The Church v. Politicians or Is There Finally Some BITE Back in Catholicism?

Cross Posted from Miss Beth’s Victory Dance here:

who visits here regularly knows at least two things about me: I am
Catholic, practicing in the Tridentine tradition (that’s the old Latin,
Pre-Vatican II version) and I am virulently anti abortion in all its
forms. For any reason. No politically correct excuses of rape or
incest. No exceptions.

When people accuse me of being against
women, I calmly tell them no, I’m simply pro-child. I don’t believe a
woman, any woman, is entitled to kill her unborn child for any
reason–when she begins a pregnancy, she is no longer a singular being
but is in fact an incubator for a new life. If that makes me
anti-woman, so be it.

Believe me, I’ve heard it all. And, when I
point out no matter how loud I’m screeched at, or how hysterical the
other person becomes, the other person generally gives up and goes
directly to ad homs.

Again, so be it. I have walked my talk and
am entitled to my views. If you don’t like them, don’t listen. But
don’t attempt to change my mind either, particularly in a hysterical

Which brings us to politicians.

We have four very
prominent politicians who proclaim to be Catholic, yet are rabidly
pro-death (do NOT argue with me on this–you are either pro-life or
pro-death; choice is a politically correct term chosen so you don’t
have to face the gruesome reality of your “choice”). Those politicians
are Nancy Pelosi, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry and Joe Biden.

Surprise! They’re all democrats.

They think the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the Bible and Church
Doctrine are something you can pick and choose from, sort of like an
ecclesiastical buffet.

The trouble is, it doesn’t work like
that. You either follow Church canon and are in line with your chosen
faith or you don’t and you aren’t. When you are out of line with the
Church because you don’t understand something or don’t know something,
that’s fine–as long as you are striving for understanding or the
answer. To be PURPOSELY out of line with Doctrine is quite another
matter. It shows you have CHOSEN to distance yourself, through your own
arrogance, from the teachings.

Might I remind anyone here that
God gave us free will–yes. Absolutely He gave us free will. Part of
that free will is to choose whether we follow Him in our faith or
distance ourselves from Him by rejecting His teachings. But you don’t
get to pick and choose for expediency.

In matters of life, the
Church has always been firm–life begins at natural conception and ends
at natural death. From the inception of the Church over 2,000 years
ago, this has been the teaching.

On July 25, 1968–in the wake
of the advent of “The Pill” and the subsequent sexual revolution–Pope
Paul VI published the groundbreaking encyclical “Humanae Vitae”.

From Section I: Problem and Competency of the Magisterium, Point 2:

The changes that have taken place are of considerable importance and
varied in nature. In the first place there is the rapid increase in
population which has made many fear that world population is going to
grow faster than available resources, with the consequence that many
families and developing countries would be faced with greater
hardships. This can easily induce public authorities to be tempted to
take even harsher measures to avert this danger. There is also the fact
that not only working and housing conditions but the greater demands
made both in the economic and educational field pose a living situation
in which it is frequently difficult these days to provide properly for
a large family.

Also noteworthy is a new
understanding of the dignity of woman and her place in society, of the
value of conjugal love in marriage and the relationship of conjugal
acts to this love.

But the most remarkable
development of all is to be seen in man’s stupendous progress in the
domination and rational organization of the forces of nature to the
point that he is endeavoring to extend this control over every aspect
of his own life—over his body, over his mind and emotions, over his
social life, and even over the laws that regulate the transmission of

The next subsection is “New Questions” Point 3:

if one were to apply here the so called principle of totality, could it
not be accepted that the intention to have a less prolific but more
rationally planned family might transform an action which renders
natural processes infertile into a licit and provident control of
birth? Could it not be admitted, in other words, that procreative
finality applies to the totality of married life rather than to each
single act? A further question is whether, because people are more
conscious today of their responsibilities, the time has not come when
the transmission of life should be regulated by their intelligence and
will rather than through the specific rhythms of their own bodies.

