Off the Record

Get the "Off the Record" Feed

what the archbishop didn't say By Diogenes | September 06, 2008

 Speaker Nancy Pelosi has accepted the invitation for a confidential chat with Archbishop George Niederauer, AP reports. The archbishop had said that he wanted to have such a conversation because of Pelosi's outspoken public advocacy for unrestricted legal abortion. 

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."

With that letter to the archbishop, Pelosi-- whose political instincts are well tuned, to say the least-- is sending us a message as well. She has had conversations with Archbishop Niederauer in the past. They have spoken about immigration. They have spoken about "needs of the poor" (which, I'm guessing, might involve federal funding for the offices of Catholic Charities). They haven't, yet, got around to the question of slaughtering unborn children.  

Whose fault is that?

You might be tempted to think that Pelosi is massaging the truth about her past conversations with the archbishop. She isn't-- according to no less an authority than the archbishop himself. Niederauer specifically mentions talking with the Speaker about immigration because, you see, that was a "hot-button issue" at the time. 

Notice that when the archbishop finally said that he did want to talk to Pelosi about abortion, she answered-- positively-- in less than 24 hours. Her response time is a lot more impressive than Niederauer's; it took him 2 weeks to crank out a public reply to the Speaker's gross misrepresentation of Church teaching on a crucial public issue. 

So now we're left wondering what might have happened if the Archbishop of San Francisco had summoned Nancy Pelosi for a conversation about abortion a month ago, or 5 years ago, or when she was first elected to Congress in 1987. For that matter, we're left wondering how many other American Catholic politicians are still waiting for their bishops to summon their courage, clear their throats, and raise the issue for the first time. 

 

If you found this helpful, please support our work. Make a pledge or one-time donation now!

It's Your Turn to Sound Off!

» To ensure well-meaning comments, only donors are allowed to Sound Off.
  If you're a donor, log in; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!

Sound Off! Comments

• Posted by: Chestertonian - Sep. 09, 2008 12:00 AM ET USA

  It is both distressing and disappointing that Niederauer is a BXVI appointee, and that, while the other bishop's seem to have had a fire lit under them by the Pope's visit, Niederauer seems immune. Thank God for the likes of Chaput, Burke, and Egan! Let's hope they don't stop with Pelosi but go after all those in public office who are bringing scandal to the Church.

• Posted by: voxfem - Sep. 08, 2008 10:22 PM ET USA

  Dear Lord, give him the courage to speak the truth, to not be ashamed of the Gospel, and to be a true sherherd to Nancy Pelosi.

• Posted by: diesel03 - Sep. 06, 2008 11:02 AM ET USA

  Consider the encounter between Bishop Ambrose and the Emperor Theodosius after the latter had ordered the slaughter of an entire town full of innocent people. The emperor ended up doing public penance before he was admitted to communion. But that was an era before testicular atrophyhad set in among the episcopate.

• Posted by: Catholicity - Sep. 06, 2008 10:14 AM ET USA

  "we're left wondering how many other American Catholic politicians are still waiting for their bishops to summon their courage, clear their throats, and raise the issue for the first time." Now, wouldn't that be pastoral. If the election year produces no other result besides prodding our bishops to realize they possess counterweight, it'll have been worth it. Lets hope the positive trend continues into '09 and beyond.