Bishop on Nancy Pelosi:

[cmt]

Link

PORTLAND, OR, March 1, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - “It is categorically impossible for the same person to state that he or she believes simultaneously both what the Catholic Church teaches and that abortion is just a choice,” says Bishop Robert Vasa in a column released today by the Catholic Sentinel, the diocesan newspaper of the Archdiocese of Portland and the Diocese of Baker.

Although Vasa, the Bishop of Baker, did not mention her by name, he was referring in his column to Democrat Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi specifically, and to all politicians of a similar ilk in general.

“Some months ago a prominent Catholic public person,” says Vasa, “described as faithful to the church, was asked if being pro-choice or pro-abortion was an issue which conflicted with the Catholic Faith.” He goes on to quote verbatim what Nancy Pelosi stated in a highly publicized interview with Newsweek in October last year. “To me it isn’t even a question. God has given us a free will. We’re all responsible for our actions. If you don’t want an abortion, you don’t believe in it, [then] don’t have one. But don’t tell somebody else what they can do in terms of honoring their responsibilities.”

Vasa then adds a comment by Pelosi’s daughter Alexandra Pelosi, calling her only a “close relative” of the unnamed prominent Catholic. Alexandra was quoted in the San Francisco Chronicle on January 17 as saying that according to her Catholic school education neither abortion nor homosexuality were wrong, “They were just choices.”

 

[Jaypeeto3]

Good for Bishop Vasa !! God bless and prosper him !!
And as for Pelosi’s daughter’s claim about what she was taught in CATHOLIC schools, that is an abomination.
The faith must really be in declension in California.

Jaypeeto3 (aka Jaypeeto4)

 

[setter]

This good and faithful Shepherd is simply pointing out the obvious.

 

[Della]

This good and faithful Shepherd is simply pointing out the obvious.

And should follow it up with excommunication for both Pelosis if they don’t recant. Now, that would be something!

 

[mary_bobo]

Link

It’s about darn time.

 

[mdzialo]

This Bishop’s reasoning is very commendable, indeed. The argument: Pro-choice = Unjust-choice. Bravo.

 

[Pax]

I sincerely hope something is done about the Catholic School where Pelosi’s daughter is being brain washed into thinking that abortion and homosexuality are simply “choices.”

 

[MJE]

Bishop Vasa routinely speaks clearly ! Diocese of Baker has a courageous leader.

 

[dbacks5439]

What would Jesus do in this situation? To me, I think the only job Catholics have in this situation is simply warn those that abortion, same sex marriage, etc., are wrong…and leave at that. Jesus commanded us to preach to the nations. He told his disciples, as they went door to door, to do just that. If the person rejects however, then we are to shake the dust off our feet and move on. We can give the Truth, but it’s up to the individual to accept it. It would be great to have anti-abortion laws, but then again, that would infringe on free will.

    Should Nancy Pelosi receive communion? What about you? Is any of us worthy of receiving Christ? I ask because many people doesn't want her to because of her political stance. Before you judge whether or not someone should receive communion, examine your own conscience. 

                                                         Peace and God Bless :)

 

[KnightErrantJR]

It serves as a bit of a reminder . . . we hear about bishops that we, right or wrong, believe are doing things contrary to the teachings of the church, and not defending its tenants. Its easy to forget about those bishops that are indeed good and faithful leaders of their diocese.

And since I’m on the subject, I honestly thank god for my bishop, Bishop Daniel R. Jenky of the Peoria Diocese.

 

[setter]

What would Jesus do in this situation? To me, I think the only job Catholics have in this situation is simply warn those that abortion, same sex marriage, etc., are wrong…and leave at that. Jesus commanded us to preach to the nations. He told his disciples, as they went door to door, to do just that. If the person rejects however, then we are to shake the dust off our feet and move on. We can give the Truth, but it’s up to the individual to accept it. It would be great to have anti-abortion laws, but then again, that would infringe on free will.

Jesus was not referring to those of the same household of faith.

