Pelosi whines about Catholics having “this conscience thing”

posted at 7:18 pm on November 21, 2011 by Tina Korbe

Maybe she’s just jealous they have something she doesn’t …

According to LifeNews.com, Nancy Pelosi is upset that the U.S. Catholic bishops wouldn’t approve if the Obama administration did, in fact, decide to force insurance companies to cover birth control, contraception and drugs that could cause abortions. The bishops say that, under such a decision, some religious groups might have to provide the insurance against their moral and religious views.

Given the Catholic Church’s ban on contraception, the bishops’ position shouldn’t come as a surprise to Ms. Pelosi — but she still manages to be baffled by their concern for conscience protections for health insurers who might not want to have to cover birth control just to be able to provide other types of health insurance.

Similarly, she was skeptical earlier this year that Republicans would fight for conscience protections for health care providers out of any noble motive. Republicans must want women to “die on the floor,” she said, just because they don’t want to compel health care providers to assist with abortions.

She still thinks that — only more so, if that could possibly be.

“[Those who disagree] may not like the language,’’ she told The Washington Post, “but the truth is what I said. I’m a devout Catholic and I honor my faith and love it . . . but they have this conscience thing [that puts women at risk.]”

Shame on us! How dare we have a conscience!

Another little anecdote Pelosi told WaPo suggests the former speaker is also put out whenever a Catholic gives the pope’s positions on life more credence than they do hers. Nancy Pelosi knows the personal experience of motherhood as the pope never could — but that doesn’t mean she can reject his authority and credibly call herself Catholic. It means more to be Catholic than to just attend a Catholic Church. The authority of the magisterium is arguably the linchpin on which all other Catholic apologetics hang — and Pelosi’s repeated disregard for it makes me cringe when I read a quote from her to the effect that she loves and honors her faith. I’m not saying she has to be Catholic — just saying she should be honest with herself (and us!) about whether she is.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 2

Devout Catholics aren’t fanatical babykillers.

WannabeAnglican on November 22, 2011 at 8:10 AM

Newt Gingrich also seems to have turned his life around and he agrees with and follows the teachings of the Church. He converted a few years ago because he was attending Mass every week with his Catholic wife and agreed with the theology.

Elisa on November 21, 2011 at 11:38 PM

Thank you! We will hear vicious attacks on Newt’s past marital issues; however they all occured before his conversion to Catholicism. As well as participating in the sacraments of confirmation and the eucharist upon his acceptance into the Catholic Church, he would also have participated in the sacraments of marriage and reconciliation. He has made himself whole with God and his past sins forgiven totally and absolutely. There are those who will make hay about his past without reflecting on the fact that he absolved himself of his past failures in those sacraments.

There’s a lot in all our pasts that we’re probably not proud of, but the sacraments change it all. I know, I became a Catholic in 2009 also.

Trafalgar on November 22, 2011 at 8:20 AM

I’m a devout Catholic and I honor my faith and love it . . . but they have this conscience thing [that puts women at risk].”

Nancy’s bishop needs to have a little chat with her regarding some basic Catholic positions.

katiejane on November 22, 2011 at 9:01 AM

Our American way of life, as we know it, is being destroyed by a progressive mental disorder known as liberalism. When you have political leaders dumber than a box of rocks, as Pelosi obviously is, how can anything else occur?

volsense on November 22, 2011 at 9:13 AM

Nancy Pelosi knows the personal experience of motherhood as the pope never could

I don’t have to have personal experience taking heroin to know if it is good or bad.

Vashta.Nerada on November 22, 2011 at 9:30 AM

Why do I feel like vomiting every time this woman is featured on HA?

JP1986UM on November 22, 2011 at 9:38 AM

mankai on November 21, 2011 at 11:03 PM

Vast majority of Catholics support abortion through their everyday actions, including voting?

And yes, I do know better. But so do the higher ups in the Catholic Church. They just refuse to do anything about it. But supporting abortion is an automatic disqualifier even if not chastised by a bishop. Masturbation is not.

NotCoach on November 21, 2011 at 11:26 PM

Sorry, but you are wrong on a couple of counts.

Take Joe Biden (please!). His bishop full well knows his “cooperation with evil” in his support of abortion, yet he has stated publicly that Joe may receive. Since the RCC teaches that you must “submit your will and intellect” to the bishop on all matters of faith and morals, no one can challenge his decision.

