www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Pelosi: Free Will Trumps Catholic Church's Pro-Life Teachings on

God have mercy on us all!

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- The rift between House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Catholic Church will likely grow thanks to new comments the abortion advocate made. Pelosi said in a new interview that the "free will" of women wanting abortions outweighs pro-life Catholic teachings.

Newsweek's Eleanor Clift conducted a year-end interview with Pelosi.

The conversation turned to the topic of abortion and health care and Pelosi blasted the Catholic bishops for their opposition to the pro-abortion bill.

She tells Clift it was frustrating that Catholic bishops "were not willing to accept what we know to be a fact" -- that the "public option" would supposedly not violate a ban on federally-funded abortions.

Then, as Clift asks about her "brushes" with the church, Pelosi drops a bomb.

"I have some concerns about the church's position respecting a woman's right to choose," Pelosi responds. "I am a practicing Catholic, although they're probably not too happy about that. But it is my faith."

"I practically mourn this difference of opinion because I feel what I was raised to believe is consistent with what I profess, and that is that we are all endowed with a free will and a responsibility to answer for our actions," she continues. "And that women should have that opportunity to exercise their free will."

Pelosi also told Newsweek she doesn't appreciate being lobbied on abortion but understands her local Catholic officials will try to persuade her.

"When I speak to my archbishop in San Francisco and his role is to try to change my mind on the subject, well then he is exercising his pastoral duty to me as one of his flock," she said. "When they call me on the phone here to talk about, or come to see me about an issue, that's a different story. Then they are advocates, and I am a public official, and I have a different responsibility."

The comments will likely throw fuel on the fire of public opinion within pro-life and Catholic circles that Pelosi is well-outside the mainstream -- but she tells the pro-abortion Newsweek reporter she doesn't care.

"I don't choose to spend my time countering perceptions and mischaracterizations that the other side puts out there. I choose to do my job. Because we are effective, I continue to be the target," Pelosi contends.

Pelosi also talked about how she discussed the abortion funding in the health care bill with a Catholic leader.

"I talked to one of the cardinals. I said to him that I believe that what we are doing honors the principles we talked about: we want to pass a health-care bill, we want it to be abortion neutral, and we want it to [have] no federal funding [for abortion], which is the law. And we believe that our language does that," she recounted. "They said, 'We believe that it does not.' I said, let's sit down at the table and our lawyers can compare language."

For Pelosi, her motive appears to be more about winning than her reputation and standing.

"I don't care how popular I am. I'm not putting myself out there to run for higher office. I just [want to] make sure that we win the election next year," she said.
The new comments follow on the heels of Pelosi thanking God that the Senate health care bill funds abortion
Pelosi [lifenews.com]

Functionally she's a Protestant. The difference between her and the legions of Bad Catholics with wrong views, whom the church doesn't micromanage, is she is in a position to cause scandal.

I wonder what her definition of a "Practicing Catholic" is? One thing you have to love about this country is how so many people profess the Catholic faith but then try to mold it into their own vision of how it should be. Then they have the nerve when someone actually challenges them with the fact that their stance is counter to what the church believes, they somehow find a way to make it seem that they are the ones who are in fact correct.

Well, she's just latae sentence excommunicated herself. Time for her bishop to grow a pair and formalize it.

Pilgrim:

Christ is Born!! Glorify Him!!

I've wondered the same thing and I've come up with a working definition--not finished and I invite your own input.

Like an athlete who is "practicing" to be a football or basketball player, but isn't quite there yet, a "Practicing Catholic" is one who is working at it, but hasn't quite made the full commitment yet. Something like the people Our lord says He will "vomit out of My Mouth." Does that work for you? Works for me.

BOB

[quote=aramis]Well, she's just latae sentence excommunicated herself. Time for her bishop to grow a pair and formalize it. [/quote]

Unfortunately I think the fear of excommunication does not carry the weight it once did. My question is if she is a practicing Catholic does this mean she attends mass and receives communion every Sunday? And if so should the bishop speak to her priest as well?

