Pope lectures Pelosi on “natural moral law”; Update: Even MS-NBC can’t spin this
posted at 10:19 am on February 18, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
The Vatican has released a statement after meeting with Nancy Pelosi, apparently mindful of the controversy created by giving an audience to a pro-choice American politician. Before Pelosi has a chance to characterize the discussion, Benedict apparently wants everyone to know that he saw this as a teaching moment (via The Corner):
Following the General Audience the Holy Father briefly greeted Mrs Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, together with her entourage.
His Holiness took the opportunity to speak of the requirements of the natural moral law and the Church’s consistent teaching on the dignity of human life from conception to natural death which enjoin all Catholics, and especially legislators, jurists and those responsible for the common good of society, to work in cooperation with all men and women of good will in creating a just system of laws capable of protecting human life at all stages of its development.
The consistent teachings, Benedict apparently emphasized, in contradiction to Pelosi’s strange insistence that Catholic opposition to abortion only goes back 50 years:
REP. PELOSI: I would say that as an ardent, practicing Catholic, this is an issue that I have studied for a long time. And what I know is, over the centuries, the doctors of the church have not been able to make that definition. And Senator–St. Augustine said at three months. We don’t know. The point is, is that it shouldn’t have an impact on the woman’s right to choose. Roe v. Wade talks about very clear definitions of when the child–first trimester, certain considerations; second trimester; not so third trimester. There’s very clear distinctions. This isn’t about abortion on demand, it’s about a careful, careful consideration of all factors and–to–that a woman has to make with her doctor and her god. And so I don’t think anybody can tell you when life begins, human life begins. As I say, the Catholic Church for centuries has been discussing this, and there are those who’ve decided…
MR. BROKAW: The Catholic Church at the moment feels very strongly that it…
REP. PELOSI: I understand that.
MR. BROKAW: …begins at the point of conception.
REP. PELOSI: I understand. And this is like maybe 50 years or something like that. So again, over the history of the church, this is an issue of controversy. But it is, it is also true that God has given us, each of us, a free will and a responsibility to answer for our actions. And we want abortions to be safe, rare, and reduce the number of abortions. That’s why we have this fight in Congress over contraception. My Republican colleagues do not support contraception. If you want to reduce the number of abortions, and we all do, we must–it would behoove you to support family planning and, and contraception, you would think. But that is not the case. So we have to take–you know, we have to handle this as respectfully–this is sacred ground. We have to handle it very respectfully and not politicize it, as it has been–and I’m not saying Rick Warren did, because I don’t think he did, but others will try to.
Message from Benedict: Study more. And he sent another message as well — that those with higher positions have higher responsibilities not to formally cooperate with the sin of abortion. That message undoubtedly was intended not just for Pelosi but for the entire class of Catholic politicians who support abortion rights, like Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, and Joe Biden, among others.
As for excommunication, that question rightly belongs to Pelosi’s bishop, not the Pope. Also, it likely would not have arisen in this setting, as the Pope does not give Communion during private audiences; that would only be an issue if Pelosi had attended a Papal Mass. It seems clear, though, that Benedict XVI does not share Pelosi’s view of Catholic teachings on abortion — and used the visit to make that clear.
Update: Jim at Gateway Pundit wonders whether Pelosi will heed Benedict’s teaching. I’d say: doubtful. The teaching has always been plain; it’s the student that has the problem.
Update II: Even MS-NBC can’t spin this one:
Pope Benedict, underscoring the Vatican’s ruling on an issue that divides Americans, told U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Wednesday that Catholic politicians and legislators cannot back abortion rights.
Pelosi, a powerful U.S. politician who is Catholic and pro-choice, has been accused by U.S. bishops in the past of misrepresenting Church teachings on abortion.
The headline? “Pope to Pelosi: Catholics cannot back abortion”.
The Anchoress has a great round-up on this story.
Related Posts:









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
Ha. Sorry to have left you out, LFOD:
rogerb on April 30, 2013 at 7:48 PM
If you had something that fired cigars, I’m sure Bill would recommend that too.
unclesmrgol on April 30, 2013 at 8:00 PM
“You’re way better off with
a shotgunan intern thanan assault weaponJuanita Broaddrick. Trust me.”nico on April 30, 2013 at 8:13 PM
Bill Clinton: “You’re way better off with a shotgun than an assault weapon. Trust me.”
