First time visitor? Learn more.

How Is She Still Permitted to Receive Communion?

by coldwarrior ( 25 Comments › )
Filed under Christianity, Politics, Progressives, Religion, Special Report at November 22nd, 2011 - 3:02 pm

 

Seriously, How Is Nancy Pelosi Still Permitted to Receive Communion?

 

She is Pro-Death and has refuted the Pope on several occasions. She can no longer call herself or still be a Catholic, period. The Bishop in San Fransisco is not doing his job either. He is responsible for setting this straying Congresscritter right, this is right in his pay grade. She is apostate at this point.

 

Pelosi whines about Catholics having “this conscience thing”

Maybe she’s just jealous they have something she doesn’t …

According to LifeNews.com, Nancy Pelosi is upset that the U.S. Catholic bishops wouldn’t approve if the Obama administration did, in fact, decide to force insurance companies to cover birth control, contraception and drugs that could cause abortions. The bishops say that, under such a decision, some religious groups might have to provide the insurance against their moral and religious views.

Given the Catholic Church’s ban on contraception, the bishops’ position shouldn’t come as a surprise to Ms. Pelosi — but she still manages to be baffled by their concern for conscience protections for health insurers who might not want to have to cover birth control just to be able to provide other types of health insurance.

Similarly, she was skeptical earlier this year that Republicans would fight for conscience protections for health care providers out of any noble motive. Republicans must want women to “die on the floor,” she said, just because they don’t want to compel health care providers to assist with abortions.

She still thinks that — only more so, if that could possibly be.

“[Those who disagree] may not like the language,’’ she told The Washington Post, “but the truth is what I said. I’m a devout Catholic and I honor my faith and love it . . . but they have this conscience thing [that puts women at risk.]”

Shame on us! How dare we have a conscience!

Another little anecdote Pelosi told WaPo suggests the former speaker is also put out whenever a Catholic gives the pope’s positions on life more credence than they do hers. Nancy Pelosi knows the personal experience of motherhood as the pope never could — but that doesn’t mean she can reject his authority and credibly call herself Catholic. It means more to be Catholic than to just attend a Catholic Church. The authority of the magisterium is arguably the linchpin on which all other Catholic apologetics hang — and Pelosi’s repeated disregard for it makes me cringe when I read a quote from her to the effect that she loves and honors her faith. I’m not saying she has to be Catholic — just saying she should be honest with herself (and us!) about whether she is.

 

I would rather have a sparse congregation of Newt Gingrich confessed and contrite converts than a church full of life-long Catholics like Pelosi.

 

If ‘Madame Speaker’ were Orthodox, she would have been told to adhere to the teachings of the church or face excommunicated for this. At her first public statement she would have been refused communion by the parish priest. I would like to see the Catholic church be a bit more strident in enforcing basic laws and teachings when it comes to the Kennedy and the Pelosi types of Catholics.

 

It’s called ‘religion’ for a reason afterall…

Comments

Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.

Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.

Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.

We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.

Play nice!

25 Responses to “How Is She Still Permitted to Receive Communion?”
( jump to bottom )

  1. 1 | November 22, 2011 3:30 pm

    She promotes abortion. Under every canon in the Catholic Church I know of, that is grounds not for denial of communion, but for excommunication.


  2. Poteen
    2 | November 22, 2011 3:59 pm

    “Indulgences” are alive and well in the Roman Catholic Church apparently. Pelosi is Catholic only insofar as it serves her political purposes. Knowing full well that the church is in difficulty on several fronts, i.e. scandal, membership, she’s trying to politically bludgeon them to her way. IMO, a clear intrusion of the state into the church.


  3. 3 | November 22, 2011 4:16 pm

    She probably bribes the Archdiocese of San Franfreakshow with a princely sum.


  4. NoThreat2U
    4 | November 22, 2011 4:47 pm

    Birth control is perfectly fine with the Catholic Church. Birth control prevents pregnancy, therefore, there is no loss of life involved. Plus the Church understands the responsibility of parenting and that not everyone can afford 500 kids. I know a Catholic who had an abortion. She was not excommunicated, but she can no longer receive communion. I have a feeling it may be because she asked and received absolution from the Church for her sin. I can guarantee she did not make the decision lightly, since she was raised for a time in a Catholic orphanage. Her husband was an abusive drunk and baby number eight would have been too much. I am sure she still bears that cross though. Nancy on the other hand has no moral compass. And I also don’t think she or anyone else in politics should be involving their legistlature into Church doctrine. I read somewhere that the dems were wanting to pressure “faith leaders” into pressuring their congregations into helping pass Obamacare. Clearly, that is a line that is NOT meant to be crossed.


  5. Poteen
    5 | November 22, 2011 5:04 pm

    Macker wrote:

    She probably bribes the Archdiocese of San Franfreakshow with a princely sum.

    I doubt bribes. I would believe threats.


  6. Da_Beerfreak
    6 | November 22, 2011 6:35 pm

    Rules are only for the “Little People”…


  7. Buckeye Abroad
    7 | November 22, 2011 7:42 pm

    @ coldwarrior

    Seriously, How Is Nancy Pelosi Still Permitted to Receive Communion?

