Update: Biden receives Communion, Pelosi stands-up Niederauer

Catholic Vice-President Elect Joe Biden and Catholic Speaker Nancy Pelosi have the shared dishonor of being pro-abortion politicians who have earned the rebuke of dozens of American bishops for their misrepresentation of their faith in a textbook case of scandalizing the faithful.

So what are they up to now?

Joe Biden is still receiving Communion, most recently (that we know of) in Tallahassee FL the Sunday before election day. Local bishop John Ricard took swift action and warned Biden to examine his conscience carefully before approaching the altar again. But hey, when do we next expect Joe Biden to be in Florida? It's served his purpose

Biden's home bishop Francis Malooly, meanwhile, the person most responsible for the formation and discipline of his parishioners, won't tell him to stop, saying "I won't politicize the Eucharist ... I don't want to alienate people. I want to change their hearts and minds."

Now while that's surely a noble aim, I don't see any results. The penalties of the Church, however, can also serve to change hearts and minds. Let's not forget that. If laws are never enforced, people will feel free to ignore them.

Speaker Pelosi, meanwhile - also still presumably presenting herself for Communion - promised her local Archbishop George Niederauer to sit down with him about her situation after he invited her. That public promise was made 68 days, 21 hours and 27 minutes ago. How do I know that? I've had a timer running since the day she made her promise. It's still ticking.

That's right, for over two months, this "ardent, faithful" Catholic - who regularly uses her faith as credentials in the exercise of her public office - couldn't even find time to fit in a sit-down with her bishop on a matter which has received national attention, both within and outside the Catholic Church.

Again, I'm looking for signs that progress is being made, that the pre-chosen methods are working.

But I'm not seeing it.

First update: Biden, Pelosi ... Kerry

There will be at least two, and possibly three prominent pro-choice Catholics in the Democratic establishment:

• Joe Biden is the Vice-President, and is unwelcome in his home diocese of Scranton, PA
• Nancy Pelosi is Speaker of the House, and Abp. Neiderauer has been waiting 61 days
• Now we hear that "Kerry refuses to rule out taking post under Obama"

Sounds like a full house to me.

Report: Catholic speaker Pelosi laundered money

Nothing will surprise me at this point:

"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has directed nearly $100,000 from her political action committee to her husband's real estate and investment firm over the past decade, a practice of paying a spouse with political donations that she supported banning last year." (WashTimes)

26 days, 10 hours, 30 minutes ....

Video: The failed vote, and Pelosi's partisanship

Plenty of people (rightly, I would say) are pinning a large part of the blame for today's failed vote in the House on Nancy Pelosi's flagrantly-partisan, bald-faced-profiteering speech given just prior to the vote.

Her beginning:

“Madam Speaker, when was the last time someone asked you for $700 billion? “It is a number that is staggering, but tells us only the costs of the Bush Administration’s failed economic policies—policies built on budgetary recklessness, on an anything goes mentality, with no regulation, no supervision, and no discipline in the system.

Her ending:

“Today, we will act to avert this crisis, but informed by our experience of the past eight years with the failed economic leadership that has left us left capable of meeting the challenges of the future. “We choose a different path. In the new year, with a new Congress and a new president, we will break free with a failed past and take America in a New Direction to a better future.”

The full video:

Worst speaker of the house ever? I'm beginning to think so. Especially when you consider the history I've pointed out. She really should take that retreat in San Francisco which she's been offered, and accepted....

24 Days, 13 Hours, 38 Minutes....

Goldman Sachs kneels to Pelosi

I'm not making this up, from Politico:

And when Democrats left after the meeting to caucus in the Roosevelt Room, Paulson pursued them, begging that they not “blow up” the legislation.

The former Goldman Sachs CEO even went down on one knee as if genuflecting, to which Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Cal.) is said to have joked, “I didn’t know you were Catholic.”

That's funny, Madame Speaker, I wasn't sure you were, either.

Breaking: Pelosi meeting with Abp. Niederauer?

I'm hearing that FOX News just reported that.

If it's true, than Pelosi only took about 20 days to get it done.

