Posted on 08/27/2008 4:02:53 PM PDT by wagglebee
WASHINGTON, D.C., August 27, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A spokeswoman for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi defended the speaker's position as a "pro-abortion Catholic", not because the Church is unclear on when life begins, as earlier stated, but because Catholics routinely contravene "clear Catholic teaching" against abortion.
In a statement praising Pelosi's appreciation for "the sanctity of the family," Brenda Daly, speaking for Pelosi, said, "While Catholic teaching is clear that life begins at conception, many Catholics do not ascribe to that view."
In the controversial interview on NBC's Meet The Press that spawned Daly's statement, Pelosi had said, "The Doctors of the Church have not been able to make that definition [of when life begins]," and called it "an issue of controversy" throughout the history of the Church. "St. Augustine said at three months. We don't know," said Pelosi.
Brenda Daly's statement says that Pelosi is not justified in her pro-abortion stance due to vague Church teaching, but on the basis that many other "Catholics" also violate Church teaching.
Susan A. Fani, Director of Communications at the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, questioned the strength of Pelosi's newest argument: "So what?" she said.
"There are plenty of Catholics living a life rife with sin that seek to justify their behavior by saying they disagree with the Church on the source of their delinquency.
"Maybe that's the source of Pelosi's confusion - she really doesn't understand the difference between the teaching authority of the Catholic Church and the DNC."
Pelosi's new statement comes after a torrential response from Church officials condemning Pelosi's blatant misrepresentation of Church teaching and history, sparking coverage of the issue in several major news sources. (See LifeSiteNews.com article: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/aug/08082601.html)
Eighteen members of the House of Representatives have signed a letter to Pelosi exhorting her to back down from her misrepresentation of Catholicism and criticizing her statements that "mangle Catholic Church doctrine." (For the full letter, see: http://www.stoppingtoaskfordirections.blogspot.com/)
American Papist's Thomas Peters, the Catholic blogger who has followed closely what he calls "Pelosi-Gate", considers Pelosi's "absurd" comments a boon for Catholic bishops, who now have the ball "back in their court."
Peters says that because Pelosi continued to defend her statements, the bishops now "have the stage, an attentive audience, and a winning position."
To view Peters' blog, visit: http://www.americanpapist.com/blog.html
Related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:
"Catholic" Speaker Pelosi Denies that Catholicism Condemns Abortion
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/aug/08082502.html
Cardinals, Bishops and Congressmen Slam Pelosi on Abortion
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/aug/08082601.html
New York Cardinal - Pelosi Not Worthy of "Providing Leadership in a Civilized Democracy"
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/aug/08082605.html
Note to the 'Rats: Y'all surely can pick 'em...
Frankly, I don't know if annulling a Kennedy marriage is evidence of corruption or of inability to consummate on the part of the Kennedy involved ~ my thoughts are that it's probably the latter.
So, what do you think? Did the Kennedy's get annulments on account of sexual dysfunction (all the way back to the date of the marriage) or for some reason not known to any of us?
I suspect you were in a nicer part of town.
BTW, I've seen much the same in Anniston Alabama at 2AM (driving through there on my way "home" for a short vacation from the Army.)
It's not like that's a denominational thing!
My true belief is that Pope Nancy is dumber than dog shiite with the personality of a pit viper.
My apologies to dog shiite and pit vipers everywhere.
THE reason that they have pushed the idea of no moral absolutes over the decades is that they want to assign to themselves the role of deciding what is and isn’t sinful - ie, to make themselves God. This was the original sin.
I keep telling them,
you pro-aborts will one day be looked upon with the same disdain as those who throughout history have dehumanized one group or another.
Nazis, Slavery supporters, etc.
You can’t engage in class envy politics and
comply with the 10th commandment:
“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.”
The “liberal Christian” traditions totally disregard the authority of Scripture.
And if you don’t know, why err on the side of killing “it” (a human being)?
Isn’t that immoral on its face?
“Now, here’s the larger context: the genuine corruption involved doesn’t involve money: it involves something even broader and more dangerous: a craven reluctance on the part of MANY American bishops to impose any kind of discipline on anyone due to false-compassion and personal cowardice”
excellent point Mrs. Don-o.
It isn’t just the wealthy or the politicians getting away with this kind of thing.
If this were only a money issue, we would see lots of poor and middle class folks getting excommunicated all over the place.
I think your distinction between CINO's and Cafeteria Catholics is a useful one, and true as far as I can see.
I don't know what the grounds were for the Ted Kennedy annulment. Rather than physical impotence, I have always thought it might be straight-out fraud in taking his matrimonial vows: if he in fact never intended a faithful, fruitful and permanent union, his vows were defective, a deliberate falsehood, and his attempted marriage null.
But I don't know for a fact what the canonical grounds were. And absent the facts, speculation is just pernicious nonsense.
So then, explain the current situation of the Catholic Church seemingly not caring about all of these goings on.
Why would someone who doesn’t “ascribe” to the Church’s teachings pretend to belong to the Church?
Please excuse me, but this sentence lacks the necessary specificity in adressing a huge subject ("all these things going on") with literally thousands of ramifications.
On just one of the problems cited:
Four years ago, 12 Catholic bishops were on record saying that pro-abort Catholic politicians were not to receive Communion in their diocese, citing Canon 915 ("those who obstinately persevere in manifest grave sin" are "not to be admitted" to Holy Communion.)
This year, Bp. Raymond Burke, who holds that NO Bishop, priest, deacon, lay Eucharistic Minister, or anybody else who distributes the Sacrament, should offer Communion to a person who "obstinately perseveres in manifest grave sin", has just been appointed to the Apostolic Signatura, the Church's equivalent of the Supreme Court.
That is not evidence of the "Catholic Church seemingly not caring." I believe Burke's a bellwether for big changes.
Similar leaves are fluttering indicating a shift in the wind. For instance, the University of San Diego denying an academic chair in Catholic Theology to pro-abort academician Rosemary Radford Ruether.
I fully empathize with your impatience, that all of this should have been done 40 years ago, dammit. But you watch. The question won't be "Why don't they do something," but "Which side are you on?"
You are indeed correct, I was viewing it in much to broad of a scope. My only excuse was that I was a bit sleep deprived, and more than a bit irritated at the woman
What is the first rule of holes?
It's a tragic "mistake" to make. It's not something you can undo later, either.
**Pelosi Spokeswoman About-face: Catholic Church Clear on Life Teaching, But Catholics Need Not Listen**
Catholics DO NEED to listen!
If you are in a hole, stop digging!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.