    Should Nancy Pelosi receive communion? What about you? Is any of us worthy of receiving Christ? I ask because many people doesn't want her to because of her political stance. Before you judge whether or not someone should receive communion, examine your own conscience.

                                                         Peace and God Bless :)

No one is worthy to receive the eucharist, but we are to receive the eucharist worthily. A Catholic who publically opposes Catholic teaching after charitable attempts to inform and offer repentance, has in effect disowned the faith. Giving this unrepentent and scandalous and ostensibly “Catholic” politician the boot has nothing to do with examining one’s own conscience.

 

[Elzee]

Off topic I know…but does anyone else think Bishop Vasa looks like Robin Williams in that picture?

God bless him for having the courage to speak on this. I wish more U.S. Bishops would.

 

[Corki]

It would be great to have anti-abortion laws, but then again, that would infringe on free will.

   Should Nancy Pelosi receive communion? What about you? Is any of us worthy of receiving Christ? I ask because many people doesn't want her to because of her political stance. 
                                                         Peace and God Bless :)

You are so right! Let’s get rid of all those laws that infringe on free will like those prohibiting other forms of murder, child abuse and robbery. We sure can’t go around imposing our morals on others.

The stance about Ms. Pelosi goes beyond her “political stance”. She has activly campaigned to keep the murder of children legal. She has voted against child protection laws. She has blood on her hands.

 

[bellesjoy]

Bishop Vasa is my Bishop and a very holy man who does not mince words as he teaches. He is patient and thoughtful and if you follow his writings you will see that he covers many topics that we just don’t get the straight scoop on very often. We thank The Lord for him and pray for him every day.

 

[Brendan]

What would Jesus do in this situation?

We know what the Holy Spirit would do, as He told Paul in Romans 13 that the lawful rulers have an obligation to punish those who do evil. Somehow I don’t think that Christ and the Holy Spirit are going to differ on this matter.

To me, I think the only job Catholics have in this situation is simply warn those that abortion, same sex marriage, etc., are wrong…and leave at that. Jesus commanded us to preach to the nations. He told his disciples, as they went door to door, to do just that. If the person rejects however, then we are to shake the dust off our feet and move on. We can give the Truth, but it’s up to the individual to accept it. It would be great to have anti-abortion laws, but then again, that would infringe on free will.

So Catholics could also not support laws that ban slavery, rape or murder. We could, of course, preach to slave owners that blacks are really humans too. But we could not support laws outlawing the practice, as that would interfere with Free Will.

Or the Church could teach that forcing someone to have sex is not a loving act, but if that person sincerly believes that cries for help and kicking are signes of consentual sex, we should not legally interfere with that either.

Or if a Klansman decides that lynching blacks is a fun weekend activity, we should not propose laws against that, as it might interfere with the Klansman’s Free Will?

Great moral system you have there. It can justifiy everything from speeding to genocide.

    Should Nancy Pelosi receive communion? What about you? Is any of us worthy of receiving Christ? I ask because many people doesn't want her to because of her political stance. Before you judge whether or not someone should receive communion, examine your own conscience.

                                                         Peace and God Bless :)

No one is worthy. But we are made ABLE to recieve the Eucharist when we repent of our sins, make retrabution to those we have offended and commit ourselves to avoiding sin in the future.

I strive to do this everyday. Perhaps you could point me towards a news articles where Nancy has now made statements supporting overturing of Roe v Wade.

If Nancy is now ABLE to recieve Communion, those articles would be easy to find; such a change of heart would be all over CNN now.

 

[Deacon2006]

Jesus calls all to repent over and over again because he loves all of us even in our error yet make no mistake about it those that don’t heed the call will burn as the fruitless fig tree and useless vines.

God Bless

 

[DavidGonzalez]

Man… do I hate abortion!

 

[Thadd1]

So Catholics could also not support laws that ban slavery, rape or murder. We could, of course, preach to slave owners that blacks are really humans too. But we could not support laws outlawing the practice, as that would interfere with Free Will.