Stay tuned...

update: I'm hearing ambiguous reports as to whether a) the meeting actually happened, b) the meeting has been scheduled or c) nothing has happened and FOX just noticed the story late.

Meanwhile, the Pelosi counter keeps ticking away....

Pelosi abortion dispute off-limits for Bush spokeswoman

WorldNetDaily tried to raise a question related to Pelosi-Gate at today's White House Briefing:

[WND correspondant Kinsolving]"Fox News reported yesterday that Speaker Pelosi has agreed to meet with San Francisco Catholic Archbishop Niederauer to discuss whether Pelosi, an abortion rights supporter, should take communion, with Pelosi agreeing to meet with him, but no date set. And my question: The president agrees with the archbishop on abortion, rather than the speaker, doesn't he?"

"I am absolutely not going to comment on Speaker Pelosi's meetings or the archibhsop – absolutely not going to comment, Les," said White House spokeswoman Dana Perino.

The next question is needlessly argumenative:

Kinsolving continued, "St. Thomas Aquinas, Anselm and Alphonsus Liguori, as well as Popes Innocent III and Gregory XIV, all disagreed that a human life begins at conception. Does the president believe these two holy fathers and three Catholic saints were all wrong?"

Again, Perino said she would let the record stand.

"The president's position on this is well-known," she said.

I have no idea where that follow-up came from. One does not become a holy father or a Catholic saint for having a perfect understanding of biology. And it should come as no surprise to us that, without microscopes, they didn't have access to the scientific information needed to determine that a human life begins at conception.

Seriously.

Related: How long has it been since Pelosi promised to meet with Niederauer? (6 days, 7 hours, 30 minutes...)

Update: Biden skips Mass where new Bishop speak out against him

Once again, my low expectations are wonderfully surpassed.

Reader John V notes that Biden, as I predicted, skipped town:

"Looks like you were right. [Biden] was in Wilmington yesterday, but had to go to Green Bay today."

And it's a good thing, too. I wouldn't have wanted to present myself for communion after this homily by Bishop Malooly:

... Mary’s mother, St. Anne, carried a very special life in her womb which serves as a vivid reminder that every life is special. We will continue to stress the constant teaching of the Church that each person must respect every life from conception to natural death. And we will continue to seek the intercession of Saint Thomas More for Statesmen, Politicians, Supreme Court Justices, Judges and Lawyers—that they may be courageous and effective in defending and promoting the sanctity of human life, the foundation of every human right, the foundation of our love for the poor.

While Bishop Fran Malooly does not name Joe Biden (or Nancy Pelosi) by name, anyone who has been keeping up on this story knows what's being said quite plainly.

Nor is the St. Thomas More reference a throw-away line, I would argue. In his new book on Catholic voting, Abp. Charles Chaput spends an entire section talking about the example of St. Thomas More.

Coincidence? Perhaps. But lest we forget, St. Thomas summed up his witness in one line before his martyrdom:

"I die the King's good servant - but God's first."

Timer: How long before Pelosi meets with Niederauer?

Here are the facts:

• Archbishop Niederauer invited Nancy Pelosi to a "conversation"
• Pelosi accepted and says she would "welcome the opportunity"
• Pelosi frequently travels the U.S., for instance, on her book tour
• Pelosi, famously, frequently travels back to San Francisco

So ... she will be in the same city as Niederauer very soon, in all likelihood. What a perfect opportunity this will be to take him up on his public offer, which she publicly accepted!

And surely if her Catholic faith is as important to her as she says, she will not leave the bishop waiting for her, after her comments have provoked the response of so many bishops and have gained so much attention.

With that said, I've started a timer which will track how long it has been since she said yes:



tick, tock, tick, tock ...

Deja Vu: Biden-Gate has begun ... complete coverage

Just when the furor over Nancy Pelosi's comments on Meet the Press had subsided...

Obama's running mate Joe Biden has today been asked the same question, in the same forum, and has given essentially the same answer.

Complete coverage here.

