next »

CatholiChat

Bible

Catechism

Catholic Encyclopedia

Today's Readings

Advanced search

[Deacon Anthony]

Buying into Pelosi’s personal church.

By Kathryn Jean Lopez

Denver — “If you’re Catholic and you disagree with your Church. What do you do? You change your mind.”

So said Archbishop Charles J. Chaput, archbishop of the Catholic archdiocese of Denver, at the Cathedral Basilica of the Immaculate Conception at 6:30 Mass on Sunday night, as the Democratic Convention was set to begin.
 
His comments — part of his homily during the Mass — came hours after Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, describing herself as an “ardent practicing Catholic,” announced that when life begins “shouldn’t have an impact on a woman’s right to choose.” She explained that “over the history of the church, this is an issue of controversy.” Ignoring both embryology and the Vatican, she insisted on giving the impression that abortion is somehow an open, undecided question in the Roman Catholic Church.

But, as Chaput, author of the new book Render Unto Caesar: Serving the Nation by Living Our Catholic Beliefs in Political Life, explained in an interview with National Review Online last week, “Abortion always, deliberately kills an innocent unborn child. Nobody can honestly claim to be a faithful Catholic and then support a false ‘right’ to abortion; it’s just an elegant way of evading the brutality of what abortion actually does.” He explained, “Abortion is never morally justified.”

The archbishop’s guidance echoes The Catechism of the Catholic Church, which states that “Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person — among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.”

“Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law,” it continues.

Further, it cites Vatican instruction: “The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being's right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death.”

It’s a far cry from Nancy Pelosi’s catechism which would make Roe v. Wade a sacred doctrine. The ruling, she said, has “very clear distinctions.” She doesn’t make those distinctions clear (nor does the Court — contrary to popular mythical belief, the Courtdoes not ban third trimester abortions, for instance), because she really can square the circle she’s trying to; she simply can’t make the case that an “ardent practicing Catholic” can believe that abortion is a perfectly fine decision that a “woman has to make with her doctor and her god.”

The issue of abortion is not the only significant issue Pelosi is in disagreement with her church on. In a book edited by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s daughter Kerry Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi contributes an essay in which she announces:
My granddaughter was getting ready for her First Communion. Around the time of the swearing-in, we were all just lying on the bed, after the tea or something, and she said to her mother, “I want to explain to Mimi” — that’s me — “that it is the body and blood of Christ. When we go to church, it is the body and blood of Christ.” So her mother, in the interest of trying to simplify, said “Yes, the host and the wine represent the body and blood of Christ.” And my granddaughter said, “Not represent. Is, it is the body and blood of Christ.” My granddaughter was buying into it, okay. But it is hard. Every Sunday for me it’s hard. Christ had died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again. Now think of it, we say that every week. Do I really believe he’s coming again? Yes, I believe he’s coming again. Christ died, Christ is risen, Chirst will come again. This is my body, this is my blood. They’re asking a lot. In my era, we didn’t question any of it.

If you believe Christ is coming again and died for our sins to give us eternal life, “they’re” not asking all that much.

If you’re not Catholic, her frustration probably sounds reasonable — which may be part of the reason you’re not Catholic. But if you’re truly Catholic, that is, if you “buy into” what the Catholic Church teaches, then you believe in the Real Presence, which is at the very heart of the Church. Otherwise, as Archbishop Chaput put it Sunday, “you’re not Catholic.” Preaching from the Gospel for the 21st Sunday in Ordinary Time, from Matthew (16:13-20), Chaput echoed Christ’s question to His Apostles: “Who do you say that I am?” Chaput replied: “You are the Messiah, the Son of the Living God.” One has to “say it and let our lives be driven by it.” Our personal, professional, communal, and political lives, Chaput was careful to spell out. “If you can’t,” he said, “you’re not Catholic.”

Like Democratic vice-presidential nominee Joseph Biden, presidential nominee John Kerry before him, nearly every Kennedy who has ever ran for office, and countless other “Catholic” Democrats, Pelosi doesn’t shy away from using her Catholicism on the campaign trail and in her political life. As these politicians court “the Catholic vote,” faithful Catholics need to consider their moral responsibilities in the voting booth and hold accountable those politicians who support and defend a candidate who, for example, has refused to oppose infanticide.

In her book, Know Your Power, Nancy Pelosi sounds sincere when she insists, “Growing up Catholic had an enormous impact on me — greater, I am certain, than growing up in a political family.” I believe she is sincere. It seems to mean a lot to her that she represents San Francisco, “the City of St. Francis.” In her book, she cites his prayer on peace and love. She loves peace and love. But that’s not enough to be Catholic.