In regard to masturbation, since it is a “grave sin” (as itis most often practiced) it is also a disqualifier for participating in the Liturgy of the Eucharist. So if one masturbates and does not receive absolution (remorse, confession, penance, etc.), he is no longer in a “state of grace” (death = fiery torment forever). The same for missing mass (using birth control, etc.).

First, you must be in a state of grace. “Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup”. This is an absolute requirement which can never be dispensed. To receive the Eucharist without sanctifying grace in your soul profanes the Eucharist in the most grievous manner.

A mortal sin is any sin whose matter is grave and which has been committed willfully and with knowledge of its seriousness. Grave matter includes, but is not limited to, murder, receiving or participating in an abortion, homosexual acts, having sexual intercourse outside of marriage or in an invalid marriage, and deliberately engaging in impure thoughts.

Source: catholic.com

Masturbation— “Masturbation is the deliberate stimulation of the sexual organs in order to derive sexual pleasure” (CCC 2352). The Church teaches that sex has two main purposes that must be sought in the marriage act: sex is for reproduction of children within a valid marriage, and it is a loving, unifying act between husband and wife. Masturbation violates both aspects of the natural law and is thus a grave sin.

mankai on November 22, 2011 at 10:23 AM

Thank you! We will hear vicious attacks on Newt’s past marital issues; however they all occured before his conversion to Catholicism. As well as participating in the sacraments of confirmation and the eucharist upon his acceptance into the Catholic Church, he would also have participated in the sacraments of marriage and reconciliation. He has made himself whole with God and his past sins forgiven totally and absolutely. There are those who will make hay about his past without reflecting on the fact that he absolved himself of his past failures in those sacraments.

There’s a lot in all our pasts that we’re probably not proud of, but the sacraments change it all. I know, I became a Catholic in 2009 also.

Trafalgar on November 22, 2011 at 8:20 AM

Congratulations! Welcome home.

As far as his soul, yes, God through His sacraments most certainly absolved a sincerely repentant Newt. And gave him graces to overcome future temptations, although we all fall and sin.

As far as us as voters, we can only hope that Newt has made a sincere resolve to sin no more in respect to those serious sins which damaged his reputation.

Elisa on November 22, 2011 at 10:39 AM

The problem I had was that the parish priest waited until the day before the baptism to tell us. He was a coward and knew I would be angry. We had planned it before she was born, then had to have an emergenccy C-section and my daughter was in intensive care for two weeks. He could have told me any time. Instead he waited until the entire family had flown in from all over the country, and told my mother instead of me. He tried to get out of seeing me, but I raised heck and went to the bishop.

I am over the Catholic church. Still angry, 25 years later.

megthered on November 22, 2011 at 12:30 AM

That is a very odd and unusual story. As is your reaction to what happened. And I can’t imagine what the priest would be afraid of you about or why you didn’t baptize your daughter when she was in intensive care. There must be something more to this story. I know that children are baptized in parishes where their parents didn’t belong until that point and exceptions are often made.

Elisa on November 22, 2011 at 10:42 AM

Nice anti-Catholic rhetoric going on in here, you ignorant bigots.

Excommunication is NOT some total ban from the Church. It merely places the person “out of communion” because of certain acts, and the object is to bring them back into communion as quickly as possible – but of course this requires sincere repentance and reconciliation, which is a two way street.

As far as who is eligible to receive Communion, the teaching is that those elected officials who vote for abortion and defend it publicly should not, but enforcement is left up to the Diocese. Many priests hesitate to withhold the Eucharist, in case the lay person has reconciled out of his direct knowledge. But Pelosi and the others clearly should know they aren’t supposed to participate in the Sacrament.

They do anyway, many of them very publicly. That’s on them, though.

Adjoran on November 22, 2011 at 12:26 AM

Perfect post. Thank you for that.

Elisa on November 22, 2011 at 10:44 AM

I don’t agree. A Catholic is someone who wants to the follow the Catholic tradition and such a person may well reject some “fundamental tenets” of the Church. Who gives the Catholic hierarchy exclusive rights to decide what is or is not a fundamental tenet? I am just as willing to listen to Pelosi’s ideas about what Catholicism is. . . . .

thuja on November 22, 2011 at 7:51 AM

LOL Who? Are we talking about the Pope and the Bishops in communion with him on matters of faith and morals formally declared for all the faithful to believe?