From the man who was shown time and again to be lying, even when the truth was better for him.
Some people never change.
RJL on April 30, 2013 at 8:15 PM
I like this one better.
Oldnuke on April 30, 2013 at 8:27 PM
Has anyone trustworthy ever used the phrase “Trust me”?
SoRight on April 30, 2013 at 8:32 PM
Speaking of, did anyone ever figure out what any of them had to do with me “learnin’ ’bout guns”?
rogerb on April 30, 2013 at 8:37 PM
Good one! I thought it was going to be the R. Lee Ermey Glock commercial, but this was even better. She did just like Joe Biden told her, except she didn’t use a shotgun.
Loved the tag line, “Horror movies don’t have to last forever …”
Earlier this year, one of the channels was touting a show with the title something on the order of “Horror 911″ or similar. I want to see a show called, “Emergency 9mm” in which armed homeowners keep themselves safe from predators instead of cowering in abject fear in an inner room clutching a phone, desperately waiting for 911 to get emergency services to them while an intruder goes through the house looking for them.
AZfederalist on April 30, 2013 at 8:39 PM
The only thing worse than a sleazy liar is an over the hill has-been sleazy liar.
mad scientist on April 30, 2013 at 8:40 PM
Yep ranks right up there with the smiling muslim tell of “I tell you the truth …”
AZfederalist on April 30, 2013 at 8:40 PM
Bill Clinton: “You’re way better off with a shotgun than an assault weapon. Trust me.”
Thanks, Bill. I was a little worried that people were trying to characterize my semi-auto shotgun with its short barrel, extended magazine and pistol grip as an assault weapon. Are we good to go with the Glock 20 too?
Trainwreck on April 30, 2013 at 8:52 PM
Why choose just one? Why not have one of each, and a good caliber handgun as backup?
Parabellum on April 30, 2013 at 9:01 PM
Yeah. That’s why the DHS is purchasing billions of 40 caliber hollow-point rounds, and not shotgun shells – right Slick?
labrat on April 30, 2013 at 9:14 PM
Bill Clinton: “You’re way better off with________________________
_________________________(insert anything, here … It won’t matter).
Trust me.”
listens2glenn on April 30, 2013 at 9:17 PM
.
. . . . N O ! ! ! !
listens2glenn on April 30, 2013 at 9:18 PM
*sip*
This place gets freakin’ weirder every day.
Axe on April 30, 2013 at 9:43 PM
Rogerb could use a pic of a Ruger 10/22.
He thinks it’s an old German pistol.
verbaluce on April 30, 2013 at 10:05 PM
can you not be a fking fool for two seconds?
tom daschle concerned on April 30, 2013 at 10:29 PM
Can anyone take Bill seriously when he talks about blowin’ someone’s head off…
bluesdoc70 on April 30, 2013 at 10:32 PM
You could stand to take your head out of Obama’s crotch every now and again.
HumpBot Salvation on April 30, 2013 at 10:47 PM
Actually, I believe the Ruger was the Japanese version of the Luger.
Sandbar on April 30, 2013 at 11:07 PM
“You’re way better off with a shotgun than an assault weapon. Trust me.”
Bwahahahahahahaha
This from the tool that is still try’n to figure out what the meaning of is…is
roflmmfao
donabernathy on May 1, 2013 at 12:26 AM
Bill Clinton (credibility: sub-zero) speaks.
He’s looking like an old man now and there’s no fool like an old fool.
virgo on May 1, 2013 at 1:19 AM
Precisely how many Americans are killed every year by the criminal use of AR-15s?
Precisely how many Americans are killed every year by the criminal use of Saturday Night Specials?
SNS’s are cheap, easily obtainable by criminals, and entirely effective at killing people or intimidating people for gain.
Am I saying SMS’s should be banned? Nope. But the fact that they’re the primary guns used in practically all criminal shootings means that if you want to look at a class of guns that’s where you’d start.
