Pelosi: No to Provision Protecting Chaplains From Being Ordered to Act Against Faith

I am on the road so I’ll just post this and walk away in disgust.

Pelosi: No to Provision Protecting Chaplains From Being Ordered to Act Against Faith: ‘It’s A Fraud’
By Elizabeth Harrington
May 17, 2012

( – House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said she stands with the White House in opposing a provision in the House defense authorization bill that would prohibit anyone in the military from ordering a chaplain to act against his or her “conscience, moral principles, or religious beliefs” or against the religious beliefs of the denomination to which he or she belongs.

Pelosi described the conscience-protection provision as a “fraud.”


On Tuesday, the White House issued a statement saying that the administration “strongly opposes” the provision in the defense authorization protecting the conscience of chaplains–Section 536–as well as another provision in the bill–Section 537–that says military facilities cannot be used to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies.

“The Administration strongly objects to sections 536 and 537 because those provisions adopt unnecessary and ill-advised policies that would inhibit the ability of same-sex couples to marry or enter a recognized relationship under State law,” said the White House statement.

“Section 536 would prohibit all personnel-related actions based on certain religious and moral beliefs, which, in its overbroad terms, is potentially harmful to good order and discipline,” said the White House.

“Section 537 would obligate DOD to deny Service members, retirees, and their family members access to facilities for religious ceremonies on the basis of sexual orientation, a troublesome and potentially unconstitutional limitation on religious liberty,” the White House.

Section 536 of the bill, introduced by Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.), states in part that no member of the armed forces may “direct, order, or require a chaplain to perform any duty, rite, ritual, ceremony, service, or function that is contrary to the conscience, moral principles, or religious beliefs of the chaplain, or contrary to the moral principles and religious beliefs of the endorsing faith group of the chaplain.”

Section 537 prohibits the use of military property for the performing of any “marriage or marriage-like ceremony involving anything other than the union of one man with one woman.”

The House Armed Services Committee passed H.R. 4310 on May 9 by a 56-5 bipartisan vote. Amendments 536 and 537 passed in committee earlier that day by a margin of 36-25 and 37-24, respectively.

On May 9, 2011, the Office of the Chief of Navy Chaplains advised that same-sex couples in the Navy would be able to get married in Navy chapels, and that Navy chaplains would be allowed to perform the ceremonies. The Chaplain Corps revised their Tier I training manuals, which had previously indicated that same-sex marriages were not authorized on federal property.

That change gave chaplains permission to marry homosexual couples, but did not force them to perform ceremonies.

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Dogs and Fleas, One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity, Priests and Priesthood, Religious Liberty, The future and our choices, The Last Acceptable Prejudice and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Laura98 says:

    I need to go find some Tums….

    And start praying harder for her and Pres. Obama… and take some more Tums.

  2. goodone121 says:

    While I have problems with the objections to 537, they have been flogged to death, IMHO.
    My problem with the objections to 536 is they disallow chaplains from following their consciences, in contradiction to the First Amendment (also IMHO).

  3. ContraMundum says:

    In for a penny, in for a pound. Since Obama can no longer pretend to be a moderate, he sees no reason not to behave as an extremist. Sadly, I don’t think the Republicans have the guts to stand up to him.

    As for Pelosi, from this point forward I will not be angry at her for using her baptism as a weapon against the Catholic Church. My anger will instead be directed toward Archbishop Niederauer until he does something worthy of the name “bishop”.

  4. Sooner or later, Pelosi is going to provoke a serious reaction from either her bishop or the USCCB or both. Deliberate, persistent irritants eventually cross the line. It’s just the waiting that is excruciatingly frustrating for the rest of us.

  5. Springkeeper says:

    The words “Satan’s Minions” comes to mind.

  6. Peter from Jersey says:

    I expect that smoking cigarettes is legal but that there are restrictions on where it may take place. It would not be a great restriction on liberty of those who wish to register civil unions between people of the same gender to restrict the places where such registration may take place.
    It does seem extraordinary to suggest that non-combatant service personnel might be guilty of a breach of military law for carrying out an order that goes against their faith: for a chaplain the reason for engaging him is to practice the faith and assist others to do so.
    Now did not certain Germans once excuse crimes on the grounds that they followed orders rather than their conscience?

