D.C. Archdiocese Sends Embarrassing Email Regarding Pelosi and Holy Communion
Archbishop Wilton Gregory is a coward.
The Washington Examiner reached out to the Washington DC diocese regarding San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone banning Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi from taking Holy Communion.
Someone probably got a lecture or two for responding with the wrong email:
“Just sharing for you to know what comes in,” the email stated. “Email since Saturday, when I last checked the comms inbox has just been a couple of random people wanting to tell the Cardinal to bring down the hammer on Pelosi. Aside from Jack Jenkins at RNS, this is the only new media inquiry. It will be ignored, too.”
The Washington Examiner reached back out to the Archdiocese of Washington asking for clarification.
Whoops.
Random people? Something tells me that The Washington Examiner is not the only publication to ask for a statement from Archbishop Wilton Gregory.
“I apologize for the mistaken email. We have not been responding to inquiries on this topic because Cardinal Gregory’s position has not changed from what he has said in the past,” the follow-up email stated. “Cardinal Gregory has no new comment about the issue of Catholic politicians receiving Communion. The actions of Archbishop Cordileone are his decision to make in the Archdiocese of San Francisco. Cardinal Gregory has not instructed the priests of The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Washington to refuse Communion to anyone.”
You know, not a lot of people know Gregory’s position on the subject. We can guess but still. This is HUGE because an archbishop rarely bans someone from Holy Communion.
In 2021, Gregory spoke to Crux:
Crux: On his way back from Slovakia, Pope Francis answered some questions about the reception of communion by pro-choice politicians. He said abortion is a crime and told bishops to be shepherds when making decisions about communion. How helpful were his words in terms of the current US situation?
Gregory: I think it was extraordinarily helpful, and it reminded the bishops, all of us, that we’re not there as police, we’re there as pastors, and as pastors, we certainly have to teach the faith of the Church, we have to be true to the Church’s heritage of faith, but we also have to bring people along with us. It is not simply a matter of pointing out their errors. That’s a part of our job, but the other part is welcoming and drawing them closer to the life of the Church, and we need to do that more effectively, more publicly.
So, I was very grateful for the Holy Father’s words. I felt supported by his words, and I think bishops should reflect on how he is trying to support us in our pastoral service to our people.
What does it mean for you for bishops to “act as shepherds” on issues like this?
It seems to me that a Good Shepherd, using that image that the Lord himself used, is always looking for the ones that stray. It’s easy to be a shepherd if the whole flock stays together. It’s more challenging if one or two of the sheep stray and then you have to go out and get them and place them on your shoulders and bring them back to the flock that belongs to Christ.
Also, has Gregory read the Canon 915 of the Code of Canon Law? It states: “Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion.”
This is not hard. If you are not in Communion with the Catholic Church you should not present yourself for Holy Communion.
It’s a cop-out for Gregory. But, in all honesty, if Pelosi wants to take Holy Communion knowing full well she is not in Communion with the Church then so be it. It’s between her and God. It’s her soul…if she has one.
Then again, how many pro-death penalty people and politicians receive Holy Communion? The Catholic Church is against the death penalty. Pope Francis revised the Catechism of the Catholic Church to oppose capital punishment:
2267. Recourse to the death penalty on the part of legitimate authority, following a fair trial, was long considered an appropriate response to the gravity of certain crimes and an acceptable, albeit extreme, means of safeguarding the common good.
Today, however, there is an increasing awareness that the dignity of the person is not lost even after the commission of very serious crimes. In addition, a new understanding has emerged of the significance of penal sanctions imposed by the state. Lastly, more effective systems of detention have been developed, which ensure the due protection of citizens but, at the same time, do not definitively deprive the guilty of the possibility of redemption.
Consequently, the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that “the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person”,i and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide.
Pelosi asked on Morning Joe why the Catholic Church doesn’t punish pro-death penalty Catholics. Punish is the wrong word. She’s not being punished.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
2 wrongs attempting to be a right
There is a special place in hell for this maggot. Let’s keep trying to help her get there.