(for regular coverage, scroll down or return to the homepage)

Sen. Joe Biden follows in Pelosi's footsteps

On today's Meet the Press, Barack Obama's Catholic running mate Joe Biden is confronted with the same question asked of Nancy Pelosi two weeks ago.

His response is not a surprise to those who know Joe Biden's record on abortion and his attempts to reconcile it with his Catholic faith.

But it is a surprise that he still tries to mount this defense after Pelosi-Gate. You would think he might have paused.

The video of his response (transcript and commentary below):



You can find the full transcript here.

Before we take a look at Biden's defense, I must note this important point:

This is developing into perfect storm. Rocco reports via the Deleware News-Journal, that tomorrow Joe Biden's new bishop Fran Malooly will be installed, and Joe Biden plans to attend the Mass.

(Malooly knows it is coming, too:

Malooly said he won't be surprised if the media ask him about the best-known member of his new diocese -- Sen. Joe Biden, who is running for vice president.

Biden, a 35-year member of the Senate, has said he believes in Catholic teachings on the sanctity of life but has often voted in favor of abortion rights.

"I'm anxious to have a chance to speak with him as I would any politician," Malooly said at a farewell reception in Parkville, Md., last Sunday.

He'll seek to understand Biden's point of view, much as he did with Maryland politicians. And Malooly said that he will share the scope of Catholic pro-life teachings with Biden.

A sizable number of Catholics hold beliefs that go against church teachings, the bishop said.

"I have to work on everybody, not just Joe Biden," Malooly said.

Biden has been invited to the installation, but as of late Friday, Biden's staff still was trying to work out the candidate's schedule so he could attend.

I see nothing in Malooly's comments which would lead me to believe he intends to use his installation Mass as an opportunity to begin publicly defending the teachings of the Church on this topic.

Abp. Chaput, it should be remembered, has told the Associated Press that Joe Biden, because of his support for abortion, should refrain from taking Communion.

Archbishop Sambi, as the apostolic nuncio, would also have an opportunity to say something officially.)

Now let's take a look at the content of Joe Biden's argument.

(In answer to the question: "As a Roman Catholic, when does life begin?")

"I'd say, "Look, I know when it begins for me." It's a personal and private issue. For me, as a Roman Catholic, I'm prepared to accept the teachings of my church."

The old mantra: "I personally believe..." Being "prepared to accept" is a reluctant phrasing.

"But let me tell you. There are an awful lot of people of great confessional faiths--Protestants, Jews, Muslims and others--who have a different view. They believe in God as strongly as I do. They're intensely as religious as I am religious. They believe in their faith and they believe in human life, and they have differing views as to when life--I'm prepared as a matter of faith to accept that life begins at the moment of conception. But that is my judgment. For me to impose that judgment on everyone else who is equally and maybe even more devout than I am seems to me is inappropriate in a pluralistic society."

Same argument: "I believe one thing. Other people believe another thing." Joe Biden is willing to sacrifice what he believes are human lives because other people believe they are not human lives (or believe they may kill them). That's really his position, in essence. And look at the example he uses to defend it next:

"And I know you get the push back, "Well, what about fascism?" Everybody, you know, you going to say fascism's all right? Fascism isn't a matter of faith. No decent religious person thinks fascism is a good idea."

This is the most incredible part of his defense. He claims that "Fascism isn't a matter of faith" but claims that abortion is a matter of faith! But this is the truth: the evil of abortion is not a matter of faith. It is a matter of reason. This is what must be taught him, publicly. (I further expand my commentary on his "fascism argument" below.)

Tom Brokaw, to his credit, goes for the throat with his next question:

Brokaw: "But if you, you believe that life begins at conception, and you've also voted for abortion rights..."

Biden: "No, what a voted against curtailing the right, criminalizing abortion. I voted against telling everyone else in the country that they have to accept my religiously based view that it's a moment of conception. There is a debate in our church, as Cardinal Egan would acknowledge, that's existed. Back in "Summa Theologia," when Thomas Aquinas wrote "Summa Theologia," he said there was no--it didn't occur until quickening, 40 days after conception."

