Journeys of a Catholic Poster Girl

Yes, this is long, but read the whole thing!

As always, my favorite online priest, Fr. Z, is on the Pelosi case:

GOP demands Pelosi apology for abortion comments

By Bob Cusack

Posted: 08/27/08 01:24 PM [ET]

DENVER —House Republicans are demanding that Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) apologize for her recent comments on abortion, saying they “mangle Catholic Church doctrine.” 

The letter comes just a day after Archbishop Donald Wuerl, for the second time in a week, [second time?  Where?  When? What?] slapped down the Speaker’s theological explanation for her support of abortion rights.

Pelosi, a Catholic, said on Sunday’s edition of “Meet the Press” that the moment of conception has long been an issue of controversy in the Catholic Church. In a highly unusual move, Wuerl publicly corrected Pelosi on doctrine, and New York Archbishop Edward Cardinal Egan said he was “shocked” by her comments. 

Egan said, “What the Speaker had to say about theologians and their positions regarding abortion was not only misinformed; it was also, and especially, utterly incredible in this day and age. … Anyone who dares to defend that they may be legitimately killed because another human being ‘chooses’ to do so or for any other equally ridiculous reason should not be providing leadership in a civilized democracy worthy of the name.”

Now, a group of 19 Catholic Republican House members are also expressing their outrage. In a letter sent to Pelosi, they write, “[Y]our erroneous claim about the history of the Church’s opposition to abortion is false and denigrates our common Faith.”

They point out that in 1679, the Church unequivocally said it is in “an error for Catholics to believe fetuses do not have a soul.”

The Republicans’ letter concludes, “To reduce the scandal and consternation caused amongst the faithful by your remarks, we necessarily write to you to correct the public record and affirm the Church’s actual and historical teaching that defends the sanctity of human life. We hope that you will rectify your errant claims and apologize for misrepresenting the Church’s doctrine and misleading fellow Catholics.”

Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly issued a statement Tuesday in which the Speaker stood by her comments. He said that not all Catholics believe that life begins at conception and cited St. Augustine, who said, “The law does not provide that the act [abortion] pertains to homicide, for there cannot yet be said to be a live soul in a body that lacks sensation.”

Wuerl blasted Pelosi’s statement, saying the “philosophical discussion of St. Augustine’s time is not relevant today.” [Not sure about that.  I think it isentirely relevant.  What Augustine has to say is helpful and we haven’t, I suspect, gotten to the bottom of what he was really struggling with… but I’ll get to that eventually.  What is important is that Augustine’s teachings are not the equivalent of the modern Magisterium.]

In his statement, Daly also said, “The Speaker agrees with the Church that we should reduce the number of abortions. She believes that can be done bymaking family planning more available, as well as by increasing the number of comprehensive age-appropriate sex education and caring adoption programs.” [That is greater distribution of contraceptives, most of which are abortifacients and also of invasive sex-education.  Speaker Pelosi should review The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality.]

Asked for comment on the House Republican letter, Daly referred to Tuesday’s statement.

The GOP members who signed the letter are: Thaddeus McCotter (Mich.), John Boehner (Ohio), Steve Chabot (Ohio), Virginia Foxx (N.C.), Phil Gingrey (Ga.), Peter King (N.Y.), Steve King (Iowa), Daniel Lungren (Calif.), Devin Nunes (Calif.), John Sullivan (Okla.), Patrick Tiberi (Ohio), Phil English (Pa.), Jean Schmidt (Ohio), Jim Walsh (N.Y.), Jeff Fortenberry (Neb.), Michael McCaul (Texas), Paul Ryan (Wis.), Walter Jones (N.C.) and Mike Ferguson (N.J.).

 

• • • • • •

Catholic dissenter and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi thinks she can use a 1500 year old sound bite from St. Augustine (+430) to confound the clear teaching of the Catholic Churchon when human life begins.

We need a public retraction from the Speaker.

And she really needs to stop with the St. Augustine thing.

Find out what St. Augustine really says about abortion and when fetuses are ensouled or vivified.

Remember:

1) Augustine’s writings, while important, are not equivalent in authority to the formal teaching of the Catholic Church.

2) We know more today about embryology than people did in the 5th century.

3) Ignorant as they might have been about biology, 5th century Christians still believed abortion was evil.  