I don’t think she needs our help. If she wants help to get right with God, that’s one thing. if she “obstinately perseveres” to harm her soul, she’s been warned. There are very few I would say “good riddance” – she is one of them.
Stop murdering infants, you ghoul and then it’s not a concern.
Demos-cracy will be aborted in darkness. The goal is to discourage the ethical rite.
Pelosi asked why the Catholic Church doesn’t punish pro-death penalty Catholics.
She fails to see the irony—that pro-abortion is pro-death penalty—for innocent babies.
Whereas, the Catholic church’s position is that the death penalty should be reserved for murderers.
“Whosoever shall shed man’s blood, his blood shall be shed: for man was made to the image of God. Gen 9:6 Douay-Rheims Bible (Catholic Bible)
“Whereas, the Catholic church’s position is that the death penalty should be reserved for murderers.”
Apparently, no longer, if Francis changed the catechism as the article states.
THANK YOU for actually reading what I wrote.
I literally just wrote that the Catholic Church is against the death penalty.
Francis is against the death penalty. The Catholic Church allows it when it is needed. Francis doesn’t have the authority to change the magisterium, and this issue was decided before he took office. That is, if he took office. Because Benedict didn’t resign from being in charge of the magisterium; he only resigned from 2 of the 4 offices.
In any event, the magisterium can never change on any issue. That is strictly forbidden.
We’re in a post-hierarchical world — one in which the people nominally in charge aren’t necessarily in charge.
The governor signs a masking EO that he has zero constitutional authority to order?
The sheeple comply.
The president bans guns that he has zero constitutional authority to ban?
The sheeple comply.
The pope changes doctrine that he has no magisterial authority to change?
The sheeple comply.
When the sheeple comply, that legitimizes your authority.
A good reminder why I left the church. Hypocrites.
The Roman Catholic Church is not against the death penalty, at least in principle. According to the RCC it’s a prudential question, about which Catholics can disagree in good faith. Francis, whose own Catholicism is an open question, should not have altered the catechism to insert his own prudential judgment; however his having done it doesn’t put Catholics who disagree with him out of communion with the Church.
It’s the same as with glowball warmening. Francis thinks we’re all about to die from it, so of course he teaches that we must do whatever we can to stop it. That’s reasonable. But Catholics are not required to agree with his premise, and those who disagree with it will certainly not accept his solution. Putting it in the catechism doesn’t change that.
“Francis, whose own Catholicism is an open question…”
Is the Pope Catholic? No one knows for sure.
Only Satan knows for sure…
I don’t know. I’m not a theologian.
Did you not read what I copied from the Catechism: “Consequently, the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that “the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person”,[1] and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide.” The Church is for life from conception to natural death. It is in the Catechism. It is Church teaching.
And yes, putting it in the Catechism DOES CHANGE THAT. The Catechism is the Church’s teachings.
No, the magisterium (dogma) is the Church’s teaching. Most of the time the Catechism gets it right, but it wanders into areas that are not dogma. For example, the Catechism teaches that Islam is an Abrahamic religion, whereas the Bible says that Abraham specifically rejected the religion of the Nabataeans which is a big part of Islam (pilgrimage, Mosques, and so forth). Whether Islam is Abrahamic is not dogma, but the Catechism teaches it. In any event, the Catechism is usually a good reference especially for those who don’t know the dogma, however it is not the official magesterium of the Church.
The catechism is authoritative only on questions of faith and morals, not on assertions of fact or on prudential judgments. Nobody is required to agree with Francis’s views on these things, even if he stuck them in the catechism. Even when speaking ex cathedra he’s only infallible on “doctrines of faith and morals”. He has never even hinted that his views on glowball warmening or capital punishment fall into that category.
Just because Whoopi made those nun movies, doesn’t mean she gets to lecture the Bishop.
While the modern Catholic church may oppose the death penalty, it has not forbidden it.
