Callista Gingrich set to be named ambassador to the Vatican

  • Thread starter Thread starter Thomas_Ruin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Another gratuitous remark. With all due respect, who cares who you would have chosen, or anyone else for that matter. We are not in a position to do so. I am amazed at how many, on both sides, find it necessary to make snarky remarks. They certainly add nothing to the conversatioin.
👍
 
Thank you. I had forgotten about the production company she and Newt have.
She does have experience in Washington and I think sounds qualified to be the
Ambassador to the Vatican. What an honor that would be!
 
Washington D.C., May 16, 2017 / 11:31 am (CNA/EWTN News).- President Donald Trump has chosen Callista Gingrich, wife of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, to be the next U.S. Ambassador to the Vatican, according to reports.

Callista Gingrich is the president of both Gingrich Productions in Arlington, Va. and the charitable non-profit Gingrich Foundation, and is a former Congressional aide.

She is also a long-time member of the choir at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington, D.C.

Newt and Callista married in 2000, after having a six-year affair while Newt was married to his previous wife. Newt converted to Catholicism in 2009 and explained, in an interview that year with Deal Hudson at InsideCatholic.com, how Callista’s witness as a Catholic brought him towards the faith.

He noted that he had attended Masses at the National Shrine where Callista sang in the choir, and she “created an environment where I could gradually think and evolve on the issue of faith.”

At the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast in 2011, he also cited Pope Benedict XVI’s 2008 visit to the U.S. as a “moment of confirmation” for him. At vespers with the Pope, where Callista sang in the Shrine choir, Newt recalled thinking that “here is where I belong.”

The couple worked on a documentary together that was released in 2010, “Nine Days That Changed the World,” that focused on Pope St. John Paul II’s 1979 pilgrimage to Poland when the former Soviet bloc country was under a communist government.

The documentary explained how the Pope invigorated the faith of the Polish people in Jesus Christ during his pilgrimage there, and how the visit precipitated the fall of Communism.

In an Easter message posted on the website of Gingrich Productions, the couple noted that “we should remember the many threats facing Christians today,” including “a growing secularism, which seeks to place human desires ahead of God and His will,” and “radical Islamism” that “seeks to destroy Christianity across the globe.”

“But in the face of this evil, we remember the words of Saint John Paul II, who throughout his papacy urged us to, ‘Be not afraid’,” the statement continued.

As ambassador, Gingrich would follow Ken Hackett, the former head of Catholic Relief Services who served during President Obama’s second term as president.

In a January interview with CNA, Hackett opined that there would be areas of difference and of collaboration between the U.S. and the Holy See under the Trump administration.

One of the possible areas of tension might be on immigration and refugees, as Trump criticized Pope Francis on the campaign trail in 2016 after the Pope said a Mass at the U.S.-Mexico border and urged everyone to pray for conversion of hearts over the suffering of forced migration.

Trump, who repeatedly promised to build a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border and make the Mexican government pay for it, said last February that the Pope was a “pawn” of the Mexican government and “is a very political person, I think he doesn’t understand the problems our country has.”

He also issued an executive order shutting down refugee admissions for four months at a time when Pope Francis has taken in refugees and U.S. bishops have called for the country to continue accepting refugees fleeing violence.

Meanwhile, there are other possible areas of collaboration between the U.S. and the Holy See, Hackett said in January, including on human trafficking, peace in the Middle East, a solution to the worsening crisis in Venezuela, and efforts to alleviate global poverty.

President Trump and Pope Francis will meet at the Vatican on May 24.

feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/catholicnewsagency/dailynews?d=yIl2AUoC8zA
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/catholicnewsagency/dailynews/~4/1tB_SQWimXY

Full article…
 
I just hope we get frequent communication between the United States and the Vatican. What exactly are the duties of the Ambassador? By the way, I do admire Calista and Newt.
 
This nomination does not sit well with me.

The nominee’s behavior prior to her marriage to Newt Gingrich was both tawdry and scandalous. To my knowledge she has expressed no regret or remorse for her role in breaking up Newt Gingrich’s second marriage. She is a public figure and regularly proclaims her Catholicity by prominently appearing in the choir of the Immaculate Conception Cathedral.