Consider that the

USCCB

the

Cardinal Archbishop of New York
Cardinal Archbishop of Philadelphia
Archbishop of Washington DC (go fam!)
Archbishop of Denver

all issued statements to correct and redress the falsehoods about Catholic doctrine on the beginning of human life stated on network television pro-abortion Catholic Speaker of the House of Representatives.

I cannot imagine this would have happened even two years ago.

 

So you know how some people (like, OK, me) occasionally say they’d like to hear the bishops speak out on this pro-choice Catholic politicians taking communion thing? 

Well, thank God, they finally have, in response to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) theological stupidity.

What the Speaker said, on Meet the Press: (emphasis and comments mine) 

REP. PELOSI:  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.  And Senator–St. Augustine said at three months (that would be St. Thomas Aquinas, not St. Augustine).  We don’t know. The point is, is that it shouldn’t have an impact on the woman’s right to choose.  Roe v. Wade talks about very clear definitions of when the child–first trimester, certain considerations; second trimester; not so third trimester.  There’s very clear distinctions.  This isn’t about abortion on demand, it’s about a careful, careful consideration of all factors and–to–that a woman has to make with her doctor and her god.  And so I don’t think anybody can tell you when life begins, human life begins.  As I say, the Catholic Church for centuries has been discussing this, and there are those who’ve decided…

MR. BROKAW:  The Catholic Church at the moment feels very strongly that it…

REP. PELOSI:  I understand that.

MR. BROKAW:  …begins at the point of conception.

REP. PELOSI:  I understand.  And this is like maybe 50 years or something like that.  So again, over the history of the church, this is an issue of controversy.  But it is, it is also true that God has given us, each of us, a free will and a responsibility to answer for our actions.  And we want abortions to be safe, rare, and reduce the number of abortions.  That’s why we have this fight in Congress over contraception.  My Republican colleagues do not support contraception.  If you want to reduce the number of abortions, and we all do, we must–it would behoove you to support family planning and, and contraception, you would think.  But that is not the case.  So we have to take–you know, we have to handle this as respectfully–this is sacred ground. We have to handle it very respectfully and not politicize it, as it has been–and I’m not saying Rick Warren did, because I don’t think he did, but others will try to.

(we’ll forget the fact that she confused St. Augustine with St. Thomas Aquinas for one minute)

And I guess 70 AD is, um, 50 years ago. (this link also has a video! and h/t dad for the linkage)

Well apparently this travesty of theology could not go unremarked upon by the higher-ups. So:

First, from my cousin (family love flying high right now). Here’s the press release

The following statement is from Washington Archbishop Donald W. Wuerl: 

On Meet the Press this past Sunday, August 23, 2008, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi made statements regarding the teaching of the Catholic Church, human life and abortion that were incorrect. 

Speaker Pelosi responded to a question on when life begins by mentioning she was Catholic. She went on to say, “And what I know is, over the centuries, the doctors of the Church have not been able to make that definition…” After Mr. Tom Brokaw, the interviewer, pointed out that the Catholic Church feels strongly that life begins at conception, she replied, “I understand. And this is like maybe 50 years or something like that. So again, over the history of the church, this is an issue of controversy.”

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.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church is clear: the current teaching of the Catholic Church on human life and abortion is the same teaching as it was 2,000 years ago. The Catechism reads: 

“Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception…Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law.” (Catechism, 2270-2271)

The Catechism goes on to quote the Didache, a treatise that dates to the first century: “’You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.’”

From the beginning, the Catholic Church has respected the dignity of all human life from the moment of conception to natural death. 

And then, from Cardinal Egan in NYC: (h/t Corner)

STATEMENT OF HIS EMINENCE, EDWARD CARDINAL EGAN

CONCERNING REMARKS MADE BY THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

            Like many other citizens of this nation, I was shocked to learn that the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States of America would make the kind of statements that were made to Mr. Tom Brokaw of NBC-TV on Sunday, August 24, 2008.  What the Speaker had to say about theologians and their positions regarding abortion was not only misinformed; it was also, and especially, utterly incredible in this day and age. 

            We are blessed in the 21st century with crystal-clear photographs and action films of the living realities within their pregnant mothers.  No one with the slightest measure of integrity or honor could fail to know what these marvelous beings manifestly, clearly, and obviously are, as they smile and wave into the world outside the womb.  In simplest terms, they are human beings with an inalienable right to live, a right that the Speaker of the House of Representatives is bound to defend at all costs for the most basic of ethical reasons.  They are not parts of their mothers, and what they are depends not at all upon the opinions of theologians of any faith.  Anyone who dares to defend that they may be legitimately killed because another human being “chooses” to do so or for any other equally ridiculous reason should not be providing leadership in a civilized democracy worthy of the name.

