Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cardinal Egan Blasts Pelosi (in brilliantly scathing response) [Open]
CMR ^ | August 26, 2008 | Matthew Archbold

Posted on 08/26/2008 10:37:18 AM PDT by NYer

Wow! This is a brilliantly scathing response to Nancy Pelosi and her comments on Meet The Press Sunday concerning abortion. Here's the amazing statement in full.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 26, 2008

STATEMENT OF HIS EMINENCE, EDWARD CARDINAL EGAN CONCERNING REMARKS MADE BY THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Like many other citizens of this nation, I was shocked to learn that the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States of America would make the kind of statements that were made to Mr. Tom Brokaw of NBC-TV on Sunday, August 24, 2008. What the Speaker had to say about theologians and their positions regarding abortion was not only misinformed; it was also, and especially, utterly incredible in this day and age.

We are blessed in the 21st century with crystal-clear photographs and action films of the living realities within their pregnant mothers. No one with the slightest measure of integrity or honor could fail to know what these marvelous beings manifestly, clearly, and obviously are, as they smile and wave into the world outside the womb. In simplest terms, they are human beings with an inalienable right to live, a right that the Speaker of the House of Representatives is bound to defend at all costs for the most basic of ethical reasons. They are not parts of their mothers, and what they are depends not at all upon the opinions of theologians of any faith. Anyone who dares to defend that they may be legitimately killed because another human being “chooses” to do so or for any other equally ridiculous reason should not be providing leadership in a civilized democracy worthy of the name.

Edward Cardinal Egan

Archbishop of New York


August 26, 2008
Wow! Wow! Wow!


TOPICS: Catholic; Religion & Politics; Theology
KEYWORDS: abortion; eagan; egan; pelosi
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-167 next last
To: sitetest
The question of the proximity or remoteness of cooperation with evil for pro-abortion political figures is one aspect of this, but the other is the issue of a public figure who professes allegiance to the Catholic Faith standing in clear opposition to a fundamental teaching of the Church, and opposing it's leaders who (if one believes Church Doctrine) have been selected by God through the working of the Spirit to attain their positions of leadership. Such a stand could conceivably lead others to take similar positions, which would endanger their souls in a grave manner. Is this also not a sinful act? There have been cases in the past where opposition to the teachings of the Church and active dissension with the Church hierarchy has led to excommunication. If the actions of a public figure drive others away from a close relationship with God and into a position where they are more easily swayed by Evil, I would guess that it would be held against them when Judgment falls upon them.
141 posted on 08/26/2008 6:16:57 PM PDT by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: sitetest

We are actually stating the same thing, but you believe one way and I believe the other.

Remember this
>>You see it differently and until some action is taken, we really don’t know the answer.<<


142 posted on 08/26/2008 6:21:27 PM PDT by netmilsmom (The Party of Darkness prefers to have the lights out. - Go Fierce 50!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: chimera
Dear chimera,

There is no question that the actions of these politicians are gravely evil. Assuming the other attributes of mortal sin, these politicians are mired in it.

“There have been cases in the past where opposition to the teachings of the Church and active dissension with the Church hierarchy has led to excommunication.”

That's true. With sufficient process, these politicians could eventually be excommunicated.

But I'm not sure that they incur excommunication latae sententiae by the mere fact of their opinion on abortion.


sitetest

143 posted on 08/26/2008 6:25:11 PM PDT by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
Dear netmilsmom,

“...but you believe one way and I believe the other.”

Actually, I don't believe one way or the other.

It is an unanswered question. Being unanswered, I hold neither position.

And I think that it's appropriate that Catholics should be cautious in advancing the view that these folks are excommunicated latae sententiae. It's been stated as uncontroverted fact on this thread and others. It shouldn't be.

If anyone wishes to say, “My OPINION is that they are excommunicated latae sententiae,” that is within his competence. But it is not within the competence of any lay Catholic to state it as fact. Not without the clear guidance of the competent ecclesial authorities.


sitetest

144 posted on 08/26/2008 6:31:07 PM PDT by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: sitetest

I believe that I am right in the way that I read those documents. Therefore until the ruling comes down that says otherwise, I will go with Mother Angelica’s way. She slammed Altar Girls until proven wrong by the Vatican. Then took her place in support of that ruling.