If enforcement of the death penalty by legitimate civil authority is considered a sin in the eyes of the church Pope Francis would have said so. He didn’t.
Abortion on the other hand is and always has been considered a sin by the church.
Did you not read what I wrote LITERALLY from the Catechism: “Consequently, the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that “the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person”,[1] and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide.”
You are relying on the Catechism, but that isn’t necessarily dogma. The death penalty was established before Francis became pope. He doesn’t have the authority to change that. You are missing one of the most beautiful elements of the Church; it has a set of rules that can not be changed because they were revealed by the Holy Spirit. As we approach Pentecost, that is something to consider.
From the ‘Capital Punishment’ section of the Catechism (literally):
“2266 The State’s effort to contain the spread of behaviors injurious to human rights and the fundamental rules of civil coexistence corresponds to the requirement of watching over the common good. Legitimate public authority has the right and duty to inflict penalties commensurate with the gravity of the crime.”
As to how the bit you quote got into the Catechism, step back a minute and see the Vatican for what it is, just another big bureaucracy. In this case, one where the boss has a pet peeve and wants it addressed:
Francis, Address to Participants in the Meeting organized by the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of the New Evangelization, 11 October 2017
So the underlings find a way to do so without really changing anything, They put it in the ‘evolving’ Catechism, make sure it is contradicted there, and use a meaningless word like “inadmissible” to describe it, Engraved in pudding and just as enduring.
Francis is a socialist political hack in a robe who made it to the top of the church hierarchy. But unless he’s speaking ex cathedra, he’s just another boss with an opinion.
If you like abortion why would you even want to be associated with a church that is headed by a man who described it as “hiring a hitman” (Pope Francis’ words not mine) and has opposition to abortion as part of the catechism (as in it can’t be changed)?
Actually I know why; the same reason Whoopi Goldberg likes to pretend to be a Jew they consider it beneficial to them.
While capital punishment may be politically congruent (“=”) to the wicked solution (e.g. reproductive rites, planned parent/hood, planned peoplehood) for social, redistributive, clinical, and fair weather causes, it is not equal in character. A credible criticism of the former is the sometimes poorly established evidence, poorly considered judgment, and poorly pursuant sentence (e.g. Capitol Hill “hero”).
It isn’t just between Pelosi and God.
If it was, she could just have a wafer with her glass of wine in her office.*
*Americans can’t afford to buy groceries or put gas in their cars, but Nancy Pelosi decides now is a good time to open a congressional liquor store on Capitol Hill.
But in the end it is. Is she causing a scandal? Yes. But it’s between her and God. He truly knows what’s in her heart and soul.
But it is also involving her shepherds and those whom she leads astray.
It’s between her and God.
No. It is also between her and her fellow declared Roman Catholics. Expression of our faith (Christians in general) is required, not just saying some words and hiding the rest of it away. And God specifically directs that the straying sheep be disciplined if it strays willfully. And part of that may be to remove the sheep from the flock and turn it out into the wilderness until such time as the devil’s ministrations push it to return. The point of God’s Church on earth is NOT a social club or a ticket-punching exercise to get to heaven, but as a means to glorify God – and that is NOT done by remaining in willful public sin. And most especially NOT by advocating such sin for others and enabling it. A bishop not removing a claimed Roman Catholic politician from communion is in violation of the responsibilities of their position within the church.
It’s her soul…if she has one.
That’s not the measure God uses. She is leading others astray and diminishing God’s glory by her willful public sin.
(BTW, so is the bishop or priest who is allowing willful sin to go on in front of their face and says nothing about it. God does not look kindly upon the shepherds of His flock leading them astray.)
The Catholic Church is against the death penalty.
Francis’ rewording notwithstanding, opposition to the death penalty is not a matter of sin so much as preferred outcome. Abortion is considered murder by the Roman Catholic church (and any Christian church worth its name) and abetting it is a mortal sin. The death penalty is not considered murder. It is considered “a better option” to not put criminals to death. (I do not support this position, as it is patently un-Biblical, and does not support the dignity of the individual created human being.)