And the last, “Interpreting the Moral Law” Point 4:

member of the faithful could possibly deny that the Church is competent
in her magisterium to interpret the natural moral law. It is in fact
indisputable, as Our predecessors have many times declared, (l) that
Jesus Christ, when He communicated His divine power to Peter and the
other Apostles and sent them to teach all nations His commandments, (2)
constituted them as the authentic guardians and interpreters of the
whole moral law, not only, that is, of the law of the Gospel but also
of the natural law. For the natural law, too, declares the will of God,
and its faithful observance is necessary for men’s eternal salvation.

of this is very basic. However, it does illustrate those politicians
were called out by the Church. The Church in no way dismissed women,
nor has it ever. It recognizes women have a separate but equal calling.
That has been drowned out by the screeds of the femi-nazis. One of
those is Nancy Pelosi.

Several times now, Nancy Pelosi has decided she can be all Catholic and totally pro-death,
including partial birth abortion. Most recently on Meet the Press and
her follow up interview. The YouTube video is below and relevant quotes
are below it, from A Shepherd’s Voice here:


The corruption of reason is one of the logical consequences of legalized abortion.

Here is the Speaker of the House this morning on “Meet the Press”:

MR. BROKAW: Senator Obama saying the question of when life begins is above his pay grade, whether you’re looking at it scientifically or theologically. If he were to come to you and say, “Help me out here, Madame Speaker. When does life begin?” what would you tell him?

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 th
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–f
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.”

To answer the simple question “When does life begin?” Nancy Pelosi chooses to cite the authority of a bishop who lived 1500 years ago. Madame Speaker, we don’t ask the Doctors of the Church to “make that definition.” One does not read St. Augustine to find out when life begins. One reads modern textbooks on biology and embryology. And when one does that, one finds out that we do know when life begins:

Nancy: “And so I don’t think anybody can tell you when life begins, human life begins.”

Actual expert: “When scientists could examine embryos under the microscope, they recognized that the processes of development constituted a continuum from fertilization through delivery. There is no magic moment at which an embryo suddenly becomes something different.” -William L. Nyhan, M.D.; Ph.D; “The Heredity Factor, ” p256.
(Professor Nyhan is a graduate of Harvard, Columbia, and the University
of Illinois, and one-time Chairman of the Department of Pediatrics at
the University of California.)

The fact is that Nancy Pelosi deliberately chooses not
to consult the experts as to when a human life begins. She must make
this choice because she knows she can only maintain her support for
legalized abortion by a deliberately cultivated ignorance.

truth is one. To justify her support of legalized abortion, Nancy must
not only ignore the teachings of scientists, who are the proper
authorities on the question of when life begins. She must also ignore
the teaching of the Church, who are the proper authorities on the
morality of abortion:

by the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter and his Successors,
in communion with the Bishops—who on various occasions have condemned
abortion and
who in the aforementioned consultation, albeit dispersed throughout the
world, have shown unanimous agreement concerning this doctrine—I
declare that direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as
a means, always constitutes a grave moral disorde
r, since it is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. This doctrine is based upon the natural law and upon the written Word of God, is transmitted by the Church’s Tradition and taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium.

circumstance, no purpose, no law whatsoever can ever make licit an act
which is intrinsically illicit, since it is contrary to the Law of God
which is written in every human heart, knowable by reason itself, and
proclaimed by the Church.”

-Pope John Paul II; “Evangelium Vitae,” paragraph 62, March 25, 1995.

Pelosi says “that as an ardent, practicing Catholic, this is an issue that I have studied for a long time.” Both assertions in that statement are false. She has not seriously studied the issue at all–to do so would force her to change her position. And no “ardent, practicing Catholic” has ever been, or ever will be, “pro-choice” on abortion.

Reactions were swift and immediate:

From Faithworl (Catholic Bishops Correct Pelosi on Abortion):

In a statement late on Tuesday, Bishop Michael Sheridan of Colorado Springs said: “Those
Catholics who take a public stance in opposition to the most
fundamental moral teaching of the Church place themselves outside full
communion with the Church, an
d they should not present themselves for the reception of Holy Communion.”

From FoxNews (Congressman Calls Pelosi’s Abortion Remarks Scandalous):

“I hope she understands this is not an historical controversy recently
settled but a long-standing, fundamental teaching of the Catholic
Church that abortion is inherently immoral. And perhaps it will help
open her heart,” he continued.

