Bishops Correct Speaker Nancy Pelosi: 'On the Separation of Sense and State'

By Archbishop Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap. and Bishop James D. Conley
8/26/2008
Archdiocese of Denver (www.archden.org/)

"Abortion kills an unborn, developing human life. It is always gravely evil, and so are the evasions employed to justify it."

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi greeted the Holy Father upon his arrival in the US. She gave a public sign of fidelity to his teaching office. However, she has overtly dissented from that teaching and attempts to confuse fellow Catholics and the public concerning Catholic teaching and its absolute opposition to every procured abortion.

Facebook Delicous MySpace

Twitter Stumble Digg

More Destinations

DENVER, CO (Archdiocese of Denver) - The Bishops of the Archdiocese of Denver, Colorado, site of the Democratic convention, issued a letter directed to the faithful of the Archdiocese of Denver entitled "Separation of Sense and State: A Clarification for the People of the Church in Northern Colorado.We set forth this fine letter for the readers of Catholic Online in its entirety:

To Catholics of the Archdiocese of Denver:

Catholic public leaders inconvenienced by the abortion debate tend to take a hard line in talking about the "separation of Church and state." But their idea of separation often seems to work one way.

In fact, some officials also seem comfortable in the role of theologian. And that warrants some interest,not as a "political" issue, but as a matter of accuracy and justice.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is 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.

Interviewed on Meet the Press August 24, Speaker Pelosi was asked when human life begins. She said the following:

"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."

Since Speaker Pelosi has, in her words, studied the issue "for a long time," she must know very well one of the premier works on the subject, Jesuit John Connery's Abortion: The Development of the Roman Catholic Perspective (Loyola, 1977). Here's how Connery concludes his study:

"The Christian tradition from the earliest days reveals a firm antiabortion attitude . . . The condemnation of abortion did not depend on and was not limited in any way by theories regarding the time of fetal animation. Even during the many centuries when Church penal and penitential practice was based on the theory of delayed animation, the condemnation of abortion was never affected by it.

"Whatever one would want to hold about the time of animation, or when the fetus became a human being in the strict sense of the term, abortion from the time of conception was considered wrong, and the time of animation was never looked on as a moral dividing line between permissible and impermissible abortion."

Or to put it in the blunter words of the great Lutheran pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer:

"Destruction of the embryo in the mother's womb is a violation of the right to live which God has bestowed on this nascent life. To raise the question whether we are here concerned already with a human being or not is merely to confuse the issue. The simple fact is that God certainly intended to create a human being and that this nascent human being has been deliberately deprived of his life. And that is nothing but murder."

Ardent, practicing Catholics will quickly learn from the historical record that from apostolic times, the Christian tradition overwhelmingly held that abortion was grievously evil. In the absence of modern medical knowledge, some of the Early Fathers held that abortion was homicide; others that it was tantamount to homicide; and various scholars theorized about when and how the unborn child might be animated or "ensouled."

But none diminished the unique evil of abortion as an attack on life itself, and the early Church closely associated abortion with infanticide. In short, from the beginning, the believing Christian community held that abortion was always, gravely wrong.

Of course, we now know with biological certainty exactly when human life begins. Thus, today's religious alibis for abortion and a so-called "right to choose" are nothing more than that - alibis that break radically with historic Christian and Catholic belief.

Abortion kills an unborn, developing human life. It is always gravely evil, and so are the evasions employed to justify it. Catholics who make excuses for it - whether they're famous or not - fool only themselves and abuse the fidelity of those Catholics who do sincerely seek to follow the Gospel and live their Catholic faith.

The duty of the Church and other religious communities is moral witness. The duty of the state and its officials is to serve the common good, which is always rooted in moral truth. A proper understanding of the "separation of Church and state" does not imply a separation of faith from political life. But of course, it's always important to know what our faith actually teaches.