Brokaw is right to point out that Biden has admitted to allowing the killing of lives he believes in faith are human. Biden's Augustine is Aquinas. But both theologians were working with an equally antiquated biology, and both men equally, constantly condemned the evil of abortion. This is a red herring that Biden offers.

Back to the core of Biden's argument:

"How am I going out and tell you, if you or anyone else that you must insist upon my view that is based on a matter of faith?"

Like Pelosi did at this point, Biden now falls back to his talking points. You can stop listening at this point:

"How am I going out and tell you, if you or anyone else that you must insist upon my view that is based on a matter of faith? And that's the reason I haven't. But then again, I also don't support a lot of other things. I don't support public, public funding. I don't, because that flips the burden. That's then telling me I have to accept a different view. This is a matter between a person's God, however they believe in God, their doctor and themselves in what is always a--and what we're going to be spending our time doing is making sure that we reduce considerably the amount of abortions that take place by providing the care, the assistance and the encouragement for people to be able to carry to term and to raise their children."

My general observations:

• Despite the notable differences, it's uncanny how similar are Biden and Pelosi's statements
• Biden has claimed that the evil of abortion is a matter of faith, not reason (science, logic, biology, etc)
• Biden has claimed a Catholic can believe life begins at conception and yet allow (and promote) abortion
• Biden has claimed it is better to respect the opinions of the majority than to prohibit them from killing human life. To avoid violating a conscience, he will take a life. He must be answered.
• Biden has claimed that "no decent religious person thinks fascism is a good idea." He has arbitrarily created a tautology that claims no decent religious person thought fascism was a good idea, but chooses not to also propose that "no decent religious person thinks abortion is a good idea." Essentially, Biden re-writes the historical record as he sees fit, and the fact that some people may claim to be faithful and pro-abortion means they must be correct, while others who claimed to be faithful and pro-fascism must be wrong. His explanation, with some extraction, is that people could condemn fascism for reasons besides those of faith.

And I think, perhaps most importantly...

• Biden has claimed, "There is a debate in our church, as Cardinal Egan would acknowledge, that's existed."

This is not a true statement, if Biden is referring to a debate about the evil of abortion. There has never been a debate about the serious evil of abortion. Cardinal Egan would not acknowledge Biden's claim in this sense. Besides, debate does not authorize dissent. Nor does debate mean there is any ambiguity in what a faithful Catholic must actually believe and how a faithful Catholic must act. If Pelosi was wrong about this, so is Biden.

By my count, twenty-seven bishops have now responded up Pelosi's denial of Church teaching.

How many will come forward and correct Biden's equally-lethal separation of faith from reason and action?

[Photo Credit: NBC's Meet the Press]

update - other places to find good commentary on this story:

• Catholics Against Joe Biden: Joe Biden Channels Nancy Pelosi on Meet the Press --another "teaching moment" for the Catholic Bishops?
• The Curt Jester: Abortion poisions everything including reason
• What Does the Prayer Really Say?: First Pete and then Re-Pete: Biden follows Pelosi down the slope on Meet The Press

update 2 - 9:30pm: Bishop Robert Morlino of Madison, WI already devoted today's Sunday homily to this topic. You can hear the audio here (MP3 file) and read Rocco's short intro here. Jeff Miller transcribed a segment of it - truly the flood gates are opening.

I'll be giving a Theology on Tap talk on the topic of "Faith in the Ballot Box" at the Cathedral parish of Madison, WI on Septebmer 18th. It looks like the Bishop is going to help me with talking points.

update 3 - 8:30am, Sep. 8th: The New York Times takes note:

Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., the Democratic nominee for vice president, departed Sunday from party doctrine on abortion rights, declaring that as a Catholic, he believes life begins at conception. Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., the Democratic nominee for vice president, departed Sunday from party doctrine on abortion rights, declaring that as a Catholic, he believes life begins at conception.

While Mr. Biden’s views may not be new to Democrats in his circle, his comments, in an interview on “Meet the Press” on NBC, came at a time when his party is confronted with a new face: Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican vice-presidential nominee, whose anti-abortion stance and decision to give birth just five months ago to a baby with Down syndrome have revved up the conservative base of her party.

update 4 - 3:30pm, Sep. 8th: Archbishop Chaput of Denver has responded, learn more here.

