"Catholics" and the right to choose?

[dancny]

The choice of excomunication is in the bishops office to use and should be used more often. If a person is publicly sinning and leading others to sin they are binding themselves to hell. Yes, they may receive forginvess from God at any time, but by their actions they are leading others to hell.

Excommunication is unnequivocal way of say that they are wrong and living sinfully. It is the making of a public example of a pyublic sin and possibly the way to show someone that they need to repent and return to the church seeking absoultion and forgivness. Excomunication is a tool in the bishops toolbox that, IMHO, should be used more often. As a charitable act to save a sinner from damnation it can be a powerful tool.

 

[elts1956]

To me, the word “revealed” means “knowing” with your whole heart and soul.

How about “giving” your whole heart and soul to God/Christ?

 

[elts1956]

**But an excommunicated Catholic would likely have been saturated with Catholic doctrine and therefore still Catholic even after excommunication, right? So probably nothing could save their souls from damnation.

Anybody?

Limerick**

Only God.

 

[elts1956]

**But an excommunicated Catholic would likely have been saturated with Catholic doctrine and therefore still Catholic even after excommunication, right? So probably nothing could save their souls from damnation.

Anybody?

Limerick**

**Casual exposure to doctrine is not dedicated study. So which is it? Which requires the formerly uninitiated to make a major lifestyle change and follow Catholicism?

Limerick**

:newidea: God/The Holy Spirit/Jesus. If you’re lucky a saint, or another person, may pray for you and help you get God’s attention.

 

[elts1956]

Catholics who reject the sanctity of life and believe in the so called “right to choose” are cafeteria “Catholics” and should be excommunicated in my opinion. And no, this is not vengeance. It is to save their souls from damnation.

Holly, they are excommunicating themselves in that they are distancing themselves from God and His Church’s teachings. But again, it is not for us to judge the heart of another. Outward appearances can sometimes be deceiving. I think they need to be hit on the head with a two by four, but I don’t know if that would work, or not.

 

[limerick]

The choice of excomunication is in the bishops office to use and should be used more often. If a person is publicly sinning and leading others to sin they are binding themselves to hell. Yes, they may receive forginvess from God at any time, but by their actions they are leading others to hell.

Excommunication is unnequivocal way of say that they are wrong and living sinfully. It is the making of a public example of a pyublic sin and possibly the way to show someone that they need to repent and return to the church seeking absoultion and forgivness. Excomunication is a tool in the bishops toolbox that, IMHO, should be used more often. As a charitable act to save a sinner from damnation it can be a powerful tool.

**It’s a big stick.

Limerick**

 

[elts1956]

I said NOTHING about equality. I am talking Justice and God is the final judge of what is right and what is wrong. In Pope John Paul II’s encyclical Evangelium Vitae, he states that women having abortions are guilty of the magnitude of their sin according to their culpability. ie. there is a great difference between a woman who freely, knowingly and selfishly chooses to get an abortion and that woman who has an abortion under duress.

But abortion is an Intrinsic evil and both will have to take responsibilty for their actions, willingly, or unwillingly.

As far as the two kids and how much time they spend in Purgatory, again that depends on their “culpability”, but I would imagine that Uncle Priest MAY be spending a few extra minutes there. He is the one who made a subjective decision which is sinful in regard to confession, or any other Sacrament.

**What is it you are responding to? There’s nothing in the quote box.

Limerick**

Sorry, I think it was in one of your posts about not everyone being equally judged such as in your post #260?

 

[mapleoak]

You are actually saying that if I tell a young Jew about the existence of Purgatory, this revelation then binds him by this teaching? This is the height of arrogance.

"The immeasurable relief comes from having been born without the Catholic faith and then being privileged and inspired by the Holy Spirit to find it." This is your feeling, your belief. Again, arrogance. Unbelievable.

Limerick

How is it arrogant if the Holy Spirit leads someone wanting of the Truth to the Truth? Rather, arrogance is when one is revealed the Truth and yet, chooses to remain in unbelief.
Belief is a choice. Faith is a gift from God.

 

[mulligan59]

**
A Protestant has faith in Jesus, and hence qualifies for salvation. As most have not been exposed to Catholic doctrine and dogma, it appears then that you are saying they can get to heaven by being devout Lutherans or Methodists or Baptists. A case for Catholics to raise their children in another faith so they can gain access the easy way, no?

What, then, of the others, the non-Christians? Are they disqualified from an afterlife in the presence of God just because they do not believe in Jesus?

Limerick**

Limerick,
You are indeed clobbering these guys on pure natural reason because they have imbibed the Vatican II religion and cannot simply say outright that "YES, ALL, pagans, heretics, Jews are lost. This was infallibly and irreformably promulgated by the Council of Florence. Yes, it is harsh to our prideful modern ears, but it is absolutley consistent with what Christ taught over and over again. The Gospels are not ambiguous on this point. You are absolutely right, that Protestantism would seem to be the “easy way” and one cannot square the necessity of being Catholic (and following all of its regulations to the letter) with the wishy washy nonsense of Vatican II. The problem is that V II is a lie, it is the product of liars, the great apostasy, the Abomination of Desolation in the Holy Place foretold by Christ.

Either there is no God, or you must absolutely be a TRADTIONAL Catholic. Nothing “in between” (as you seem to perceive) makes logical sense.

The notion of invincible ignorance by the way is horribly misunderstood and mischaracterized in many of these posts. Ignorance does not save you, It merely avoids punishment for those things of which you are ignorant. And “invincibility” is a high bar. Hard to imagine its application to anyone in the modern world.

 

[elts1956]

Limerick,
You are indeed clobbering these guys on pure natural reason because they have imbibed the Vatican II religion and cannot simply say outright that "YES, ALL, pagans, heretics, Jews are lost. This was infallibly and irreformably promulgated by the Council of Florence. Yes, it is harsh to our prideful modern ears, but it is absolutley consistent with what Christ taught over and over again. The Gospels are not ambiguous on this point. You are absolutely right, that Protestantism would seem to be the “easy way” and one cannot square the necessity of being Catholic (and following all of its regulations to the letter) with the wishy washy nonsense of Vatican II. The problem is that V II is a lie, it is the product of liars, the great apostasy, the Abomination of Desolation in the Holy Place foretold by Christ.

Either there is no God, or you must absolutely be a TRADTIONAL Catholic. Nothing “in between” (as you seem to perceive) makes logical sense.

The notion of invincible ignorance by the way is horribly misunderstood and mischaracterized in many of these posts. Ignorance does not save you, It merely avoids punishment for those things of which you are ignorant. And “invincibility” is a high bar. Hard to imagine its application to anyone in the modern world.

So you think Pope John Paul II’s encyclical on ecumenism is incorrect? One day we will see who is “right”, but by then, it won’t matter.

 

[mapleoak]

Limerick,
You are indeed clobbering these guys on pure natural reason because they have imbibed the Vatican II religion and cannot simply say outright that "YES, ALL, pagans, heretics, Jews are lost. This was infallibly and irreformably promulgated by the Council of Florence. Yes, it is harsh to our prideful modern ears, but it is absolutley consistent with what Christ taught over and over again. The Gospels are not ambiguous on this point. You are absolutely right, that Protestantism would seem to be the “easy way” and one cannot square the necessity of being Catholic (and following all of its regulations to the letter) with the wishy washy nonsense of Vatican II. The problem is that V II is a lie, it is the product of liars, the great apostasy, the Abomination of Desolation in the Holy Place foretold by Christ.

Either there is no God, or you must absolutely be a TRADTIONAL Catholic. Nothing “in between” (as you seem to perceive) makes logical sense.

The notion of invincible ignorance by the way is horribly misunderstood and mischaracterized in many of these posts. Ignorance does not save you, It merely avoids punishment for those things of which you are ignorant. And “invincibility” is a high bar. Hard to imagine its application to anyone in the modern world.

Do you subscribe to “Cafeteria Catholicism”? To be a faithful Catholic means to embrace ALL of the teachings of the Catholic Church.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

**But an excommunicated Catholic would likely have been saturated with Catholic doctrine and therefore still Catholic even after excommunication, right? So probably nothing could save their souls from damnation.

Anybody?

Limerick**

Hi Limerick,

Excommunication does not mean expulsion from the Catholic religion. It means that the person excommunicated is not permitted to present themselves to the Sacraments, including the Sacrament of Confession. Only a Bishop can remove the excommunication, but most Bishops have given their priests permission to remove an excommunication to their priests.

It isn’t a punishment, but actually a form of mercy. It encourages a time period of reflection and understanding on what the Church actually teaches.

Finally, an excommunicated person can receive the sacraments in an emergency situation, (life threatening) They can receive the anointing of the Sick if possible

 

[mulligan59]

So you think Pope John Paul II’s encyclical on ecumenism is incorrect? One day we will see who is “right”, but by then, it won’t matter.

Yes. I have to, because as a Catholic faithful the the magisterium, I cannot accept something that practically word for word contradicts previous definitions (and scripture).

One day we will know who is right, but I disagree with you as to how much it will matter. I thnk it matters very much, it is of infinite importance, to get this right.

 

[fix]

Yes. I have to, because as a Catholic faithful the the magisterium, I cannot accept something that practically word for word contradicts previous definitions (and scripture).

We have a living magisterium. If you assert the magisterium is teaching error then it would seem that the confusion is with those who misunderstand the teaching, not the the Holy Spirit is allowing error to be taught.

 

[Lemonpoptart]

Perhaps I shouldn’t butt in, because I’ve not read this entire thread, and plus I am new here. However…here’s my 2c.

Abortion is murder. Period. This isn’t about being Catholic or not. It’s about being human. About morality. For Christians, “Thou Shalt Not Kill” is one of God’s commandments. It’s not a choice, it’s a baby. No, I don’t think there are times when it’s okay. It’s still murder. I am not okay with other Catholics (or anyone else for that matter), being Pro Choice. I pray that God changes the hearts of people who think murdering babies is okay. Should they be excommunicated? Not for me to decide. But I do think anyone who thinks baby killing is fine has no business calling themselves a Catholic.

I teach my kids that anyone who has an abortion we do still love. We don’t love what they did, but we do still love them. For those of us who are Pro Life, and take a stand for those with no voice, we should always do it with love. Always.

 

[LindaSK]

Perhaps I shouldn’t butt in, because I’ve not read this entire thread, and plus I am new here. However…here’s my 2c.

Abortion is murder. Period. This isn’t about being Catholic or not. It’s about being human. About morality. For Christians, “Thou Shalt Not Kill” is one of God’s commandments. It’s not a choice, it’s a baby. No, I don’t think there are times when it’s okay. It’s still murder. I am not okay with other Catholics (or anyone else for that matter), being Pro Choice. I pray that God changes the hearts of people who think murdering babies is okay. Should they be excommunicated? Not for me to decide. But I do think anyone who thinks baby killing is fine has no business calling themselves a Catholic.

I teach my kids that anyone who has an abortion we do still love. We don’t love what they did, but we do still love them. For those of us who are Pro Life, and take a stand for those with no voice, we should always do it with love. Always.

Amen

 

[mulligan59]

Do you subscribe to “Cafeteria Catholicism”? To be a faithful Catholic means to embrace ALL of the teachings of the Catholic Church.

OK. So do I accept Gregory XVIth when he called Religious Liberty an Insanity, or Pius IX who also condemned it, and Saint Pius Xth who also condemned it, OR, do I accept John Paul II who called religious Liberty an essential human and civil right?

Do I accept the Council of Florence which stated that the Jews must convert or burn in Hell. Or how about Jesus who told them that if they were son of Abraham they would know him, because Abraham rejoiced at the coming of my day, but your Fatehr is Satan, because you know me not." Or do i accept Vatican II which states that the Jews are “faithfull to their convenant”?

Learn something about what you are saying.

 

[elts1956]

OK. So do I accept Gregory XVIth when he called Religious Liberty an Insanity, or Pius IX who also condemned it, and Saint Pius Xth who also condemned it, OR, do I accept John Paul II who called religious Liberty an essential human and civil right?

Do I accept the Council of Florence which stated that the Jews must convert or burn in Hell. Or how about Jesus who told them that if they were son of Abraham they would know him, because Abraham rejoiced at the coming of my day, but your Fatehr is Satan, because you know me not." Or do i accept Vatican II which states that the Jews are “faithfull to their convenant”?

Learn something about what you are saying.

Peope who practice the Jewish Faith are faithful to their covenant with God. This is what they know, just as the Catholic Faith is what we know. Hopefully, we Catholics are capable of sometimes being non judgemental.

 

[elts1956]

OK. So do I accept Gregory XVIth when he called Religious Liberty an Insanity, or Pius IX who also condemned it, and Saint Pius Xth who also condemned it, OR, do I accept John Paul II who called religious Liberty an essential human and civil right?

Do I accept the Council of Florence which stated that the Jews must convert or burn in Hell. Or how about Jesus who told them that if they were son of Abraham they would know him, because Abraham rejoiced at the coming of my day, but your Fatehr is Satan, because you know me not." Or do i accept Vatican II which states that the Jews are “faithfull to their convenant”?

Learn something about what you are saying.

I said NOTHING about equality. I am talking Justice and God is the final judge of what is right and what is wrong. In Pope John Paul II’s encyclical Evangelium Vitae, he states that women having abortions are guilty of the magnitude of their sin according to their culpability. ie. there is a great difference between a woman who freely, knowingly and selfishly chooses to get an abortion and that woman who has an abortion under duress.

But abortion is an Intrinsic evil and both will have to take responsibilty for their actions, willingly, or unwillingly.

As far as the two kids and how much time they spend in Purgatory, again that depends on their “culpability”, but I would imagine that Uncle Priest MAY be spending a few extra minutes there. He is the one who made a subjective decision which is sinful in regard to confession, or any other Sacrament.

**A woman having an abortion and not doing so under duress is a classic, 24K gold oxymoron.

Limerick**

I happened to see a blog “somewhere” in which the young woman was ranting about how delighted she and her “other” were that she had gotten rid of that “thing”. So don’t think that some women don’t quite willingly have abortions. It is possible and not an oxymoron.

 

[Fiyero3305]

There was also a woman in college who planned to impregnate herself and abort over and over again as an art project. I don’t believe she ended up doing it, but there are definitely many women with very flippant attitudes toward abortion.