Most Rev. Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap.
+Archbishop of Denver

James D. Conley
+Auxiliary Bishop of Denver

Rate This Article

Was this helpful to you? Very Helpful Somewhat Helpful Not Helpful at All

Would you be interested in more articles like this? Yes, I am Interested No, I am not Interested

Rate Article

1 - 10 of 38 Comments

Brad
4 years ago
I had some doubts about His Grace Chaput recently, but . . . H E R O C K S ! !
Paolo
4 years ago
Mandy, there exists excommunication "latae sententiae"; it means that all those who operate against christian primciples have set themselves out of the Church. In this case no measure needs to be undertaken.
Mandy
4 years ago
Mr. Baldwin your statements are erroneous. You claim abortions haven�t decreased under conservative administrations:

http://www.lifenews.com/nat4141.html
[Snip] Yet that claim doesn't square with the latest national abortion numbers put forward by the Alan Guttmacher Institute, a research firm associated with Planned Parenthood, the abortion business that has endorsed Obama.

In January, AGI reported that the number of abortions nationwide have fallen to their lowest point in 30 years and have declined 25 percent since 1990 -- with half of that time period coming under pro-life presidents.

The number of abortions are now at their lowest point since 1.179 million in 1976, AGI said.

Meanwhile, research from a nonpartisan political watchdog group finds the claim false when compared with national and state abortion statistics.
The Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania says that claims that abortions have not decreased under President Bush are "not true."
"Politicians from Hillary Clinton and John Kerry to Howard Dean have recently contended that abortions have increased since George W. Bush took office in 2001," the researchers have written.
"This claim is false. It's based on an opinion piece that used data from only 16 states. A study by the Alan Guttmacher Institute of 43 states found that abortions have actually decreased," Annenberg indicates. [Snip]

McCain has promised to appoint pro-life justices to the courts. Obama has promised to continue more of the same, including infanticide of those born alive during a botched abortion.

If I had to choose between McCain and Obama I would choose the candidate who promised to appoint justices who will eventually reverse Roe-vs.-Wade. That candidate is John McCain.
Rob
4 years ago
The Bishops clearly articulate the Catholic moral belief that life begins at conception, and that abortion is an evil. They do not say that women who don't accept this moral belief and have abortions should face criminal penalties under the law. Would they prosecute such women for murder under all circumstances? If not, when would they permit an exception? If a woman was convicted for abortion, should she face mandatory life in prison for murder, or some lesser penalty? If a lesser penalty, how is that justified for a conscious, planned murder?

Of course most of us (probably the Bishops included)wouldn't favor laws jailing a woman for having an abortion, at least an abortion she chose for the sake of her own health, because we would choose to treat her differently than violent criminals. We would do so even though she was complicit in ending a human life. Would any politician vote for such a law, even if he or she believed it would deter some abortions? Probably not. So difficult moral choices have to be made to craft abortion laws, some involving circumstances that our legal system isn't well-equipped to handle, and ultimately all falling short of the moral ideal.

Aren't we then generally better off as a pluralistic society of many faiths with various views on the beginning of life to leave the question of ultimate judgement and punishment under many circumstances to God, rather than to judges, juries and politicians? In a democracy won't any law dealing with abortion always contain some element of 'choice', meaning exceptions leaving something less than a complete prohibition under any circumstances? If so, the rather than focusing our efforts on devising laws 'ending' all abortion, shouldn't our energies instead be devoted primarily to helping women contemplating abortion make the right moral choices?

In my view, Bishops and priests telling the faithful how to vote based on single-issue labels is politics, and single issue politics leaves well-intentioned Catholics subject to manipulation by politicians who simply adopt the label "pro-life" without any realistic plan or intent to stop or meaningfully reduce abortion. How many so-called "pro-life" politicians would vote for a law prohibiting all abortions from the moment of conception? They are all (I think correctly) "pro-choice" if the choice is between the mother's life and that of the unborn. So ultimately whether they're labeled "pro-life" or "pro-choice" politicians and voters are really debating restrictions on abortion, not elimination of abortion. The question of which restrictions are in the public good and therefore should be part of the law is one on which people of good faith may disagree, depending on their view of the appropriate role of law in our society. Those who believe that that the law should limit abortions but can't and should not prohibit them entirely are therefore not non-Catholic. Likewise, Catholics in this country shouldn't be encouraged to vote for a candidate simply because they are self-proclaimed "pro-life", when that simply means they are "pro-choice" but perhaps to a different degree than their opponent. We must carefully look at where both candidates stand in relation to Catholic teaching on all issues.
Mandy
4 years ago
As a Catholic I don't understand why proponents of abortion who call themselves Catholics aren't excommunicated from the Church? What is the Church afraid of? That they will lose followers? The Church has lost many followers over the years, but would be surprised at how many have left because modern liberalism (as opposed to classical liberalism) has infected the Church like a disease. That the Church refuses to stand up for its doctrine and values and at the very least not allow Catholic (and I use this term very loosely) proponents of abortion communion, seriously has me questioning my own obligation to a religious organization which doesn't represent my values and that of many other Catholics. Or is it okay for liberals like Nancy Pelosi and Joseph Biden to rewrite Church Doctrine and the teachings of the Bible?
Jim
4 years ago
JOHN McCAIN PRO LIFE WHAT A JOKE