Perhaps in this case "practice makes imperfect"?

Or "Practice once to master"

Apparently somehow Madame Speaker has become Pope, Ecumenical Council and the very personification of the Magisterium itself. Gee, how'd I miss the memo on that?

Christ is Born!! Glorify Him!!

Pilgrim:

I think you've hit the nail on the head. And I think it is linked to the fading belief in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist.

My early training was that excommunication had eternal consequences. Die in that state and you had no hope. Why? Because communion is the relationship with Christ that the believer has through the Church and the sacramental life. It seems to have had a very early understanding in the Fathers. Now it seems that no one makes much of it. Even people who have excommunicated themselves seem to think they have a "right" to approach.

I have a long article about what the Orthodox Church believes about Holy Communion and what she expects. It's very much what my early training was. But it is so far removed from what things seem to be in the Catholic Church today that priests I've shown it too have recoiled, calling it too strict.

There's one more way to llok at this "free will" thing. We have the "free will" to accept or reject the revelation Christ gave and entrusted to His Church. Nothing wrong about that. But that it has eternal consequences, now that is, apparently, something that Madame Speaker hasn't thought about.

BOB

I was taught that you cannot die excommunicated, since the Church has authority only over the living.

So every kind of excommunication, including the officially declared or imposed is automatically lifted in the moment of death, or rather at the moment of death you're judged directly by God.

So that somebody died without his excommunication (of whatever kind) officially lifted or without repentance for the cause of excommunication, doesn't automatically mean that he is damned, or that he was really excommunicated, because the Church is not infallible in juridical or penitential matters. Excommunication as a juridical or penitential matter doesn't bind our conscience, but acts only, so it's not a sin not to believe that certain person is really excommunicated.

Excommunication therefore is something like mortal sin that can be absolved (depending on the cause) only by certain priests, usually under condition of significant penance.

My opinion is that there is of course strong link between lack of belief in real presence, lack of belief in eternal damnation, malformed conscience, pride etc. and the lack of fear of excommunication, but I think the most important problem is how the excommunicated are handled, that is how the faithful and clergy acts towards them.

If the faithful are not obliged to abstain from intercourse with the excommunicated even in non-religious, civil matters, that is there's no social ostracism, and no one is going to throw them out of the church then who cares anyway...

If her Bishop had any courage and sense of pastoral responsibility he would publicy excommunicate her.
God help her if she shows up in this parish of her constituency.
Stephanos I

We excommunicate ourselves by our thoughts, words and deeds. That is, we separate ourselves from the Body of Christ. The Church does no more than take cognizance of instances where these thoughts, words, and deeds have become so blatant that the Church must act to maintain its discipline, as well as to warn the person of the danger to his soul. In cases where the Church does not act, and a person continues to receive the Eucharist despite breaking the unity of faith that makes Communion efficacious, he receives for judgment and condemnation, not for eternal life. There is nothing that we, or the Church, can do to alter that fact. And that is why formal excommunication should not be viewed as punishment but as therapy for a sickness of the soul.

We do not really know the impact of a public excommunication on these politicians themselves, on the remainder of the laity, and on the credibility of the bishops' teaching authority. When did the last public excommunication of a public official occur in the USA? While there is no shortage of scandalous candidates, our bishops have manufactured all manner of justifications for avoiding this step. The thing that seems clear to me is that their tepid response to scandal and outright disobedience over the past 30+ years has not worked and has contributed to getting us where we are today.

To me, in my understanding, it may be well that each abortion that occurs after the fact, if this goes through, will leave an indelable mark on her soul. That would be exactly because she is a leader of people.

Scripture says to render unto Ceaser what is Ceasars, and render unto God what is God. These little ones who loose their life because of money, and I sometimes think in the back of it, is a bloody sacrifice to the darkness of this world, these little ones are God's not Ceaser's.