I’ll give anyone here 3 guesses on “Who” we Catholics believe gave the magisterium the “right” (or obligation and responsibility to “open and shut” “bind and loose.”)

I bet even some non-Catholics who don’t agree with our beliefs on this matter can answer the question about “Who.”

Elisa on November 22, 2011 at 10:48 AM

But Pelosi and the others clearly should know they aren’t supposed to participate in the Sacrament.

They do anyway, many of them very publicly. That’s on them, though.

Adjoran on November 22, 2011 at 12:26 AM

Biden’s bishop specifically gives him permission.

Who are you to say he is wrong? Are you questioning Pelosi’s bishop too? The post-conciliar documents of Vat II state that the faithful must “bow both will and intellect” to his bishop in all matters of faith and morals.

You can’t have it both ways.

mankai on November 22, 2011 at 10:53 AM

Authority is in the mind of the beholder.

The current Pope has written treatises in favor of “wealth redistribution,” making any dispute between he and Pelosi an example of communist vs communist.

leereyno on November 22, 2011 at 10:57 AM

Hey

leereyno on November 22, 2011 at 10:57 AM

Not so fast…

“Wherever politics tries to be redemptive, it is promising too much. Where it wishes to do the work of God, it becomes not divine, but demonic.” Pope Benedict XVI

and

Who gives the Catholic hierarchy exclusive rights to decide what is or is not a fundamental tenet? thuja on November 22, 2011 at 7:51 AM

You are possibly the dumbest person on the internet.

Branch Rickey on November 22, 2011 at 11:32 AM

Pelosi doesn’t have a conscience, so no wonder she’s baffled by others that do.

zoyclem on November 22, 2011 at 11:38 AM

I know God doesn’t do the whole ‘Old Testament’ thing anymore, but, at least once, it would be kinda cool to see Pelosi spontaneously combust in front of the cameras and microphones after saying something so stupid (like her ‘the word’ debacle)…or maybe just get struck by a lightning bolt! :p

easyt65 on November 22, 2011 at 11:51 AM

zoyclem on November 22, 2011 at 11:38 AM

Amen, ‘Boo-ya, and ‘Nuff said’!

easyt65 on November 22, 2011 at 11:52 AM

Morality is such an inhibiting force on some people…

hawksruleva on November 22, 2011 at 11:57 AM

The only “God” or authority in Pelosi’s world, is Pelosi.

Wood Dragon on November 22, 2011 at 12:17 PM

“[Those who disagree] may not like the language,’’ she told The Washington Post, “but the truth is what I said. I’m a devout Catholic and I honor my faith and love it . . . but they have this conscience thing [that puts women at risk.]”

And I’m a constitutionalist, except for the part about always deferring to the constitution, yep

They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate – Titus 1:16

Meanwhile, Devout Catholic Pelosi pledges allegiane to President Obama, who gave what is effectively the Dred Scott argument of our era, when he argued against a state bill mandating medical care for born alive victims of abortion, on the grounds it would define the aborted child as a ‘person’ and thus grant it rights.

Ironic, to have the first black President make the legal argument that one part of our population should not be granted the full measure of humanity on the grounds it would gain equal protection under the law

entagor on November 22, 2011 at 12:23 PM

Just look at Pelosi’s plastic, Botulinum infested face — would someone with a conscience be capable of such butchery?

Demosthenes on November 22, 2011 at 12:26 PM

I was born and raised Catholic but their positions on some things are just out of touch with reality. I’m not referring to abortion here but some of the responses regarding states of grace, the Eucharist, and being in a valid vs invalid marriage. You see, die-hard Catholics are every bit as much bigoted against those who don’t share their views as are anti Catholic Protestants who hate Catholics just for being Catholic. It’s really a sad state the Christianity is in. Jesus would be appalled at all this orthodoxy and legalese.

I mean, I am divorced because my ex wife decided to cheat and get a boyfriend and leave me. According to the stricto Catholics I have to stay celibate and offer up my suffering to Jesus, never to be married or enjoy the company of a woman again. Yeah, riiiight. Later to that bunch of crap.

