Posted on 11/15/2002 4:25:22 AM PST by governsleastgovernsbest
Matt Lauer just completed an interview with Nancy Pelosi. After some standard stuff about her "historic" role as the first woman to lead a congressional party, Lauer asked a a pretty probing question:
"When Republicans chose Newt as their leader, Democrats were quick to say they had gone too far right. Why shouldn't the Republicans now say that in choosing you, the Democrats have gone too far left?"
Pelosi answered by stating that while she represented her district in SF (implying that she was being very liberal in representing a very liberal district), she will lead "right down the center" of the Dem caucus.
She then added the following statement: "When people call me a liberal, I call myself a conservative Catholic."
I had heard Pelosi make the same statement in an interview yesterday, so this clearly seems to be a standard part of her defense to the charge that she's too liberal to lead successfully.
I'm not Catholic, but I have to assume that many true "conservative Catholics" will be upset by hearing Pelosi claim that label. It is hard to imagine an authentic conservative Catholic supporting unrestricted abortion, including partial birth abortion, as does Pelosi.
Pelosi failed to vote to ban PBA even when an exception was included for the life of the mother. I think it is thus fair to categorize her as a pro-abortion extremist. Given that record, to go on national TV and call herself a conservative Catholic seems the height of gall and duplicity.
As a sidenote, Pelosi also trotted out what the Dems have apparently decided to make their new theme: "Safety and Soundness," apparently some combination of national security and economic progress. Instant nominee for the "Lamest Political Slogan of the Decade."
The Catholic church is so weak it doesn't excommunicate members who are clearly heretics. The church has been and will pay the price for this continued inaction.
There are basically two types of heretics; material and formal. One doesn't know the teaching of the church and is in disagreement with it.
The other knows the churches teaching and still persists in holding a contrary view. That's where Pelosi is now and should be thrown out of the church along with thousansds of others.
Remember, the Catholic church wants a gang raped victim who becomes pregnant to carry the baby to birth. No abortion for her allowed. But yet the church bishops and cardinals and pope, allows so-called Catholics like Pelosi to vote for, and encourage partial birth abortions.
- TOM
This was a fallible disciplinary decision by the Inquisition, not an infallible decision of the pope or a council.
It is clear, moreover, that the authors of the judgment themselves did not consider it to be absolutely final and irreversible, for Cardinal Bellarmine, the most influential member of the Sacred College, writing to Foscarini, after urging that he and Galileo should be content to show that their system explains all celestial phenomena -- an unexceptional proposition, and one sufficient for all practical purposes -- but should not categorically assert what seemed to contradict the Bible, thus continued:
I say that if a real proof be found that the sun is fixed and does not revolve round the earth, but the earth round the sun, then it will be necessary, very carefully, to proceed to the explanation of the passages of Scripture which appear to be contrary, and we should rather say that we have misunderstood these than pronounce that to be false which is demonstrated.
Also, keep in mind that at the same time several cardinals were funding Copernicus' astronomical endeavors.
Nevertheless it was a churchman, Nicholas Copernicus, who first advanced the contrary doctrine that the sun and not the earth is the centre of our system, round which our planet revolves, rotating on its own axis. His great work, "De Revolutionibus orblure coelestium", was published at the earnest solicitation of two distinguished churchmen, Cardinal Schömberg and Tiedemann Giese, Bishop of Culm. It was dedicated by permission to Pope Paul III in order, as Copernicus explained, that it might be thus protected from the attacks which it was sure to encounter on the part of the "mathematicians" (i.e. philosophers) for its apparent contradiction of the evidence of our senses, and even of common sense.
No, but many people the "call themselves Catholic" do.
Also, here is a picture of Campion on the job (I'm the big guy in red):
And I call you, Nancy, a LIAR.
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.