Posted on 01/26/2015 11:27:50 AM PST by jazusamo
Video at link of Pelosi's comments.
(CNSNews.com) – Responding to statements made by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi--who would not say at her press briefing last week if a 20-week-old unborn child is a "human being"--Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone of San Francisco said that it is a “scientific fact that human life begins at conception” and that “no Catholic can dissent in good conscience” from Church teaching on the sanctity of life. At her Jan. 22 briefing Pelosi said she had "great standing" to speak on the issue of abortion, noting that she was a "Catholic and a mom of five" and asserting that it was "true" she knew "more about having babies than the pope."
CNSNews.com asked Archbishop Cordileone about Pelosi’s comments on human life, particularly in light her self-description “as a Catholic and a mom of five."
"It is a scientific fact that human life begins at conception," the archbishop said in a written statement to CNSNews.com. "This has been established in medical science for over 100 years. Catholic moral teaching acknowledges this scientific fact, and has always affirmed the grave moral evil of taking an innocent human life.
“This has been the consistent teaching of the Church from the very beginning, a teaching already discernible in the natural moral law, and so a teaching from which no Catholic can dissent in good conscience,” he said.
“It is the obligation of pastors of souls to reach out to their people who have difficulty understanding and accepting such important teachings of the Church in order to extend to them true pastoral care and, where appropriate, to establish a regular dialogue,” said Archbishop Cordileone. “This is something I have always striven to do in the various ministries I have exercised as a priest and bishop, including now as the Archbishop of San Francisco. I ask for people’s prayers for success as I continue to strive to do this."
Pelosi lives in Cordileone's archdiocese and represents San Francisco in Congress.
At her Jan. 22 press conference at the Capitol, CNSNews.com twice asked Pelosi whether an unborn child 20 weeks into pregnancy is a human being.
Pelosi would not answer the yes-no question with a yes-no answer, but did say that a woman has "the right" to abort her child.
“The fact is is what we have said: The life and the health of the mother is what is preeminent in when a decision is made about a woman’s reproductive health," said Pelosi, after declining for the second time to say if an unborn child at 20 weeks is a human being. "It isn't an ideological fight, it is a personal health issue.
"And as a mother of five, in six years, I have great standing on this issue, great understanding of it, more than my colleagues. In fact, one day many years ago, perhaps before you were born, when I was a new member of Congress, as a Catholic and a mom of five, opposing some of the initiatives similar to what--in the same vein as--what we have today, one of the Republicans stood up and said: Nancy Pelosi thinks she knows more about having babies than the pope.
"Yeah, Yeah. That would be true. So, in any event, this is up to women, their conscience, their God, their doctor, their fate, their survival. And that is what the decision should be. Decisions about women’s reproductive health should not be made by politicians in Washington, D.C., but should honor the decisions that have been made by the Supreme Court, a decision made by the Supreme Court, recognizing the right of women to have that choice.”
During the press conference, Pelosi made clear that she is opposed to both the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act and the No Taxpayer Funding of Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act.
The former would prohibit the abortion of babies 20 weeks or later into gestation unless they were conceived in rape or incest, or if the life of the mother was at risk. The latter prohibits federal funding of abortion and stops federal Obamacare subsidies from going to insurance plans that cover abortion while not preventing people in subsidized Obamacare plans from buying supplemental abortion coverage--with their own money.
Excomunicate the Witch!!!
BTTT
Yeah well the exalted Catholic Church FAILS to do a damned thing about these abortion supporters.
It does not matter where Pelosi lives, or who is “her” archbishop. Cardinal Wuerl in Washington has consistently lied about this point, pretending that politicians from other parts of the country are not his concern.
What matters is where she receives Communion.
Any priest who gives Nancy Pelosi Communion commits a mortal sin. Any bishop of a place where priests give Pelosi Communion also commits mortal sin.
Cardinal Burke laid it all out for his brother bishops almost ten years ago:
Right. It is the duty of Catholic clergy to DENY COMMUNION to people like Pelosi.
This is an obligation. Those who refuse to fulfill this obligation commit MORTAL SIN.
Pelosi said in an interview that she decides things for herself based on her own understanding after considering what the Catholic Church says, what the Bible says, and how she feels after praying about something. The basic foundation for her is Self and Self Alone which is the real basis of all Protestant and Protestant derived "Christianity".