Pope Benedict XVI weighs in here:

“Children are the major richness and the most precious good of a family,” he said.

this reason, it is necessary to help all people to be aware that the
intrinsic evil of the crime of abortion, which attacks human life at
its beginning, is also an aggression against society itself,” the pope

Many, MANY others have weighed in on this. The
fact is the Church is VERY clear on it’s stands regarding life and
death and always has been. It is unequivocal. You cannot be a
practicing Catholic and be pro-death. It’s a dichotomy which will never

Pelosi has garnered special attention and is finally being called out publicly, to the point of being denied Holy Communion:

National Catholic Reporter Online: San Francisco Archbishop Invites Pelosi to Discuss Abortion here and Archbishop Niederauer Responds to House Speaker’s Statements here:

a Catholic in his or her personal or professional life were knowingly
and obstinately to reject the defined doctrines of the church, or
knowingly and obstinately repudiate her definitive teachings on moral
issues, however, he or she would seriously diminish his or her
communion with the church. Reception of Holy Communion in such a
situation would not accord with the nature of the eucharistic
celebration, so that he or she should refrain.”


The Catechism of the Catholic Church we find this statement: “Human
life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of
conception. Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral
evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and
remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, willed either as
an end or a means, is grossly contrary to the moral law.” (2270-71) The
Catechism then quotes the Didache (also referred to as The Teachings of
the Twelve Apostles), the oldest extant manual of church order, dating
from the late first or early second century: “You shall not kill the
embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.

Well. That seems pretty clear to me.

Vatican II, the Church has been pretty lax on a lot of her teachings.
Many, particularly on the liberal side of the aisle, feel the Church
isn’t lax enough–they want birth control, women priests, Holy
Communion without Penance, “freedom” to cohabitate without marriage,
etc. They simply don’t understand the Church will not change her stance
on these items–ever. No matter the currently in vogue “revolution”,
the Church will not change for expediency. She can’t change. These are
doctrines laid down by Jesus Himself. They are forever. And the
unchanging nature of the Church on these doctrines is what has made the
Catholic Church the Universal church all these centuries.

Vatican II, churches are closing, seminaries and convents are closing,
pews sit empty. Why? Because of the changes. The people DID NOT want
the changes. Those changes didn’t strengthen the Church, they weakened

Pope John Paul II started the road back to what she was;
Benedict XVI is following in his footsteps. But understand
this–artificial birth control, pro-death views, demanding women
priests, demanding accomodations for homosexual behavior–the doctrines
will not change. There was one good thing that came out of Vatican II.
Instead of feeling condemned in confession, the trend has indeed been
on hate the sin, love the sinner.

The Church has given her
warning. If you are a politician and/or a public figure and claiming to
be Catholic, and if as a Catholic politician and/or public figure you
are espousing positions outside of Church doctrine, you will be denied
Holy Communion. Both Pelosi, Biden and Kerry have been told not to
approach. As it should be.

Is this a matter of separation of
Church and State? No–because you have to make a choice at sometime. If
you make a public choice to live outside your stated faith, that faith
has the right to deny you the benefits of that faith as you are not a
steward by example. It really is that simple.

Here, for those
who think abortion is no big deal, are a few views of “women’s choice”
espoused by Biden, Pelosi, Kerry and Kennedy:

This is a saline abortion:

This is a partial birth abortion:

dare anyone to tell me these children were simply blobs of tissue. This
is what pro-death means. This is what is meant by those screaming for
“women’s rights”.

People like me are very dangerous indeed. We
are not perfect by any means. But we do the best we can to walk our
talk. And for that, we are screamed at and called “religious” as if it
were a dirty word. Perhaps it’s because those who believe in this kind
of “enlightenment” are truly dangerous–and yes, evil. This isn’t about
a woman’s choice, her personal doctor and her body. This is about the
wholesale slaughter of children, pure and simple.

Pelosi, Biden,
Kerry and Kennedy–I truly hope you see the light. Otherwise, I hope
you remove yourself from the Catholic family. We cherish our children
whereas you cherish the killing of them.