Deacon Jim's sloppy and irresponsible pretension to scholarship on this issue is a scandal to this worthy outlet and it's a shame they published it. This matter was debated publicly and openly in many fora in which the Deacon himself took part back in 2011 when the first news of Live Action's tactics came to light, and then - as now - Deacon Jim responded to well-researched and carefully-reasoned positions (such as my own) with haphazard sophistries and empty rhetoric. Rather than taking the Catechism's teaching at face value on this matter and dealing with the harder question of what we *ought* to do - instead, in order to achieve Live Action's results without violating Christian moral standards, consequentialist proponents of the goods wrought by this work (themselves questionable and yet to *really* bear fruit) decide to do a strained reading of moral doctrine on the matter and repose upon the easy solution of lying for a good cause. As such, they become nothing more than newcomers to the already too-long queue of cafeteria Catholics waiting to pick-and-choose any of the Catechism's many utterances (a practice which is an easy logical extension of the Deacon's reasoning), and assemble them in their own pre-determined and too-neat proportions.
Live Action lies to the very people who most need to hear the TRUTH of the Gospel, and this is reprehensible and heart-breaking in spite of their many good intentions (of which I have no doubt). If the Deacon wants to settle division he should join with the many responsible critical theologians and others (who have already covered this ground of debate extensively and thoroughly) in trying to figure out a better way forward, instead of doubling-down on the side of a tactic which, in addition to being morally questionable *at best*, has yet to yield a single, demonstrable, pragmatic result.
But this isn't about results, Joe; it isn't about the Catechism; it isn't about Church teaching; and it isn't about Christ.