Pray for Nancy Pelosi

Just pray for her.

Pelosi’s office did not respond to’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.

It takes a special kind of cognitive dissonance
to speak fervently of the Word Made Flesh, and to understand that by his Incarnation God has ennobled all mortal flesh with a sanctity and a holiness relative to his own, and yet to consistently vote–as Nancy Pelosi did in 2003–against legislation that would have banned the most savage of abortion procedures, the so-called “partial-birth abortion.”

Let us refresh our memories for a moment about what occurs during such an abortion:

In a so-called late-term abortion, a baby is delivered vaginally, and feet first. The body and shoulders are delivered, but the infant’s head is held within the birth canal, until the doctor can slip a scissor into its skull and suction out its brains, at which point he will deliver a dead child and avoid a charge of infanticide. We are told that these abortions are necessary to spare the life or mental health of a fragile mother who may not be able to endure the physical or psychological rigors of childbirth.

The American Medical Association has quietly conceded that—as we do not live in the nineteenth or even the early twentieth century, when a cesarean section was all but a death sentence for a woman—there really is no medical reason for such an abortion. One may additionally argue that delivering a baby feet first, then shoulders, is by no means a simple or easy sort of delivery, so the dangers it purports to spare a woman are not obvious.

A vacuum or D&C abortion shreds human life within the deepest part of a woman’s body. That is awful enough to contemplate (and even Buddhists and Taoists will tell you, from a different perspective than the Christian’s, that the event leaves a lasting mark upon the woman in many ways) but partial-birth abortion plays with the notion of human life and death the way a lawyer parses language in order to live between the lines. The child living within the womb would very likely be viable if allowed to be delivered normally and to take that first breath–becoming known to us, as the babe is already known to the Creator–and so, as a lawyer contorts words and meanings, the abortion-provider twists the flesh that incarnates that known-to-God-spirit. He manipulates that flesh most unnaturally before completely dishonoring both created creature and Source by savage means.

Nancy Pelosi, who has made something of a habit of calling upon the saints and the bishops of her faith to assist her in moving her legislation, receives a 100% approval rating from the Americans United for Separation of Church and State. She heads a party and an ideology that routinely freaks out with paranoid cries of “theocracy! Theocracy!” whenever a conservative dares to invoke God, or discuss matters of faith, and yet she feels perfectly justified in using religious language when it suits her, or for the promulgation of her own propaganda. And neither the press nor her political tribe calls her out on it; they do not even appear to notice the incongruity of a woman speaking with eyes aglow about the Incarnation, and the Word Made Flesh, while offering unswerving support to the shredding of the tenderest and most innocent flesh.

No one asks her about it, not even those Catholic reporters and Catholic Democrats who (presumably) understand just how profoundly and regularly Catholics ponder this greatest and most humbling of mysteries: that the Creator would condescend to enflesh via his own creation, be subject to it, in order to serve and save it. We are wholly in wonder at this. This particular moment of Incarnation is one we strive to keep before our eyes daily; we ponder it in the Angelus which some of us pray at least once a day; we recall it within the Joyful Mysteries of the Rosary and remember John’s Gospel at the end of Mass, after we have partaken of that very flesh, for the life of the world. “…the Word was made flesh, and set his tent with us; we have seen his glory . . . of his fullness, we all have a share, love following upon love…”

These are serious words, invoking a serious idea and deep mystification; they are not words to be hauled out and thrown into a muddle of politics, for base expediency.

Mrs. Pelosi may seem confused to some; perhaps she is. I prefer to believe that her seeming inability to stop herself from conflating her religion and her politics is evidence that the Holy Spirit is working upon her–that perhaps her photo-op-free meeting with Pope Benedict, and with her bishop (or her public communion-taking) have flicked her conscience in such a way that we are now watching a woman try to reconcile her faith and her politics in a very public manner.

One can certainly serve the World by first being faithful to the Word; the great saints have proven this time and again. But can one serve the Word by employing the wisdom and sensibilities of the Worldly, without falling into an inconsistency (and spiritual chaos) that may cast one into mortal error?

I mean to pray for Mrs. Pelosi. I have no doubt that her identification as a Catholic is a sincere one, and I know firsthand how difficult it can be to form a conscience in the midst of sometimes pernicious influences. If she is being schooled and ravished by the Holy Spirit while also being pulled by all of her worldly attachments, then something will have to give, in God’s own time.

Meanwhile, Jay Nordlinger notes quite correctly:

Whoa, baby. [Conservatives] can’t say that — no one right of center can say that; but [Democrats] can. A curious fact about a strange place, America.