                                                            Edward Cardinal Egan

I guess the real key to getting an episcopal reaction is to go on National TV and really, really flub up Catholic theology. 

I also liked Archbishop Chaput’s call for V-P candidate Biden not to receive communion. 

As Archbishop Chaput said, “BE CATHOLIC.” You have to take what the Church believes hook, line and sinker if you’re going to be Catholic, the way we’re supposed to be, if our faith is our “North Star” (Arch. Chaput). You can’t just muddle the theology and hem and haw to try to make it support your position if it doesn’t. 

But wait…there’s more! (As the Count on Sesame street says…)

Here are two awesome interviews with Archbishop Chaput of Denver, who is a hero of mine. If any American could be Pope, I’d pick him (well, and my cousin, naturally.). 

The first is from NRO

Some choice bits (but you really need to read the whole thing) (emphasis mine):

LOPEZ: What should it mean when someone says, “I’m Catholic.”

ARCHBISHOP CHAPUT: It should mean that we love Jesus Christ as our redeemer, love the Catholic Church as our mother, and give our hearts to what she teaches, because she teaches in Christ’s name.

LOPEZ: What should it mean when I’m “voting Catholic?”

ARCHBISHOP CHAPUT: We should see ourselves as Catholic first — not white or black, or young or old. or Democrat or Republican, or labor militant or business owner, but Catholic firstas the main way we identify ourselves. Our faith should shape our lives, including our political choices. Of course, that demands that we actually study and deepen our Catholic faith. The Catholic faith isn’t a set of clothes that we can tailor to a personal fit. We don’t “invent” our faith, and we don’t “own” it. If we really want to be Catholic, then we’ll live by Catholic teaching. Otherwise we’re just fooling ourselves and abusing the belief of other Catholics who really do try to practice what the Church teaches.

And: (emphases mine)

LOPEZ: Whenever I write about Catholics and abortion, I am immediately asked, “What about war? What about the death penalty?” What about them? Can a Catholic vote for Senator “Surge”? We have killed people in Iraq, after all.

ARCHBISHOP CHAPUT: I’ve written and spoken against the death penalty for more than 30 years. And along with most other American bishops, I opposed our intervention in Iraq. But these issues are different in kind, not merely degree, from the violence involved in abortion. Anyone rooted in Scripture and Catholic tradition will understand the distinction if he or she reasons honestly. Genocide, euthanasia, abortion, and deliberately targeting civilians in war — these things are always grievously wrong. But in Catholic thought, war and capital punishment can be morally legitimate under certain carefully defined circumstances. Abortion is never morally justified. 

Last: 

LOPEZ: If there is one single point that every Catholic reader of your book could take away from it and pray about and make their own, what would you pray it be?

ARCHBISHOP CHAPUT: Again: Don’t lie. If we say we’re Catholic, we need to back it up with proof. Our faith needs to be the North Star of our lives. Our behavior needs to match our words, including in our political choices.

Here’s the Archbishop’s interview with radio host (and Catholic) Hugh Hewitt

And, of course, here’s the book: Render Unto Caesar. 

Archbishop Wuerl did a live chat with the WaPo today about BXVI’s visit next week.

From the WashTimes…now that I can post things again (!):

Wuerl paves own path
By Julia Duin
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
June 17, 2007