…and that’s exactly why I don’t consider myself Catholic anymore. I’m tired of the hypocrisy and the cult of suffering. Life was not meant to be suffered through. It’s a sick cult that believes such things. Between that and the Cult of Mary that exists in so many parishes, led by Catholic priests who miss their mothers and can’t have wives… it’s sick. The same Church that for years protected and shielded child predators in the form of pedophile priests and let’s not forget the Irish laundries where women were enslaved by nuns and preyed on by priests…

I am a Conservative though and I vote that way. I find myself more at home with non Catholic Churches these days.

worlok on November 22, 2011 at 12:47 PM

Pelosi,like so. many casual Catholics and other Christians, having been gifted with being made in the image of God, spends her entire life trying to remake the real God into her fallen image.
Being your own God is a certain path to destruction…but that free will without a well formed conscience, can’t wait to rush down that path…

Don L on November 22, 2011 at 12:54 PM

Our congress is full of dead peoples bones!

MCGIRV on November 22, 2011 at 1:26 PM

God forbid people in government should have a conscience!

infidel4life on November 22, 2011 at 1:32 PM

“but they have this conscience thing”

Wow — on a few levels.

Aside from the jaw-dropping idiocy of taking exception to folks having a conscience and using it, and aside from what kind of person one must be to incredulous about that, it’s just mind-numbing to consider that a compliment like this is seen by its speaker as being a criticism…

rasqual on November 22, 2011 at 1:34 PM

“…the magisterium is arguably the linchpin on which all other Catholic apologetics hang…”

Exactly.

When the Bible and the magisterium differ, which do you believe? Do you use the magisterium to evaluate what the Bible says, or do you use the Bible to evaluate your church’s (any church’s) teachings? Which has the ultimate authority for your faith and practice?

The Catechism of the Catholic Church says (in para. 2027, I believe) that “we can merit for ourselves and for others all the graces needed to attain eternal life…” Roman Catholics believe that they must maintain their justification before God through effort and works.

The Bible, however, teaches that we sinners can do nothing to merit God’s grace, and that it is by God’s grace only through faith (obedient trust) in Jesus alone that we are justified/saved (e.g. Romans 4:5, 5:1).

It is Catholic teaching that Mary can “pray for us sinners now and in the hour of our death,” and that she has titles such as Queen of Heaven, but the Bible says no such thing. Which do you believe? The last time the Bible specifically mentions Mary, the mother of Jesus, she is merely a member of a group that gathers to pray together (Acts 1:14).

There is a place for church tradition as long as it does not conflict with the Bible or change its teachings. Tradition is from man. The Bible is from God.

KyMouse on November 22, 2011 at 2:00 PM

Since the Catholic church never got around to ex-communicating Hitler — he was a Catholic — or Ted Kennedy for that matter I doubt they’ll ever get around to the princess, It’s not a ‘conscience problem’ with the Church of Rome; it’s a problem of hypocrisy.

Annar on November 22, 2011 at 2:02 PM

There is a place for church tradition as long as it does not conflict with the Bible or change its teachings. Tradition is from man. The Bible is from God.

KyMouse on November 22, 2011 at 2:00 PM

It is all from man alone.

Annar on November 22, 2011 at 2:22 PM

There is a place for church tradition as long as it does not conflict with the Bible or change its teachings. Tradition is from man. The Bible is from God.

The bible was inspired by God, but written by men. The bible is not the sole repository of the faith in any event.

It always amusing to see Protestants lecture us on a religion we were practicing 1400 years before Martin Luther was born.

Reagan Republican on November 22, 2011 at 2:34 PM

Annar on November 22, 2011 at 2:02 PM

Why exactly would a man who abandoned the Catholicism of his parents in childhood be excommunicated? That is like saying to someone after they quit their job, “Oh yeah? We’ll you’re fired!” He excommunicated himself.

NotCoach on November 22, 2011 at 2:36 PM

Pelosi is a devout a Catholic as the devil himself.

BillCarson on November 22, 2011 at 2:56 PM

Pelosi is a devout a Catholic as the devil himself.

BillCarson on November 22, 2011 at 2:56 PM

Probably more so. If children are never born how does he ever get a shot at corrupting their souls?

NotCoach on November 22, 2011 at 2:59 PM

NotCoach on November 22, 2011 at 2:36 PM

“I am now, as before, a Catholic and will always remain so.” , Adolph Hitler 1941. (Reported by Gen. Gerhard Engel) Perhaps he was a ‘bad Catholic’ and loved Nietsche but he never renounced his Catholicism. He also received support from both the Catholic church and the German Lutheran sects almost to the end.