Or the Church could teach that forcing someone to have sex is not a loving act, but if that person sincerly believes that cries for help and kicking are signes of consentual sex, we should not legally interfere with that either.

Or if a Klansman decides that lynching blacks is a fun weekend activity, we should not propose laws against that, as it might interfere with the Klansman’s Free Will?

This is a popular argument, but nonetheless, ridiculous. It is the responsibility of our government to maintain order. Laws against rape, murder, theft, speeding, and the like are for that purpose. It is our responsibility as Christians to promote moral behavior.

The question is not whether woman should chose life, a teen should remain chaste, or a Catholic should attend mass. The answers to these (for us, at least), are obvious. The real question, then, is why.

There have been laws in place to force us to mass, force our teens to chastity, and force our women to choose life. These no longer exist, because it was not our government’s responsibility to legislate morality, nor should it be.

If one is chaste, attends mass regularly, and follows the rest of Christ’s teachings because it is illegal not to, what does that prove? Would only lawmakers and policeman go to heaven then?

Simply put, I would not look to my local sheriff for spiritual guidance any more than I would call my parish priest if someone were breaking into my home.

 

[Glenn_J]

Link

I think that before we .accept as true what Nancy Pelosi’s daughter said about her catholic school’s teaching,
the officials at the school should be asked.
I hope it’s false.

From the time of the Apostles, induced abortion was considered a grave( Mortal) sin! See the Didache.

Glenn J

 

[Brendan]

This is a popular argument, but nonetheless, ridiculous. It is the responsibility of our government to maintain order. Laws against rape, murder, theft, speeding, and the like are for that purpose. It is our responsibility as Christians to promote moral behavior.

And one of the ways we promote moral behavior is via laws ( read Romans 13)

We recognize that rape is immoral, not just against ‘maintaining order’, and thus make it illegal.

We can historically see cultures that allowed for forced concubinage, which is a type of rape. But those societies were also able to maint ‘order’. So clearly laws against rape are not required, per se, to maintain socilogical order. But we have them none the less.

If you read in the paper about such a society, how would you feel? Whould you objection be moralily based ( on the principle of human rights), or would it be based on ‘order’?

Does the fact that such concubinage would be legal in that country have a bearing on if it is moral or not?

The question is not whether woman should chose life, a teen should remain chaste, or a Catholic should attend mass. The answers to these (for us, at least), are obvious. The real question, then, is why.

There have been laws in place to force us to mass, force our teens to chastity, and force our women to choose life. These no longer exist, because it was not our government’s responsibility to legislate morality, nor should it be.

Actually, the Mass are law that govern PIETY, not MORALITY.

On the others, yes, legislation DOES inforce Morality. A prime example are laws against chattle slavery. That is strictly a moral issue. There have certainly been ordered societies that have institutied chattle slavery.

But the 19thCentury Abolitionists advocated against slavery on MORAL grounds. And quite correctly so; no personal opinion, no law can override basic human rights.

And that is the issue here. If one is truely “pro-choice”, in that an individual person can determine, on their own, who is, or is not a human person, then they cannot honestly object to slavery.

Because what can then stop another person from beliving that blacks are not truly human, and therefore can be property, or that Jews are not truly human, and therefore can be ‘cleansed’ from a country. Or an unborn child is not truly human, and therefore may be killed.

It’s all the same issue. Who gets to determine who is human. And an ‘ordered’ society recognizes that its not a personal choice.

If one is chaste, attends mass regularly, and follows the rest of Christ’s teachings because it is illegal not to, what does that prove?

It proves that they understand Romans 13 at the very least

Would only lawmakers and policeman go to heaven then?

Nope,

Simply put, I would not look to my local sheriff for spiritual guidance any more than I would call my parish priest if someone were breaking into my home.

But this isn’t a ‘spiritual’ issue, but rather one of murder. And murder is murder, even if the person doesn’t recognize the humanity of the person they are killing.