Bookmark and Share
My Photo

FROM the EDITORS:

  • IMPORTANT INFORMATION:
    Opinions expressed on the Insight Scoop weblog are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Ignatius Press. Links on this weblog to articles do not necessarily imply agreement by the author or by Ignatius Press with the contents of the articles. Links are provided to foster discussion of important issues. Readers should make their own evaluations of the contents of such articles.

NEW & UPCOMING, available from IGNATIUS PRESS

















































































« New books and films at 20% off at www.Ignatius.com | Main | Deluges and Deserts, Sin and Salvation »

Friday, February 24, 2012

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b7c369e2016301f9cebf970d

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Taking directives from Nancy Pelosi on conscience and consistency is like...:

Comments

Charles E Flynn

Here is some food for thought:

Bishops have denied communion before, by Tim Townsend.

Peter l

I am stealing this piece.I am arguing on another blog and this is the way i see it to.I will probably be called a bigoted Catholic again but that means i won lol.

Lets hope Pelosi gets in on the act,by going on her "Winning" tour,just like that other pillar of all that is good and moral,the one and only Charlie Sheen.

Arnobius of Sicca

One thing I think we need to be careful of is questioning the commitment of bishops because they haven't excommunicated a person. Otherwise we might find others dredging up the so-called "Silence" of Pope Pius XII and Hitler.

No doubt Pelosi is a Quisling who places her soul at risk, and that by itself is a good reason to impose sanctions on her.

However, we do need to avoid thinking "Either A or B." We also need to pray for Pelosi's conversion and that her bishop be given wisdom in this matter.

Carl E. Olson

One thing I think we need to be careful of is questioning the commitment of bishops because they haven't excommunicated a person.

I agree that we need to be careful, and to give the benefit of doubt. Absolutely. But when I ask, "Why hasn't her bishop said anything?", it's not so much an accusatory question as an honest bit of wondering. I'm thrilled the bishops have all stood up against the mandate. But this is, I think, just the beginning. And addressing Pelosi publicly will be, in my estimation, necessary at some point.

Gail Finke

That feminist is close to what no one is daring to say, even her. It comes down to this: YOU MUST APPROVE. It is not enough to say, as the Church pretty much did: "You want to have sex with a lot of men? We don't approve, but go at it. Buy all the birth control devices you want, or sterilize yourself. As long as you're not killing babies, we won't even make a fuss. Don't say we didn't warn you that it wouldn't work out well. And if you decide you're sorry later, we'll help you out." No, we must all say: "You want to have sex with a lot of men? GOOD FOR YOU! That's great and we support you 100%. No wait -- we support you %110, because we will pay for you to do it!" Now, why is it that this is so vital to the Democrats? Why is that more important than pretty much any other legislative issue? Surely, if we want to talk about sensible "accommodations," we already HAD them. Do what you want and pay for it yourself, or find an employer that covers that with co-pays; that seems to me to be a pretty reasonable accommodation to me. No one is forced to pay for things that their religion teaches are wrong, and there is an affordable and universally available option for everyone who has no moral or religious problem with them. But you would never know that from the rhetoric that I hear every day from people on Facebook.

Arnobius of Sicca

I agree Mr Olson and I hope my comment did not come across as accusing you. It was more of a general comment based on some I was reminded of defending Pope Pius XII from the charges of being pro-Nazi.

If the comment did come across as accusatory, then of course I apologize.

Robert Miller

I don't recall that Hitler ever proclaimed, during the course of his political career, that he was a Catholic. Nor did any of his leading Catholic-baptized henchmen -- except Papen, of course. And Papen was a little bit like Kmiec -- a frivolous dabbler who thought (and led many of his politically like-minded Catholics to think) that he could control "his" man.
Hitler never claimed he could be a "good Catholic" and a murderer at the same time.
Furthermore, a closer look at the Nazi regime will reveal, I think, that it required even less "remote participation" in murder than the current US regime does. First, the German law (while it was modified to change the definition of who was entitled to the rights of a "German") was never interpreted to allow the murder of anyone as a matter of right. Second, the Nazi death camps were remarkably "private enterprises" -- much like abortion clinics -- only, in Nazi Germany, they were protected, out of sight (if not beyond the reasonable imagination, of most German citizens), under the cover of military command, not public law. Third, the German bishops did step up to the occasion of which they were able to take public cognizance: German laws allowing the taking of the lives of the "unfit" -- a program of state-sponsored murder of which most Germans were inescapably aware.
But, even in this third case, who were the German bishops to excommunicate? Did Hitler go to Mass and try to receive Communion? Did he ever claim he was a Catholic who, no matter what his personal views and upbringing, felt he had an obligation to support a murderous public agenda because the German public had a right to rid itself of undesirables?
No. Of course not. But then too, neither did he, the signer of the 1933 Concordat (never mind how many times he violated its letter and spirit), ever revoke it -- or take the final formal step to change German public law to rescind the framework in which the Catholic Church operated. That, perhaps, was for after a victorious war.
In the US, in contrast, we have avowed "Catholics" who are changing the public law (e.g., Pelosi, Sebelius, Cuomo, etc.)to accommodate murder and the subversion of marriage. And they uphold a regime whose public laws sanction "private" murder as a matter of right.
Actually, I would single out Sebelius, rather than Pelosi, for the priority ecclesial j'accuse.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Ignatius Insight

Twitter


Ignatius Press


Catholic World Report


WORTHY OF ATTENTION:




















Blogs & Sites We Like

November 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30            
Blog powered by Typepad