Archbishop Donald W. Wuerl.  J.M. EDDINS JR. (THE WASHINGTON TIMES)
———————————————————— ——————–
Almost a year into his job as the spiritual leader of the Washington area’s 560,000 Catholics, Archbishop Donald W. Wuerl has set a personal agenda and style that are worlds apart from those of his more flamboyant predecessor.
Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick, now retired, was known for his extroverted persona, hobnobbing with politicians and worldwide travels. His successor prefers to stay closer to home.
“I am not making the politics of the country my focus,” Archbishop Wuerl said in an interview with The Washington Times. “My focus is pastoral and spiritual as bishop.”
However, he hasn’t ruled out political involvement. In April, the archbishop met with an unspecified number of Catholic House Democrats at the D.C. home of Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut for what she called “an opportunity to get to know one another.”
“He has a wonderful style and focus on teaching. He has a willingness to listen and a pastoral approach. He appears to be a consensus builder,” Mrs. DeLauro said.
Asked about the nature of the discussion, she said: “We talked about everything but not about specific issues. People wanted the opportunity to talk about why they are serving [in Congress] and who they are.”
Sen. John Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat, said he has had several “conversations” with Archbishop Wuerl. The archbishop was a deacon at the wedding of his wife, Teresa, and her first husband, John Heinz, in February 1966.
“He’s a very thoughtful, very intelligent, strong representative of the church,” Mr. Kerry, also a Catholic, said this month. “He’s doing a terrific job. I’ve talked to him a couple of times [this year] and have had wonderful conversations with him.”
Archbishop Wuerl’s studious, precise and understated manner is a change of pace from Cardinal McCarrick’s frequent press conferences and de facto role as spokesman for American Catholic bishops. In January 2001, the cardinal had barely arrived at his Washington chancery from his previous post as archbishop of Newark, N.J., when he hosted two special dinner guests: the newly elected President Bush and his wife, Laura.
The cardinal left office a year ago, and Archbishop Wuerl was installed as the leader of Washington’s Catholics on June 22.
“I had no sooner gotten here than they invited me to the White House,” Archbishop Wuerl said.
“It was an extraordinary evening,” he said, adding that the meal in Mr. Bush’s private quarters was partly an occasion to bid farewell to Cardinal McCarrick and partly to greet him as the new archbishop and welcome Archbishop Pietro Sambi as the new papal nuncio to the United States.