  7. sedulus says:

    So this provision seems to have something to do with gay marriage…Kudos to Nancy! (not Reagan!)
    I would vote for her to be president, if not pope!

  8. mzanghetti says:

    I went to popvox and sent a letter to my congresscritter and posted this on facebook and twitter and will blog about it some5time in the next couple of days, this is WRONG!

  9. eyeclinic says:

    But who better to identify a “fraud” than Nancy Pelosi?

  10. Supertradmum says:

    What about Muslim chaplains?

  11. Richard says:

    Did I read that correctly? Did the White House actually say Section 537 could be “a troublesome and potentially unconstitutional limitation on religious liberty“?!

    Really?! NOW they are concerned about religious liberty?!?!?!

  12. MaryW says:

    I’m with Laura98. Pray, pray, pray.

    How much longer, O Lord!

  13. digdigby says:

    Nancy Pelosi is surprisingly fond of the U.S. military, particularly the Air Force:

    Part of the tab for alcoholic drinks on a congressional trip arranged by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi reads like a dream order for a wild frat party: Maker’s Mark whiskey, Courvoisier cognac, Johnny Walker Red scotch, Grey Goose vodka, E&J brandy, Bailey’s Irish Crème, Bacardi Light rum, Jim Beam whiskey, Beefeater gin, Dewars scotch, Bombay Sapphire gin, Jack Daniels whiskey … and Corona beer. But that single receipt makes up just part of the more than $101,000 taxpayers paid for “in-flight services” – including food and liquor, for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s trips on Air Force jets over the last two years. That’s almost $1,000 per week. Documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by Judicial Watch, which investigates and prosecutes government corruption, show Pelosi incurred expenses of some $2.1 million for her use of Air Force jets for travel over that time. “Speaker Pelosi has a history of wasting taxpayer funds with her boorish demands for military travel,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said today. “And these documents suggest the Speaker’s congressional delegations are more about partying than anything else.” By the way, Pelosi, this ‘moral paragon’ has a personal net worth of 35 million dollars.

  14. CarpeNoctem says:

    As a National Guard chaplain and priest, I am not completely following this story. My understanding is that we are presently protected from having to do anything against our consciences… that means, for instance, that for some non-baby-baptizing protestants, for instance, they cannot be compelled to perform an infant baptism against their wills. Now, those same chaplains, when presented with such a request, do have an obligation to point them in the direction of someone who can accomodate them, either in the military or in the civilian realm, but they need not participate in the rite itself. That being said, the military has a preference in its accessions for baby-baptizing (‘liturgical’) protestants, as they have disproportionately too many evangelical protestants for the demand for services.

    Catholic priests, if we were compelled to preside over same-sex unions, or anything of that sort, would be protected under current law and practice. The real change is if this is being taken away from us… and not just us, but us all as chaplains. If this happens, I would foresee the Archdiocese of Military Services first launch a very stern protest and tell its priests not to participate, until some poor priest gets caught in a trap by some homosexual activist, ends up in jail or before a court martial… at which point, I hope the AMS would have the guts to pull all of its priests out of service. That’s the way we are going… all of us, both civilians and military… we are going to be set up when the laws start getting restrictive. I hope the brothers have the guts to go to jail for this, becuase it is coming, my friends.

    There’s more to say here, but I am late for a meeting as it is. I’m sure there’s others out there who can amplify these points….

  15. EXCHIEF says:

    I’m sure the little Marxist would be very happy if there were no Chaplains in the military since he loathes both. Without conscience protection large numbers of military chaplains (depending on the denomination) may have no choice but to pull out of the chaplain corps (that’s corps Obama not corpse)…just like real Catholic Colleges are having to drop health care programs for students. Obama is certainly doing Satan’s work.

  16. ContraMundum says:


    I think you sum up the situation very well.

    *If* this reaches the point where the AMS has to pull the chaplains, I would sincerely hope that Catholics would stop enlisting.