http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin465.htm

Dr. Chuck Baldwin 8/22/08

Once again, "pro-life" Christians are doing back flips to try and justify their compromise of the life issue by trying to convince everyone (including themselves) that McCain is truly pro-life. However, these same people know in their hearts that McCain shares no fidelity to the life issue in any significant or meaningful way. Like many in the Republican Party, McCain's commitment to life is about as deep as a mud puddle

the "pro-life" GOP controlled the entire federal government from 2000 to 2006 and nothing was done to overturn Roe v. Wade or end legal abortion-on-demand? When Bush took the oath of office in January of 2001, over one million innocent unborn babies were being murdered in the wombs of their mothers every year via legal abortions in this country. When Bush leaves office in January of 2009, over one million innocent unborn babies would still be murdered in the wombs of their mothers every year via legal abortions in this country

Had McCain & his fellow Republicans truly wanted to end legal abortion, they could have passed Congressman Ron Paul's Sanctity of Life Act.

How can McCain, & his fellow Republicans in D.C., look pro-life Christians and conservatives in the eye in 2008 and expect that we take them seriously when they say that they are "pro-life"?

The reason they did not do it is because they did not want to do it. They merely want to use "pro-life" rhetoric as a campaign tool to dupe gullible Christian voters every election year. The disgusting thing about it is--it works
Barbara
4 years ago
To Brian, re:passive abortion. I haven't seen the democrats do anything about health care either. What did Clinton do about health care? Nothing! I am anti abortion as well as anti death penalty. But someone on death row has had their day in court. Babies in the womb have not been convicted of any crime. Compare the number of death penalty executions and the number of abortions. Not even close! If the choice is between an anti death penalty candidate and an anti-abortion candidate, which one do you think I'm going to vote for. The democrats seem more concerned with funding planned-parenthood, and making it legal for my under-age daughters to procure an abortion without my knowledge or consent. They cannot be given even a Tylenol at school without my written consent but can be given birth control pills without my knowledge. I am sick of my tax dollars helping to fund planned parenthood. If the democrats were serious about health care they would use that money to fund pre-natal care.
waynette
4 years ago
Thank you Bishop Chaput for making public the true teachings of the Catholic Church and not allowing the likes of a Nancy Pelosi to believe she has the right to override and degrade what God has created to a mere act of selfish convenience in the name of compassion, she defines hypocrisy at its best. Her view on life determines that your only human if your mother wants you, not if God has created you. My prayer is that the Church will take a stand and not allow those known anti-life catholic leaders to be denied the life of Christ as they deny life. I think that would send a solid message that you cannot override God,s will.
Kiet Tran
4 years ago
It is said that a person like Pelosi abuses her position to make claim in matter that she lacks authority. This type of behavior is inexcusable and shameful. Pelosi is a grandmother and she should know better. I�m pleased with many of our Bishops and Archbishops have countered her offend in public. What about refusing her communion? When will this happen?
mary
4 years ago
I pray that Nancy Pelosi will be so filled with God's grace that God will give her the strength to stand up for unborn babies and guide the Democratic party into God's good graces.

Prev12 3 4 Next

Comments submitted must be civil, remain on-topic and not violate any laws including copyright. We reserve the right to delete any comments which are abusive, inappropriate or not constructive to the discussion.

Though we invite robust discussion, we reserve the right to not publish any comment which denigrates the human person, undermines marriage and the family, or advocates for positions which openly oppose the teaching of the Catholic Church.

This is a supervised forum and the Editors of Catholic Online retain the right to direct it.

We also reserve the right to block any commenter for repeated violations. Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.

We ask that you NOT post your comment more than once. Catholic Online is growing and our ability to review all comments sometimes results in a delay in their publication.

Name *

Email *

Comment *

Send me important information from Catholic Online and it's partners. See Sample

Post Comment