By David Warren

Should everything be political?

My own view is that nothing should be, or as little as possible, given our fallen human nature. And there should be laws against political schemes, as we have long had laws against theft, murder, and the other divine Commandments.

But this is merely my opinion, which, of course, counts for nothing in a democratic system, where even right and wrong are subject to impulsive voting.

The fact that I am a Catholic Christian does not come into this, let alone the much larger fact that there is Jesus Christ.

Indeed, just mentioning these facts in the neighborhood of democratic activists - some of whom concede that I have "free speech" - is pointless. For a majority may suddenly vote that I do not.

Or a "theoretical" majority. In fact, we are ruled by (intensely) political parties, and the opinion of "50 percent plus one" is instead represented. Except, this is much more than one needs to win an election, and when one reduces it to actual voters (subtracting those who didn't vote or were unqualified), and several parties are contending, a small fraction will usually give us a landslide.

You may trust the polls, or trust the voting laws (written or amended by whoever won the last election). In either case, your faith is in men; unless, like me, you have no faith in them.

Will you vote for Trump, or will you vote for Harris? This might make a real difference in this world, but you can only vote for what you (cursorily) believe. And what you believe is seldom up to you.

That is where the media come in; and the nursery of distortions in which you were raised.

In this political season, as in all the others, I have been impressed by the demonstrable untruths that many people believe, especially when they have been raised in a political household. Some lies are more monstrous than others, but the "little white lies" do more damage, in aggregate.

Public opinion encourages lying. That is because the committed citizen wishes to convince the uncommitted. And how better to do this than by circulating lies? He fires these at his uncommitted neighbor, in a hail of statistics, which even when partially true can never be contextual.

For the truth of things cannot be known by numbers. Things are vastly too large, and the truth even about one person isn't fully known, even to himself. To "cut to the chase," we must choose the big whopper that appears most appetizing.

The truth, according to me and a tiny minority of "religious fanatics," can actually be known to God, and is accessible within the narrow limits of human fallibility, to us, through prayer.

Public prayer is not public opinion. It is invariably expressed in a liturgy (good or bad); as opposed to private prayer, which only God can hear, supposing we have given Him reason to listen. Liturgy can't be free speech except, perhaps, as it is breaking down.

Scripture and liturgy work to the same end, which is the opposite of politics. We do not tell them what to do, or vote on how each sequence will unfold, as we do when choosing a favorite recording. Curiously, instead, we submit.

The Mass is not an election in any form, it is a reception. Nothing comes of it that a true politician would notice, for he would be looking for what it doesn't do. If God wanted you to vote Republican, for instance, He would not be telling you through the Mass, even in the homily.

Or so I say, from a fairly elementary understanding of the Christian creeds. The notion that Our Lord, whether then or since, has participated in a political campaign, is too ridiculous. It contains only the opposite of the truth.

He (the Lord) ignores our opinions, except what they do to us. He is not moved by our reasons, for they are a jumble of ludicrous assertions. The person who thinks God is on his side, and gives political instruction, should think again, and ask God what He wants, in prayer.

Or even without prayer, Christian or non-Christian should see that he is being a clown. In a r...