Perhaps Pelosi has not had the gift of a Sunday teacher as clear as Archbishop Chaput in her life. Perhaps Pelosi has been given mixed signals by churchmen. Perhaps Pelosi truly believes she can write her own way without effectively removing herself from the Catholic Church. That possibility underscores the need for more forthright priests and bishops like Chaput — for the benefit of the Nancy Pelosis and Joe Bidens of the world, as well as every last Catholic vote they court.

As Chaput put it to NRO last week: “Our faith should shape our lives, including our political choices. Of course, that demands that we actually study and deepen our Catholic faith. The Catholic faith isn’t a set of clothes that we can tailor to a personal fit. We don’t “invent” our faith, and we don’t “own” it. If we really want to be Catholic, then we’ll live by Catholic teaching. Otherwise we’re just fooling ourselves and abusing the belief of other Catholics who really do try to practice what the Church teaches.”

Sometimes “Catholic” isn’t all that Catholic. Sometimes, on Meet the Press, or on a convention stage — from which Nancy Pelosi will speak tonight here in Denver — it’s just another strategic rhetorical device. Don’t be fooled. And whether you’re voting or campaigning, don’t lose your soul to the soul of a party.

— Kathryn Jean Lopez is the editor of National Review Online

[Deacon Anthony]

I thought politicians that believed abortion was oK were to be excommunicated  no???

Yeah, well, that seems like it should be the situation however it's a bit more complicated than that.  Go to this link at the NCCB web site and maybe it will help clear things up for u......... or not. lol

http://www.usccb.org/bishops/reflections.shtml

[Ed NY]

I thought politicians that believed abortion was oK were to be excommunicated  no???

Yeah, well, that seems like it should be the situation however it's a bit more complicated than that.  Go to this link at the NCCB web site and maybe it will help clear things up for u......... or not. lol

http://www.usccb.org/bishops/reflections.shtml

Deacon and Shar,

The webpage states the following:

In the case of persons who do not accept some teaching of the faith that has been definitively (infallibly) taught necessarily connected with divine Revelation, but not expressly and categorically set forth as divinely revealed, their rejection of such a truth (e.g. the evil of abortion) would affect and diminish their full communion with the faith and life of the Church. In such cases, the practice of the Church does not per se exclude such persons from the reception of the sacraments (cf. "Some Brief Responses to Questions Regarding the Professio Fidei," no. 6; in Proclaiming the Truth of Jesus Christ [Papers from the Vallombrosa Meeting], USCCB Publications, 2000). Rather, the Church invites such persons to a fuller understanding of the truth and a conversion of mind and heart to embrace the fullness of Christ's teaching. In this case, the bishop will want to use the virtue of prudence in judging how best to ensure the Catholic person's understanding of the situation for their Catholic faith.

I do not understand why the Church teaching on abortion is placed under "Category 2" of magisterial statements. "Category 2" applies to definitive declarations of non-revealed truths closely connected with Revelation and Christian life. The response required is "firm assent".

There is a "Category 1" which applies to statements that definitively set forth something that all Catholics are to accept as divinely revealed. The response required is "divine and Catholic faith".

Aren't the Ten Commandments divinely revealed? If so, isn't the fifth commandment divinely revealed? If so, doesn't the Church teaching on abortion fall under "Category 1"?

Ed
 

[Deacon Anthony]

I thought politicians that believed abortion was oK were to be excommunicated  no???

Yeah, well, that seems like it should be the situation however it's a bit more complicated than that.  Go to this link at the NCCB web site and maybe it will help clear things up for u......... or not. lol

http://www.usccb.org/bishops/reflections.shtml

Deacon and Shar,

The webpage states the following:

In the case of persons who do not accept some teaching of the faith that has been definitively (infallibly) taught necessarily connected with divine Revelation, but not expressly and categorically set forth as divinely revealed, their rejection of such a truth (e.g. the evil of abortion) would affect and diminish their full communion with the faith and life of the Church. In such cases, the practice of the Church does not per se exclude such persons from the reception of the sacraments (cf. "Some Brief Responses to Questions Regarding the Professio Fidei," no. 6; in Proclaiming the Truth of Jesus Christ [Papers from the Vallombrosa Meeting], USCCB Publications, 2000). Rather, the Church invites such persons to a fuller understanding of the truth and a conversion of mind and heart to embrace the fullness of Christ's teaching. In this case, the bishop will want to use the virtue of prudence in judging how best to ensure the Catholic person's understanding of the situation for their Catholic faith.