Yes. One need not have any imagination at all to realize that if a Sarah Palin or a George W. Bush, or a Chris Christie had said, “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 outcry would be swift, vast and paranoid. And if any of them had dared to “tell” the bishops “I want you to speak about it from the pulpit,” as Pelosi has done, we would be hearing a debate about tax-exemptions and the churches.

Writes Ed Morrissey:

When conservatives talk about religious values informing public policy goals, the Left shrieks about the separation of church and state and usually refers to the Right as an American Taliban. Pelosi will get a pass, however, because she uses the religious language to argue for their pet causes. It’s a good idea to capture this moment anyway, for the next time someone argues that “Christianists” are attempting a theocratic takeover of America.

Because everyone knows, only Democrats can be trusted to discuss politics from the pulpit.

Pelosi made these remarks almost a month ago. Why are we only hearing them, now?

Ann Althouse: polls for your opinion on Pelosi.

Washington Examiner
Michelle Malkin
VDH: Media double standards
Pro-Choice Mystical Rubbish
Fr. Z
Gateway Pundit

About Elizabeth Scalia
  • Last Sphere

    Yes, we must pray for our enemies. But we should never tolerate their deceptive message and we should never be seduced by their false compassion and their militant hatred disguised as societal fairness.

    “Whoever will not receive you or listen to your words–go outside that house or town and shake the dust from your feet.

    Amen, I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.

    Behold, I am sending you like sheep in the midst of wolves; so be shrewd as serpents and simple as doves.”

    Matthew 10:14-16

  • Pingback: A few thoughts on Pelosi’s ‘Word’ « A Blog for Dallas Area Catholics

  • dry valleys

    Vatican reaches out to atheists (but not Richard Dawkins)

    I obviously do not behave like Richard Dawkins myself but I do not join in this trendy cult of denouncing him as being all nasty & cruel. I have all his books & I think there needs to be fervent atheists who are stark in their message as well as those who are not so forthright. There isn’t actually any great way in which my views differ from his, I have a different way of saying it but I am still glad he & the Hitch (whom I don’t really like so much as I frown upon his views on most issues apart from religion) are out there, outraging the world.

    There was a good book a bit ago called Belief Or Non-Belief in which Umberto Eco & Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini thrashed out similar issues.

  • Last Sphere

    (dry valleys wrote – “I think there needs to be fervent atheists who are stark in their message as well as those who are not so forthright.”)

    Why? Why is there a “need” for proselytizing atheists?

    After all- the most evil atrocities ever unleashed upon humanity were overwhelming committed by atheistic societies of the twentieth century.

  • SKAY

    Pelosi is a devious woman. She knows exactly what she is saying and who her targets are.

  • Pingback: Pelosi Sims to be a Speaker of the Word

  • Pingback: Red, White, and Blue in the Face! » Blog Archive » In all things charity . . . sigh

  • Mary

    There’s something very unsettling about this clip. If she feels so strongly about the Word, then why can’t she say it out loud? It’s almost as if she’s afraid to …

    Oh my Jesus, forgive us our sins and save us from the fires of hell ESPECIALLY those most in need of your mercy. Amen.

  • Rita

    I need to google where after Gore’s bitter loss in 2000, the liberals announced a concentrated effort to employ and adopt the semantics of the “religious moderates” and Catholics. It has worked. They have finessed the language and postures, as Nancy does rather regularly now, and they were disappointed that the aborting candidate didn’t get more than the 60% of the Catholic vote. We the people are not all very Catholic ourselves I submit.

    Does this ring a bell with anyone else??

  • SKay


    Yes it rings a loud bell.

    George Soros is helping to fund groups like Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good-a group that backed Obama. I am sure Pelosi fits right in.

  • Jeff

    Well at least we can guess what Cardinal Egan thinks. This was so powerful and we need more bishops who have the guts to say things like this:

    “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
    Archbishop of New York
    August 26, 2008

  • Jeff

    And who are the freaks who are “always” asking Nancy Pelosi what her “favorite things” are. is this the Sound of Music.

  • Skay


    Yes it rings a loud bell.

    One example–George Soros gave donations to Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good. This group endorsed the pro abortion Obama before the election.
    Pelosi was very involved in recruiting “blue dog”
    Democrats who were ran as pro life candidates to run in conservative districts in order to put the Democrats in power in the House. We see how that has worked out for pro life voters who voted for them. Pelosi/Obama were able to buy off enough of the the blue dog votes in order to get the pro abortion healthcare bill through.

  • Pingback: Pelosi Aims to be a Speaker of the Word

  • Pingback: Steynite 412nd « Free Canuckistan!

  • Pingback: Bookworm Room » Watchers Council nominations

  • Pingback: Watcher of Weasels » The Council has Spoken 060410

  • Pingback: Bookworm Room » Watcher’s winners for 6/04/2010