For Advertising Info, Write.
rwnews@blogads.com
Premium Left blogad
Left Blog Ad

Advertisement
Once Again The Archbishop Has To Correct Speaker Pelosi on Church Teaching
Written By : Kathleen McKinley

From Catholic San Francisco:

In a recent interview with Eleanor Clift in Newsweek magazine (Dec. 21, 2009), House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was asked about her disagreements with the United States Catholic bishops concerning Church teaching. Speaker Pelosi replied, in part: “I practically mourn this difference of opinion because I feel what I was raised to believe is consistent with what I profess, and that we are all endowed with a free will and a responsibility to answer for our actions. And that women should have the opportunity to exercise their free will.”

The Archbishop of San Francisco wrote this to correct Speaker Pelosi once again. (emphasis mine)

Catholic teaching on free will recognizes that God has given men and women the capacity to choose good or evil in their lives. The bishops at the Second Vatican Council declared that the human person, endowed with freedom, is “an outstanding manifestation of the divine image.” (Gaudium et Spes, No. 17) As the parable of the Grand Inquisitor in Dostoevsky’s novel, The Brothers Karamazov, makes so beautifully clear, God did not want humanity to be mere automatons, but to have the dignity of freedom, even recognizing that with that freedom comes the cost of many evil choices.

However, human freedom does not legitimate bad moral choices, nor does it justify a stance that all moral choices are good if they are free: “The exercise of freedom does not imply a right to say or do everything.” (The Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 1740) Christian belief in human freedom recognizes that we are called but not compelled by God to choose constantly the values of the Gospel—faith, hope, love, mercy, justice, forgiveness, integrity and compassion.

It is entirely incompatible with Catholic teaching to conclude that our freedom of will justifies choices that are radically contrary to the Gospel—racism, infidelity, abortion, theft. Freedom of will is the capacity to act with moral responsibility; it is not the ability to determine arbitrarily what constitutes moral right.
………………

While we deeply respect the freedom of our fellow citizens, we nevertheless are profoundly convinced that free will cannot be cited as justification for society to allow moral choices that strike at the most fundamental rights of others. Such a choice is abortion, which constitutes the taking of innocent human life, and cannot be justified by any Catholic notion of freedom.

Kudos to the Archbishop for not letting a leader who professes to be Catholic distort the Catholic faith. Pelosi is free to believe in the “the church of Pelosi” and cite that all she wishes, but leave the Catholic faith out of it. It’s clear she was raised with little understanding of it.

0
  • http://conservativebootcamp.com martinhale

    Just when you think you’ve heard the most arrogant thing that Ms. Pelosi has said, she comes out and tops it with something even more arrogant and self-centered. The name Queen Nancy sure fits with her sense of imperiousness.

  • http://networdblog.blogspot.com/ Christopher_Taylor

    I know this is Nancy Pelosi and so we’re dealing with at best a minor intelligence, but the argument that free will must be defended to the point of killing other human beings is the weakest argument for abortion I’ve ever heard.

  • Crimsonfella

    I have noticed many times the left having to twist the scriptures around to try to defend their left wing policies.It sounds like to me she is trying to say I was raised up a catholic and I know the church’s position on abortion but I cannot accept that because I am a liberal democrat and believe women have a right to abort babies.

  • http://guardian.blogdrive.com/ CavalierX

    I have noticed many times the left having to twist the scriptures around to try to defend their left wing policies.

    Whenever a Liberal’s religious beliefs conflict with his ideology, religion loses.

  • MediumHeadBoy

    Nah, to leftists their ideology is a religion. Witness “global warming.”

  • fiscal_conservative

    Well you folks will really like this one. God is pro-choice. My god can rain fire, split the seas, flood the earth, turn you into a pillar of salt. He can certainly stop an abortion if he so chooses. It is a moral decision, one you will have to answer for. Do you want big government telling you what you can and can’t do with your body? Do you want to provide medical care for an additional 4 million children a year? Do you want to provide prenatal care for 4 million mothers a year? You may say it is their responsibility, but it has been demonstrated that the would be mothers would rather end their pregnancy than carry these children to term. What will keep them from drinking, smoking, drug use, etc… during the pregnancy. Are you going to pass additional laws on what they can and can’t do with their bodies? So much for small gov. If you disagree you are a fascist.

  • http://conservativebootcamp.com martinhale

    Slow shift on the power panel, hoggo?

    So, let me see if I can get your “reasoning” straight – the care for all those babies is going to cost a lot of money, so let’s just kill them. Isn’t that what you’re saying, at least in part?

    So all those millions of seniors on Medicare are costing too much, especially in the last 18 months of their lives, so why don’t we just kill them?

    All those people born with serious birth defects and mental/intellectual deficiencies are going to cost us a bunch too, so why don’t we just kill them.

    Oh, and then there are those millions who become mentally ill and/or addicted. Aren’t they costing us a bundle? I know, why don’t we just kill them?

    Wait, this is easy – how about those louts rotting in prison on life sentences? They’re running us billions. How about we just kill them?

    Wow, this is fun. How about those Democrats? They spend more than the government can take in. Wouldn’t it just be cheaper for us if we just killed them?

    Thinking like that ought to get us back to a population about the size of the US in 1900 in no time. And think of the benefit to the environment that would happen in the process. Plus there’d be tonnes of excess housing available so everyone could have a house.

    If you can’t comprehend the sarcasm, I feel sorry for you.

  • fiscal_conservative

    In one short answer, yes. That would be the fiscally responsible thing to do. Does that hurt your feelings? Do you enjoy paying taxes?

Advertisement
Featured Video

The History of Ernesto Che Guevara – A Short Story

php developer india
Premium Right Ads
Blogads Right
Previous Features

Ads

The Best Quotes From “Ten Prayers God Always Says Yes To”
Hey Lady Gaga, Kids Have a Time-Tested Answer for Bullies: Punch Them in the Mouth
Seven Differences Between Winners And Losers
The Problem With The Occupy Wall Street Generation
The 20 Most Influential Black Republicans
Talking With Chuck D. From Public Enemy About Farrakhan, Air America’s Failure, And Open Borders
Advertisement
User Info