I have no comment on the canonical status of her marriage. I don’t know anything about that. Also, I fully recognize that we are all sinners. No one is exempt from that designation. Yet I think that as a public figure, a Catholic public figure, she has a moral obligation to avoid giving scandal. To my mind she has failed to live up to that obligation.

A Catholic who aspires to such an important and public role as Ambassador to the Holy See should be free from giving public scandal.
 
This nomination does not sit well with me.

The nominee’s behavior prior to her marriage to Newt Gingrich was both tawdry and scandalous. To my knowledge she has expressed no regret or remorse for her role in breaking up Newt Gingrich’s second marriage. She is a public figure and regularly proclaims her Catholicity by prominently appearing in the choir of the Immaculate Conception Cathedral.

I have no comment on the canonical status of her marriage. I don’t know anything about that. Also, I fully recognize that we are all sinners. No one is exempt from that designation. Yet I think that as a public figure, a Catholic public figure, she has a moral obligation to avoid giving scandal. To my mind she has failed to live up to that obligation.

A Catholic who aspires to such an important and public role as Ambassador to the Holy See should be free from giving public scandal.
Congratulations on your ability to read minds and hearts. I guesss you are God now?
 
Can we have an actual conversation about her qualifications? I am asking sincerely. Some ambassadors are merely political appointments, and the ambassador has no diplomatic background and no background in whatever issues may arise. Others are chosen for a specific reason. I have no problem with Pres. Trump picking Callista for either reason. (is that clear enough?) I am just wondering if anyone knows if she has a background other than being Catholic?
I’m not familiar with this, but what’s the qualification to be an ambassador to the Vatican?
 
I’m not familiar with this, but what’s the qualification to be an ambassador to the Vatican?
There is nothing formal. I opined in an earlier post that an ambassador should be close enough to the administration to be an effective representative to the country, and know enough about the relevant issues and cultures to be an effective communicator. I suppose I would add that the person should be someone the country finds credible and serious. I am willing to believe that Ms. Gingrich meets those criteria, but I really don’t know one way or the other.
 
This nomination does not sit well with me.

The nominee’s behavior prior to her marriage to Newt Gingrich was both tawdry and scandalous. To my knowledge she has expressed no regret or remorse for her role in breaking up Newt Gingrich’s second marriage. She is a public figure and regularly proclaims her Catholicity by prominently appearing in the choir of the Immaculate Conception Cathedral.

I have no comment on the canonical status of her marriage. I don’t know anything about that. Also, I fully recognize that we are all sinners. No one is exempt from that designation. Yet I think that as a public figure, a Catholic public figure, she has a moral obligation to avoid giving scandal. To my mind she has failed to live up to that obligation.

A Catholic who aspires to such an important and public role as Ambassador to the Holy See should be free from giving public scandal.
There is not many Americans to choose from and those who do have been long dead. So we have to make do with Mrs. Gingrich, unless you can recommend a better one?
 
There is nothing formal. I opined in an earlier post that an ambassador should be close enough to the administration to be an effective representative to the country, and know enough about the relevant issues and cultures to be an effective communicator. I suppose I would add that the person should be someone the country finds credible and serious. I am willing to believe that Ms. Gingrich meets those criteria, but I really don’t know one way or the other.
So, in your estimation that is the qualification. Ok, got it.
 
I think it very uncharitable to assume that Callista (1) not repentant of her sins and (2) doesn’t deserve a political appointment because of sins she committed decades ago. Even the EWTN article seem to slap a “scarlet woman who sinned sexually” label on her. Yet, I can’t think of any EWTN articles on her husband, Newt, that make it a point of mentioning he was married three times and cheated on both his 1st and 2nd wives.

Why should Callista Gingrich be held to a higher standard than her husband? Or her boss, President Trump, who also married three times, and definitely cheated on his 1st wife, Ivana, with the 2nd one, Marla. That scandal fueled the gossip rags for a while when it happened, though Trump was much less famous back then.