    Good question. Or as my sister once asked, “how can anyone claiming to be catholic vote democrat?”


  8. coldwarrior
    8 | November 22, 2011 10:06 pm

    Buckeye Abroad wrote:

    @ coldwarrior
    Seriously, How Is Nancy Pelosi Still Permitted to Receive Communion?
    Good question. Or as my sister once asked, “how can anyone claiming to be catholic vote democrat?”

    your sister asks the better question


  9. 9 | November 23, 2011 12:16 am

    NoThreat2U wrote:

    I know a Catholic who had an abortion. She was not excommunicated, but she can no longer receive communion.

    I am really confused. Please help me out. If “excommunication” does not mean no longer eligible to receive Sacraments, such as Communion, what does it mean?


  10. 10 | November 23, 2011 12:22 am

    Buckeye Abroad wrote:

    @ coldwarrior
    Or as my sister once asked, “how can anyone claiming to be catholic vote democrat?”

    Please don’t take this the wrong way if you are a Conservative, a Roman Catholic and a Christian, but it seems to me the that far too many Roman Catholics--including clergy--seem to feel that it the most important part of being Roman Catholic is support the Democratic Party no matter what it stands for.

    Once again, sorry to ALL my Roman Catholic friends to whom the above does not apply.


  11. 11 | November 23, 2011 4:00 am

    @ CzechRebel:

    Wiki is, of course, your friend.


  12. coldwarrior
    12 | November 23, 2011 6:12 am

    CzechRebel wrote:

    but it seems to me the that far too many Roman Catholics–including clergy–seem to feel that it the most important part of being Roman Catholic is support the Democratic Party no matter what it stands for.

    i would need to see some serious polling data on that before i came to that conclusion


  13. coldwarrior
    13 | November 23, 2011 6:12 am

    @ CzechRebel:

    she is, in fact, excommunicated.


  14. Speranza
    14 | November 23, 2011 9:16 am

    Not for anything but I am resenting being called Pro Death when I do not want to make abortion illegal and throw 16 year old girls into prison.


  15. 15 | November 23, 2011 9:25 am

    @ Speranza:

    Still, you have to admit that the current system is rediculous. Why should it be easier to get an abortion than to get a tattoo? Parental notification laws are resisted simply to protect people who have comitted statutory rape. Certainly, there could be reasonable restrictions on abortions. Currently, the right to an abortion is legally the most sacrosanct right we have. If you applied the logic of the protections on it to the Second Amendment, I would have the right to keep my own thermonuclear weapons at my disposal, and we’d be fighting about whether or not the government should subsidize my armament. If such broad protections are rediculous when applied to weapons, where there is the potential to end human life, why are they considered good and just when applied to abortion, where there is no question about the ending of a human life?


  16. lobo91
    16 | November 23, 2011 9:25 am

    Speranza wrote:

    Not for anything but I am resenting being called Pro Death when I do not want to make abortion illegal and throw 16 year old girls into prison.

    Make sure you have that strawman properly fireproofed.

    /Today’s safety tip


  17. Speranza
    17 | November 23, 2011 10:02 am

    @ lobo91:

    Cut the snark ok? It is not a strawman and I resent that implication.
    Todays safety tip for you.


  18. Speranza
    18 | November 23, 2011 10:05 am

    @ Iron Fist:
    I was talking about calling someone pro death. Yes the abortion laws need to be tightened up. Too many people view it as a form of birth control.


  19. lobo91
    19 | November 23, 2011 10:18 am

    Speranza wrote:

    @ lobo91:
    Cut the snark ok? It is not a strawman and I resent that implication.
    Todays safety tip for you.

    Please highlight where anyone on this thread suggested putting 16 year olds in prison.

    Until then, I suggest that you look up the definition of a strawman argument.


  20. Speranza
    20 | November 23, 2011 1:17 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    Until then, I suggest that you look up the definition of a strawman argument.

    Enlighten me professor.


  21. lobo91
    21 | November 24, 2011 1:59 am

    Speranza wrote:

    lobo91 wrote:
    Until then, I suggest that you look up the definition of a strawman argument.
    Enlighten me professor.

    Description of Straw Man

    The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person’s actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position.

    In other words, exactly what you’re doing.

    Not one person of any consequence has ever suggested jailing 16 year olds (who, by the way, represent a tiny portion of those who obtain abortions).


  22. Fritz Katz
    22 | November 27, 2011 11:15 pm

    I say lobo91 pwnd Speranza. What say you?


  23. lobo91
    23 | November 27, 2011 11:33 pm

    Fritz Katz wrote:

    I say lobo91 pwnd Speranza. What say you?

    “Some people just need pwning…”


  24. Speranza
    24 | December 1, 2011 11:34 pm

    @ Fritz Katz:
    @ lobo91:
    I say you pwnd nobody but your selves with your idiot comments. Assholes.


  25. lobo91
    25 | December 3, 2011 12:03 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    @ Fritz Katz:
    @ lobo91:
    I say you pwnd nobody but your selves with your idiot comments. Assholes.

    While attempting to point out facts to someone like you was clearly a waste of time, I think “idiotic” is a bit harsh.


Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By David