I do not understand why the Church teaching on abortion is placed under "Category 2" of magisterial statements. "Category 2" applies to definitive declarations of non-revealed truths closely connected with Revelation and Christian life. The response required is "firm assent".

There is a "Category 1" which applies to statements that definitively set forth something that all Catholics are to accept as divinely revealed. The response required is "divine and Catholic faith".

Aren't the Ten Commandments divinely revealed? If so, isn't the fifth commandment divinely revealed? If so, doesn't the Church teaching on abortion fall under "Category 1"?

Ed
 

The response is firmly assented to AND held.  It's not as though the Catholic can reject this teaching it is still binding and infallible. Another example would be the Immaculate Conception. The only thing I can come up with, Ed is that abortion isn't explicitly mentioned in Divine Revelation.


When the Magisterium of the Church makes an infallible pronouncement and solemnly declares that a teaching is found in Revelation, the assent called for is that of theological faith. This kind of adherence is to be given even to the teaching of the ordinary and universal Magisterium when it proposes for belief a teaching of faith as divinely revealed.

When the Magisterium proposes "in a definitive way" truths concerning faith and morals, which, even if not divinely revealed, are nevertheless strictly and intimately connected with Revelation, these must be firmly accepted and held.(22)

[Ed NY]

Hi Deacon,

Thanks for your response.

I actually also noticed that the word abortion is not explicitly mentioned in Ex 20:1-17. However, doesn't a clear specific instance of violation of a commandment constitute a direct violation of what Divine Revelation requires of us?

There are Church teachings on unintentional abortion, but doesn't the fifth commandment pertain to intentional killing? I actually had in mind intentional abortion.

There are various ways of directly violating any of the Ten Commandments. Do the Magisterial statements on these violations all fall under "Category 2"?

Thanks.
Ed

[Deacon Anthony]

Hi Ed,

IDK, u've gone passed what I know about the subject.  I'm not sure that I wouldn't have to get into the mind of the Magisterium to be able to explain why it is categorized as it is.  I do know someone that may be able to help though and I'll get back w/ u. 

[Dave B]

In defense of Pelosi, Biden, and other Chatholics politicians, we must give them the opportunity to seperate their political decisions from their personal, spiritiual, and moral decisions.  They are in a situation dealing with people who don't share their views and they don't have many Catholic colleagues to offer support in an often hostile environment.  I am very sure if you asked any politican, or any person for that matter,  you would find that nearly everyone sees the inherent evil of abortion with overwhelming conviction.   They will also, with overwhelming conviction, see the greed and larceny of the international banking cartels that have left millions of people starving.  Politics has become global and very very complitcated.  With so much at stake, I caution against being a single issue voter.  Which is probably why, at this late date, I'm still undecided. 

We are all against abortion be it legal or illegal.  Most people I have talked to don't want to return to back alley abortions.  It's sad that making it illegal doesn't stop it.  And making it illegal, saddly doesn't take away the guilt that humanity shares.  I feel very awkward turning to a politician for help with such grave concerns because ultimately it is our decision, not a politicians. There must be something more I can do.   I say the Rosary every morning to ask the Blessed Mother for guidance.  There must be something more that I can do.  All suggestions welcome. 

[Deacon Anthony]

In defense of Pelosi, Biden, and other Chatholics politicians, we must give them the opportunity to seperate their political decisions from their personal, spiritiual, and moral decisions.  They are in a situation dealing with people who don't share their views and they don't have many Catholic colleagues to offer support in an often hostile environment.  I am very sure if you asked any politican, or any person for that matter,  you would find that nearly everyone sees the inherent evil of abortion with overwhelming conviction.   They will also, with overwhelming conviction, see the greed and larceny of the international banking cartels that have left millions of people starving.  Politics has become global and very very complitcated.  With so much at stake, I caution against being a single issue voter.  Which is probably why, at this late date, I'm still undecided. 

We are all against abortion be it legal or illegal.  Most people I have talked to don't want to return to back alley abortions.  It's sad that making it illegal doesn't stop it.  And making it illegal, saddly doesn't take away the guilt that humanity shares.  I feel very awkward turning to a politician for help with such grave concerns because ultimately it is our decision, not a politicians. There must be something more I can do.   I say the Rosary every morning to ask the Blessed Mother for guidance.  There must be something more that I can do.  All suggestions welcome. 

So what you're saying, Dave about the politicians is that it's ok for them to allow an intrinsic evil in order to satisfy their constituents?  That God will say, "well I understand that you had to disobey my commandments because, after all, you didn't get any support and I sure don't expect you to work in a hostile environment because if Me"? 