Archbishop Wuerl has since been back to the White House to talk about urban Catholic schools, but the rest of his first year here has been spent comparatively under wraps, traveling the 2,104 square miles that comprise the Archdiocese of Washington.
So far, he has visited half of the archdiocese’s 140 parishes. His duties have ranged from dedicating a new Catholic high school in Olney and celebrating the Vietnamese New Year at Our Lady of Vietnam in Silver Spring to ordaining five priests last month at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception.
“We’ve been trying to get to know this local church, which means getting around to it,” Archbishop Wuerl said. “That’s been a joy. It’s also been a challenge. It’s a big archdiocese territorially.”
David Gibson, an observer of the U.S. Catholic hierarchy and author of several books — including “The Rule of Benedict: Pope Benedict XVI and His Battle With the Modern World,” released last year — said the archbishop was fortunate to have a year of adjustment before the 2008 presidential election.
“He is not a headline-grabber and he hasn’t been through a presidential campaign,” Mr. Gibson said. “Now he will be. As much as he’d like to keep a low profile and be a pastor, all those things are going to press in on him.”
Lawmakers and Communion
Archbishop Wuerl’s primary focus has been to establish himself as a teacher — much like his boss, Pope Benedict XVI, now into his third year of what religious observers and journalists have called a “teaching pontificate.”
The archbishop said he goes to Capitol Hill occasionally to meet with “a number of people on both sides of the aisle” for “conversations” to help people “form a conscience.” Just recently, he added, someone called to ask him about conscientious objection.
“The whole idea was, ‘Bishop, can you help me understand what the church’s take on this is?’ ” Archbishop Wuerl said of the dialogue with the lawmaker, whose name he did not disclose.
“I think that is one of the things a bishop can do that helps his flock: to try to help people understand the distinction between political actions and the moral import of those actions,” he said.
The archbishop’s relationships with lawmakers have generated some controversy, particularly on Jan. 3, when House Speaker-designate Nancy Pelosi attended Mass at Trinity University in the District. Her presence set off protests from Catholics who believe that canon law plainly bars pro-choice Catholic lawmakers from receiving Communion. A week later, the archbishop told a reporter in San Diego that he had no plans to bar Mrs. Pelosi from receiving Communion in his diocese.
“He created great scandal in the archdiocese for choosing not to deny Nancy Pelosi Holy Communion,” said Judie Brown, president of the American Life League. “She persistently draws attention to her Catholic identity and her public support for abortion. He had a tremendous opportunity to set the record straight while publicly instructing her. What kind of teacher is that?”
In 2004, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger — now Pope Benedict XVI — wrote a letter to U.S. Catholic bishops saying they must try to convince pro-choice Catholic legislators that their stance is wrong. If the lawmakers did not change their minds, the letter said, they should be barred from receiving Communion.
Archbishop Wuerl declined to say whether he would ever take such a step.
“My primary responsibility is to teach and therefore to help every Catholic inform their conscience,” he said. “When people do things contrary to church teaching, my responsibility is to help them understand that is wrong. Sometimes that takes a lot of conversation. Sometimes you’re not successful at it.
“The next step — after lots and lots of conversation — is that if a person is acting out in a way that contravenes their faith, you ask them, ‘Do you think you should be receiving Communion?’ and even to say to them, ‘If you really do need to examine your conscience and if you can’t bring yourself to what the church calls a coherent position, don’t you think you should refrain from Communion?’
“I think that’s what the pope is talking about,” Archbishop Wuerl said.
Is there a time when teaching stops and discipline starts?
“I think there will always be a time you say, ‘For the good of the church, you are now presenting a public scandal,’ but you have to remember this person has a bishop and he has to be involved in this discussion as well. I think discipline is always the last step,” he said.
But isn’t it his right to say who receives Communion within the archdiocese?
“I don’t think it is uniquely any one bishop’s job to oversee all the politicians in the United States,” Archbishop Wuerl said. “Every Catholic member of government has a pastor and a bishop and they need to be in dialogue with them. The idea that the archbishop of Washington is somehow bishop for the nation is not acceptable.”
Inside the Wuerl pool
Catholic blogger Rocco Palmo says the archdiocese’s Hyattsville chancery has been nicknamed the “Wuerl machine” for the archbishop’s meticulous and driven work ethic.
“The hard-charging administrative style — schedule divvied up into 10-minute blocks, detailed command of figures large and small, lots of homework for aides and [bishop] — both inspire confidence and credibility,” Mr. Palmo wrote in November on his Web site, whispersintheloggia.blogspot.com.
Within three days of the papal announcement on May 16, 2006, that Archbishop Wuerl was named to the Washington see, his senior staff members were asked to come up with job descriptions and lists of their accomplishments and goals.
The archbishop’s schedule’s been so packed since coming here, he has had to forgo his habit of swimming laps, except for an occasional foray into the Catholic University pool.
“He’s a hard worker 24/7,” said the Very Rev. David O’Connell, president of Catholic University and a 20-year friend of the archbishop. “On Saturday, I was working in the garden and I got a phone call from the archbishop. I was wearing a T-shirt,” but the archbishop, he noted, was at his office. The two men talked about business for an hour on a day that most clergy take off.
“He’s not a micromanager, in my experience of him,” Father O’Connell added. “He’s got carefully honed administrative skills. He’s had those positions all his life, so he’s had a long time to develop those skills. He’s got a great sense of humor. He’s a bishop’s bishop, he really is.”
The education archbishop
According to the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate, 50 percent of the 475 men who will be ordained as priests this year in the United States attended a Catholic elementary school.
This is one reason why Archbishop Wuerl has spent much of his first year trying to overhaul the archdiocese’s inner-city school system. Soon after he arrived in Washington, the archbishop called in his catechists and said he wanted to hold a workshop for the archdiocese’s religious educators. On Oct. 5, 2,300 people attended the archdiocese’s first catechetical convocation to set a vision for religious education.
“We had to get everyone on the page with the same information,” Archbishop Wuerl said. “Here are the number of students we have, here’s what it costs, here is where the deficits are, here is where our potential for addressing some of those deficits lie. And … how to guarantee Catholic education in the future for the diocese and how can we guarantee we won’t outprice it.”
One of his concerns is that the Center City Consortium, a corporation created to fund eight inner-city schools, has run out of money.
“In the past 10 years, we have spent nearly $60 million,” the archbishop said, “but the number of schools has gone from eight to 14. That has overtaxed the sources. The board is working to see how we can keep as much Catholic education in the [inner-city] as possible while also being able to pay for it.”
It’s not that the archbishop is lax on fundraising.
His annual archbishop’s appeal is far ahead on donations, having raised $11.3 million in pledges, about $3 million more than it had at the same time last year. This year’s goal was $11.1 million.
Monsignor Ronald Jameson, rector of St. Matthew’s Cathedral downtown, said his parish pledged 114 percent of its goal for the appeal.
“I am very impressed with him,” Monsignor Jameson said of the archbishop. “He is so organized. He spends a lot of time in preparation for ceremonies [at the cathedral] to make sure everyone is on the same page.”
In the confessional
Perhaps the archbishop’s biggest success was his first pastoral letter on the sacrament of confession, released near the beginning of Lent.
Called “The Light is on for You,” it evolved into a press campaign with 100,000 brochures in English and Spanish, a Web site (www.thelightison.org), ads on the Metro system, one billboard in Prince George’s County and radio ads.
“It was an extremely successful effort,” Archbishop Wuerl said. “A large number of priests have said to me, ‘Some of the confessions I heard in one day made the whole thing worth it.’ “
Other pastors reported having to reorder brochures and hearing confessions of Catholics who had not taken part in the sacrament for several decades.
The Catholic Church requires its members to go to confession at least once a year, but a 1980 University of Notre Dame survey — the most recent one available — showed that one out of four Catholics never go. The archdiocese received inquiries from several other dioceses and press requests from overseas about the pastoral letter.
The success of the penance campaign raised questions at the chancery about what else can be done to reach the region’s many Catholics.
“We’ve had some meetings on how to get my voice out as pastor,” Archbishop Wuerl said. “We found out those ‘Light is on for You’ radio pieces got responses from thousands of people. I’d like to get into that whole world of popular communications.”
So when does he intend to begin a blog? The 66-year-old archbishop acknowledged that this technology is beyond him.
“Down the road I’d like to,” he said. “But you have to use sound bites and be brief and repetitious. Many of us were trained and formed in literature, philosophy, theology — the very disciplines that don’t train you to release everything into sound bites. So you have to reprogram your way of speaking.”