Disclosure: I am not a Roman Catholic. I am a staunch, conservative Lutheran. I have studied Roman Catholic doctrine, however, as well as other denominations and religions.
Thanks for than informative post. Appreciate it.
Hi, actual Catholic here. It is ultimately between Pelosi and God. She causes a scandal but in the end it is between her and God.
I LITERALLY JUST WROTE THAT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS AGAINST THE DEATH PENALTY. The Catholic Church IS AGAINST THE DEATH PENALTY. I literally wrote that the Catholic Church finds no reason to support or justify it. The Church stands for life from conception to natural death.
And it is her soul that she’s damaging the most. God knows if you’re truly in Communion with the Church or not. Again, yes, she is causing a scandal, but in the end it’s about her soul and God.
Please do not try to educate me on my religion. Thanks.
Do you not understand the difference between a mortal sin and a policy preference? There is “against” and then there is “AGAINST”. The Roman church thinks the death penalty should be abolished as a better course. It believes abortion is a MORTAL SIN. PERIOD. There is a BIG difference between “no reason to support it” and “Oh no! What have you done?! Your immortal soul is in danger of hell!”
I saw what you wrote. I wonder if you actually study your doctrine or if you just nod your head along with the priest. What sort of strength does the pope put behind “not supporting” the death penalty and behind claiming that abortion is MURDER?
Is it her soul she’s damaging? Or is it the Church? YES is the correct answer. And she is damaging the Church by her intransigent advocacy of mortal sin. And that is because she is damaging God’s glory and weakening the faith of her co-congregants. That’s the entire reason God has us in fellowship with one another – to strengthen each other in the living out of our faith and to demonstrate God’s glory before the world. She is diminishing BOTH of those!
As to not educating you on your religion, I won’t say any more because it won’t accomplish anything. But if you’re ignorant, you’d be among legions of similar people who claim Christianity and Roman Catholicism.
Hello, do you know the Catechism? It’s the book of our teachings. In other words, if you are in conflict with the teachings THEN YOU ARE NOT IN COMMUNION WITH THE CHURCH.
How do I Catechism?!
It’s not just abortion, It’s EVERYTHING in the Catechism. So how about you just stop right there,
At the risk of being redundant, the Lutheran has it right. The Catechism is not always dogma. For example, the Catechism is subject to revision, but dogma is not. People can be executed when necessary. This issue was settled long before Francis, and he can not change it. Dogma is rigid for all time.
That is just not true. I’m not even a Christian let alone a Catholic, but I know enough about it to know that your statement is incorrect. Catholics are not required to accept the Pope’s policy preferences, or his understanding of facts, just because he publishes them in the catechism. It is wrong of him to put them there, because that gives the false impression that they are church doctrine; but the act of putting them there doesn’t make them so.
Let’s take an example: That abortion is a grave sin, exactly equivalent to all other kinds of murder, is definitely a matter of church doctrine, which all Catholics must accept. But what to do about that is a matter of policy preference. Should a state ban it entirely, or is it better to allow it in some circumstances? i.e. will keeping it legal in some circumstances lead to less evil than banning it would? Suppose it is banned, should the woman who ordered the hit on her baby be charged with a crime, or should charges be reserved only for the hit man himself? These are all policy questions about which there is no doctrine; a Catholic legislator must consider the options and their likely consequences and decide what course leads to the least evil. And on such questions the catechism has no authority, except the respect that is due the Pope; Catholics are required to take his opinions seriously and give them proper consideration, but having done so they are free to decide he is wrong.
Bro, pretty sure you’re the ignorant here. But, heretics often are.
A charge of heresy is a serious one. If you are going to declare somebody a heretic you need to show by what cause.
I won’t try to educate you on your religion. However being a Catholic who once dabbled in Apologetics I will do my best to educate you on when the Catechism is addressing the Church’s involvement and opinions of civil life and when she is telling the faithful teaching on faith and morals AKA dogma.
Without getting into whether Pope F had the authority to change what had been consistent teaching on when a state authority had a legit reason to levy the death penalty. The catechism over the years has recognized abuses by civic authorities and called for a very limited use of the death penalty. She has not however taken that teaching on how the Church relates to various civic authorities and put it upon the faithful that public support for the death penalty (or participation as may happen. Someone administers the cocktail) is cause for being banned from the Holy Eucharist.
Where you err is comparing the teaching on abortion to the teaching on the death penalty. A better comparison is the teaching on Just War and the death penalty. When a civic authority is justified in engaging in war has long been a Catholic teaching. At no time however has the Church stated that a soldier who fights and kills in a war that the Church would declare unjust be subject to excommunication.
If that soldier comes home and plots to and finally kills the grocer he is now a murderer. He has committed a mortal sin. He is not to present himself for Holy Communion unless he as received the Sacrament of Confession and been absolved.
Pelosi is telling the faithful that committing a mortal sin is inconsequential by to supporting and advancing liberal abortion policies. That does create scandal and is not a private matter between Pelosi and God.
Stumping for slaughter of innocents is and never will be in the same category of believing a mass murderer should be put to death by legitimate authority.
The DC Diocese rejects the personal Pastoral intervention and spiritual guidance provided personally to Pelosi by the Archbishop of SF. Apparently now one may shop for a more pliant Priest outside one’s Diocese to obtain a more comfortable outcome.
IMO this is a temporal act by Cardinal Gregory and it foreshadows the coming storm for the Catholic Church as the end of Roe removes the fig leaf many self declared ‘faithful’ Catholics have hidden behind since 1973.
“Apparently now one may shop for a more pliant Priest outside one’s Diocese to obtain a more comfortable outcome.”
But such has always been the case for many issues, especially annulments (divorce is forbidden).
It wasn’t explicit, it was behind the scenes. This episode has the active connivance of a Cardinal archbishop in public. Spiking the football by a member of the hierarchy is a bad look.
The Catholic Church is either relevant because of it stands upon its beliefs or it succumbs to the temptations of modernity. If there is one Church then there is one communion; not a separate a la cart menu of temporal convenience.
We call them Cafeteria Catholics. But there is a reason why this action is rarely used. We do not know a person’s heart and soul. God does. But then there’s people like Pelosi who have no problem letting us know what is in their heart and soul. As I wrote in my other post then-Cardinal Ratzinger said these politicians need to not only be in line with Catholic teaching but not support or try to make abortion easier.
Indeed. I’m not sure how leaders of organized religious organizations of any type can expect their organization to survive when the leadership actively and publicly undermines the basic doctrinal teaching of the organization.
The Pelagians, Cathars, Henry VIII, Martin Luther, among others, would seem to have a legitimate case for mal administration and selective prosecution based upon the whimsical attitude of some Leaders regarding faithful adherence to doctrine.
We are meant to go to confession, to go to Mass, and to continue our conversion. We are meant to be self-regulating.
While others may be anti-life by supporting abortion and the death penalty, Pelosi is doing it on a world stage and has gone unchecked by The Church for decades.
Hate it, throw a fit, cry your little heart out, but she’s going against the teachings of The Church. Period.
Also, please educate yourself on Catholicism and the Catechism before you make yourself look like some of the simps above.
Politicians can oppose the death penalty and vote against it yet it can remain a political law. The church has to fully support doctrine. This is the meaning of separation of church and state.
I’m not so old that I remember the days when people like Pelosi would simply have been declared heretics and burned as witches.
But I read about them fondly, and picture her when I do.
Perhaps more research ‘mary c’. The position of the Church is not categorically against the death penalty. Historically. No matter what francis says; he cannot change the catechism in this matter. The bishop of rome is first among bishops in preserving the faith Not changing it. To not understand this or adopt an ultraMontanist approach, is to misunder stand Christianity.
Wilton Gregory was a p.o.s. as bishop of Atlanta, ad nwo as Archbishop of D.C. Maybe someone shold ask Wilton about the pdeo priests he is supposedly investigating??
Pelosi is a Catholic-In-Name-Only and I would support her excommunication from the Church.
There is an excellent presentation by a retired Lt. Col. Ed Monk. Tim Larkin showed it on his YT channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDDK0jLsdKQ
Lots of hard facts about school shootings and how to defend against them.
I sympathize with the San Fran bp. on this one, even if I am not Roman Catholic. As for being pro-death penalty, there’s a huge difference. In Genesis 9, God prescribes the death penalty for a murderer, since the murderer violates the image of God. . An unborn child, however, has done nothing save be an inconvenience (and there are lots of other ways to be inconvenient to others).
If you think Genesis 9 is explicit, check out Numbers 35:33. You can’t get more explicit than that, and the Roman Church’s position, even pre-Francis, directly contradicts it.
Yes, but you should check out the Mishnah sometime. The Sanhedrin had the power to sentence people to death but it rarely did in order to avoid being considered “bloodthirsty.”
“…It’s more challenging if one or two of the sheep stray and then you have to go out and get them and place them on your shoulders and bring them back to the flock that belongs to Christ.”
At what point does Gregory put his sheep Pelosi on his shoulders and bring her back to the flock? The answer is, apparently, never. He’s mouthing words he clearly doesn’t mean. He just let’s them wander. And there’s a reason for his cowardice.
I’m going to try to thread the needle here, as it may not be clear at first exactly what I’m criticizing. Perhaps the article at the link my help clear things up.
https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/vatican-police-bust-gay-sex-party-cardinals-apartment-1628975
This priest, a Monsignor, used to use his boss’ car (a very nice BMW I hear) to go out into Rome and buy drugs. The Italian police treated cars with Vatican plates just like they treated cars with diplomatic plates (although the Vatican plates didn’t have the same legal status). He’d bring the drugs up to his apartment which was inside the Vatican walls above the offices where he worked. Conveniently, there was a door, the only one, in which someone could enter without having to get past a guard at the main entrance. This priest’s friends could just walk in and climb the stairs to his apartment where they’d have orgies.
The Roman police didn’t patrol the plaza outside that door as it was technically Vatican property. But neither did the Vatican police as it was outside the wall. So neither the priest or his lovers had to worry about police questioning.
Then they’d have gay orgies.
There are priests who join the clergy who have no intention of keeping their vows of celibacy. I’m not saying that there aren’t straight priests who have sex with women; there are. But who with the intention of being sexually active is more likely to attracted to a lifestyle where there are only men? Gays.
The worst kept secret in Rome is that a lot of priests are gay and cruise for sex. There’s a park in Rome where gays would cruise for sex. And of course muggers would go there looking for priests (apparently they’re easy to spot, like undercover cops). They knew the priests wouldn’t out themselves by reporting the crime to the police.
It’s a badly kept secret but it’s still supposed to be a secret. Sexually active gay priests try to keep up the appearance of maintaining their vows. But within the curia everyone has dirt on everyone else.
It works the same way here in the U.S. Which is why the pedophile priests simply got transferred from one diocese to another. The pedophile priests knew exactly what their bosses were doing when the lights went out. If the bishops dealt with the pedos as morality and the law required, then EVERYBODY would know what the bishop was doing. Then the church couldn’t turn a blind eye no matter how much it wanted to.
This kind of hypocrisy breeds cowardice. How can a Gregory deal harshly with Pelosi when he’s just as much a hypocrite as she is?
Oh, speaking of hypocrisy, the kicker? The Monsignor’s apartment just above the offices where he worked. He worked at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. You know, what used to be known as the Inquisition. Originally intended to root out heresy, now it’s supposed to promulgate and defend Catholic doctrine. Who knew drug-fueled gay orgies are part of Catholic doctrine.
This is why I’m now a non-denominational Christian.