Flash: Pelosi *accepts* the Niederauer invitation {updated}

{updated 1:00pm - see below}

This comes as a surprise to me.

The Associated Press reports (and so far only they are covering it):

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, under fire from U.S. bishops for comments she made about abortion, accepted on Friday an invitation from the Roman Catholic archbishop of San Francisco for a private talk.

Pelosi said in a letter to Archbishop George Niederauer that she'd "welcome the opportunity for our personal conversation and to go beyond our earlier most cordial exchange about immigration and needs of the poor to Church teaching on other significant matters."

...While Pelosi's letter said she was interested in speaking about "church teaching on other significant matters," it did not mention abortion specifically. Her spokesman has defended her comments, saying in a previous statement that the congresswoman "fully appreciates the sanctity of family."

(See my commentary on Abp. Niederauer's letter here.)

Okay, let's examine these scant details. There's no mention of a date, and if there were I'd imagine it would have made it into the story. As the story notes, there is no reference to abortion (why beat around the bush like that?). And we don't have a copy of the actual letter.

At least she has obligated herself to eventually having the meeting. That's something.

And in completely unrelated news, the Associated Press also reports:

A light earthquake has rattled the San Francisco Bay area. The U.S. Geological Survey's preliminary report put the quake at a 4.0 magnitude. The temblor hit just after 9 p.m. and could be felt throughout the region. There were no immediate reports of damage.

Hmm, I wonder when Abp. Niederauer found out he might actually have to follow through on his offer?

update: Diogenes also takes a look at what this episode means.

AP summarizes Niederauer's statement to Pelosi

The Associated Press has a bland summary. A few observations/corrections:

... Archbishop George Niederauer isn't going as far as suggesting that the Catholic lawmaker stop taking Holy Communion because of her support for abortion rights.

At least it's clear to third parties that Niederauer doesn't plan on taking any action.

Several U.S. bishops condemned Pelosi last week after her appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press."

Actually, by my count, twenty-four bishops have spoken-up. And I'm sure there are others.

The congresswoman from San Francisco defended her support for abortion by saying that church leaders throughout history haven't been able to define when life begins.

But Niederauer and other bishops say that the church from its earliest days has considered abortion evil.

Why is it so hard for the reporter to add one more line? "Pelosi is wrong."

As I've said before, this is a debate about historical fact, not opinion or interpretation. Reporters in other instances feel free to quote people claiming one thing, and then the reporter will follow-up with a line that reads "but records show...[that the person is wrong]."

In other words, the truth of the claim made by the bishops is not solely dependant on their having said it. External corroborating evidence exists, and overwhelmingly favors them, not Pelosi.

Archbishop Niederauer invites Pelosi to "a conversation" {updated}

{updated 10:45AM - see below.}

As previously reported and commented upon, Archbishop George Niederauer has released his statement:

Following is a statement by San Francisco Archbishop George H. Niederauer in response to recent comments on abortion, Catholic teaching on the beginning of life, and other life issues made by U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi. This statement by Archbishop Niederauer was published in the Sept. 5, 2008 issue of Catholic San Francisco, the official newspaper of the Archdiocese of San Francisco.

Click here for the full text.

The conclusion of his column (underlining mine with my commentary interspersed):

I conclude that it is my responsibility as Archbishop to discern and decide, prayerfully, how best to approach this question as it may arise in the Archdiocese of San Francisco.

Respectfully, the archbishop has had since the time of his installation to discern and decide how best to approach this question. He's even had twelve solid days since Pelosi made her most recent comments. What conclusion has he arrived at? Or has he already arrived at it, and is telling us, essentially, that he plans to do nothing?

I regret the necessity of addressing these issues in so public a forum, but the widespread consternation among Catholics made it unavoidable.

I regret that the Archbishop apparently made no effort to address this matter privately for such a lengthy period of time so that now the only way to address it is publicly. Who's failing is that? The consternation of Catholics, or the archbishop's neglect of his duties?

Speaker Pelosi has often said how highly she values her Catholic faith, and how much it is a source of joy for her.

