Archbishop Wilton Gregory will not deny Biden Communion

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

Please elaborate on “a few other teachings”.

None were meant specifically. My point was that virtually all Catholics disagree with the Church on something, with birth control being the most prominent example. Of those American Catholics that both agree with the Church on BC AND follow that teaching, it is nearly certain they have some other area where they disagree with the Church and/or fall short of the Church’s teachings.

Four words to such folks:

Get with the program.

A faithful Catholic gives assent of mind and heart, and adheres externally, to each and every teaching of the Church (or at least gives it their best shot). No picking and choosing. No taking this teaching or that one, “running it up the flagpole of me”, and seeing if I “agree” with it or not.

 

[TMC]

A faithful Catholic gives assent of mind and heart, and adheres externally, to each and every teaching of the Church (or at least gives it their best shot). No picking and choosing. No taking this teaching or that one, “running it up the flagpole of me”, and seeing if I “agree” with it or not.

Which would probably leave you sitting in the pew alone waiting for the priest - who would never show up because he likely fails that test also.

 

[upant]

Perhaps rather ask how many are being “led down the wide path” that otherwise wouldn’t be on that path already, whatever Biden or any other Democrat had to say.

Biden’s goal as a Catholic should be to lead them to the narrow path, not make the wide path easier to follow

this is about abortion but the idea applies to all anti-catholic laws

1. Sometimes morally flawed laws already exist. In this situation, the process of framing legislation to protect life is subject to prudential judgment and “the art of the possible.” At times this process may restore justice only partially or gradually. For example, St. John Paul II taught that when a government official who fully opposes abortion cannot succeed in completely overturning a pro-abortion law, he or she may work to improve protection for unborn human life, “limiting the harm done by such a law” and lessening its negative impact as much as possible (Evangelium Vitae, no. 73). Such incremental improvements in the law are acceptable as steps toward the full restoration of justice. However, Catholics must never abandon the moral requirement to seek full protection for all human life from the moment of conception until natural death (usccb voters guide)

My point was that virtually all Catholics disagree with the Church on something, with birth control being the most prominent example.

is it still a sin if one disagrees with the teaching? do we get to pick and choose what is a sin to us?

Hedonistic lifestyle?
Biden?

Biden promotes the entire hedonistic agenda, which of these are okay according to church teaching

LGBT agenda, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, transgenderism, identity politics, the destruction of the family, contraception, socialism, breaking the seal of the confession, forced abortions in catholic hospitals, federal funds to pay for abortion, abortion on demand until and infanticide just after birth

it isn’t about trump. blaming trump hides the truth of the agenda of the democrats

the salvation of the people engaged in the lifestyle listed above may be at stake.

Which would probably leave you sitting in the pew alone waiting for the priest - who would never show up because he likely fails that test also.

that is why it is a narrow path, unfortunately, we don’t get to change it

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

A faithful Catholic gives assent of mind and heart, and adheres externally, to each and every teaching of the Church (or at least gives it their best shot). No picking and choosing. No taking this teaching or that one, “running it up the flagpole of me”, and seeing if I “agree” with it or not.

Which would probably leave you sitting in the pew alone waiting for the priest - who would never show up because he likely fails that test also.

I don’t think it’s that dire, but if it were… so be it. I don’t look to majorities for truth.

“Picking and choosing” is a Protestant and secularist error that has leached into Catholics’ minds and souls from the overwhelming influence of the larger culture.

 

[HopingforGodtohelp]

Millions of men and women cut off from committing more sacrilege? That sounds fantastic to me.

I have to add something to this conversation: It is not a punishment to be cut off from receiving communion when in a state of mortal sin. It is a gift. If you “believe in choice” or have abortions or use birth control, you should not be receiving communion before you go to confession.

Lastly, I’d add, that cutting off communion from President-elect Biden would be a gift to him and his soul, so that he does not commit sacrilege every time he goes up there, and a gift to all poorly Catechized Catholics who will no longer be scandalized.

And to those who are saying that I don’t know the state of his soul, that’s sort of true. For all I know, he could’ve gone to confession yesterday, and confessed his support for abortion. HOWEVER, even if he did this, it’s his responsibility to publicly declare this, because his current stance scandalizes many Catholics, who know think it’s okay to “believe in choice.” Scandalizing Catholics like this is a grave matter. So unless he publicly renounces his stance on abortion, he should not receive communion.

 

[HopingforGodtohelp]

So what’s your solution? Tolerate mass sacrilege?

To obstinately deny a Church’s teaching and then receive anyways is sacrilege.

 

[TMC]

is it still a sin if one disagrees with the teaching? do we get to pick and choose what is a sin to us?

