Speaker of the House—and practicing Catholic—Nancy Pelosi made some rather interesting comments at a recent Capitol Hill Catholic Community Conference and personally — I don’t know, I’m a bit confused by her words. Keep reading … you’ll understand.
“They ask me all the time, ‘What is your favorite this? What is your favorite that? What is your favorite that?’ And one time, ‘What is your favorite word?’ And I said, ‘My favorite word? That is really easy. My favorite word is the Word, is the Word. And that is everything. It says it all for us. And you know the biblical reference, you know the Gospel reference of the Word.”
“And that Word,” Pelosi said, “is, we have to give voice to what that means in terms of public policy that would be in keeping with the values of the Word. The Word. Isn’t it a beautiful word when you think of it? It just covers everything. The Word.
“Fill it in with anything you want. But, of course, we know it means: ‘The Word was made flesh and dwelt amongst us.’ And that’s the great mystery of our faith. He will come again. He will come again. So, we have to make sure we’re prepared to answer in this life, or otherwise, as to how we have measured up.”
Well, I guess that you have to give Pelosi credit for trying to connect with some of her audience …
CBS News attempts to clarify where Pelosi was coming from a bit:
John 1:14 states, “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we saw His glory, the glory as it were of the only begotten of the Father) full of grace and truth.”
The passage from the Gospel of John, Christians believe, refers to God (the Word) becoming a man, Jesus Christ, at the moment of the Annunciation, when the angel Gabriel told the Virgin Mary she was going to have a child. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, “the Incarnation is the mystery and the dogma of the Word made Flesh.”
Section 423 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church states: “We believe and confess that Jesus of Nazareth, born a Jew of a daughter of Israel at Bethlehem at the time of King Herod the Great and the emperor Caesar Augustus, a carpenter by trade, who died crucified in Jerusalem under the procurator Pontius Pilate during the reign of the emperor Tiberius, is the eternal Son of God made man. He ‘came from God’, ‘descended from heaven’, and ‘came in the flesh’. For ‘the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father … And from his fullness have we all received, grace upon grace.”
Pelosi’s words (no pun intended) are considered a bit hypocritical by some, who feel that her position on legalized abortion go against her professed Catholic beliefs. Her critics include Pope Benedict XVI, who had a private meeting with Pelosi a year or so ago. I would love to have been a fly on the wall during that conversation, following which the Vatican released this statement:
“His Holiness took the opportunity to speak of the requirements of the natural moral law and the Church’s consistent teaching on the dignity of human life from conception to natural death which enjoin all Catholics, and especially legislators, jurists and those responsible for the common good of society, to work in co-operation with all men and women of good will in creating a just system of laws capable of protecting human life at all stages of its development.”
So let me get this straight. Pelosi publicly, vehemently, and proudly supports abortion, which is of course her right both as an American citizen and a lawmaker—but, come on, it goes completely against the teachings of the Catholic Church, which she claims to embrace. You kind of can’t have it both ways, Madame Speaker, and rambling to a gathering of Catholics about “the Word” does not change anything.
Pelosi is by no means the only pro-choice Catholic; she is not even the only pro-choice Catholic politician. However, her Sarah Palin impression attempts at vocalizing something she either doesn’t know much about or is only meant to placate a specific audience really rubbed me the wrong way.
Not surprisingly, Pelosi’s reps ignored CBSNews.com’s follow-up questions “regarding the speaker’s statement that she seeks to make policy in conformance with the values of the Word made flesh”.
So what are your thoughts on Pelosi’s words on “the Word”?
Most people of the Christian faith pick and choose what they would like to follow from the bible (like views on gay marriage, murder, adultry, etc) and decide to turn a blind eye on other (sex before marriage, divorce, etc). Why can’t Pelosi do the same?? I don’t see how this is any different than disagreeing with any other medievil (or older), barbaric religious rule.
