If at first you don't succeed - ignore.

Andrew Greeley of the Chicago Sun-Times publishes an editorial today that follows a classic pattern:

• If the bishops say something I agree with, we should listen, even if no one else does.
• If the bishops say something I don't agree with, we shouldn't listen, because no one else does.

Case in point:

Let us assume that there are different candidates next November, maybe Michael Huckabee and Barack Obama. Does anyone think that the outcome of such an election could be affected in the slightest by a statement about abortion from Catholic bishops? No one who has studied Catholic attitudes and voting patterns over the past couple of decades could possibly believe that. Bishops have historically exercised political influence over the faithful that would not lead a pack of starving vampires to a blood bank.

The false premise here is the phrase "the last couple of decades." Well, let's try to expand our historical conciousness just a bit farther. Historically for most of American history, up until the last couple of decades, the public opinion of Catholic bishops held a very great weight in public discourse. For one thing, they taught clearly on the issues. Now, they are again teaching - um - less hazily on the issues.

Yes, it's terrifying that Catholics might listen. So terrifying that we should remind them they are not currently.

After all, it doesn't take much effort to lead a bunch of starving vampires to a blood bank (I'm guessing).