Card. Burke: "Biden is not a Catholic in good standing..."

[pnewton]

No, you are wrong again.

Hey, if we can’t even agree on the meaning of the word “wrong”, I will have to leave you to your own world. You want to shut down this debate, fine.

 

[Randolph]

Hey, if we can’t even agree on the meaning of the word “wrong”, I will have to leave you to your own world.

Pnewton. You can deny the truth and kind actions of people. But the truth remains true. It’s quite sad. I too will leave you to your own denial.

 

[BornInMarch]

Yes, I acknowledge that aspect of US law was enforced under Trump exactly as it was under the previous administration when, apparently, it was not considered heinous.

Actually the news sources I cited both say that Trump’s immigration policy of separating detained children from their parents is a new policy and not one practiced by the previous administration. Politifact also backs this up.

I don’t think truth is a popularity contest, but when all the reputable sources say one thing and you claim it’s not true then you’ll need more evidence than just shouting “Fake News!”

That would make the charges equally ludicrous then.

The modern charge against Trump is not ludicrous, and comparing them to a charge against the catholic church that you just made up comes off as disingenuous on your part.

 

[fide]

That concern was a valid one, deserving addressing, and it has been addressed and is being addressed. MLK knew how to address the concern rightly - righteously - and he did, bringing great advancements. Many today claim to be addressing injustice, but are not in the right spirit of MLK, and their results are not good. To see their projected end, look to the horrible results of the totalitarian leftist-initiated dictatorships in Cuba, Venezuela, N. Korea, China and Russia. Many others are working rightly, one of whom prominently is Trump, and with him others, also seeking and working toward true greatness, including hyphenated-Americans of various origins.

 

[JimG]

One of my friends in the USAF was born in a U.S. internment camp during WW-II for Japanese-Americans. After leaving the USAF, he used the GI Bill benefits to finish college at UC Berkeley, and later was among those compensated for their internment by a law passed in 1988.

 

[Ender]

Actually the news sources I cited both say that Trump’s immigration policy of separating detained children from their parents is a new policy and not one practiced by the previous administration. Politifact also backs this up.

I don’t doubt that this is what many news sources say, but it still isn’t accurate…which says a great deal about the news these days. (Source)

if a child’s parents are criminally prosecuted and held in federal prison awaiting trial, then family separation must occur as a consequence as children may not be held in federal prison. In addition, due to the 1997 Flores Settlement, children may not be held in an immigration detention center for longer than 20 days. As a result, if a child’s parents are held in a detention center for longer than this period, the child is required to be separated from their parents.

This became an issue not because it was a new policy, but because in 2018 a zero-tolerance policy was implemented “for all offenses referred for prosecution under section 1325(a).” This significantly increased the number of people affected because it was the end of “catch and release”.

Not quite how the news reported it is it?

 

[YADA]

And yet you say this when it took Republicans without any meaningful Democratic support but immense Democratic opposition to not once but twice pass a ban on partial both abortion . Vetoed by a Democratic president …finally signed into law by a Republican president. Then immediately litigated by major donors to Democratic Party and Democratic candidates until upheld by the SCOTUS … With opposition like that - which your continued support of Democratic candidate insures - the Republicans or any pro-Life politician will never succeed …you are actually enabling the continuation of the culture of death and abortion.

The next excuse is that abortion limits are being realized at the State legislative arena. True but those limits are again mostly Republican led, fought legislatively by Democrats and then by those same characters NARAL/Planned Parenthood in the courts …

But Republicans are failing on eliminating abortion …sheesh…with your active insurance that they will IMHO

 

[pnewton]

The title is misleading. While it is true that a Cardinal made that statement, what the article does not make clear is that the statement has no effect. It is an opinion. This is FOX slanting the news, similar to the way other networks slant it the other way. The fact that you use the phrase “so-called” Catholics, for people that are objectively and a matter of fact Catholics shows its effect upon some readers.

Judging souls now? That is the job of God alone.

BTW, no, politicians are not incurring latae sententiae excommuication. That is not what Canon 1398 says, and even Cardinal Burke did not go that far. He did not perform, procure, or have an abortion. That does not mean that a bishop cannot deny such a politician communion. That can still happen, but it is not excommunication. Nor does this mean Biden should or should not receive communion. I will leave that to his bishop and keep my own limited opinion to myself.

 

[WA_Catholic]

Anyone that is committing the sin of heresy, which Joe Biden likely is, can be considered a “so-called Catholic”. He literally is denying the authority of the Church and does so openly and to the detriment of society.

 

[WA_Catholic]

He officiated a “gay marriage”? He is clearly promoting evils against the Church. How has he not been excommunicated? I know excommunication is a last resort and is a discipline tool to get Catholics to realize their wrongs. I feel like Joe Biden needs this wake up call, especially with the influence he has on society.

 

[WA_Catholic]

Agree 100%. Well said.

 

[stpurl]

You think not. . . And because you don’t think so, that makes it so. Let me tell you, sir, the influence of figures like Ms Pelosi and how they are associated with their policies and how those appear to be upheld and the figures not just accepted but lauded by many US bishops over the years is a scandal and a shame.

I was 14 in 1970; my mom was 41. We have extended family members who were then between ages birth and age 80, and over the years since we have added many more.

Despite the many members born since all receiving the same Catholic modelling, experiences, etc. A huge percentage have become confused by ‘modern’ catechesis and by the words and teachings of the bishops and priests, to the point where indeed they truly believe the Eucharist is symbolic and was ‘erroneously’ believed to be “real’ years ago, ‘before science’ and ‘out of a need to keep people in the pews. They truly believe that women priests are fine, gay marriage is fine, even abortion and of course contraception can be fine. They believe that Jesus was a good moral teacher but not necessarily ‘God’, they believe that Mary had more children and ‘it’s not necessary to believe she was always a virgin’. And you can find plenty of priests who taught them that and are continuing to teach them that. Who outright contradict Church teaching by their ambiguity and by playing all kinds of ‘word games’.

Prior to 1970 the idea that somebody like Nancy Pelosi as she is today and with the platform she supports could be considered a Catholic in good standing would have been quite literally incomprehensible to the oldest ‘cradle Catholic’ as well as the newest Catholic convert; from the Catholic grandpa to the youngest first communicant.

 

[JimG]

Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, and others can’t helo but give a false idea of Catholicism by reason of the policies which they publicly advocate. By advocating anti-Catholic policies while claiming Catholicism they lead others astray.

I think it began with Sen. Ted Kennedy, who wanted to find a way to support abortion while remaining Catholic.

 

[pnewton]

He was Vice President. The most powerful position in his household.

Anyone that is committing the sin of heresy, which Joe Biden likely is,

Heresy occurs when one denies dogma. It is not dogma that abortion should be illegal. He is denying doctrine, something that the Church is teaching, but has not been defined infallibly. He is creating scandal, which does qualify for being denied communion, in some cases.

Yes, it is. Of that, I totally agree.

Oh, and you are wrong, if you were implying that St. Pius was a Klingon. He was Organian.

 

[BornInMarch]

This became an issue not because it was a new policy, but because in 2018 a zero-tolerance policy was implemented “ for all offenses referred for prosecution under section 1325(a). ” This significantly increased the number of people affected because it was the end of “ catch and release ”.

It’s good that you’re using sources; it adds needed some context. And I will admit that media bias has become a bad problem; while it’s impossible for a journalist to entirely banish personal bias it feels like some aren’t even trying anymore.

Though I don’t think the fact that the law already existed excuses the president. Having a piece of paper that says something and actually doing it are two different very animals, and the current zero-tolerance policy has hurt people who didn’t deserve it.

 

[Victoria33]

Teddy, Jesse Jackson, it’s sad that these people were pro-life at first. I’d like to know more about how they got swayed into this. I don’t know if Edward Kennedy came to a full regret on his position by the end of his life but I do believe he was questioning his position.

 

[Ender]

Though I don’t think the fact that the law already existed excuses the president. Having a piece of paper that says something and actually doing it are two different very animals, and the current zero-tolerance policy has hurt people who didn’t deserve it.

The “zero-tolerance” policy established in 2018 was nothing more than the application of the law as it already existed. The difference is that it was enforced more by this administration than by the previous one. Both administrations, however, were obliged to abide by the 1997 ruling mandating separation. That too was US law.

As for hurting people “who didn’t deserve it”: yes, they did. They violated US law which was then enforced. Keep in mind that if they found the separation intolerable they could have announced they would return to Mexico, been reunited, and exported. The decision to continue the separation (I believe) is theirs to make.

 

[BornInMarch]

The “zero-tolerance” policy established in 2018 was nothing more than the application of the law as it already existed.

The reason the previous administration didn’t enforce the law was because they knew it was an unjust law but repealing it would take more than eight years.

I might just be cynical, but I don’t have confidence in “the proper channels” anymore because they seem designed in bad faith.

As for hurting people “who didn’t deserve it”: yes, they did. They violated US law which was then enforced

We are talking about children. An eight year old can’t understand the nuances of immigration law, and even one that could has no power to go against their parents.

As for the parents, they still have basic human rights. Even if they broke the law. This “criminals deserve whatever they get” attitude that often comes up (not accusing you personally of holding it) is contrary to both Catholic teachings of mercy as well as American Ideals of liberty (specifically the 8th Amendment).

 

[Ender]

The reason the previous administration didn’t enforce the law was because they knew it was an unjust law but repealing it would take more than eight years.

This excuse is your own personal invention; you have no real idea why the government refused to enforce the law.

We are talking about children. An eight year old can’t understand the nuances of immigration law, and even one that could has no power to go against their parents.

Then hold the parents responsible, not the government. It is also important to recognize that a lot of the children being brought through were not in fact accompanied by their parents. The law as it was previously enforced encouraged illegals to come through with a child - any child.

As for the parents, they still have basic human rights. Even if they broke the law.

Nor were their basic rights violated. They gambled they could get through safely. They knew the risks, and lost the gamble. The mere fact of their incarceration is in no way contrary to human rights.

This “criminals deserve whatever they get” attitude that often comes up (not accusing you personally of holding it) is contrary to both Catholic teachings of mercy as well as American Ideals of liberty (specifically the 8th Amendment).

That was not my comment. They knowingly violated the law and should pay the penalty for their action. There is nothing unmerciful about enforcing a just law, and there is nothing unjust about those laws. Would you take your children into a situation where you know they could be separated from you, and would you leave them wherever they are so you could stay wherever you are?

 

[Julius_Caesar]

And a really expensive bit I would say.