Annar on November 22, 2011 at 3:05 PM

Pelosi is a devout a Catholic as the devil himself.

BillCarson on November 22, 2011 at 2:56 PM

She’s a dope but she should govern according to the Constitution and her constituents. A bishop’s opinion on her legislation shouldn’t count for much.

dedalus on November 22, 2011 at 3:11 PM

What is the definition of a sociopath again, someone who has no conscience?! Hmmmm.

Sterling Holobyte on November 22, 2011 at 3:17 PM

“[Those who disagree] may not like the language,’’ she told The Washington Post, “but the truth is what I said. I’m a devout Catholic and I honor my faith and love it . . . but they have this conscience thing [that puts women at risk.]”

There is evil in this world.

She has excommunicated herself whether she knows it or not.

CW on November 21, 2011 at 7:24 PM

You’re right about that, CW.

Ipso-facto, she has indeed excommunicated herself from the Church.

Whatever she THINKS she’s “practicing” now is some sort of evil construct she’s devised to satiate her evil desires and doom her soul. “By the deed it is done.”

Lourdes on November 22, 2011 at 3:17 PM

Can we be serious here for a moment?

She’s not a Catholic. Period. End of conversation. Full Stop.

She does not believe in the magisterium, therefore she’s not a Catholic. That’s the definition of being a Catholic.

I just wish her bishop would grow a pair and excommunicate her.

Sean Bannion on November 21, 2011 at 7:25 PM

DITTO 1,000+.

Lourdes on November 22, 2011 at 3:19 PM

Annar on November 22, 2011 at 3:05 PM

The Ustaša

Sean Bannion on November 21, 2011 at 7:25 PM

Your post is a sin. You are to submit both will and intellect to bishop in all matters of faith and morals.

You also are committing the sin of presumption by presuming that Pelosi is not a Catholic. If you judge her to be in “grave sin” you have judged her unworthy of eternal life.

Also, if she willingly leaves the RCC, Vatican II and the CCC teach she “cannot be saved.” If her bishop has not made such a pronouncement, you cannot… unless you want to usurp the station of a “Prince of the Church.”

You can’t have it both ways.

mankai on November 22, 2011 at 3:32 PM

Annar on November 22, 2011 at 3:05 PM

That quote is contrary to what many of his other confidants said about his religious beliefs and is also secondhand. I take it with a grain of salt since it was never spoken publicly or written by Hitler himself. Also the only quote directly attributed to him, that I can find, in which he spoke of Catholicism positively. But when his views are taken as a whole he had a general dislike of Christianity with a particular distaste for Catholicism. But at the same time he revered Jesus. He had developed a warped view of Christianity in which the Catholic Church had distorted or hidden Jesus’ struggles, as an Aryan, to defeat Judaism.

NotCoach on November 22, 2011 at 3:35 PM

NotCoach on November 22, 2011 at 3:35 PM

Rome is not responsible for Hitler’s statements in any case, however they are responsible for their actions in regard to fascist dictators (see: Mussolini and Ante Pavelić – a devout Catholic).

mankai on November 22, 2011 at 3:44 PM

Sean Bannion on November 21, 2011 at 7:25 PM

Your post is a sin. You are to submit both will and intellect to bishop in all matters of faith and morals.

You also are committing the sin of presumption by presuming that Pelosi is not a Catholic. If you judge her to be in “grave sin” you have judged her unworthy of eternal life.

Also, if she willingly leaves the RCC, Vatican II and the CCC teach she “cannot be saved.” If her bishop has not made such a pronouncement, you cannot… unless you want to usurp the station of a “Prince of the Church.”

You can’t have it both ways.

mankai on November 22, 2011 at 3:32 PM

I disagree that what Mr. Bannion expressed is/was “a sin.”

When someone misrepresents the Church as Pelosi is doing and has been doing consistently for some time now, it is not at all “a sin” to point out (or, to determine) their wayward, ERRANT way and what they express (or, profess as being righteous when it is not and at worst, as in Pelosi’s case, is entirely contradictory to righteousness, or, “the opposite of good”).

Were this not the right response when confronting evil, then, none of us would be capable of confronting evil.

And Bishops are mortal men, too. They can be led astray, corrupted, by evil just as any other person can be and, in fact, instances abound of such.