Apparently FireFox is hating me and not allowing me to cut and paste things onto my blogs! So I’m just going to have to tell you fun things I’ve read:

–The WaPo had an article on my cousin, Archbishop Wuerl, and his first year “in office.” If I can ever get this to cut, I’ll post it here, but you can probably find it on the site’s archieves.

–Fr.Z had a great list of five things to do when the M.P. comes out; check out the link of the sidebar to see it. And it IS coming, we swear! Really!

–Note that the MP just allows priests to celebrate the old Latin Mass without getting a bishop’s approval. The old  Mass has always been allowed to be said but you had to get the OK. (if I am wrong about this let me know!)
–In  local news…preparations are underway for my pastor’s Last Mass with us on July 8th at noon. The choir will be singing, and since I will have my CI activated by then, I will join them! YAY! And we are singing some of our best stuff, so it you’re an SPX parishioner be sure to come on out!

–Parish festival prep already! I signed up to work the food booth. Doesn’t everyone love the parish festival?

–Started Evelyn Waugh’s (a man, yes, not a woman, thank you) quintessential Catholic novel, Brideshead Revisted. Very, very good thus far.

–Finished Suffering of Love and Honey from the Rock. Both extremely good.

–Oh, and the ECUSA has a bishop who is both Episcopalian and MUSLIM. You can read about this on Rod’s blog (Crunchy Cons) on the sidebar.  When headlines from The Onion are coming true, that’s got to be a “sign of the apocalypse” (S.I.)

From USA Today: (and it quotes my cousin!!)

  Bush awarded Pope John Paul II the Medal of Freedom. The president will meet Pope Benedict XVI for the first time Saturday.

Benedict, Bush both benefit from meeting

USA TODAY/GALLUP POLL

How much attention should President Bush pay to Pope Benedict XVI’s ideas and pronouncements about policy?

Moderate amount: 46%

Not much: 21%

A great deal: 18%

None at all: 11%

No opinion: 4%

Source: USA TODAY/Gallup Poll taken June 1-3 of 496 adults nationwide. Margin of error +/-5 percentage points.

By David Jackson, USA TODAY
ROSTOCK, Germany — When Al Smith lost the 1928 presidential race, he was attacked for being Roman Catholic and therefore too close to the pope.
Today, U.S. presidents and the leader of the Catholic Church enjoy a working relationship that has spanned decades.

President Bush had his fourth papal audience on Saturday and his first with Pope Benedict XVI. Bush will tie a meeting record set by presidents Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton, who both met four times with Pope John Paul II.

Bush told a group of European journalists last week that he was looking forward to meeting with Benedict, calling him a “a good thinker and a smart man. I’ll be in a listening mode.

“Sometimes I’m not poetic enough to describe what it’s like to be in the presence of the Holy Father,” Bush said. “It is a moving experience.”

Americans generally like the idea of presidents conferring with popes. About seven in 10 say Bush should pay more attention or the same amount to Benedict as he does to other world leaders, according to a recent USA TODAY/Gallup Poll. Only 27% say the pope should receive less attention.