Obviously the notion you have of not making this a single issue in the election seems logical. What with concerns about the economy, social security, education, etc. to vote for a candidate based on one issue would seem ridiculous. We have kids killing kids in schools, we can't afford to make abortion the central issue.

    The problem is that, firstly, pro-abortion groups make abortion a central issue, why shouldn't we? They've already made abortion rights a 'litmus' test for candidates, Supreme Court Justices, etc. After all, Robert Bork was refused approval as a Supreme Court Justice 'solely' because of his position on abortion. Nothing else. But this isn't simply a case of 'they do, so we can too!' No, we need to do it for more serious reasons.

    A nation, poor and in chaos was tearing itself apart. There were many issues at hand. The economy, education, employment, etc. One was expected to look at the overall picture and not a single issue. The candicate they voted for turned the country around. Employment was up, prosperity was on the rise. 'Happy Days were here again!' Except... The candidate had one 'flaw' which could be overlooked for the good of the nation. A flaw which could be kept under control. That candidate was Adolf Hilter and his flaw was anti-semitism.

    Why one issue when the issue is abortion? Because without life, there is no need for education, employment, social security. Without life, there is no need to guarantee liberty or the pursuit of happiness. Without life, you have no need of other 'freedoms'. Yours is the 'freedom' of the grave.

As far as "back alley" abortions go, they still go on. People who can't afford abortions are still getting them. It seems ludicrous to me to say that it's better to kill 50,000,000 babies legally then to kill a few hundred illegally.  What else can we legalize because people will do it anyway? 

[Dave B]

Deacon Anthony,  I hear you loud and clear and I agree with what you are saying.  Please be certain that my goal is to completely eradicate abortion, and also, all illtreatment of unwanted children world wide.  And please accept that I am very serious about this goal.

Abortion and other nefarious methods of dealing with unwanted children has always plagued humanity.  Crossing cultural, econimic, racial, geographical, educational, boundries  etc.   Why?  I really want to know Why???  And what can be done about it?  Am I naive?

To clarify the point I was trying to make in the previous post,  I don't see overturning Roe v Wade as much of a victory.  I'm more interested in figuring out what needs to be done after it is overturned.  And frankly, I think it would be best to direct our efforts to this point now.   

I see this as so much more than a political issue. So much more than  political bandy to attract votes.  Politicians have influence and power, but it is limited.  This issue reaches through history and to the heart of man.  It is way beyond politics.  It is something we as humans need to deal with personally.  Not something to dump into the lap of politicians.   

Any Suggestions?
Ty DB

[Deacon Anthony]

Deacon Anthony,  I hear you loud and clear and I agree with what you are saying.  Please be certain that my goal is to completely eradicate abortion, and also, all illtreatment of unwanted children world wide.  And please accept that I am very serious about this goal.

Abortion and other nefarious methods of dealing with unwanted children has always plagued humanity.  Crossing cultural, econimic, racial, geographical, educational, boundries  etc.   Why?  I really want to know Why???  And what can be done about it?  Am I naive?

To clarify the point I was trying to make in the previous post,  I don't see overturning Roe v Wade as much of a victory.  I'm more interested in figuring out what needs to be done after it is overturned.  And frankly, I think it would be best to direct our efforts to this point now.   

I see this as so much more than a political issue. So much more than  political bandy to attract votes.  Politicians have influence and power, but it is limited.  This issue reaches through history and to the heart of man.  It is way beyond politics.  It is something we as humans need to deal with personally.  Not something to dump into the lap of politicians.   

Any Suggestions?
Ty DB

Since my mind can't possibly even remotely understand why people kill children I can't give u the whys. All I can say is because evil entered the world and that seems so inadequate but that's the answer.  Politicians need to be sent the message that we're not going to put up w/ that anymore.  They do have power. The president (Clinton) used his veto power to allow partial birth abortions to continue even though congress had past a law to forbid it.  The next president (Bush) signed it into law. They also have to power to appoint supreme court justices who have assumed the power of amending the constitution to suit themselves.  So we need judges who will overturn Roe V. Wade.  We need to pray, we need to be activists, not only against abortion, but for all the other atrocities you mentioned.  I think people who care about these things have been much to meek and have let the evil forces of the world take charge.  So, I think we do need to dump it in the lap of the politician AND deal w/ it ourselves. It doesn't have to be either/ or.  It's just that right now no other issue can even come close to the issue of abortion when it comes to intrinsic evils.

[kevinej]

everything