Of course in an ideal world everyone who has a public position has a sterling moral life, but that hasn’t been the case since, well, ever. Even medieval kings had mistresses as a matter of course, and some of the queens had lovers, too. Marie Antoinette comes to mind as a famous example.
 
I think it very uncharitable to assume that Callista (1) not repentant of her sins and (2) doesn’t deserve a political appointment because of sins she committed decades ago. Even the EWTN article seem to slap a “scarlet woman who sinned sexually” label on her. Yet, I can’t think of any EWTN articles on her husband, Newt, that make it a point of mentioning he was married three times and cheated on both his 1st and 2nd wives.

Why should Callista Gingrich be held to a higher standard than her husband? Or her boss, President Trump, who also married three times, and definitely cheated on his 1st wife, Ivana, with the 2nd one, Marla. That scandal fueled the gossip rags for a while when it happened, though Trump was much less famous back then.

Of course in an ideal world everyone who has a public position has a sterling moral life, but that hasn’t been the case since, well, ever. Even medieval kings had mistresses as a matter of course, and some of the queens had lovers, too. Marie Antoinette comes to mind as a famous example.
Well said!👍
 
This nomination does not sit well with me.

The nominee’s behavior prior to her marriage to Newt Gingrich was both tawdry and scandalous. To my knowledge she has expressed no regret or remorse for her role in breaking up Newt Gingrich’s second marriage. She is a public figure and regularly proclaims her Catholicity by prominently appearing in the choir of the Immaculate Conception Cathedral.

I have no comment on the canonical status of her marriage. I don’t know anything about that. Also, I fully recognize that we are all sinners. No one is exempt from that designation. Yet I think that as a public figure, a Catholic public figure, she has a moral obligation to avoid giving scandal. To my mind she has failed to live up to that obligation.

A Catholic who aspires to such an important and public role as Ambassador to the Holy See should be free from giving public scandal.
Are you the priest she goes to for confession where you would be in a position to know this? If the answer is in fact yes (which i doubt) is it really proper to be sharing that information?
 
I think it very uncharitable to assume that Callista (1) not repentant of her sins
I did not say that. I have no way of knowing that.
40.png
ToeInTheWater:
and (2) doesn’t deserve a political appointment because of sins she committed decades ago.
I don’t have an issue with her being appointed ambassador anywhere except the Vatican. Before getting this job, some kind of public acknowledgement of previous misconduct ought to be expected.

The Church expects thieves to be willing to make some form of restitution (which is in effect a public acknowledgement of what the thief has done) as part of receiving absolution.

So it should be with a prominent Catholic appointed to represent the US in the Vatican whose past has been mired in public scandal.
40.png
ToeInTheWater:
Even the EWTN article seem to slap a “scarlet woman who sinned sexually” label on her. Yet, I can’t think of any EWTN articles on her husband, Newt, that make it a point of mentioning he was married three times and cheated on both his 1st and 2nd wives.

Why should Callista Gingrich be held to a higher standard than her husband? Or her boss, President Trump, who also married three times, and definitely cheated on his 1st wife, Ivana, with the 2nd one, Marla. That scandal fueled the gossip rags for a while when it happened, though Trump was much less famous back then.
She is the one up for this job, not her husband. If he were, I would make the exact same objection.
 
This nomination does not sit well with me.

The nominee’s behavior prior to her marriage to Newt Gingrich was both tawdry and scandalous. To my knowledge she has expressed no regret or remorse for her role in breaking up Newt Gingrich’s second marriage. She is a public figure and regularly proclaims her Catholicity by prominently appearing in the choir of the Immaculate Conception Cathedral.

I have no comment on the canonical status of her marriage. I don’t know anything about that. Also, I fully recognize that we are all sinners. No one is exempt from that designation. Yet I think that as a public figure, a Catholic public figure, she has a moral obligation to avoid giving scandal. To my mind she has failed to live up to that obligation.

A Catholic who aspires to such an important and public role as Ambassador to the Holy See should be free from giving public scandal.
I can see your point.
 
There is not many Americans to choose from and those who do have been long dead.
80 million Catholics in the U.S.

Does one have to be related to a politician to be in this “not many Americans” pool?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top