While American political history includes a thread of anti-Catholicism, church observers and political analysts say the meetings between the president and the pontiff offer something for both.

The president represents “the one great superpower and all that signifies,” said Archbishop Donald Wuerl of Washington, D.C. “The pope speaks from a worldwide perspective of faith, spirituality and conscience.”

Matthew Wilson, a political scientist at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, said “a sense of approval from the Vatican” can only help a president on the international stage. Closer to home, he said, the White House “has seen good relations with the Vatican as part of (its) domestic effort to woo Catholic voters, particularly conservative Catholic voters.”

Bush won 52% of the Catholic vote in 2004, according to media exit polls, and beat Sen. John Kerry, who is Catholic.

Bush’s meeting with Benedict touched on the Iraq war, which the Vatican has long opposed. John Paul dispatched a cardinal to the White House in 2003 to plead against the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, and echoed his opposition to the war when he met with Bush in 2004. John Paul also opposed the Persian Gulf War.

The president’s other meetings with John Paul touched on politically sensitive issues such as embryonic stem cell research and charges of clergy sex abuse.

In his Easter message this year, Benedict bemoaned that “nothing positive comes from Iraq, torn apart by continual slaughter as the civil population flees.”

Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, former archbishop of Washington, D.C., said, “War and peace are always on the mind of the Holy Father.”

Benedict, who became pope in April 2005, has had his share of controversy. His suggestion of a link between violence and Islam in September 2006 sparked a protest throughout the Muslim world, though Benedict sought to clarify his remarks on a visit to Turkey a few months later.

And while traveling to Brazil earlier this year, Benedict said politicians risked excommunication if they supported abortion laws.

The Rev. Thomas Reese, a senior fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University, said the meeting between Bush and the pontiff was a “photo op.” Still, he said, it “allows for an exchange of information and views” on a wide range of issues.

“The Vatican has been called one of the great listening posts of diplomacy,” Reese said. “Let’s hope the administration listens.”

Some historical facts about presidents and popes, according to the Rev. James Garneau, who lectured on the topic at Catholic University:

•Woodrow Wilson was the first president to meet with a pope, Benedict XV in 1919. A president did not have a papal audience again until 1959, when John XXIII received Dwight Eisenhower. That began a tradition that has included every president since.

•John F. Kennedy, the first Catholic elected to the White House, ignored anti-Catholic sentiment to visit Pope Paul VI in 1963. They discussed the civil rights movement.

•Reagan, who nodded off during his first meeting with John Paul II, formed an anti-communist pact with the pontiff whose native Poland was temporarily behind the Iron Curtain.

July 23, 2001 at Castel Gandolfo, the papal retreat Stem cell research The pope asked Bush not to support federal funding of research on embryonic stem cells. The meeting occurred months before Bush approved limited federal support of such research using existing stem cell lines. Bush vowed Thursday he’ll veto a research bill passed by Congress because it would destroy human embryos. He vetoed the measure once before, in 2006.  “Experience is already showing how a tragic coarsening of conscience accompanies the assault on innocent human life in the womb.” —Pope John Paul II One example he cited: “Proposals for the creation for research purposes of human embryos, destined to destruction in the process.”

May 28, 2002 at the Vatican Clergy sexual abuse of children Bush was in Rome for a NATO conference. At the time, several priests in the USA were under investigation for molesting children. Church leaders were accused of covering up the problem. Bush and the pope met privately, and there were no statements afterward — the only time that happened in their encounters. “I will tell him that I am concerned about the Catholic Church in America. I am concerned about its standing, and I say that because the Catholic Church is an incredibly important institution in our country.” —President Bush, before the meeting

June 4, 2004 at the Vatican  The Iraq war  On his way to a 60th anniversary commemoration of the Normandy landings, Bush visited the pope to give him a U.S. Medal of Freedom. The pope and the Vatican were outspoken against the war in Iraq and violence in the Middle East. Later that year, Bush won a second term, even though the Iraq war brought down his approval ratings.  “Mr. President, your visit to Rome takes place at a moment of great concern for the continuing situation of grave unrest in the Middle East, both in Iraq and in the Holy Land. You are very familiar with the unequivocal position of the Holy See in this regard.” —Pope John Paul II

OK this is kind of old but I just found it on the WaPo’s site. It’s a Christmastime interview with Archbishop Wuerl of D.C. , who, if you did not know, is like my third cousin, or something. Anyway, here’s the link:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006  /12/18/DI2006121800546.html