Committing onesself as a Catholic to the authority of Bishops does not mean that Catholics surrender moral conscience or their very ability to correspond with God as authority over us all.

Lourdes on November 22, 2011 at 4:04 PM

…He (Hitler) had developed a warped view of Christianity in which the Catholic Church had distorted or hidden Jesus’ struggles, as an Aryan, to defeat Judaism.

NotCoach on November 22, 2011 at 3:35 PM

As to Catholics confronting evil, or, rather, EVALUATING IT, discerning it, having “moral conscience” to the task of discerning ‘right from wrong’…that’s about the same as this instance with Pelosi, or as to Pelosi.

Not saying she’s Hitler or the same as, etc., but, you know, trying to evaluate evil on some sliding scale of “more” and then “less” of it misses the point of making the determination as to what is and isn’t evil.

It’s evil to mislead others by way of staging what is wrong, what is essentially not from God, as being good. This can be taken to extreme proportions by numbers of affected and those misled and severity of results, but the act itself is what is evil and as evil as it gets. Meaning, one shouldn’t try to say that-he-she is more-evil than he-she-it over there, while what is offensive itself is the evil itself.

Remember that caution about that millstone…

Lourdes on November 22, 2011 at 4:10 PM

Matthew 18:6
but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.
Matthew 18:5-7 (in Context) Matthew 18 (Whole Chapter)

Mark 9:42
“ Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe to stumble, it would be better for him if, with a heavy millstone hung around his neck, he had been cast into the sea.
Mark 9:41-43 (in Context) Mark 9 (Whole Chapter)

Luke 17:2
It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck and he were thrown into the sea, than that he would cause one of these little ones to stumble.
Luke 17:1-3 (in Context) Luke 17 (Whole Chapter)

Lourdes on November 22, 2011 at 4:17 PM

…that millstone…

Lourdes on November 22, 2011 at 4:18 PM

Lourdes on November 22, 2011 at 4:10 PM

I don’t find anything to disagree with in your post, but I am at a loss as to how it connects with what I posted. I was trying to make the point that Hitler was no Catholic just as I believe Pelosi is no Catholic. However, one of the above pretends to be a Catholic as an adult.

NotCoach on November 22, 2011 at 4:26 PM

Lourdes on November 22, 2011 at 4:10 PM

I don’t find anything to disagree with in your post, but I am at a loss as to how it connects with what I posted. I was trying to make the point that Hitler was no Catholic just as I believe Pelosi is no Catholic. However, one of the above pretends to be a Catholic as an adult.

NotCoach on November 22, 2011 at 4:26 PM

I wasn’t disagreeing with anything you wrote. I was just adding my own thoughts on the issue you raised in your comments.

Lourdes on November 22, 2011 at 4:33 PM

NotCoach on November 22, 2011 at 4:26 PM

I wasn’t disagreeing with anything you wrote. I was just adding my own thoughts on the issue you raised in your comments.

Lourdes on November 22, 2011 at 4:33 PM

…and in somewhat related commenting (by me) to what “mankai” had posted earlier.

Within those contexts, I added my own comments. No disagreement from me as to what you wrote, but agreement with it.

Lourdes on November 22, 2011 at 4:35 PM

thuja on November 22, 2011 at 7:51 AM

As a Catholic, I’ll take the hierarchy’s idea of what makes a good Catholic over Pelosi’s any day.

Pelosi ignores science, and, judging from her positions, chooses the words of God she listens to carefully.

She has constructed her own god, and God is probably not very happy about that. What she does to the least of us she does to Him.

unclesmrgol on November 22, 2011 at 8:01 PM

She’s a dope but she should govern according to the Constitution and her constituents. A bishop’s opinion on her legislation shouldn’t count for much.

dedalus on November 22, 2011 at 3:11 PM

One should govern according to one’s own ethics and morals — to do otherwise is to live a lie. Pelosi claims to be a good Catholic. As such, her ethics and morals should be informed by Church teaching. Sadly, part of the big lesson Pelosi learned has not fallen on fertile ground.

The Church teaches that we must individually take care of the poor and the weak. It does not teach that we must rip property or life away from others to perform this act. It defines the poor and the weak fully in accordance with Scripture — and scripture includes children of any age, including those not yet born.