  17. AnnAsher says:

    Unfortunately, I think the AMS has no authority with the appointment or recall of the Priests in the Armed Forces. It is not an aarchdiocese in the same manner as others, canonically and practically. AMS does not appoint priests, their military branch assigns them. Military chapels are not parishes. AMS can and should speak out but when it comes down to it, ABp Broglio has a voice but no military authority. Our Priests would have to be recalled by their Bishops to their diocese of incardination. The AMS “owns” no priests of its own.

  18. AnnAsher says:

    Additionally, Priests are officers and could individually resign their commission and walk away.

  19. Cantor says:

    How long would it take a clever lawyer to extend things to mandate that Catholic medical personnel must perform abortions on demand and that the Military Ordinary is forbidden to participate in any action that might effect excommunication, or the priest to deny sacraments?

  20. ContraMundum says:

    I don’t think all priests could simply resign. “Stop loss” would be used.

    We’ve been through this before, but the first priority of a priest has to be to the Church, not to the government.

  21. SKAY says:

    Nancy is from San Francisco. It is all about greed/money and power/re-election for her. Nothing else matters now. She would crawl over a bed of nails and brocken glass to become speaker again.
    It’s rather clear what she is willing to sell in order to achieve it.

  22. sedulus says:

    Not so SKAY! I think Congresswoman Pelosi is an honorable person and an INTELLIGENT catholic. If you are looking for greed/power, I recommend Fox News and the Republican party!

  23. jhayes says:

    As a National Guard chaplain and priest, I am not completely following this story. My understanding is that we are presently protected from having to do anything against our consciences…

    Catholic priests, if we were compelled to preside over same-sex unions, or anything of that sort, would be protected under current law and practice. The real change is if this is being taken away from us… and not just us, but us all as chaplains.

    I believe this proposed law is in response to this letter from the chief of Chaplains saying that if a chaplain consistent with the tenets of his or her religious organization wishes to perform a same sex marriage he/she may use a military chapel to do it – as long as it is in a state that allows same-sex marriage”

    The effect of the proposed law appears to be to prevent a chaplain who wants to perform a same sex wedding from using a military chapel to do it.

    As you and the Chief’s letter point out, there is no requireement that any chaplain perform same-sex marriages. However, the language in the proposed bill appears to be so broad that it might reopen the “no establishment” issue that came up at the Air Force Academy a few years ago in which evangelical chaplains had to be instructed that while specifically Christian prayers were appropriate in religious services that students were free to attend or not, they should not be be used in formations which students were required by the Academy to attend, nor should chaplains proselytize in speaking to required formations.

  24. Matt R says:

    I’m upset that we are at the point where people are seriously discussing the prospect of limited or prohibited enlistment of Catholics in the US military.

  25. rodin says:

    Given Bishop Niederauer non-performance it would seem reasonable for the Pope to accept his resignation and allow a substitute to run the Archdiocese temporarily. It would probably be an improvement.

    As for frauds, in my very distant youth there was an expression–“It takes one to know one.” So apt for Pelosi.

  26. ContraMundum says:

    @Matt R

    Read up on Julian the Apostate. His harassment of the Church is much more like what we’re likely to see here than that of Diocletian.

  27. aviva meriam says:

    I’m embarassed.
    Watched an episode this week from Glenn Beck: he mentioned that when LDS members do something that violates docterine, they’re excomunicated. Why do the LDS have a greater willingness to defend their faithful and beliefs than the Catholic Church?

    How did this nation founded on freedom of religion come to this pass? How did we allow this?

    OK…. back to prayer. I fear I might be wallowing in despair.

  28. Supertradmum says:

    Father Z, as I am on my phone, I cannot access your Nov. 7th, 2008, post on Bishop Finn’s letter on voting for Obama. He warned us of the loss of conscience protection in that statement and how Catholics could not vote for that man. I tried on my blog at that time and with friends and family to stop Catholics from aiding and abetting sin. I failed. Now, we are witnessing the results of over 50% of Democrat Catholics turning away from wisdom. Can we try again to stop his re-election? If not, we have lost America.