Ah, but *why* does she value it and find in it a source of joy? For expedient reasons? Might those reasons just as reasonably evaporate when the going gets tough?

Accordingly, as her pastor, I am writing to invite her into a conversation with me about these matters.

This is his great solution? It provides no timetable, no demands, no expectations. It gives her the opportunity of delaying this conversation for, oh, at least 60 days. But the simple fact of the matter is that she has been invited into conversation with the American bishops and has refused to change her position. One cannot invite someone into a conversation who has made it clear they see no reason to have one.

It is my obligation to teach forthrightly and to shepherd caringly, and that is my intent. Let us pray together that the Holy Spirit will guide us all toward a more profound understanding and appreciation for human life, and toward a resolution of these differences in truth and charity and peace.

It's hard for me to hear these lines and believe the Archbishop feels any sense of urgency from the ongoing slaughter of millions of unborn children. The goal of arriving at "a profound understanding and appreciating for human life", let alone a mutual "resolution of differences", might be reasonable if this were a theological/doctrinal dispute. In actuality, this debate is about remedying (or condoning) mass murder.

This seems like far too comfortable a plan of action for a situation of such grave injustice.

update: Carl Olson adds his helpful commentary.

AmP readers have made some pointed observations in the comment box:

"It is my obligation to teach forthrightly..." - He's telling us that or trying to convince himself? - Nan

"We waited a week for this! She punches him in the nose and he invites her to coffee?" - Kelly Asan

As Diogenes pointed out last week, Archbishop Niederauer demurred in February 2007 that Pelosi's stance on abortion was something he hadn't "had a chance to talk to her about" yet. Eighteen months later, it took a direct misrepresentation of Catholic tradition on global TV, a spokesman's flip-off to the USCCB and half the American bishops coming down on Pelosi to jump-start that long-delayed conversation, or at least to spark an invitation. - SDG

"Denying someone communion can often be the best "pastoral" move possible. It is a medicinal action, intended to sear the conscience of the person involved. Inviting them to coffee does not have that effect - it makes the person in grave error think she is just wrong about something as trivial as the weather forecast." - Francis

AmP reader Desiderius asks:

"Note the Abp's message was printed simultaneously in The Tidings (Los Angeles), obviously [well, reasonably - AmP] a coordinated effort. Might one conclude this suffices as Cardinal Mahony's response to Nancy Pelosi?"

The Tidings is a weekly newspaper serving Southern California Catholics.

Eve of the 5th: All Eyes on Archbishop Niederauer

When Pelosi-Gate erupted on August 24th, attention quickly focused on her local archbishop, George Niederauer of San Francisco, as the pastor of souls who is primarily responsible for ensuring that the most prominent Catholic in his archdiocese understands the teachings of the Church.

So far the only public action taken by the archdiocese of San Francisco has been to reprint the (first) statement issued by the USCCB and link to a good article by Rick DelVecchio (and not just because he mentions AmP). The archdiocesan newspaper, in addition, has reprinted a statement made by Niederauer in 2007.

Niederauer's spokesman, however, has promised that Niederauer will take up the issue in tomorrow's edition of the archdiocesan newspaper, twelve days after Pelosi made her comments.

It goes without saying that I'll be posting it as soon as I have access to the text.

At this point, twenty-four bishops, archbishops and cardinals have publicly corrected Pelosi, in various ways (see my updated list here), including the President of the USCCB, the chairman on Pro-Life Activities, the chairman on Doctrine, and the Archbishop of Washington (multiple times, in fact).

Now pardon my loose claims about Church law, but it is my general understanding that, while the duty to instruct the faithful falls equally upon all bishops, it falls particularly on the local bishop. And the duty to discipline lies particularly, and normally exclusively, with the local bishop.

That having been said, we eagerly await Archbishop Niederauer's column of tomorrow morning.

See my previous posts on Pelosi-Gate here.

Related: And while we are waiting tonight, I recommend listening to Fr. Dominic Legge, O.P. on the topic.

Update 7:30pm: Archbishop George Niederauer has released his text.