortunate at our parish soup kitchen than in online comments. Prayers to all.

Every Catholic who disagree with certain moral teachings and attends weekly Mass, prays daily, educates themselves, confesses often and strives to love God and neighbor is not condoning evil and sin. Those who disagree for good reasons based on their properly formed and informed consciences also do not believe that every action that the magisterium defines as a sin, is a sin. For example most, if not all, married couples who practice contraception and do not have an anti-life attitude believes that contraception is a sin, regardless of the fact that the magisterium says so. To be clear about what I am saying: Not every disagreement and hope in a change in a moral teaching is an exception that undermines God's Will, unravels the articles of our faith or undermines the sanctity of our Church. There is room for disagreement and the Holy Spirit guides us to the truth in both agreement and 'disagreement'. It was disagreement that led to changes in many teachings of the magisterium that were taught as truth for centuries. Even today, we are witnessing another change, namely, that it may be possible that many bishops will allow Holy Communion for the divorced and remarried Catholics as Amoris Laetitia is implemented. Before Pope Francis, no one in the hierarchy believed this was ever possible. We should all pray for enlightenment. However, enlightenment does not automatically mean that every disagreement is wrong, evil and false, nor does disagreement mean we are unfaithful and misguided Catholics. We should also pray that those born with a same-sex orientation and who enter into a permanent, faithful and loving relationship will not experience discrimination of any kind, and that some aspects of the teaching on same-sex marriage is changed so that they will love God and neighbor and not feel disenfranchised from the Church.

Tim...thank you for such a spacious prayer...it leaves room for ALL -- homosexuals and heterosexuals -- and it asks that NO ONE be marginalized or discriminated against for practicing their faith (which has happened for far too long to our homosexual brothers and sisters), "as they see it". That's beautiful. I'd add, "as they feel called by our Lord Jesus Christ in their own hearts."

There are so many items in this story upon which to comment, I don’t know where to start. On the Trump portion of it, the Church in the USA must come to grips with the fact that a significant number of its white constituents are racists. And Trump does appeal to racists by any standard of measurement. That fact is the product of the isolationism in which the Church found itself for so many years in the USA – imposed by Protestant bigots when Catholic immigrants first arrived and self-imposed by institutional Church practices to protect the flock even after the bigotry dissipated in large measure. Among African-Americans and Native Americans the Church in the USA continues to treat them as “others.” I am always galled by the annual USCCB collection for the “Black and Indian Missions.” What mission to Christianization is there to a people who have church members gunned down during worship and still proclaim forgiveness to the criminal? I don’t think I’ve ever heard that out of a Catholic congregation! The evangelization of African-Americans was undermined by the possession of slaves by some Church members and orders and by the failure of the USA Church to condemn slavery long after even a Pope had condemned it. As for Native Americans the USA Church allowed itself to become a vehicle of colonialism. It is the rare individual who subscribes to a belief system that treats one like an object and not a human being. It might be worthwhile for the Bishops to take a long hard look in one of their conferences to figure out how to address the racists that the Church has helped to create among us. As for gay marriage, maybe the majority of Catholics has figured out something that the bishops fail to emphasize. Marriage is a contract between two individuals, not a state of being created by the Church. It existed long before the Church did. It exists around the world without the Church. What the Church did was to make it a sacrament. No civil wedding between any partners - opposite or same sex - is a sacrament. If the civil government wants to allow same sex individuals to contract with each other, so be it. And truth be told, there are many same sex relationships with children that are better than those of some married in Church! The extremity of language and rhetoric that some Church leaders use undermines their own positions in the minds of thoughtful members. The Trump campaign manager Bannon’s comments that Paul Ryan is pushing some Catholic social teaching proves how bigoted and stupid Bannon really is. He is obviously an anti-Catholic bigot for the comment alone about Catholic social teaching. That he thinks Paul Ryan’s proposals in any way mirror Catholic social teaching, to me, is probably the most absurd understanding of Catholic social teaching that I’ve ever heard. The social safety net is not something to be tinkered with, nor is there anything that is taught that creates a divide between the deserving and undeserving poor, a favorite position of the bigots and Paul Ryan! Finally, bishops like Chaput and Wester betray their own bias with comments that no candidate aligns completely with Catholic teaching. We live in a secular society. We have never had, nor ever will, a candidate who aligns completely with Catholic teaching. They have advocated for the Republican Party for years now on the sole issue of abortion. They have played into the hands of the rightists, the bigots, the ignorant, and the anti-immigrants who got what they wanted…the candidate of their rhetoric and their dreams, Donald Trump who somehow got religion and became anti-abortion for a Presidential campaign. Let me NOT be politically correct and use my version of Trump’s favorite language and rhetoric, if I depended on the Catholic Bishops for guidance on civic choices for office, we’d have been back in a theocracy of the Middle Ages here in USA.