Could the Pope place a President Biden under personal interdict?

Status
Not open for further replies.
He’s a Catholic who doesn’t think he has to follow Catholic teachng. A bit like a communist who believes in free-market capitalism.

I’d be interested to to see how you would apply to Biden the remark that the Holy Father applied in another context to politicians who do not conform to moral teaching?

“And then, a person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian.”
 
Last edited:
I did not know he was Catholic. We must Pray for him to repent of ‘pro choice’ policies
 
I guess I have a question : can the Pope do whatever he wants ? Maybe can he, would he, should he ?
It must be a pretty universal thought for Catholics about Biden : we’d like to see him stand up for Pro Life. He gave such a wonderful acceptance speech, quoted Psalms and a Catholic Hymn. I really think we need to uplift him in prayer, be supportive of Biden as a Catholic brother, and not focus hard on skipping to the obvious. He’s got a tremendously difficult road ahead.
 
Flor said:
He’s got a tremendously difficult road ahead.
Click to expand...
Anyone supporting the killing of babies will hopefully see ASAP that the road extends into the afterlife, and not presume on God’s mercy.
 
Last edited:
Flor said:
. I really think we need to uplift him in prayer, b
Click to expand...
Yes, especially that he confounds all expectations by legislating against abortion, which he now has the power to do if he chooses.
 
jgaw1234 said:
I see your point but we did stand up this time, or at least most of us. Relevant radio reported that Biden got less than 1/3 of the Catholic vote and less than 1/4 of the Evangelical. That says a lot considering there are a lot of Catholics in the northeast blue area. I think most are starting to wake up to the seriousness of the attacks on our faith.
Click to expand...
That’s good to know. Reassuring.

This morning the network news shows are all full of stories hoping for “unity” in the U.S. under the new President.

At the same time, they listed the “Executive Orders” that Pres. Biden plans to sign the day he takes office. Most of them have no moral consequences; e.g., re-joining the Paris Climate Accord. But they didn’t list some of the Exec Orders that DO have evil consequences.

LIstening to VP Harris is very difficult for me as a woman because I have read the articles in the various women’s magazines over the years and I know all the things that she wants to happen.

I greatly fear for my husband and me–we are nearing retirement and really need to have as much of our income as possible to pay down all our debts, make sure that our medical needs are taken care of while we are still working and have health care benefits–what will the Democrats DO to health care in this country?! My husband and I do NOT want to see more taxes, and it looks very likely that all the wonderful social programs that are touted by the Biden/Harris Administration will be funded primarily through taxing the Working Middle Class–people like me and my husband.

Add this to the taxes that the State of Illinois imposes upon us, and we could be in very bad shape to retire. 😟

As for the COVID-19 pandemic, I have little faith that Pres. Biden and VP Harris will be able to do anything different than Pres. Trump and VP Pence–other than perhaps cracking down on mask wearing, social distancing, and all the other fairly-useless things that obviously are NOT working.

I think that Pres. Biden will discover that Democrats are no better at fighting a virus than Republicans.

What I fear more than anything is that Pres. Biden will leave office “for health reasons” after he and his family celebrate a lovely Christmas in the White House in 2021. And then Kamala Harris will be President–and I think that many people in this country will realize what they have done by voting in this Administration. She is to be feared.

Hopefully our Senators and Representatives can and will provide a check/balance for all the evil policies, even if they can’t stop the obejctionable but not-evil policies of this Administration.
 
Last edited:
Which law are you referring to?

While two of the bishops in the United States have said they would deny him communion because of scandal, I am unaware of any that said he is excommunicated. He has not committed heresy.
 
Last edited:
Peeps said:
What I fear more than anything is that Pres. Biden will leave office “for health reasons” after he and his family celebrate a lovely Christmas in the White House in 2021. And then Kamala Harris will be President–and I think that many people in this country will realize what they have done by voting in this Administration. She is to be feared.
Click to expand...
“Do not be afraid. Do not be satisfied with mediocrity. Put out into the deep and let down your nets for a catch…. I plead with you–never, ever give up on hope, never doubt, never tire, and never become discouraged. Be not afraid.” St. John Paul
 
Maximian said:
I’d be interested to to see how you would apply to Biden the remark that the Holy Father applied in another context to politicians who do not conform to moral teaching?

“And then, a person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian.”
Click to expand...
Every sovereign country has the right to secure its borders in the way it sees fit, and circumstances will differ. To my knowledge, there is no Church teaching that countries must allow their borders to be porous, so that immigrants from other countries can come across at will, settle there, work there, raise their families there, and avail themselves of the benefits that residency in that country affords, least of all without legal sanction. If there is such a teaching, I would appreciate knowing about it — I have toyed with the idea of moving to Canada one day, in that I am a monarchist and believe in a vast social welfare state. I need something to be able to tell Justin 😊 🍁 🦆
 
Peeps said:
What I fear more than anything is that Pres. Biden will leave office “for health reasons” after he and his family celebrate a lovely Christmas in the White House in 2021. And then Kamala Harris will be President–and I think that many people in this country will realize what they have done by voting in this Administration. She is to be feared.
Click to expand...
Actually, it might be 2022, as if he were to leave office after 01/20/23, Harris would have then been in office less than two years, therefore enabling her to run for two more terms beyond that. Unless she were really “all things to all people” (or at least enough people to win), I can’t see the American people being willing for her to be president for ten years. She’s not Bill Clinton.
 
Calm down…As if we never followed the wrong voice… :roll_eyes:
He isn’t saying people are Satan.Nor is such the tone of his posts .
You are new, try and read a little more before flagging…we try not to make this site a battleground. We try…
 
Last edited:
As you wish…
I read you joined August 8, and I was trying to help.
 
The mods decide, that is their job as to keep this place charitable as well.
As is ours. We try…
Have a good day!
 
Last edited:
I did not. Really, is English that hard for people here? It is a biblical fact he is know as the Accuser of the Brethren (Revelation 12:10 for reference.) Or is it the Bible we find uncomfortable. There is a reason Jesus warned us against judging others. He alone gets that throne. The one that accuses others before it is Satan. We can only face our own judgement. None the less, I removed it, as I never said no one is is Satan. I never thought it would be taken that way.
You never answered what law you meant.

Canon law is an exercise of the Church with good reason. Lay people with their politics and imprecision do nothing my uncharitable condemn others when they try to dabble with it. There is no one here with authority to judge another Catholic. Actions could be judged, which is why I asked what law you think would meet the burden of excommunication. That normally is reserved for committing an abortion, having an abortion, or specifically assisting in a specific abortion by a specific act.
 
Last edited:
I assume Jesus is allowed here:

7 “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

Just to be clear, I do not ever remember attending Mass that was free of sinners. Most Catholics I know do sin, and most even have some point of disagreement with the Church. It is only when one denies dogma is one a heretic. And it is only the Church who can excommunicate.
 
AlNg said:
Then why is it a grave sin to proselytize the Orthodox?
Click to expand...
It’s not unless you are using a narrow, negative definition of “proselytize”, which is commonly used today (and then it would be a sin to do it to anyone). The CDF addressed the issue of seeking the reunion of individual non-Catholic Christians (recall, ecumenism is seeking corporate reunion):
In such a case, it would not be a question of proselytism in the negative sense that has been attributed to this term.[49] As explicitly recognized in the Decree on Ecumenism of the Second Vatican Council, “it is evident that the work of preparing and reconciling those individuals who desire full Catholic communion is of its nature distinct from ecumenical action, but there is no opposition between the two, since both proceed from the marvelous ways of God”.[50] Therefore, the work of ecumenism does not remove the right or take away the responsibility of proclaiming in fullness the Catholic faith to other Christians, who freely wish to receive it.
Click to expand...
[49] The term proselytism originated in the context of Judaism, in which the term proselyte referred to someone who, coming from the gentiles, had passed into the Chosen People. So too, in the Christian context, the term proselytism was often used as a synonym for missionary activity. More recently, however, the term has taken on a negative connotation, to mean the promotion of a religion by using means, and for motives, contrary to the spirit of the Gospel; that is, which do not safeguard the freedom and dignity of the human person. It is in this sense that the term proselytism is understood in the context of the ecumenical movement: cf. The Joint Working Group between the Catholic Church and the World Council of Churches, “The Challenge of Proselytism and the Calling to Common Witness” (1995).
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...20071203_nota-evangelizzazione_en.html#_ftn49
Click to expand...
The Lord calls all to his one Church:
CCC 845 To reunite all his children, scattered and led astray by sin, the Father willed to call the whole of humanity together into his Son’s Church. The Church is the place where humanity must rediscover its unity and salvation. The Church is “the world reconciled.” She is that bark which “in the full sail of the Lord’s cross, by the breath of the Holy Spirit, navigates safely in this world.” According to another image dear to the Church Fathers, she is prefigured by Noah’s ark, which alone saves from the flood.334
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
40.png
pnewton:
Again, what law would this refer to? I won’t hound, but I thought the question might have been lost.
 
I don’t love getting wrapped up in technicalities. But if we’re pointing to if he’s a catholic, isn’t there an excommunication if one participates or facilitates in abortion? Like voting and campaigning for it? I’m not familiar with the legalities.

Something along those lines.
 
Last edited:
The infant mortality rate had little to do with overpopulation and very much to do with poor hygiene, poor nutrition, and a lack of vaccines and antibiotics. The infant mortality rate would have been no better with fewer babies, but the parents might not have had any surviving children.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top