Pelosi Says Her Catholic Faith ‘Compels’ Her To Support Gay Marriage

[CMatt25]

The excommunication can be lifted. It is up to that person whether they want to reconcile with the church. No one should be worried about Pelosi’s wounded pride.

Correct on excommunicated Catholics. I don’t know if she personally feels wounded or not though. I think I’m just going to leave the state of her heart and mind though to be between God and herself and the state of her soul to God as well. And leave it go at that.

 

[Dymphna82]

Correct on excommunicated Catholics. I don’t know if she personally feels wounded or not though. I think I’m just going to leave the state of her heart and mind though to be between God and herself and the state of her soul to God as well. And leave it go at that.

What I mean by wounded pride is, I can only imagine that her excuse for not reconciling would be wounded pride. Afterall, if her good standing with the Church is more important than her need for power and acclaim, certainly she would run, not walk to the Church and apologize.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Again, I don’t know why we’re talking about excommunication. #1 - that’s a spiritual matter that is between a Catholic and his or her bishop; #2 - Excommunication as a response, from the official Church, for an erroroneous public statement about Church teaching, is not as immediate & direct as a contrary statement also publicly made, from someone recognized as an authoritative representative of Church teaching. The latter move corrects the record as to the veracity/accuracy of a pronouncement; the former could be interpreted not as a correction but merely as a (political) effort to silence. While informed Catholics know that not to be its purpose, the uninformed media and uninformed Catholics would most likely receive it as merely that, rather than an effort to set the record straight.

I do realize that Kathleeen Sibelius has been asked by her bishop not to show herself at Communion (a matter that is nevertheless between her and her bishop), because that was made public, but other things may be at play in that situation, pertinent to the level of Sibelius’ influence & her direct decisions/support. I don’t know, and again I don’t think it is helpful to concern ourselves with such matters.

 

[CMatt25]

What I mean by wounded pride is, I can only imagine that her excuse for not reconciling would be wounded pride. Afterall, if her good standing with the Church is more important than her need for power and acclaim, certainly she would run, not walk to the Church and apologize.

Or maybe at this time she just doesn’t believe or just isn’t sure her standing in the Catholic Church is all important. I have no idea. I can’t read her mind nor see within heart and am not about to try.

 

[NickVA]

Laypersons have no right or authority to ask for excommunications. This is a matter that pertains to the judgment and authority of the Bishops alone. In steady of fruitlessly talking about something you have no authority to determine, please pray for the person involved and for the Bishops, that they be good shepherds.

Please, no more talk about excommunicating her, your stepping out of you scope of influence.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

Laypersons have no right or authority to ask for excommunications. This is a matter that pertains to the judgment and authority of the Bishops alone. In steady of fruitlessly talking about something you have no authority to determine, please pray for the person involved and for the Bishops, that they be good shepherds.

Please, no more talk about excommunicating her, your stepping out of you scope of influence.

But, can we at least ask Bishops for clarification as to why she hasn’t been excommunicated then?

As a lay person, it would seem that one can make a clear case for it. That is the problem among more conservative catholics that canon law and the CCC saw one thing yet the bishops seem to be ignoring it.

 

[Elizabeth502]

But, can we at least ask Bishops for clarification as to why she hasn’t been excommunicated then?

No (i.m.o.), because it is not our business. It is, however, the business of laypeople when Catholics make errant public statements about the faith (whether those people have positions of civil authority or not). It causes confusion, distress, and scandal. But the point is, a person making an inaccurate statement may not be intending to cause scandal, regardless of how incorrect he or she is. Accuracy can be judged from afar, but intention cannot.

 

[vsedriver]

Nothing in the law or proposed law changes in any way the Sacrament of marriage in the Catholic Church. Non-sacramental unions historically called “marriage,” have existed in civil law, a contract between the state and two people. Some people want to define that contract as only being valid between opposite genders. I don’t. The Church is the Church. Everyone else in the society is not required to believe what we believe.

that contract between the state and two people has always been between opposite genders. It has never, ever been between two people of the same sex. Now if you can change that ‘contract’ to include two people of the same sex you can also change the number of people in the contract and must open it to multiple partners. Also you’ll have to open that contract up to blood relations as well.

 

[Dymphna82]

It’s more wishful thinking on my part. I hate to see the Church attacked. I’ll just point out more of her heresies instead then.

"Pelosi: ‘I am going to stick with fellow Catholics’ in supporting Obama birth control mandate"
lifesitenews.com/news/pelosi-i-am-going-to-stick-with-fellow-catholics-in-supporting-obama-birth

Pelosi: Because 90% of Catholic women use contraception, we have to mandate that Catholic orgs buy it
hotair.com/archives/2012/03/02/pelosi-because-90-of-catholic-women-use-contraception-we-have-to-mandate-that-catholic-orgs-buy-it/

“I know that the records show that 90 percent of Catholic women of childbearing age use birth control,” Pelosi said to reporters on Thursday. ”So this is a women’s health issue.”

“It’s a matter of conscience for each woman, her doctor, her husband, her family, and her God to make their own decisions. And as a Catholic, I support the right of a woman to make that decision.”

Pelosi: Catholic Church Secretly Wants Govt Contraception
newsmax.com/Newsfront/Pelosi-Catholic-contraception-Obama/2012/02/23/id/430353
**
Pelosi Bashes Catholics: “They Have This Conscience Thing”**
lifenews.com/2011/11/21/pelosi-bashes-catholics-they-have-this-conscience-thing/

A video, “Nancy Pelosi vs. the Catholic Church”. Has many soundbites:
youtube.com/watch?v=IepLtfNSM7I

ETA: Here we can see a news reporter telling her that the Church is against the mandate, but she goes against the Church anyway:
youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=jD8siKz7-Qo

 

[CMatt25]

I know that the records show that 90 percent of Catholic women of childbearing age use birth control,” Pelosi said to reporters on Thursday. ”So this is a women’s health issue.”

“It’s a matter of conscience for each woman, her doctor, her husband, her family, and her God to make their own decisions. And as a Catholic, I support the right of a woman to make that decision.”

I think I see now why you think she is saying the Catholic Church supports women using birth control. You might be misinterpreting what she means by “as a Catholic”. It’s possible all she is saying there is, I am a Catholic (She is according to the Church) and nevertheless I support a woman’s right to use birth control (She does) and she alludes to polls showing other Catholic women do. But I see though you’re interpreting her to be saying “as a Catholic” to mean she is speaking for the Church. I don’t necessarily see her saying that. We just don’t know.

 

[Elizabeth502]

I agree it’s distressing, Dymphna. That’s why the Church needs to use the media in the same aggressive ways that politicians and others use the media to communicate messages. Not only can Catholic websites (including those owned by individual Catholics --clergy, lay, etc.) publish their own CatholicPoliticiansWatch and CatholicJournalistsWatch, and DisinformationWatch, Catholic groups and clergy can also issue press releases, and initiate other forms of contact with the press, as antidotes to misrepresentations and more.

Another good move would be to lobby in various ways to become a “regular” (frequent) guest on one of those MSNBC shows. Most broadcast journalists are lazy; they like their convenient (preferably local) “expert,” and are often happy to keep a spokesperson on a virtual retainer (really just, agreement) to appear when “needed.” Chris Matthews is typical that way. On the other side, Rachel Maddow, who is even more liberal than Chris, and who is herself a lesbian, is nevertheless very open-minded about hosting oppositional guests.

I think it would be an excellent idea for clergy like Dolan (who loves to talk to the press) to contact some of the more liberal outlets to correct some of the myths and mistaken notions out there.

 

[CMatt25]

I agree it’s distressing, Dymphna. That’s why the Church needs to use the media in the same aggressive ways that politicians and others use the media to communicate messages. Not only can Catholic websites (including those owned by individual Catholics --clergy, lay, etc.) publish their own CatholicPoliticiansWatch and CatholicJournalistsWatch, and DisinformationWatch, Catholic groups and clergy can also issue press releases, and initiate other forms of contact with the press, as antidotes to misrepresentations and more.

Another good move would be to lobby in various ways to become a “regular” (frequent) guest on one of those MSNBC shows. Most broadcast journalists are lazy; they like their convenient (preferably local) “expert,” and are often happy to keep a spokesperson on a virtual retainer (really just, agreement) to appear when “needed.” Chris Matthews is typical that way. On the other side, Rachel Maddow, who is even more liberal than Chris, and who is herself a lesbian, is nevertheless very open-minded about hosting oppositional guests.

I think it would be an excellent idea for clergy like Dolan (who loves to talk to the press) to contact some of the more liberal outlets to correct some of the myths and mistaken notions out there.

It might also be helpful too while Catholic websites are doing all of those things that they also don’t mislead people as to who is a Catholic according to Church teaching, by forbidding Catholics to identify themselves as such. That would lend more credibility to them I would think. Catholic Boy for instance earlier in the thread said Nancy Pelosi would not be able to identify herself as a Catholic here on this site. I have no reason not to believe he might be right. So if she were not, it would be misleading to suggest to people that she is not a Catholic when that is not what the Church teaches. And I watch Rachel and Chris often. I’d welcome seeing them debate the guests you would like to see. Chris doesn’t call his show “Hardball” for nothing.

 

[Dymphna82]

Catholic Boy for instance earlier in the thread said Nancy Pelosi would not be able to identify herself as a Catholic here on this site. I have no reason not to believe he might be right.

Anyone here can label themselves anything they wish to label themselves as. I’m sure she’d label herself Catholic, and as long as she stayed within the rules, she’d be allowed to stay.

Meantime, I’m pretty sure she’d give most of us here an aneurism, because the things that have come out of her mouth, that she’d probably spout off here, would just be too much for us to deal with.

And that’s why these things are so distressing. How many pages have we gone through already, trying to defend the Church, because we love it, and in the end, it looks like the Church doesn’t care what is said in its name.

I guess I find things to do this summer, to help those that actually want help.