They've already rendered their mind and soul to Caesar in order to gain power so what they claim to believe is irrelevant, really. For them, the highest possible authority is Self, that's it, that's all.
Statements like Cordileone’s always sound as if Pelosi just REVEALED, TODAY that she is pro-abortion.
Every archbishop of SF for the last thirty years has made a statement about having a “conversation” with Pelosi about abortion. IIRC, it was revealed recently that NO SUCH CONVERSATION has ever taken place—with any archbishop of SF.
Cordileone has to have known for 40 or 30 years that Pelosi is pro-abortion.
Sent December 6, 2014.
The Most Reverend Blase J. Cupich
Archbishop of Chicago
PO Box 1979
Chicago, IL 60690-1979
Your Excellency:
I have viewed the video and read the transcript of your recent interview with Norah O’Donnell.
You declared that the reception of Communion is “a time of forgiveness of sins.” Since the specific sin at issue was the promotion of abortion, your statement implies that the reception of Communion forgives the sin of promoting abortion.
But this is impossible, since the reception of Communion forgives only venial sins.
It could not have been your intention to imply that promotion of abortion is only venially sinful.
Thus, it is your duty to make another public statement, clarifying both that: The promotion of abortion is mortally sinful; the reception of Communion does not forgive mortal sins.
Moreover, far from forgiving mortal sins, the reception of Communion in the state of mortal sin is the mortal sin of sacrilege. You did not mention this in the interview.
The other major assertion in your interview was that you reject the Church’s discipline of denying Communion to notorious grave sinners.
As Cardinal Burke established beyond a shadow of a doubt in his now-famous article on the subject, giving Communion to notorious sinners is always grave matter. It is always a source of grave scandal because it is a public sacrilegious act, and because it constitutes public approval of the notorious sin in question. http://tinyurl.com/canon915
Thus, giving Communion to a pro-abortion politician is to give public approval of his promotion of abortion, and, necessarily, abortion itself.
Canon 915 merely codifies this moral norm. The act prohibited by Canon 915 is always grave matter. You pledged to commit this act.
Having been reminded that giving Communion to persons who are obstinately persisting in manifest grave sin is itself a mortal sin, you are obliged to repudiate the pledge you made to Norah O’Donnell to commit that mortal sin.
Other bishops have made the same public pledge. And they have punished priests who refused to commit the same mortal sin.
Because no bishop has the authority to mandate that any minister of Communion commit this mortal sin—
4. Bearing in mind the nature of the above-cited norm (cfr. n. 1), no ecclesiastical authority may dispense the minister of Holy Communion from this obligation in any case, nor may he emanate directives that contradict it. Http://tinyurl.com/pont915
—the priests of the Archdiocese of Chicago have the right to be reassured immediately that there is no possibility that you would punish a priest for obeying Canon 915. Indeed, it is your duty to remind them of their strict, grave obligation to obey it.
I am sure I need not elaborate on the extreme urgency of correcting the situation of a Catholic bishop’s pledging in public to commit mortal sin.
Catholic FReepers were heralding Cordileone for having a backbone when he was first announced.
We all have our views on abortion? Um, this is a pro-life forum. Your position, as you have stated it so clearly abive, is not one if life. Explain how someone conceived in rape has any lesser value as a human being?
I will pray the scales fall from your eyes. You’re advocating an evil. Becaus you fail to see the truth. And when it comes to abortion, the is only one truth. It’s either a human being or it isn’t.
So, no we don’t all have our views on abortion.
Pro-abortion catholics politicians have excommunicated themselves when they support abortion. The good bishops like this one will refuse to give her communion and publically call for her to repent. The democrat operative bishops like Cupich, Dolan and Donna Wuerl will continue to commit mortal sin by allowing these baby killers up for communion.
These two ladies conceived in rape but saved from the abortionist knife should demand to address the Republican National Committee when they finally get around to selecting someone to run against Hillary Clinton. The GOP official platform for years has claimed they are “pro-life” but believe it’s perfectly fine to abort children conceived in rape and incest.
Common sense isn’t it, I absolutely will let you know that some people get so over the top scorched earth on the matter that they can’t be reasoned with.
If it was my justice, I would cut the balls off the rapist if it was a guy, and the guy was found guilty by trial.
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.