August 27, 2008

Way to go!

So, Speaker Pelosi made this statement about Church doctrine:

I would say that as an ardent, practicing Catholic, this is an issue that I have studied for a long time. And what I know is, over the centuries, the doctors of the church have not been able to make that definition. St. Augustine said at three months. We don't know. The point is, is that it shouldn't have an impact on the woman's right to choose. Roe v. Wade talks about very clear definitions of when the child-first trimester, certain considerations; second trimester; not so third trimester. There's very clear distinctions. This isn't about abortion on demand, it's about a careful, careful consideration of all factors and-to-that a woman has to make with her doctor and her god. And so I don't think anybody can tell you when life begins, human life begins.

Obviously, this is a gross mangling of Church doctrine. The Church is, in fact, very clear that abortion is always wrong, regardless of any circumstances. In response to this, just about every bishop in America spoke up in defense of the Church, just as they should. A few selected responses:

From the USCCB:

The Church has always taught that human life deserves respect from its very beginning and that procured abortion is a grave moral evil. In the Middle Ages, uninformed and inadequate theories about embryology led some theologians to speculate that specifically human life capable of receiving an immortal soul may not exist until a few weeks into pregnancy. While in canon law these theories led to a distinction in penalties between very early and later abortions, the Church's moral teaching never justified or permitted abortion at any stage of development.

And from His Emminence Edward Cardinal Egan:

We are blessed in the 21st century with crystal-clear photographs and action films of the living realities within their pregnant mothers. No one with the slightest measure of integrity or honor could fail to know what these marvelous beings manifestly, clearly, and obviously are, as they smile and wave into the world outside the womb. In simplest terms, they are human beings with an inalienable right to live, a right that the Speaker of the House of Representatives is bound to defend at all costs for the most basic of ethical reasons. They are not parts of their mothers, and what they are depends not at all upon the opinions of theologians of any faith. Anyone who dares to defend that they may be legitimately killed because another human being "chooses" to do so or for any other equally ridiculous reason should not be providing leadership in a civilized democracy worthy of the name.

This leaves no room whatsoever for doubt. Pelosi, and any other Catholics in office who support abortion are completely seperating themselves from the Church and its doctrine, and in doing so are leading astray other Catholics. This is a very evil thing, indeed. Let us be thankful that our bishops were so quick to refute her unfounded statements! Three cheers for the U.S. bishops!


Labels: , , , , , ,


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes....because when I'm looking for an institution to give me teaching on right/wrong in regards to babies.......I go to one that has an established history of serial rape of innocent children. Makes sense.

August 28, 2008 1:11 PM  
Anonymous Catholic Obvious Man said...

You have some dang sloppy methods for reaching an "established history", anon., if you think a miniscule fraction of the members blatantly disregarding the teaching of the society as a whole makes the society hypocritical. By that logic the US government is a far greater problem on any criminal issue, including, yes, rape of innocent children by schoolteachers who are then protected by the law. Have you actually looked at any statistics on it or is your Bright Enlightened brain capable of drawing factual conclusions based on the gist of the newspaper hype? Pardon my brashness; that argument is just both so dumb and so overused that I can't respond gently to it these days.

August 28, 2008 1:57 PM  
Anonymous Catholic Obvious Man said...

In hindsight, it was wrong of me to give an ad hominem response, even to an ad hominem argument, and I especially shouldn't be a hypocrite like that while talking about hypocrisy. Please accept my apologies. (Maybe I need a different pseudonym till I learn to keep a better eye on my own obvious wrongs?)

August 28, 2008 3:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Minuscule fraction? If it was only ONE priest who was systematically moved around from parish to parish, being permitted to rape and rape again, it was too many and damning of those in charge who not only LET it happen, but covered it up thereafter.

But it was more than one. ALLOT more than one. And you know that.

How anyone could call themselves a proud member of an organization that has condoned and covered up the rape of children is beyond me.

But then again, how anyone can read the bible and not crack up laughing at the complete and utter nonsense dripping from every page is also beyond me.

August 29, 2008 2:53 PM  
Blogger Kyle R. Cupp said...


It's good that you know that there are matters beyond you. Humility is a prerequisite for wisdom and understanding.

August 30, 2008 9:22 AM  
Blogger Kyle R. Cupp said...

The ethic of functioning in an organization includes the toleration of evils within that organization. By that I don’t mean that such evils should be ignored or encouraged – they should be condemned – but rather that belonging to any organization means that one is organized with evils, either done by other individuals within the organization or systemic to the organization itself. Human nature being what it is, the larger the organization, the more evil members of that organization will have to tolerate, or live with, if they are to remain members.

An alternative is to separate oneself from any and all organizations, but this, practically speaking, is almost impossible. It would mean severing oneself from all bonds of fellowship: family, company, state, and society itself.

The Catholic Church ranks among the largest and oldest organizations in the world; its history is in part a history or failure, vice, and sin. Yet one cannot logically conclude from that dark history that the official laws of the Catholic Church are themselves unjust.

August 30, 2008 9:35 AM  
Blogger Immortal Philosopher said...

I understand your sentiment, Anon. How can a person believe in a religion that condones rape? However, if you realized that the Church doesn't, and never did, condone rape, perhaps your opinion of it would change.

It has always been Church teaching that sexual relations should exist only between a married man and woman. Any other case is a gross violation of our nature and of Church law. As a result, the Church cannot, does not, and has never offically condoned rape. In fact, it has violently opposed rape since its institution, and has done much to help the recovery of the victims and the conversion of the perpetrators.

Granted, some individuals (priests, in this instance) who claim to be Catholic have raped other people. However, this says nothing about the Church itself, and only things about the people who performed those actions.

The actions of one individual, or even a thousand individuals, (which you correctly point out to be flagrantly evil actions) does not reflect the religion or morals they claim to have. If any of said individuals actually followed Church teaching, we wouldn't be having this conversation whatsoever. I agree that the acts were horribly wrong, and that the rape of innocent children cannot be condoned. However, you cannot make the case that their actions, which are in opposition to all Church teaching, disprove the truth of any Catholic doctrine. If anything, the fact that both you and I agree that these actions are wrong supports the universality of the Catholic moral teaching. We all know internally that rape is wrong.

Your comment about the bible is irrelevant to the argument at hand. You may find it funny, but I don't think your opinion on the matter lends anything to the discussion.

September 02, 2008 2:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

All well and true....but when "The Church" is as active in the cover up of the crimes as the Catholic Church is and has been, your argument loses it's weight.

September 04, 2008 11:08 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home