  29. ContraMundum says:

    Specifically, I recommend both The Age of Martyrs and Julian the Apostate by Abbot Giuseppe Ricciotti.

  30. Supertradmum says:

    “We will know Gethsemane.”
    Father Z.,
    from your Nov. 17th 2008 post—people have been asleep
    His Eminence James Francis Cardinal Stafford criticized President-elect Barack Obama as “aggressive, disruptive and apocalyptic,“ and said he campaigned on an “extremist anti-life platform,” Thursday night in Keane Auditorium during his lecture “Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II: Being True in Body and Soul.“

    “Because man is a sacred element of secular life,” Stafford remarked, “man should not be held to a supreme power of state, and a person’s life cannot ultimately be controlled by government.”

    “For the next few years, Gethsemane will not be marginal. We will know that garden,” Stafford said, comparing America’s future with Obama as president to Jesus’ agony in the garden. E2On November 4, 2008, America suffered a cultural earthquake.”

    Cardinal Stafford said Catholics must deal with the “hot, angry tears of betrayal” by beginning a new sentiment where one is “with Jesus, sick because of love.” [I didn’t hear the speech and I don’t have the full text. But I wonder if he isn’t in part referring to the betrayal of Catholic teaching both by pro-abortion Catholic politicians and also… it must be said… Catholic voters.]

    The lecture, hosted by the Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family, pertained to Humanae Vitae, a papal encyclical written by Pope Paul VI in 1968 and celebrating its 40 anniversary this year.

    Stafford also spoke about the decline of a respect for human life and the need for Catholics to return to the original values of marriage and human dignity.

    “If 1968 was the year of America’s ‘suicide attempt,’ 2008 is the year of America’s exhaustion,” said Stafford, an American Cardinal and Major Penitentiary of the Apostolic Penitentiary for the Tribunal of the Holy See. “In the intervening 40 years since Humanae Vitae, the United States has been thrown upon ruins.”

    There was more. And, here is the other link I wanted

    The man in office planned all of this and it was clear–no evolution of thought– since I lived and watched him in Illinois in 2004. If he is re-elected, it is our own fault.

  31. sedulus says:

    May Obama be re-elected and perform the first gay marriage in the White House!

  32. Kathleen10 says:

    huh, now where’s that handle for the trap door….I put it somewhere here…..darn it….

    I only wanted to say, we have reason to hope. All signs are indicating that there are many people who are unhappy with Obama’s “evolving” opinion. Newt Gingrich thinks that not only the White House will be gained this November, but the House and Senate too. Brian Brown on the NOM site also sees reasons to be optimistic. Let’s keep praying, and boy, November may be a very sweet month!
    I posted yesterday that I have selected one newspaper outlet, and I go online and encourage others to stand up for traditional marriage. That’s really the “target” for now, encouraging people to not throw in the towel. There are many who are opposed to same-sex marriage, and more who feel that way than are for it. We have to embolden others to also stand up for traditional marriage, and that there is no good reason to change it.

    The military priests are going to have to be like everyone else. There are people who are losing their jobs that we don’t know about. Remember that old horror movie, where the zombies detected that a person was actually a living human being? They screached and pointed at the person. It’s kind of like that. Gay activists are fascists. They have the upper hand, and they are employing it. We have to remember we are entitled to our opinion. It comes down to that, do we have freedom of speech, or not. Right now, in some ways, we don’t. We have to fight for our freedom of religion and speech. Our forefathers did, and now we will. But fighting means writing a letter, an email, or making a phone call of support to a company that goes our way. For example, just today the Bank of America issued a statement that declares they will not discriminate against employees who voice their opinion! One of their employees was fired for writing a book against gay marriage, and the Bank of America then created this statement that now reflects their changed position on this. They WILL not take action against employees who voice their opinion, even if it goes against the current tide. This is a big deal! Bank of America deserves to get letters or emails of support. Hopefully, this will catch on.

    I get alot of information from the Catholic League. What a fantastic organization, again, on the front lines for us. You can give a donation and get their periodical “The Catalyst”, or just sign up for newsletters and get emails about anything that is going on. They provide phone numbers, etc.
    Keep praying, and keep busy, working for the Lord!

