Archbishop Wilton Gregory will not deny Biden Communion

  • Thread starter Thread starter Toolmaker
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Cardinal Gregory is a wonderful prelate. The Church in the United States is richly blessed to have him. He is remarkably able and gifted. I am very happy he is now in the College of Cardinals.
 
BornInMarch said:
48.png
BigBoom:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
Click to expand...
They didn’t need to be rebaptized because original sin had already been removed from their soul when they were originally baptized. Once original sin has been removed, there is no reason for another baptism and it’s therefore impossible.
 
🤔 I don’t get this kind of attitude. It’s Church teaching that those in obstinate, public sin should not receive the Eucharist. That is not the same as judging someone’s private sins or the state of their soul.
 
Anesti33 said:
Thank you, your excellency. Over which diocese do you reign, so that I can point and laugh when Biden attempts to commune there?
Click to expand...
Sadly, not Joe Bidens, if I were his bishop he’d be excommunicated - and I’d love to see it happen to him and others like him.
 
But it is judging without authority, because Canon 915 does not bind random pseudonymous forum users, it binds the ministers distributing Holy Communion.
 
TMC said:
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.
Click to expand...
I think we are in fundamental agreement, and I am happy to see your acknowledgement that voluntary dissent from Church teaching could rise to the level of unworthiness for communion.

I do have issues in my own mind with certain teachings of the Church, and I freely acknowledge that to myself. It runs the gamut from core teachings such as the Incarnation and the necessity of the Passion, through wondering if Rome has “overshot the runway” in her claims of primacy especially vis-a-vis the East, all the way down to more mundane things such as tattooing (my gut instinct, Newman’s “aboriginal vicar”, tells me it’s wrong) and disallowing the use of condoms where the sole objective is to prevent the spread of loathsome diseases such as HIV, Zika, and possibly even COVID, with the prevention of pregnancy being an unwanted yet unpreventable side effect. Yet in the absence of teaching which accords with “running it up the flagpole of wonderful little me”, I go with the Church, and leave it to the magisterium to direct my thinking accordingly. (I think the highly restricted condom use I cited above could be found to be in line with Church teaching, but I haven’t the connections, the theological chops, nor the credentials to take it before the CDF and seek a development of Church doctrine on the matter.)
 
Last edited:
The lay faithful have a crucial role in holding our shepherds to account. We are not to be mindless sheep who accept every sinful action or unjust decision of our Bishop. Bishops can be wrong.
 
sealabeag said:
The lay faithful have a crucial role in holding our shepherds to account. We are not to be mindless sheep who accept every sinful action or unjust decision of our Bishop. Bishops can be wrong.
Click to expand...
I want everyone to keep in mind that Canon 1373 could apply to the topic of this thread, and tread lightly, because bishops and pastors do tend to know what their faithful are doing on the Internet.
 
What element of that Canon are you making reference to? If my priest or Bishop knows that I’m on CAF under this username I will be very, very surprised! Priests and Bishops know what their faithful are doing online? 🤔 I definitely doubt that.
 
Last edited:
BigBoom said:
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.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, that isn’t church teaching.
 
I think you are viewing communion incorrectly.

Receiving communion unworthily is not a “privilege” that you should be happy you get. It is a sin, a grave matter. These people should be denying themselves communion. If they don’t, then that is their funeral, and if they do it with full knowledge and complete consent, they are . . . risking the fires of . . . hell. If their sin is obstinate, grave, and public, then their reception of communion causes scandal for other Catholics, who see them receiving communion and then believe it to be okay. Canon 915 is not optional, and bishops are risking their own souls and the souls of others by not enforcing it.

If you dissent from the Church on issues of infallible doctrine and refuse to assent to the teaching, you should not receive communion. Pray that God changes your heart. If you are willing to change your mind and accept the Church teaching, you should then go to confession and then receive communion.
 
TMC said:
But the Church’s theological and moral teachings are what they are. They are not optional.
Click to expand...
the idea is that not all moral issues have the same moral weight and there can be differences of opinion on the morality of the specific issue

in some moral issues, there is a difference in how you can achieve a moral goal, for example, how do you care for the poor, welfare or a jobs program, you have legitimate options on how to achieve your goal.

there is no option in abortion or euthanasia, the victim is done.
TMC said:
Put another way, the notion that abortion is the only mandatory teaching with political impacts (or one of only a few) is simply untrue.
Click to expand...
I am not arguing the politics of the issues nor do I think Cardinal Ratzinger was either. it is just that these two are always wrong and must always be opposed and yes there are others.

the bottom line is that a person can not present themselves for communion when in a sinful state
TMC said:
If so, can you name a single prominent Catholic person who would be able to receive by that standard? I cannot.
Click to expand...
still doesn’t make it right, even if no one is eligible. St Paul is clear
TMC said:
maybe is even a public servant like a teacher, will ever be able to be a fully practicing Catholic
Click to expand...
so you would allow them to receive unworthily knowing their salvation is endangered?
BornInMarch said:
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.
Click to expand...
he has been officially denied
 
JMMJ said:
48.png
BigBoom:
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.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, that isn’t church teaching.
Click to expand...
What is Heresy?
“Heresy consists in a stubborn denial of truths which have been defined and proposed by the Church as divinely revealed doctrines.” (Canon 1324-1325 of the 1917 Code of Canon Law).

Who does not believe all those things taught by the Magisterium of the Church?
“Any baptized person who … obstinately denies or doubts any of the truths proposed for belief by divine and Catholic faith, is a heretic.” (C. 1325)

He who dissents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all faith, since he thereby refuses to honor God as the supreme truth and the formal motive of faith. “In many things they are with me, in a few things not with me; but in those few things in which they are not with me the many things in which they are will not profit them” (St Augustine in Psalm. LIV, n.19). And this indeed most deservedly; for they who take from Christian doctrine what they please lean on their own judgements, not on faith; and not bringing into captivity every understanding unto the obedience of Christ (Cor. X,5), they more truly obey themselves than God. “You, who believe what you like of the gospels and believe not what you like, believe yourselves rather than the gospel” ’ (St Augustine, lib. XVII., Contra Faustum Manichaeum, cap. 3).

What are the Effects of Heresy?
Heresy deprives one of being a Member of the Church and places them in the state of perdition unless they abjure their error and return to the Catholic Faith (The Council of Florence, Dz 714). Heresy also deprives the offender of access to any of the Churches sacraments unless he first repents of his crime (Canons 731, 765, 795,985,1240).

St. Augustine expressly states that “whoever draws away anyone from the universal Church to any sect, is a murderer and a Child of Satan” - Ad Petilian, 2, 13.
 
I thought we were debating whether excommunication equates to being kicked out of the Church.
 
sealabeag said:
Affordable care act,
Click to expand...
Not so.

Executive Order 13535 is an executive order announced by President Barack Obama on March 21, 2010, and signed on March 24. It reinforces a commitment to preservation of the Hyde Amendment’s policy restricting federal funds for abortion within the context of recent health care legislation.
 
sealabeag said:
some cases obliged to question the actions and decisions of their Bishops, especially in cases where souls may be harmed or scandalised.
Click to expand...
Yeah the vicar of my Cathedral told me bishops must be corrected at times.
 
BigBoom said:
They didn’t need to be rebaptized because original sin had already been removed from their soul when they were originally baptized. Once original sin has been removed, there is no reason for another baptism and it’s therefore impossible.
Click to expand...
Baptism is also what marks someone as Catholic until the day they die. You’re wrong if you think someone can ever stop being a Catholic in the eyes of God. If you’re in the “only Trad. Catholics are true Catholics!” camp then your belief has more in common with Donatism then what the Catholic Church actually teaches.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top