 

[CMatt25]

Anyone here can label themselves anything they wish to label themselves as. I’m sure she’d label herself Catholic, and as long as she stayed within the rules, she’d be allowed to stay.

No they can’t. But I agree she would probably at first label herself as such since she probably knows that is what the Church teaches.

 

[Keith_W_OR_USA]

Can she be excommunicated, please? Please, please, pretty please?

What a terrible thing to wish for. As far as gay marriage be recognized by the State I am totally for it. The Church does not ever have to perform same sex marriage and can deny communion to any one that is Catholic and living in sin. But we can not let the Church dictate to non-Catholics or non-believers on how they should live. America is a plural society and every person has the right to enter into a contract with anyone they want.
I have gay friends that are very dear to me and I support their right to be married if they wish. In the Church, not allowing gay marriage is fine. But outside of the Church other people have the right to live the way they see fit.

 

[Elizabeth502]

In the Church, not allowing gay marriage is fine. But outside of the Church other people have the right to live the way they see fit.

The Church most certainly does have “the right” to persuade the rest of society about what is best for society. Society can choose to be persuaded or to remain unpersuaded. That’s what a democracy is all about. Your Church and mine is not interested in discussing marriage only within the Catholic Church. That is not what the Church’s integrated, unified teaching on sexuality, marriage, the family, personhood, and an ordered Creation is all about. It’s not possible to segregate out specific portions of that theology and declare that a certain portion of it should be discarded because many members of society find it uncomfortable. Many members of society also find the Church’s stance against abortion uncomfortable, but the Church also has a right to speak out against it, and to try to pass laws opposing it, through due process, freedom of speech, and freedom of assembly.

As to America being a pluralistic country; that’s right: it means all individuals and all groups have a legitimate right to express their views, even if those views are unpopular with certain groups or individuals. And contracts do not need the title of marriage to be lawful. Finally, marriage is far more than a contract.

 

[CMatt25]

What a terrible thing to wish for. As far as gay marriage be recognized by the State I am totally for it. The Church does not ever have to perform same sex marriage and can deny communion to any one that is Catholic and living in sin. But we can not let the Church dictate to non-Catholics or non-believers on how they should live. America is a plural society and every person has the right to enter into a contract with anyone they want.
I have gay friends that are very dear to me and I support their right to be married if they wish. In the Church, not allowing gay marriage is fine. But outside of the Church other people have the right to live the way they see fit.

That might be what Nancy Pelosi is saying too. I myself am not a Catholic here nor do I speak for the Catholic Church but I agree with you. Nothing about gay marriage or the state changing the legal civil definition of marriage affects Catholic Sacramental religious marriage whatsoever. No Catholic marriage would be in jeopardy because 2 gays get recognized by the state as being married under civil law. The Catholic Church would continue not to perform such ceremonies. Some religions might. Others would not. A Catholic marriage would only be in jeopardy if there were other problems within their marriage totally unrelated. Peace.

 

[Elizabeth502]

It might also be helpful too while Catholic websites are doing all of those things that they also don’t mislead people as to who is a Catholic according to Church teaching, by forbidding Catholics to identify themselves as such.

Why do you insist on continuing to bring this up, CMatt? With whom are you arguing? The issue is dead. Again, as has been said repeatedly, the issue both on this thread and in general, is not what (a) Nancy Pelosi’s technical religious identity is, (b) what your religious identity is, (c) what your debaters’ religious identity is, or are. It doesn’t matter if Nancy Pelosi has waived her baptismal certificate constantly during every un-Catholic statement she has made.

And I did not bring that up in the post of mine, above, which you just quoted. It’s your attempt to derail the thread into a recalcitrant discussion of who is technically defined as Catholic by the Church, even while everyone else has left the subject. Therefore, your quoting me just now is non-responsive to the quote you cited. Drop it. My post had zero to do with Catholic identities on Catholic websites.

We get it that it’s your agenda, and your way of avoiding the essential topic of just what is a Catholic position versus what is not a Catholic position – instead of the straw man of “who is Catholic” and “who is not Catholic.”

 

[Dymphna82]

No they can’t.

They can’t? 2 years I’ve been here and I haven’t seen an instance of someone being told, “We don’t think you are what you say you are. Remove your religious affiliation at once!” It might be suggested but I’ve never seen it forced.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Nothing about gay marriage or the state changing the legal civil definition of marriage affects Catholic Sacramental religious marriage whatsoever.

That has nothing to do with the Church’s position on same sex “marriage.” The Church’s moral theology, as I just addressed in a recent post, is an integrated theology regarding all of marriage for all of the human race. The question of the Sacrament is an entirely separate question. And since you have been raised as a Catholic and have admitted here publicly that you have not left the faith, that is something that you should be well aware of.

No Catholic marriage would be in jeopardy because 2 gays get recognized by the state as being married.

It’s not “particular” marriages which are individually jeopardized, so much as the entire institution of marriage, for a society and even a world, being jeopardized: Catholic marriages, civil traditional marriages, Jewish marriages, Protestant marriages…