  33. Johnno says:

    (Looks at watch) It’s gonna come any day now… That train’s never late!

  34. robtbrown says:

    sedulus says:

    Not so SKAY! I think Congresswoman Pelosi is an honorable person and an INTELLIGENT catholic. If you are looking for greed/power, I recommend Fox News and the Republican party!

    You lack not only faith but also reason.

    Greed and power? How about liberals like Jon Corzine and George Soros? At the moment Corzine is trying to save his arse by playing dumb about the strategies that bankrupted MF Global. Soros is a smart multi-billionaire investor who made $1 billion by currency manipulation.

  35. everett says:

    In regards to sedulus’ comments, don’t feed the troll.

  36. CarpeNoctem says:

    jhayes best describes the situation regarding being unable to probibit same-sex ceremonies in a military chapel… that’s the real focus here, which I didn’t get to in previous post. My previous point is actually that if it goes beyond that, then this is a serious change in the chaplain’s ‘rules of engagement’, so to speak, and it would be a deal-breaker for anyone with any integrity in this business…. not just on same-sex unions, but all sorts of quirks found in all sorts of faith groups out there. If the government cannot provide an environment where we can safely practice religion according to our conscience and in line with our endorsers discipline (as is the case with the Archdiocese of the Military Services, AMS), then we are going down a very dangerous and harmful road.

    No, the AMS does not have appointment authority, but they do have “endorser” authority. If my endorsement is withdrawn by the AMS, I am out the next day or I am scrambling for another endorser to pick me up (and there are some moonbat groups out there who might just do that for someone who is desperate enough… and if they have the cash, I suppose… but that might cause some problems with my own bishop… that’s another post.) The power that AMS actually has over its priests is disciplinary (are they doing what Catholic priests are supposed to do), quality assurance (that we actually have seminary educated, ordained, authentic priests), and to be protective of them as assets. No, AMS doesn’t appoint them, but without the AMS endorsement, they are never presented to be accessed.

    I have been wondering when the rug is going to be pulled out from under me. I know I have a supportive command who will not put me into a bad situation. I also know that my Guard community is a very stable, generally a much older and mature group with fewer ‘first-term’ folks than one might find elsewhere, most of whom are already married and with families or otherwise practicing their faith in their regular civilian environments. It will be a different story for Active Duty types I would think, based on my limited overseas AD time.

    There may very well come a time when I or a priest colleague will not be able to accomodate someone with such a request… and I fear that that someone might be “Catholic” planted by some radical homosexual group specifically for the purpose of putting me in the crosshairs as someone who should be able to do this because of some crazy colleague (probably a Jesuit somewhere or maybe another priest chaplain who is ‘soft’ on this issue) who says that this is a perfectly good thing to do. God only knows how that might be adjudicated with a particular commander or with a particular court martial. Even if vindicated, no doubt the price of suffering it will exact on me (or whoever is the unlucky priest-chaplain to be there when this comes down) will be crushing. As I said, the bretheren must be ready to go resign commissions and even to jail over this when the time comes. There will be those who will resign and who are ready to go to jail, and there will be those who retreat and compromise… The nouveau donatists they will be the ones that break our unity and destroy our ability to be of ‘one voice’ on this issue, which will be our ultimate downfall… it’s a divide an conquer strategy that has worked so well for the enemy in the civilian world. The whole flap about “Catholic” colleges and their commencement speakers is meant to ‘normalize’ Catholic teaching towards the intentions of the moonbat fringe, and not the faithful Church. If ND welcomes the president, if Georgetown welcomes the HHS secretary, then it’s not so bad– you other ‘holier than thou’ colleges are just ‘politicizing’ the faith. If Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden and Dick Durbin are admitted to Holy Communion without a statement from their bishop, then anyone who even questions the discipline is, themselves, called into question. (This might sound familiar to other recovering seminarians out there on a whole other range of topics… the “questioner” becomes the one who has the “real” problem?) That’s how they’re going to try to undermine our faithful priests in the military (and there are some incredible, incredible men there… yes, along with a number of duds as well) and make it hell for the rest of us… they are going to find Catholic priests who believe it totally acceptable to do whatever they want, and those of us who are faithful will be standing there holding the bag, being asked “well Fr. so-and-so did it, why can’t you?”

    I think we are already on that path, but suffering is the price that ‘military priests’ must be ready pay at all times to have access and provide access to the free practice of religion that our Catholic personnel need and deserve… that suffering is being killed on the battlefield, working ugly long hours, keeping in shape, risking one’s neck to be the one guy on the commander’s staff who will break ranks to say what needs to be said, perhaps on the same morning after an all-night being bedside with the most junior private who has been injured, or got a “Dear John” letter, or found out he has AIDS, or who is homesick, or wants to come back to the Church after some harrowing experience… all issues which I have had to face while having the honor of wearing the uniform. The suffering which we are in store for where our consciences rights are being chipped away– suffering which is completely unnecessary with a proper understanding our Consititution and Bill of Rights–is not part of what anyone signed up for. That’s what I mourn.

    I, for one, don’t need this extra job. Doing this extra ministry comes at great sacrifice for me and for my parish which I am trying to faithfully shepherd. If they want to fire me, then so be it. But it would be a tremendous loss at a very difficult time for Catholics in military service… not because of who I am personally, but because of what I bring as a priest… a padre. Our Catholic personnel serve, in part, to defend the right to practice their religion freely. If we can’t provide that for them, then we are no longer the America that so many have fought and died for, and their sacrifices will go in vain.

  37. frjim4321 says:

    hmm as I read it, it seems like the provision is from a very partisan origin and in principle probably should have been opposed but there is so much crosstalk in the msm this evening I can’t sort out the info … clearly a situation in which more data is needed … will return to this on the morrow and hope for more facts

  38. CarpeNoctem says:

    Well, I think the provision of s. 536 is already the policy and practice of the military right now. And yes, the effort may be partisan to enshrine this policy in law, but I would be much more comfortable with this, as opposed to similar ‘partisan’ back-room dealings which snuck ObamaCare through Congress based on some worthless ‘promise’ about abortion and conscience rights that doesn’t have the standing of law.

    I, for one, invite such a protection to become part of law. By including ‘endorsing groups’ as a protected class in this law, then it is short-circuiting exactly the scenario which I fear we are going to see… if the AMS says its personnel will not witness SSM’s, then I don’t have to worry about colleagues who missed that day in seminary when they taught us about the nature and ends of marriage.

    I’m not sure that the ‘endorsing groups’ exception has ever been included in such rules, regs, or law… I just don’t know. That may be one of the novelties of the proposal that I would particularly welcome.

  39. robtbrown says:

    sedulus says:

    May Obama be re-elected and perform the first gay marriage in the White House!

    I wonder whether he’ll be as good at that as he has been in managing the economy.

  40. pj_houston says:

    Perhaps it’s best if Obama is re-elected, history shows that the Catholic Church becomes its strongest when it is openly persecuted. The bishops will finally be forced to draw the line in the sand, and take action against heretical institutions and people. The downside is that America, at least as we know it, will not survive another Obama term.

  41. robtbrown says:

    everett says:

    In regards to sedulus’ comments, don’t feed the troll.

    Disagree. You just have to feed them poison.

  42. sedulus says:

    Misereatur vestri omnipotens Deus, et, dimissis peccatis vestris, perducat vos ad vitan aeternam.

  43. iPadre says:

    Viva Christo Rey!

    Are you prepared to give witness?

    On June 1st, you have to see “For Greater Glory”. I saw an advance screening this evening.

  44. catholicmidwest says:

    Get these people out of office in November!!! All of them.

  45. jflare says:

    Times like these, I’m VERY relieved to be no longer a military officer!
    I recall during my years on duty and in ROTC, the military struck me as being very distinctly secular. Leadership didn’t outwardly assault the character of any church or denomination per se, but neither did they typically eagerly embrace worship or encourage anyone to attend services. In fact, I nearly wound up having to surrender the idea of attending Mass while downrange; I simply couldn’t attend Mass, then competently brief the Wing Commander. I simply needed more time to prepare. I don’t remember how I solved that problem, but I remember being relieved to return home.

    I can’t profess to be an expert on the matter, but the way this reads, it appears to me as though a chaplain who receives a request to “marry” two men or two women will not have the right to decline. My impression is that, if a “couple” insists, the chaplain will likely face court-martial under UCMJ on grounds of violating the two peoples’ “rights”.
    In other words, their right to insist on being married will over-rule the chaplain’s right to refuse.
    Granted, the verbiage doesn’t read quite that way, but I suspect that’s exactly how it’ll wind out.

    God be with our troops. He’s coming close to being the only One left who’ll care for them properly. (Though not for want of chaplains trying to cause circumstances to be otherwise.)

  46. jflare says:

    pj houston,
    I’m not so sure that America will fall in the course of one more term for the President. I DO think we’ll be severely weakened though. Ties that bind us all together as one nation from many peoples certainly will suffer serious damage.
    I have long felt that the coming 15 years or so will be a severe test for the nation. I honestly don’t know if we’ll still be the United States of America by 2030.

  47. Supertradmum says:

    Carpe Noctem, thank you for your eloquence, your vocation, your responding to the call to serve God and country. Your insights should be shared with and in every seminary class of morals and ethics in the nation. I personally know sems who have need of your example as they have been marginalized or worse, pushed out, as recently as this year for upholding the Church’s teaching on gay issues in the States. God bless you and them. From mobile.

  48. Supertradmum says:

    robtbrown…as to trolls, I like the Spanish phrase…”do not play chess with a pigeon”…it just poops on the board and flies away….

  49. Diane at Te Deum Laudamus says:

    Archbishop Niederauer submitted his letter of resignation upon turning 75 in the wake of heart surgery. Unless he is physically unable, it would be good of him to not leave Pelosi to some other bishop. That particular weed ought not be left any longer among the wheat because it is choking everything around it. How the bishops don’t see this, is beyond me.

    God have mercy on the souls of bishops who allow people like Pelosi and Sebelius to use their very public platforms and their “Catholic-in-good-standing” status to work against the Church and lead others astray.

  50. robtbrown says:

    Supertradmum says:

    robtbrown…as to trolls, I like the Spanish phrase…”do not play chess with a pigeon”…it just poops on the board and flies away….

    Use chess to lure them–and keep a shotgun nearby.

    BTW, did you ever read about Calvin Trillin and the Tic Tac Toe playing chicken at the Chinese Restaurant in NY?

  51. robtbrown says:

    Trillin on the chicken:

    “…nearly all the people I take down there have precisely the same
    response to the prospect of playing ticktacktoe with a chicken. After
    looking the situation over, they say, ‘The chicken gets to go first!’
    ‘But she’s a chicken,’ I say. ‘You’re a human being. Surely there
    should be some advantage in that.’
    Some of my guests, I always report with some embarrassment, don’t
    stop there. Some of them say, ‘The chicken plays every day. I haven’t
    played in years.’ “

  52. HeatherPA says:

    Father, just how long are Bishop Niederauer and Cardinal Wuerl going to allow Pelosi a platform to spew her heretical nonsense? What exactly does she have to say to merit a public rebuke? The longer this woman is allowed to speak unchecked by the Church, the more scandal she spreads. It is not good for the faithful at all or her own soul to let her continue this kind of behavior without censure. I truly am baffled by the silence.

  53. Springkeeper says:

    CarpeNoctem, thank you so very much for your service. My son is on the front lines in Afghanistan and his faith is very important to him (as it is to many of his fellow Marines). I served for twenty years in the Marine Corps (to include the drill field) and I cannot even begin to tell you how important a good chaplain is to a unit. My prayers are with you.

  54. Supertradmum says:

    robtbrown, love it

  55. Gretchen says:

    I second Springkeeper’s comment to CarpeNoctem. My son is just finishing up Army basic training. He heads off to AIT training as a combat medic in a few weeks. The thought of our soldiers not having Catholic chaplains brings me to tears.

    Regarding why our bishops do not act, that also brings me to tears. Whatever the reasons for their silence, the result is further degradation of the Faith. The schism of Catholics and ‘catholics’ in the United States is nearly accomplished. I pray the bandaid be ripped off quickly so that air and light can reach the infection and begin healing the wound.

  56. Pingback: Friday Highlights | Pseudo-Polymath

  57. Pingback: Stones Cry Out - If they keep silent… » Things Heard: e221v5

  58. AnnAsher says:

    Good point ContraMundum. We may end up with our very own American Priests hiding underground like our Chinese brothers and our English before them … And … Before them … And …

  59. AnnAsher says:

    Ipadre- I’ve been eagerly watching and waiting for the film in the Cristeros. We’ve done a little study in our homeschool.

    Thank you – all if you – Good Men and Good Priests!

  60. Supertradmum says:

    I hope no one of this blog really wishes for persecution. Persecution is bad, really bad, as well as good. Just as in war, some people despair and fall away even further from the Truth. We should always pray not to have persecution. I think it is a sin of presumption to think I would not succumb, as I need grace constantly, and I need to pray for fortitude, perseverance, etc. We cannot get cocky.

  61. chantgirl says:

    Supertadmum- Amen. There is no persecution without casualties.

  62. MWindsor says:

    Supertradmum – I don’t know of anyone that would wish for persecution, but I think we’ll regret it very much if we don’t start to seriously prepare.

  63. Supertradmum says:

    Personal holiness is the preparation, unless you live in Missouri, where a few empty caves, camping equipment, supplies, and guns would be a great idea.

  64. Some one ought to tell the “devout Catholic” Nancy Pelosi that she should not confuse St. Jude Thaddeus with Judas Iscariot when she says her prayers> Good grief!

  65. msafford says:

    To flip this around so that Pelosi et. al. might understand what a bad idea removing conscience protections would be: What happens if a liberal chaplain is ordered to STOP performing same-sex “marriages” by their superior officer? Or if they are ordered to give a sermon on the immorality of homosexual acts? Removing the freedom of chaplains to act according to their conscience isn’t just an issue for conservative Catholics, but for everyone. By denying anyone the right to act according to their faith, everyone loses.

  66. @eyeclinic,

    There is a sense in which Nancy Pelosi may be among the most qualified in the House of Representatives to identify a fraud, based on the principle that “it takes one to know one.”

    Pax et bonum,
    Keith Töpfer

  67. All intransigent trolls, sedulus included, should be “sent to Coventry”!

    Pax et bonum,
    Keith Töpfer

  68. robtbrown says:

    Martial Artist says:

    All intransigent trolls, sedulus included, should be “sent to Coventry”!

    Pax et bonum,
    Keith Töpfer

    Isn’t it a principle of the Martial Arts to use the opponent’s force against him?

  69. Nun2OCDS says:

    A few years ago I had the proper certificate from the diocese to allow me to take Communiion to the sick in the hospital. I loved doing this. We could always reach a priest when needed or requested. Then we were told that if anyone (read Protestant) asked for communion we were to give them Communion and if we objected, we were to find another EMHC to do so. This would have been to be a participant in something (almost always) against the teachings of the Church. I quit.

    If any Catholic military priest is asked to do something against our religious beliefs, may he have the moral courage to be faithful. Let him be a true soldier for Christ.

    The military need not just more Catholic Chaplains but more faithful Catholic Chaplains.

  70. catholicmidwest says:

    You’ve got to vote these creeps out of office in November. It’s only going to get worse.

  71. PostCatholic says:

    Knowing that Mrs. Pelosi does not drink alcohol at all, I found digbydigby’s tales of in-flight liquor a bit odd. Here are the facts:

  72. jhayes says:

    Then we were told that if anyone (read Protestant) asked for communion we were to give them Communion and if we objected, we were to find another EMHC to do so.

    Would you please clarify who told you this – a priest or someone delegated by him – or someone wihtout any authority from the church?

  73. inara says:

    jhayes, My mom-in-law was just relating to me the very same story ~ she was instructed as part of her training as an Extraordinary Minister to the hospital bound that she was to give Communion to anyone who asked, regardless of whether or not they were Catholic. I too was shocked.

Comments are closed.