Now why are SMS guns so common? Because if you’re buying a gun for the express purpose of threatening someone then you don’t really care if the gun works or not. And if you’re buying it black market it means you’re paying a markup cost ON TOP Of whatever the gun actually costs. So the cost to the criminal due to the mark up can make criminals very cost conscious. Beyond that, especially if the gun is discharged, it is in the criminal’s interest to dispose of the gun after the crime so that the same gun can’t link the same criminal to multiple crimes. If the criminal uses different guns every time then there is no link.
The AR-15 by comparison is poorly suited to crime. For one thing it is comparatively expensive. For another, it is too large to be easily concealed. And most damning, it operates best at medium range. Criminals want to intimidate you from close range. Close enough for you to give them things or hand them things. Close enough for them to see everything you’re doing with your hands so they can know if you’re complying or not. A sawed off shotgun or a small handgun is better suited to this task. Possibly a sub-machine gun would be effective as well. Though, a replica semi-automatic machine gun is horribly suited to this task.
Really, the AR-15 is a stupid gun. I don’t say that in the sense that people shouldn’t buy it. Rather, it doesn’t do anything very well. I say that as a near complete gun novice. So I’m likely talking loudly out of my ass here. But I bet the average hunting rifle is better at long distance marksmanship, the shot gun has more stopping power at close range, and the hand gun is generally more portable.
What niche then does the AR-15 fill? What does it do that these other guns don’t do besides sorta look like an M16?
It appears to be mostly an atheistic difference. And assuming I’m right there, the focus on the AR-15 by the democrats is just absurd.
Karmashock on May 1, 2013 at 3:18 AM
The only thing I would trust about BJ Clinton is that he loves open-face tacos and a good smoke after dining. Sheesh, what a loser.
philoise65 on May 1, 2013 at 8:40 AM
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!1
Wow.
A regular Don Rickles this guy is…
… or maybe just a hockey puck.
hillbillyjim on May 1, 2013 at 9:00 AM
I think you mean aesthetic difference. ;)
GWB on May 1, 2013 at 11:31 AM
I think he meant to say:
“You is better off with a shotgun than you is with an assault rifle.”
But it depends on what the meaning of is is.
BigAlSouth on May 1, 2013 at 11:32 AM
Wow. Nailed that one, didn’t I?
And yikes. I actually felt sorry for you when I read it.
Regardless, I was torn on how best to respond. There are so many choices.
I know. Let’s take a poll.
Candidate #1:
I’m leaning towards this one. Especially since it wasn’t even two months ago:
Ha. Conviction!
The other candidates follow. Copy and paste your favorite (or the best bit of your favorite) to vote.
rogerb on May 1, 2013 at 12:47 PM
Candidate #2:
rogerb on May 1, 2013 at 12:47 PM
Candidate #3:
rogerb on May 1, 2013 at 12:49 PM
Candidate #4:
rogerb on May 1, 2013 at 12:50 PM
Candidate #5:
rogerb on May 1, 2013 at 12:53 PM
Candidate #6
rogerb on May 1, 2013 at 12:54 PM
And the funniest part is you think it takes hours to google words like “ad hominem” + verbaluce.
Wait, maybe this is the funniest part
Should we take a poll?
rogerb on May 1, 2013 at 12:58 PM
Ipecac
lakeman on May 1, 2013 at 12:59 PM
Looks like this took about fifteen minutes out of my lunch hour, verbaluce.
How about you? What does your math show?Sorry, I forgot. Nevermind.
rogerb on May 1, 2013 at 1:02 PM
I had the great pleasure of going to the range for the first time ever yesterday, with a friend. He let me fire both his shotgun and his assault weapon. The former is difficult to use, slow, bruised my shoulder, and wasn’t extremely accurate. The latter was easy to load and fire, safer, faster, with almost not recoil. I also was able to hit three bullseyes and five in-target hits out of ten shots, which means that it was rather accurate.
I definitely prefer the assault rifle. Dumb name for it, since it isn’t different from a normal rifle, of course, but whatever you call it, it’s a great weapon.
DrUrchin on May 1, 2013 at 1:39 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2