Friday, September 5, 2008

Pelosi's Bishop Responds

Archbishop Niederauer of San Francisco has released the following statement about Pelosi's abortion stance. I think it is the weakest of all the Bishops' responses.

The Archbishop has invited her into a "conversation". This isn't a time to be polite or to have quid pro quo. Babies are dying and she supports killing them - so what is there to talk about? She has made her feelings very clear and has heard the Bishops speak for the Church again and again. Yet, she has not swayed in her opinion.


3 comments:

Geoff said...

I had assumed earlier that the biblical model of correction had begun already. I guess I was wrong. I'm kind of bothered that they're only at this step in the process.

I think Levada is doing some good work in Rome, but it is my opinion that he should have started the process of "conversation" with her a long time ago. Niederauer's had time to start it earlier, too, but perhaps it's "better late than never."

I'm thankful for the leadership of authentic defenders of the faith like Chaput and the host of other bishops who have already stood up.

kevsisk said...

IF this goes well (and that is a big IF), this might reflect well on Archbishop Wuerl.

Last week, James Dobson was on Hannity and Colmes, and he was forced to remove his foot from his mouth after condemning McCain and his campaign earlier in the primaries. I remember praising (for the most part) the humility and meekness that seems inherent in the ordained of the Catholic Church. Isn't true humility our first step toward Holiness?

IF Pelosi meets with her Archbishop, IF this happens in a timely fashion, and IF they are able to reconcile her public scandal (speaking of her voting record on abortion, not just her misleadings on national television), I think it speaks highly of the church's willingness to shepherd each and every single member of its body. This may bode well, too, for future discussions with other politicians who pick and choose when to agree with the Catholic Church, thereby not following the Church's teaching at all (see Bishop Vasa's response: http://sentinel.org/node/9396).

Although the past is behind us and out of our present connection with God's eternity, it still begs the question, why didn't this conversation take place BEFORE now? Again, IF all goes well, I think this gives a great window of opportunity to other bishops to do some teaching of their own.

If not... then it is certainly time to turn over the tables of the moneychangers.

Geoff said...

I agree, Kevin.

I would add that any punitive measures like restricting communion or full excommunication are intended to be applied in order to save the person's soul, not publicly gauge a person. One thing that Niederauer did that was great was that gave Pelosi another chance to come reconcile, perhaps for the "seven times seventy"-th time, in a Christ-like way.

He has been criticized for his approach, and I am on the record as critical, myself, but here's the thing: Pelosi has accepted his invitation to discuss this and she is on the record as having said that being refused communion would be a serious blow to her. I believe that this process could bear positive fruit, so I'll be praying.

But I really want him to treat this with due gravity. I believe that she should publicly repent, just as she has publicly dissented for so many years, before she returns to communion. That is, IF she decides to accept the Church's teaching. I want to see an ultimatum or something, for gosh sakes!