I shouldn’t have even specified Christians, people in every organised relgion do this; like my jewish buddy who eats bacon omelettes, or my tantrum throwing buhdist friend, it’s all the same.
So, should she stop believing in the Catholic version of God? Or should she become pro-life? I don’t know what the argument or problem is here.
My thoughts on her thoughts on the word- Catholics tend to like Jesus. No surprise there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WNrx2jq184
This is the first thing that popped into my head when I started reading this. LOL
That was a real tune when I was a 7th grader,it was by The Trashmen
I kid you not I started singing this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iH2a30LTeWw
The chick is crazier than bat shit,she rambles all the time. God help us,she’s third in line for the presidency,right after Joey Biden! I thought botox wasn’t harmful!
I hate it when Christians act like everyone else in the America MUST share their beliefs.
Yeah, how DARE she talk about [her interpretation of] Catholicism at a Catholic Community Conference.
Huh. I don’t know what to think of this either. It seems really out of the blue.
I don’t think that politicians should reveal their religious beliefs or be expected to reveal their religious beliefs to gain votes. They should appear to the public as neutral, no matter what they choose to personally believe in.
I completely agree and would be proud of a politician who refused to reveal his/her religious belief. Politics should be based upon their past voting history and actions, not on what church/temple/couch they attend.
The writer’s argument is insulting. It reminds me of many hateful things I heard growing up. “Oh, you’re a democrat? Then you can’t possibly be a true Christian.” Only reversed… “Oh, you’re a Christian? Then you can’t possibly be a true democrat.” Give me a beak.
Yeah, this whole post is thinly veiled religious discrimination.
Religion and spirituality are very personal matters and there are unique interpretations of belief even within very organized systems like the Catholic Church.
And as to the cover-up thing, or politicians keeping up a “neutral front”–Why should a politician have to cover up their religion? That implies shame. It’s a belief system. Do we want atheists to shut up about their atheism as well? Also a belief system.
People will continue to be drawn to leaders who they believe share similar beliefs to support their ideals with laws and a person’s spirituality/religious beliefs will ultimately tie in to their ideals—While someone can have a strong sense of morality without being religious or even spiritual at all, a person’s religious beliefs do ultimately tie into their morality–>tie into their ideals–>tie into the kinds of laws they’ll pass. There’s of course overlap– people of different backgrounds supporting the same law–but to assume someone’s religious background will never have any bearing on how they view issues/vote is just ridiculous and impractical. So why try to deny it?
because there’s this thing called “separation of church and state.”
der.
Way to oversimplify the issue. Separation of church and state may serve to keep a specific religion’s teachings from becoming law of the land (like avoiding the model England had for many many years), but if you really think individuals can consistently-and-without-exception separate their religious belief system from how they view justice and hence how they vote, you’re insane.
The point is, since I clearly have to explain myself like I’m talking to a toddler, is that the majority of people aren’t going to accept one religion over another, especially if it’s not their home religion. Assuming you live in the US (because if you don’t, you clearly don’t understand the mindset of some individuals here), you’ll know that if a President, for example, were a different religion than Christian (which is a dominant religion in the US), they wouldn’t appreciate him discussing it during public time and interviewing simultaneously about religion and his policies. The same goes for other political figureheads, much like Nancy Pelosi herself.
@ Jules:
I do live in the U.S. You responded to a different issue than what I brought up, though. Yes, some people get pissed when politicians talk about their religious background, especially if they disagree with it. I don’t know if this article’s instance qualifies as “during public time” since it was a Catholic Conference. And I still don’t see how this discusses how you can honestly expect people, *when they consider how to vote*, to consistently disregard their religious/spiritual beliefs. We may not want them to DISCUSS the connection, but a person’s policies and religion will ultimately coincide in some ways—their policies are connected to their beliefs and morals and, if they’re religious, their religion is part of their system of beliefs and morals.
You don’t have to pretend you have to “talk to me like I’m a toddler” just because I disagree and have a valid point. I understand you. I just question what you don’t.