Like all of us, Pelosi is a sinner. Sadly, she persists in her particular sin, even when instructed as to its nature and to the harm it is doing.

If she’s a good Catholic, she undoubtedly reads the Catechism of the Catholic Church often, for the words of the Catechism point out both references in Scripture and in Tradition to buttress Church teachsing. I’m betting that when she does, she avoids paragraphs 2270 to 2275 like the plague, for those paragraphs describe Church teachings about the sanctity of life beginning from conception.

unclesmrgol on November 22, 2011 at 8:16 PM

Lourdes on November 22, 2011 at 4:17 PM

+1000

Sadly, one can claim that little ones only become little ones when (a) they’ve taken their first breath, or (b) they look like adorable little humans, or (c) they are “wanted” (whatever that means), or (d) the mother decides that the little one is a little one.

I don’t know which of these Pelosi subscribes to. Perhaps quizzing her on what she thought Conner Peterson was would be illuminating.

unclesmrgol on November 22, 2011 at 8:23 PM

You can claim to be anything, but your actions define what you are. A pedophile would probably claim he just loves children. You cannot be a Catholic and hold beliefs that are contrary to the teachings of the church. In days gone by, she would have long since been excommunicated, along with Kerry and others.

pgrossjr on November 22, 2011 at 9:03 PM

Since the Catholic church never got around to ex-communicating Hitler — he was a Catholic — or Ted Kennedy for that matter I doubt they’ll ever get around to the princess, It’s not a ‘conscience problem’ with the Church of Rome; it’s a problem of hypocrisy.

Annar on November 22, 2011 at 2:02 PM

a) Hitler walked away from the Church as a young adult and never came back — the Church’s rituals had too much Judaism in them for his liking. I’d put him more closer to you than to any Catholic.

b) The Church rarely excommunicates people — for it considers all people (including those in the clergy) to be sinners.

Paragraph 1463 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church (in the section associated with reconciliation/confession/penance), says

Certain particularly grave sins incur excommunication, the most severe ecclesiastical penalty, which impedes the reception of the sacraments and the exercise of certain ecclesiastical acts, and for which absolution consequently cannot be granted, according to canon law, except by the Pope, the bishop of the place or priests authorized by them. In danger of death any priest, even if deprived of faculties for hearing confessions, can absolve from every sin and excommunication.

Note that excommunication is not a sin, but a state resulting from sin.

Excommunication tends to be reserved for Catholic clergy or lay leaders (from a liturgical standpoint — not a governmental one) who are in opposition to one or more teachings of the Church, for those people have the most capability for inducing others into error. The act is reversible if the excommunicated person make a declaration of repentance. An example of excommunication was the one pronounced upon Martin Luther, an Augustinian priest, for 41 errors (from the Church’s standpoint) in three tracts which he had published. Of course, from Luther’s standpoint, the Church had no power over him — the excommunication was moot. But, again from the Church’s standpoint, it meant that any liturgical authority Luther had from the Church was nullified until he recanted.

unclesmrgol on November 22, 2011 at 9:16 PM

She’s not Catholic. She’s Catholic-ish, in the same way that many people self-identify as culturally “Jewish” but only actually *practice* their religion a few times a year.

One female stand-up comedienne a few years ago had a routine about being “Christian-ish” – she went to church on Easter and Christmas, but pretty much did what she wanted to do the other 363 days of the year.

skydaddy on November 23, 2011 at 12:01 AM

Piglosi’s not a Catholic, she just plays one on TV.

Laura in Maryland on November 23, 2011 at 2:45 PM

Trafalgar on November 22, 2011 at 8:20 AM

While I agree in principle that Newt has repented of past errors, to keep in context it is fair to say that his forgiveness for those errors is between himself and God. If he has not offered restitution or otherwise specifically sought forgiveness from those he has wronged, then he still bears a burden for those past actions. Tex Watson came to Christ in prison, and is forgiven in God’s eyes, but he still deserves to remain in prison for the rest of his life for the murders he committed.

Having never been wronged by Newt Gingrich, I consider him forgiven and would be willing to accept that he is a changed person. Others, who don’t follow the same or a similar faith, have no compulsion to view him so favorably, and they won’t.

The funny thing is, most of those people would expect the rest of us to believe that child molesters can be “rehabilitated”. They always want it both ways.

Freelancer on November 25, 2011 at 3:33 PM

Comment pages: 1 2