Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Has Pelosi ALREADY Met with Archbishop Niederauer?

The answer is yes, according to James Todd, writing in

"Michael Voris of Real CathlicTV reports today in his daily Vortex column that this meeting between Pelosi and Archbishop Niederauer took place quietly and clandestinely on Sunday, February 8th in a private residence in San Francisco. confirmed this fact with both the Archdiocese of San Francisco and Pelosi’s office in DC.

Pelsoi’s spokesman Brendan Daly said Pelosi described the meeting as quote .. 'cordial and pleasant .. a fair exchange and good.'

When pressed by producer and host Michael Voris , if "good" meant that she had changed her position on abortion and finally gotten in line with Catholic teaching, Daly replied, "You won’t see that happening. She is not changing her position on abortion."

This puts the ball squarely in the archbishop’s court now. He has met with her. They explained each other’s position. She admits that she understood Church teaching incorrectly and now, presumably, understands it correctly and yet remains defiant."

If true, this is in direct conflict with what was reported in Our Sunday Visitor yesterday:

“While she initially accepted the archbishop's invitation to a pastoral meeting, she has not been able to arrange such a meeting on her schedule, despite our putting forward several available dates,” said Maurice Healy, spokesman for the archbishop, in a Feb. 13 e-mail.

An email from Pelosi's office quoted in the OSV story supported Mr. Healy's statement:

"A Pelosi press spokesman said Feb. 13 that she did not know when or if Pelosi would meet with the archbishop or when Pelosi would respond to Our Sunday Visitor’s inquiry."

Strange. It will be interesting to get some clarification on this.


I've been unable to embed the video clip From "Real Catholic TV" that Mr. Todd references, but it can be seen by going to

Mr. Todd's description of the content of the "Real Catholic TV" story is accurate. To see the video clip, you must register on the site, but it is free.

UPDATE II: For my take on the cause of the confusion between the two stories, go here.

Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney

No comments: