I was disappointed that a Catholic University (USF) would fail to heed the voice of our Catholic Bishops of the USA and invite an abortion proponent to present the major address at a commencement ceremony. But the article defending the choice and offering the objections thereto only exacerbated the situation, and made the divide even greater between those who want to follow the Magisterium and those who want to make deals.
Our "Catholic San Francisco" story of the event attempted to be fair and balanced. I really want to take issue with an adjunct professor of Social Ethics, Fr. Weare's remarks: those "who aggressively enforce an almost single issue campaign...can perpetuate and validate the negative label of 'Cafeteria Catholic.’. Within the context of a divided if not uneducated populace, the forced establishment of laws contrary to the common morality--such as it is--could be detrimental." He's talking about abortion. It sure can be detrimental. Detrimental in a murderous way to millions of aborted babies! And if the populace is uneducated, what are you, Father, doing to promote the prime right of everyone: the right to life?
The priest goes on to state "the congresswoman is by far much more in line with the body of Catholic moral teaching than Bush ever was." Really? That statement doesn’t 'cut any ice', as we used to argue. How can Nancy Pelosi be in line with Catholic moral teaching when she is as, Professor Dennehy correctly called her "a major facilitator in mass murder."
The last paragraph of the Catholic San Francisco tells it all. Over the years Nancy Pelosi has helped USF receive millions of dollars from the federal government. I suggest the least USF could do for Nancy would be to instruct her in her Catholic faith, admonish her that she cannot receive Communion and support abortion, and pray for her soul, as I do daily.