When House Speaker Nancy Pelosi meets with San Francisco Archbishop George Niederauer to discuss Catholic teaching on abortion, at least two paths could emerge. The strongly pro-choice Catholic politician might vigorously debate Augustine and church history with her archbishop. Or the two will try to put their heads together to create a public resolution that is acceptable for everyone. Or maybe they will do both.

But two Catholic scholars who know about butting heads with the church agree on this: The controversy that brought this meeting about could have been avoided.

As long as rebellious and arrogant or willfully ignorant Catholics are elected to public office and publicly support, as did the pagans of old, the murder of innocent unborn children and who continue to flaunt their "Catholicism", this "controversy" will not go away - as much as they might wish.

“I think it’s a mistake for politicians to talk theology,” said Jesuit Father Thomas J. Reese, senior research fellow at Woodstock Theological Center. “Let’s just say, it’s above their pay grade....”

I think it's a mistake for Resse to open his month with useless commentary. There are many who are speaking of things "above their pay grade."

...David J. O’Brien, professor emeritus of Catholic studies at Holy Cross College, said Pelosi is not necessarily off the mark in her statements.

Guess it depends if one claims to be an "ardent, practicing Catholic"?

“There is some validity to the idea that the church’s stance was somewhat different at the beginning of the last century,” O’Brien said. “But I would also say it’s her role to speak to the political realities of today rather than church history. She might not have framed it quite right, but she has a right to speak to the issue from her perspective.”

As abortion is a abominable violation of the natural moral law, any "perspective" that Pelosi embraces that is contrary to the truth has no validity and hence, no right. She might have the freedom or license to speak as a fool but she has no right to speak and promote error and evil. And, of course, she and her Washington comrades who claim to be Catholic are obligated to uphold the truth, and reject error and evil.

And from that perspective, all Catholics have a right and perhaps obligation to push for dialogue on the realities of the abortion debate.

This statment is patently false and any "professor of Catholic studies" should know better, unless, of course, he too has rejected certain tenets of the Church's teaching.

“I personally feel we should not be so passive in dealing with hierarchy and dealing with this question,” said O’Brien, an outspoken critic of church paternalism. “They should be challenged as to the political uses of this issue.”

Church paternalism? One must ask if he corrupted the youth with his bankrupt opinions and beliefs? And why must there be so many "professors" in so-called Catholic colleges who are at war with the Church and, indeed, with Christ Himself?

“I wouldn’t argue over the teaching of the church,” he said, “but I would argue about the experience of the church. What do Catholics in everyday life say about their experience with this issue.”

How's this for experience - 40 to 50 million butchered and murdered babies since Roe V Wade - Is that enough "experience" for these cafeteria Catholics?

Reese pointed to the Catholics United-sponsored study released last week that states overturning Roe v. Wade would do little to reduce the number of abortions in America.

No doubt a flawed study, especially from a group which obfuscates the Church's teachings to give cover for heretics.

Some faithful Catholics still wonder why the penalty of excommunication is so rarely used when onslaughts of heresy, error, dissent and rebellion are publicly voiced and spread like a plague among the faithful?

at National Catholic Distorter here.