Northwest Indiana Discussion

Indeed.

Archbishop of Washington Chides Pelosi; Denver Archbishop Warns Biden to Skip Communion
By Bill Sammon

FOXNews.com
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
By Bill Sammon

Irked by pro-choice Democrats who tout their Catholicism, the archbishop of Washington is chiding House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for misstating church history and the archbishop of Denver is warning vice presidential hopeful Joe Biden not to take Communion.

The unusual public rebukes come as both Pelosi and Biden are talking up their faith in a bid for swing voters as Democrats stage their national convention in Denver. In an interview Sunday, Pelosi claimed to be an expert on the church’s abortion stance.

“As an ardent, practicing Catholic, this is an issue that I have studied for a long time,” Pelosi told NBC’s Tom Brokaw, who had asked her when life begins. "And what I know is, over the centuries, the doctors of the church have not been able to make that definition. And St. Augustine said at three months. We don’t know.”

When Brokaw pointed out that the Catholic church “feels very strongly” that life begins at conception, Pelosi said: “I understand. And this is like maybe 50 years or something like that. So again, over the history of the church, this is an issue of controversy.”

In an interview with FOX News on Tuesday, Archbishop Donald Wuerl said people need to reflect more before they start talking about church doctrine. He also issued a statement calling Pelosi’s explanation of the church’s abortion stance “incorrect."

“The current teaching of the Catholic Church on human life and abortion is the same teaching as it was 2,000 years ago,” Wuerl noted. “From the beginning, the Catholic Church has respected the dignity of all human life from the moment of conception to natural death.”

Wuerl cited a passage from the church’s catechism that condemns abortion as “gravely contrary to moral law.”

“Since the first century the church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion,” the catechism states. “This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable.”

In an afternoon response, Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly said that as mother of five, the speaker appreciates the "sanctity of family."

"While Catholic teaching is clear that life begins at conception, many Catholics do not ascribe to that view. The speaker agrees with the Church that we should reduce the number of abortions. She believes that can be done by making family planning more available, as well as by increasing the number of comprehensive age-appropriate sex education and caring adoption programs. The speaker has a long, proud record of working with the Catholic Church on many issues, including alleviating poverty and promoting social justice and peace," said spokesman Brendan Daly.

Biden too has disagreed with the catechism, as evidenced by a 2006 interview he gave to C-SPAN, which asked him about abortion.

“That debate in our church has not morphed, but changed over a thousand years,” Biden said. “It always is viewed by the church as something that is wrong, but there’s been gradations of whether it was wrong. You know, from venial or mortal sin, as we Catholics say, and versions of it.”

But Biden added that since Pope Pius IX's reign (1846-1878), “it’s been pretty clear that’s been automatic -- moment of conception.”

Over the weekend, Biden’s pro-choice views raised the ire of Denver Archbishop Charles Chaput.

"I presume that his integrity will lead him to refrain from presenting himself for communion, if he supports a false 'right' to abortion,” Chaput told The Associated Press.

As for Pelosi, Chaput called her “a gifted public servant of strong convictions and many professional skills. Regrettably, knowledge of Catholic history and teaching does not seem to be one of them.”

Chaput added that abortion “is always gravely evil, and so are the evasions employed to justify it.”

During that 2004 presidential campaign, Chaput and a dozen other bishops called on Democratic nominee John Kerry to refrain from taking Communion. The church has also objected to former GOP presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani taking Communion.

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/08/26 ... communion/

While Bishop Chaput is entitled to his opinion,it is not the official stance of the Catholic church.

Duuuuuude. You don't have a clue what you are talking about.



The earliest explicit teaching against abortion is found in the Didache (The Lord's Instruction to the Gentiles through the Twelve Apostles). This work (c. 80) is the oldest source of ecclesiastical law and, after the New Testament, the first Christian catechism. The pertinent passage reads: "You shall not slay the child by abortion."24

The second reference to abortion appears in a theological tract known as the Epistle of the pseudo-Barnabas, written about 138. This work was highly regarded for centuries, especially by the theologians of Alexandria. The author treats abortion as a corollary to the law of fraternal charity: "You shall love your neighbor more than your own life. You shall not slay the child by abortion."25

Athenagoras, an Athenian philosopher, states in a letter to Marcus Aurelius (177) that: "All who use abortifacients are homicides and will account to God for their abortions as for the killing of men."26 Clement of Alexandria, the "Father of Theologians," wrote in 215 that abortions "destroy utterly the embryo and, with it, the love of man."27

Two early Church councils — of Elvira in Granada, Spain (c. 305) and of Ancyra in Galatia, Asia Minor (314)—condemned abortion. These councils established a firm historical precedent on the matter of abortion which later councils—the Council of Chalcedon (451) and Consillium Quinisextum (692)—ratified and strengthened. During the early period of Christianity many important writers clearly and emphatically condemned abortion as a grave evil. Among these writers are Hippolytus (235), Cyprian (258), St. Ambrose, Bishop of Milan (375), St. Jerome (d. 420), St. Augustine (d. 430), Caesarius, Bishop of Arles (d. 543), and St. Martin of Braga (580). The Christian respect for all human life during the early Christian era, exemplified in part by its opposition to abortion, contrasted markedly with the pagan world in which abortion and infanticide were common practices. This Christian attitude toward the unborn was all the more striking since it resisted the prevailing Stoic view that associated life with breath, holding that the fetus was not alive until it could breathe, and because it maintained its opposition to all abortion despite Septuagint teaching and Aristotelian thinking, both of which made distinctions between the formed and unformed fetus.
http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/ ... fm?id=3362

Have any of you conservatives ever considered why abortion continues to be legal in this country despite the fact that since 1980, Republicans have controlled the White House for twenty years? I found a site that gives a very good discussion about why none for the conservative politicians who campaign as "Pro-life" have done anything about making abortions illegal again.http://civilliberty.about.com/od/abortion/qt/roe_wade_whatif.htm
The Religious Right as we know it today exists because abortion was made legal, and it has delivered the presidency to Republicans for five of the last seven presidential elections. Want to take a guess at how the national political landscape would change if Roe were overturned? Yeah. Neither do conservative politicians, which is why--despite winning the aforementioned presidencies--Republican administrations have done nothing concrete to ban abortion. Even though conservative Republican presidents have appointed seven of our nine current Supreme Court justices, only two of these justices have expressed an interest in overturning Roe v. Wade.
I think the few dissident Bishops who talk about excommunicating Joe Biden would accomplish far more by asking why the conservative politicians they have supported have done nothing to change things.

If the conservatives were serious about making abortion illegal, they could sponsor a constitutional amendment. You also have to ask yourself why Republican Presidents have appointed 5 Supreme court justices who aren't willing to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

That is why 5 of the 7 Republican appointees to the Supreme Court aren't likely to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

The whole point of a constitutional amendment is to take the issue out of the Supreme Court's hands completely. It becomes the law of the law. Your comments about the views of appointees to the Supreme court just proves my point that Republicans have no interest in banning abortion in this country. All they want is the support of the religious right. The best way to keep that support is to give lip service to being pro-life while doing nothing about it. That is why 5 of the 7 Republican appointees to the Supreme Court aren't likely to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

Congress managed to amend the constitution to enact Prohibition, so IMO, it would be possible to amend it to ban abortion. It would take a coalition of both Democrats and Republicans to do so.

However, whether abortion is legal or not, women are still going to have them.