I can always trust columnist Cal Thomas to provide a laugh, particularly when he writes on the issue of church and state. Or, as with his most recent column, Democrats and church and state. The op-ed covered a wide range of topics with the general theme being that Democrats will never succeed at getting votes from religious folks because the Democratic agenda is incongruent with the Godly agenda. I can only assume that the Godly agenda is like the gay agenda, except the exact opposite.
He particularly takes on the issue of Democratic Catholics and communion:
[…] In 2004, the Archbishop of Boston, Sean O’Malley stood by a statement he had made the previous year that pro-choice Catholics are in a state of grave sin and cannot take Communion properly.
[…] Appearing last Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tried some theological hair-splitting.
She described herself as “an ardent, practicing Catholic,” but then said the church had only held its pro-life position for the last 50 years and that during the previous 2,000 years it had reached different conclusions about when life begins.
In an unusual public rebuke of a leading political figure, Washington, D.C., Archbishop Donald W. Wuerl said Pelosi was “incorrect” in her statement that the church had differed over the years about when life begins.
Wuerl added, “We respect the right of elected officials such as Speaker Pelosi to address matters of public policy that are before them, but the interpretation of Catholic faith has rightfully been entrusted to the Catholic bishops. Given this responsibility to teach, it is important to make this correction for the record.”
There are some things you shouldn’t trust to the Catholic church, among them are an understanding of the historical doctrines of their own church and young boys. Catholics know as a matter of faith that their religion as led by the pope is inerrant in spiritual matters, which makes it easy to brush aside those pesky facts. Such as the long and colorful history of teachings on abortion within the Catholic church.
With regards to Catholic teachings on abortion, the important point isn’t where life begins, but when the fetus is ensouled, because that was when human life began. This point has not always been assumed to be at conception. For example, Pope Innocent III (1161-1216) stated that the soul enters the fetus at the time of the quickening–when the woman first feels movement, usually around weeks 18-20. A later pope said ensoulment happened at conception, and then yet another reinstated the “quickening test” and even gave it a definite date of 16.5 weeks. I do wonder what studies he conducted to determine such a precise, and inaccurate, time.
Pelosi: 1, Catholic Arch-Bishop: 0.
The issue of giving communion to pro-choice politicians is particularly interesting, considering abortion is the only issue that the Bishops have raised as a possible litmus test. Given that the official church policy is anti-death penalty and anti-Iraq war, should politicians who support either be denied communion? The church also holds the view of theistic evolution, so should creationists be denied communion? Heck, 96% of married American Catholics use a modern form of birth control, according to the Church’s own statistics, should they be denied communion? I think we can see how this gets ridiculous quite fast if applied in any sort of rational manner. I guess it’s a good thing the Bishops are so good at ignoring reason and their own history so easily, otherwise there would be no one at all to receive the eucharist, and I kinda doubt they want that.
Letters from Nebraska 