That is a complicated question that goes well beyond the scope of this thread, which is (at least ostensibly) about public scandal. My point is that if the standard is to agree with the Church on all teachings, virtually no one meets that standard, and if the standard is to always comply with all teachings, no one meets that standard. If the remedy for those failings is to be denied the Eucharist, the rail should be empty.

 

[upant]

My point is that if the standard is to agree with the Church on all teachings, virtually no one meets that standard,

there are issues that you can disagree with but certain things you can’t

“Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the -application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia” (WRHC 3). WRHC = Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion, General Principles

if the standard is to agree with the Church on all teachings, virtually no one meets that standard, and if the standard is to always comply with all teachings, no one meets that standard. If the remedy for those failings is to be denied the Eucharist, the rail should be empty.

that is why there is confession

 

[TMC]

I don’t think it’s that dire, but if it were… so be it. I don’t look to majorities for truth.

“Picking and choosing” is a Protestant and secularist error that has leached into Catholics’ minds and souls from the overwhelming influence of the larger culture.

I understand the sentiment without necessarily agreeing.

I think we certainly agree that the Church’s teaching is what it is and we are not able to just ‘interpret’ it to match our personal or political preferences. My most heated arguments here have tended to be not with those that disagree with me, but with those that insist the Church teaches other than it clearly does. I know that sometimes there is real disagreement about what the Church actually teaches, but too often the Church speaks with clarity and those that differ stretch and twist to argue they do not ‘really’ disagree with the Church. I disagree with the Church on a handful of things, I know it, I don’t deny it, and I try to deal with that situation honestly.

That said, we differ on what to do with that disagreement. I don’t have all the answers, and I think each case quickly becomes fact specific, but I don’t think that pushing away all those that don’t agree with every teaching is the right answer. (Not saying that is your actual position.) I would agree that someone that deeply disagrees with the Church on fundamental points will reach the point where Communion is inappropriate. It is simply not my place to say whether Mr. Biden (or Mr. Barr, or Ms. Pelosi, or Mr. Gingrich, or any other famous Catholic) has reached that point.

 

[TMC]

there are issues that you can disagree with but certain things you can’t

Not really. I mean, each Catholic can decide in their own mind certain things - evolution, or if Joseph was elderly when he married Mary, were the wise men real people. But the Church’s theological and moral teachings are what they are. They are not optional. You can disagree if your well-formed conscience dictates disagreement, but you are still dissenting. I don’t want to start listing issues because that will quickly devolve, but we all know that the Church teaches certain things that conflict with many Catholics’ strongly held political beliefs - both left and right. That does not make them “optional.”

Put another way, the notion that abortion is the only mandatory teaching with political impacts (or one of only a few) is simply untrue.

 

[knightfall]

My point was that virtually all Catholics disagree with the Church on something, with birth control being the most prominent example. Of those American Catholics that both agree with the Church on BC AND follow that teaching, it is nearly certain they have some other area where they disagree with the Church and/or fall short of the Church’s teachings.

This is a red herring.

The issue is not whether a Catholic disagrees with or falls short of a teaching. It’s whether a Catholic actively and publicly promotes the opposite of Catholic teaching.

God bless.

 

[TMC]

This is a red herring.

The issue is not whether a Catholic disagrees with or falls short of a teaching. It’s whether a Catholic actively and publicly promotes the opposite of Catholic teaching.

Yes, that is precisely what we are discussing, which is why my point is not a red herring. That principle is not limited to Presidents, after all. Do you think that the Church should deny communion to every person of any prominence that is publicly acting or speaking against Church teaching - mayors, school administrators, law enforcement, legislators, and on and on? If so, can you name a single prominent Catholic person who would be able to receive by that standard? I cannot.

 

[knightfall]

Yes, that is precisely what we are discussing, which is why my point is not a red herring.

Sorry, your wording above did not suggest you were referring to Catholics who were actively and publicly promoting the opposite of Catholic teaching.

Do you think that the Church should deny communion to every person of any prominence that is publicly acting or speaking against Church teaching - mayors, school administrators, law enforcement, legislators, and on and on?

Yes, for those who are actively and publicly promoting the opposite of Catholic teaching. The more public their efforts, the sooner the gift of withholding Holy Communion from them should be considered.

If so, can you name a single prominent Catholic person who would be able to receive by that standard? I cannot.

So? Better this than Canon 915 be ignored. It’s there for a reason.

I am of course assuming that all other efforts of dissuading the public figure have failed.

God bless.

 

[TMC]

So? Better this than Canon 915 be ignored. It’s there for a reason.

I am of course assuming that all other efforts of dissuading the public figure have failed.

Well, that is at least consistent. In practice, no one who enters public life in any meaningful way, or maybe is even a public servant like a teacher, will ever be able to be a fully practicing Catholic. I’m sure that will have no ill effects.

 

[BornInMarch]

Only one of them claimed to be Catholic, so I doubt most of them were presenting themselves for Holy Communion.

Biden isn’t just claiming to be a Catholic, he genuinely is one. He was baptized, confirmed, while we can’t see in his heart the fact that he prays and goes to church suggests he really believes in God.

When Trad. Catholics say “this person is a fake catholic” or “you’re not a real catholic if you do this”, they attempt to usurp power from the Holy Spirit which declares a person a Catholic at the moment of baptism. It’s the same reason why the Church only declares a saint after a miracle or martyrdom - to do so more freely, or to declare that a specific soul is in Hell, would be an attempt to usurp power from the Son. So Biden is a real Catholic, as is Pelosi, as are all the people who were baptized in the church but live imperfectly after that.

As for if Biden should be allowed to receive communion, he hasn’t done anything to warrant ferendae sententiae excommunication. He didn’t try to buy an ordination or to celebrate the Mass as a layperson.

 

[BigBoom]

Elf01:

Only one of them claimed to be Catholic, so I doubt most of them were presenting themselves for Holy Communion.

Biden isn’t just claiming to be a Catholic, he genuinely is one. He was baptized, confirmed, while we can’t see in his heart the fact that he prays and goes to church suggests he really believes in God.

When Trad. Catholics say “this person is a fake catholic” or “you’re not a real catholic if you do this”, they attempt to usurp power from the Holy Spirit which declares a person a Catholic at the moment of baptism. It’s the same reason why the Church only declares a saint after a miracle or martyrdom - to do so more freely, or to declare that a specific soul is in Hell, would be an attempt to usurp power from the Son. So Biden is a real Catholic, as is Pelosi, as are all the people who were baptized in the church but live imperfectly after that.

As for if Biden should be allowed to receive communion, he hasn’t done anything to warrant ferendae sententiae excommunication. He didn’t try to buy an ordination or to celebrate the Mass as a layperson.

All baptism does is remove original sin from a person’s soul. The idea that baptism is a big “joining” of the church is a modern idea and not true. The idea that a person can never leave the church is also not true. If a baptized person is excommunicated, they are officially no longer a member of the church as are heretics and schismatics.

 

[po18guy]

He had an abortion, what do you think? If you say men cannot have an abortion, that’s sexist! Hateful. Maleophobia.

1. 47 years of public support for and voting in favor of abortion legislation.
2. Has presided over two same-sex unions. Fine president!
3. Agreed with and supported Obama in raping the conscience (rape is violation, my dear) of the Little Sisters of the Poor, stealing time and money from the poor as the LSOTP must fight to defend their consciences.
4. Has appointed the same HHS director who raped the condescension of the religious sisters.
   It could go on and on, but four strikes should be enough.

 

[BornInMarch]

All baptism does is remove original sin from a person’s soul. The idea that baptism is a big “joining” of the church is a modern idea and not true. The idea that a person can never leave the church is also not true. If a baptized person is excommunicated, they are officially no longer a member of the church as are heretics and schismatics.

You couldn’t be more wrong. What you said is so wrong it rivals the “Eucharist is only symbolic” claim some Protestant churches make.

Early in Church history there was a question of whether priests who apostatized needed to be re-baptized - in other words, if they stopped being Catholic because of their sin - and the church decided they did not. The people who thought they did were the donatists, and the Church condemned that as a heresy. Even excommunication doesn’t constitute declaring someone no-longer Catholic, as they are still expected to fulfill their obligations such as attending church on Sunday and fasting during Lent.

 

[Elf01]

Biden isn’t just claiming to be a Catholic, he genuinely is one. He was baptized, confirmed, while we can’t see in his heart the fact that he prays and goes to church suggests he really believes in God.

We can’t judge his heart, but we can judge his actions, and until he publicaly retracts his support for abortion and gay marriage he should not be receiving Holy Communion.

 

[Anesti33]

BornInMarch:

Biden isn’t just claiming to be a Catholic, he genuinely is one. He was baptized, confirmed, while we can’t see in his heart the fact that he prays and goes to church suggests he really believes in God.

We can’t judge his heart, but we can judge his actions, and until he publicaly retracts his support for abortion and gay marriage he should not be receiving Holy Communion.

Thank you, your excellency. Over which diocese do you reign, so that I can point and laugh when Biden attempts to commune there?