This editorial first appeared in the March 8, 2009 issue of NZ Catholic There would be few encounters that could raise someones profile more than a meeting and accompanying photo opportunity with the Holy Father. Photographers usually swarm around the Pontiff and those who cross his path.
Imagine Nancy Pelosis indignation when she found out that her chance to be snapped with Benedict XVI was thwarted. It would seem the guys and gals from Reuters and the Vatican newspaper, LOsservatore Romano, were given an extended lunch break when the Speaker of the House a self-professed ardent Catholic came calling.
Some would argue that no one can judge whether another person is an ardent or devout Catholic. But one might also argue that one ought not use those words to describe oneself.
But we digress. The reason for Pelosis snub is obvious. The Californian is an ardent there’s that word again supporter of a woman’s right to choose, and immersed herself in the abortion debate last year when she basically said the Church is divided over when life begins.
That earned her a rap on the knuckles from several Catholic bishops, all of whom have no doubt at all over that answered question.
The Pope’s decision to use his closed-door meeting, not pre-empted by the usual public meet-and-greet, was his way of saying I know what you said. According to the Vatican communiqué, Benedict XVI reminded Pelosi, in no uncertain terms, of the Catholic teaching she is conveniently ignoring.
Pelosis synopsis of the meeting was unsurprisingly from a seasoned politician quite different. She says she commended the Pope for the Church’s work on issues like climate change and combating poverty and hunger. It prompted commentators to ask if the Pope and Pelosi were in the same room.
Pelosi is one in a long list of Catholic politicians, mostly Democrats, who are comfortable talking about Catholic social justice, but shy away from discussion of the Church’s views on the sanctity of life.
They gladly use their faith to buttress support for an upcoming election, and enjoy the chance to be photographed in the pews on Sunday, but find some aspects of the Church’s teaching archaic or unrealistic.
Bishops who try to call those politicians to account are often heavily criticised for politicising the Eucharist.
Bishop Joseph Martino in Scranton, Pennsylvania, is one such bishop. Hes drawn several lines in the sand recently and has heard the criticism. But a former Pennsylvania senator, Rick Santorum, has thrown his support behind the bishop with an astute observation.
In a newspaper column, Santorum acknowledges there are people threatening to leave the Church over the strong statements of prelates like Bishop Martino.
In the end, however, people leaving the Church because of a bishop who enforces its teachings are a blessing compared with the alternative people leaving because bishops and their priests dont teach, much less enforce, those teachings.
Makes sense, when you consider a bishops tri-fold mandate reaffirmed at Vatican II is to teach, govern and sanctify. An effective handling of the first, almost by default, leads to the third.