145 posted on 08/26/2008 6:40:02 PM PDT by netmilsmom (The Party of Darkness prefers to have the lights out. - Go Fierce 50!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
Dear netmilsmom,

“I believe that I am right...”

The fact that you say it in that way shows that that is your opinion. You should say as much when you make the claim.

There are posters here wondering what is the actual position of the Catholic Church. If folks don't identify their opinion as just that, and assert it as the formal position of the Church, then that's misleading.


sitetest

146 posted on 08/26/2008 6:45:40 PM PDT by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: sitetest

Like I said, I’ll handle it like Mother Angelica. If you would like to follow me and put your opinion of the whole situation, please feel free.

The documents speak for themselves.


147 posted on 08/26/2008 6:51:08 PM PDT by netmilsmom (The Party of Darkness prefers to have the lights out. - Go Fierce 50!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
Dear netmilsmom,

“The documents speak for themselves.”

The documents do speak for themselves, but you haven't shown at all that they say what YOU say they say. In fact, strictly speaking about Canon 1398, it would seem that it does NOT apply to pro-abort politicians.

If you want to assert your position as objective fact, you should at least make some effort to support it with a logical argument on behalf of the assertion.


sitetest

148 posted on 08/26/2008 6:55:15 PM PDT by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: Patriotic1; Bosco
And her Bishop has spoken:

Breaking: Pelosi's home archdiocese republishes USCCB statement

149 posted on 08/26/2008 7:05:05 PM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: sitetest

I did. I posted the documents.


150 posted on 08/26/2008 7:06:16 PM PDT by netmilsmom (The Party of Darkness prefers to have the lights out. - Go Fierce 50!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham

This letter from her priest is great!


151 posted on 08/26/2008 7:07:15 PM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: sitetest

And btw that is

TITLE III.

THE SUBJECT LIABLE TO PENAL SANCTIONS (Cann. 1321 - 1330)

That was linked.


152 posted on 08/26/2008 7:10:00 PM PDT by netmilsmom (The Party of Darkness prefers to have the lights out. - Go Fierce 50!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
Dear netmilsmom,

You posted some excerpts from Canon Law, but frankly, they don't make your case. Those who procure abortions are excommunicated latae sententiae. Their direct conspirators also incur it.

But you haven't made the case at all that pro-abortion “Catholic” politicians are the direct conspirators of individual women procuring individual abortions.

And you haven't made a case that these folks are excommunicated latae sententiae on other grounds.

Just asserting your position isn't the same thing as making the argument.


sitetest

153 posted on 08/26/2008 7:11:34 PM PDT by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham

wow! Is this for real?


154 posted on 08/26/2008 7:12:49 PM PDT by purpleraine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: sitetest

Well, my FRiend, you are more than welcome to follow each of my posts with that disclaimer.

G’Night!


155 posted on 08/26/2008 7:19:45 PM PDT by netmilsmom (The Party of Darkness prefers to have the lights out. - Go Fierce 50!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
Dear netmilsmom,

I'm not going to follow you around to attach disclaimers to your posts.

I'm not responsible for the falsehoods posted by others.


sitetest

156 posted on 08/26/2008 7:33:11 PM PDT by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: sitetest

And I’m not responsible for making you understand the link I put in, my FRiend.

That’s just something that you will have to read and comprehend yourself. Think what I’m saying is false? Fine, that’s your right.

Until the Vatican says I’m wrong, not you, you are actually accusing me of “bearing false witness” Not kosher, but you have to reconcile that on your soul. I don’t.


157 posted on 08/27/2008 5:18:35 AM PDT by netmilsmom (The Party of Darkness prefers to have the lights out. - Go Fierce 50!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
Dear netmilsmom,

What is false is to represent your opinion as the authentic teaching of the Church.


sitetest

158 posted on 08/27/2008 5:20:01 AM PDT by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: sitetest

And that my FRiend is your opinion.


159 posted on 08/27/2008 5:41:40 AM PDT by netmilsmom (The Party of Darkness prefers to have the lights out. - Go Fierce 50!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham
You apparently haven't been paying attention

You have that right.

160 posted on 08/27/2008 5:45:52 AM PDT by bcsco (Obama's just biden his time until McCain wins in November.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-167 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson