Dolan: Whoever thinks he could be next Pope must be on dope

[PaulinVA]

I don’t mean to be finger wagging at you per se…and I’m truly sorry if you took it that way. I work with a Catholics Can Come Home program and have seen so many Catholics truly hurt by someone throwing the rule book at them…many times unjustified. Not that this is why I think you are doing…I’m just trying to challenge you to move beyond the black/white view of things. Again…sorry if you think I’m finger wagging at you…it’s not my intent.

Annabelle, I’ll jump in here to give Lucky7 a break.

I agree with what you are saying about returning Catholics. The problem I have is that it is unclear to the normal pew potato whether the Church is a rule-book throwing entity or whether the rules are more like swiss cheese for all of the loopholes and pastoral provisions.

It’s either one or the other. As an example, a Catholic woman who has an abortion but doesn’t know that it is an offense that draws a latae sententiae excommunication is in fact not excommunicated. Sooo, the woman who educates herself in Church teachings is excommunicated but the Catholic who does care to inform herself of Church teaching is still in good standing.

 

[JamesCaruso]

Annabelle, I’ll jump in here to give Lucky7 a break.

I agree with what you are saying about returning Catholics. The problem I have is that it is unclear to the normal pew potato whether the Church is a rule-book throwing entity or whether the rules are more like swiss cheese for all of the loopholes and pastoral provisions.

It’s either one or the other. As an example, a Catholic woman who has an abortion but doesn’t know that it is an offense that draws a latae sententiae excommunication is in fact not excommunicated. Sooo, the woman who educates herself in Church teachings is excommunicated but the Catholic who does care to inform herself of Church teaching is still in good standing.

So, are you saying swiss cheese or cheddar?

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Annabelle, I’ll jump in here to give Lucky7 a break.

I agree with what you are saying about returning Catholics. The problem I have is that it is unclear to the normal pew potato whether the Church is a rule-book throwing entity or whether the rules are more like swiss cheese for all of the loopholes and pastoral provisions.

It’s either one or the other. As an example, a Catholic woman who has an abortion but doesn’t know that it is an offense that draws a latae sententiae excommunication is in fact not excommunicated. Sooo, the woman who educates herself in Church teachings is excommunicated but the Catholic who does care to inform herself of Church teaching is still in good standing.

Yes…that is the way the Church has set it up. Much like the prodigal son…the one who returned gets a fatted calf killed for him. The other one is like…wait a minute…what the heck??? But that is always the wrong attitude to have. We shouldn’t be so worried about what we see as “swiss cheese” and instead be grateful for what we have and have been forgiven for. Do you really think that in the end…they are “getting” away with something? The Church is not a rule-book type entity…they leave it up to our shepards. The Church does not dictate…she invites (something Pope Benedict said often). How can you be so sure that the person who might not appear to care to educate themselves in Church teaching doesn’t have other things going on that disadvantaged her from the get go?? You don’t know…I don’t know…only God knows.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Annabelle, I’ll jump in here to give Lucky7 a break.

I agree with what you are saying about returning Catholics. The problem I have is that it is unclear to the normal pew potato whether the Church is a rule-book throwing entity or whether the rules are more like swiss cheese for all of the loopholes and pastoral provisions.

It’s either one or the other. As an example, a Catholic woman who has an abortion but doesn’t know that it is an offense that draws a latae sententiae excommunication is in fact not excommunicated. Sooo, the woman who educates herself in Church teachings is excommunicated but the Catholic who does [not] care to inform herself of Church teaching is still in good standing.

(I added the “not” because I think that’s what you meant, no?)

No, Paul, the Catholic who does not care to inform herself of Church teaching is not in good standing. It’s an affirmative command of the Catechism to form one’s conscience with the Magisterium, and to seek out what the doctrinal positions are. It’s an extension of what was implicitly affirmed in her Confirmation, the Coming of Age of any Catholic as far as moral responsiblity goes.

I will add that the purpose of Coming Home programs of all kinds (variously called Catholics Come Home, Landings, and Homecoming) is twofold: (1) one purpose is to provide an avenue for those returning to sort out (and usually articulate, though they don’t have to) why they left and often to articulate what they miss; (2) to answer their questions about what (still) are the current Church positions on matters about which they might have left, or previously felt merely ambivalent about.

Any program which does not direct returning Catholics with ongoing questions about doctrine, to answers (or resources for those answers) is doing an insufficient job or a halfway job. I notice, for example, in the Homecoming program I went to many years ago, some of us did stay; others did not, because they could not reconcile they preferred lifestyles or beliefs with those of the authentic Church. (For example, one woman was attached to her New Age attractions. She learned that the Roman Catholic Church and New Age are not synonymous and actually not compatible. So while she came to the initial meetings, she did not return. She learned what she had to learn and she made her choices.)

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

(I added the “not” because I think that’s what you meant, no?)

No, Paul, the Catholic who does not care to inform herself of Church teaching is not in good standing. It’s an affirmative command of the Catechism to form one’s conscience with the Magisterium, and to seek out what the doctrinal positions are. It’s an extension of what was implicitly affirmed in her Confirmation, the Coming of Age of any Catholic as far as moral responsiblity goes.

I’m not saying that we don’t have a responsibility to inform our concience…but we can’t say for sure if this lady’s conscience was well informed enough for an automatic excommunication to apply. Much as we can never tell if someone is in the state of mortal sin. Certainly the sin can be grave…that much we can tell…BUT do they have full knowledge or not? We can never REALLY say that for sure. Now you may like to say…they SHOULD have known…but that is not the same as all the requirements for mortal sin.

For example…contraception. I was baptized Catholic…had first communion…then my parents left the church…in my teen years for two years I went with my dad to the Catholic church but he never taught me anything. Then I left…spent 20+ years as a protestant…full contracepting protestant as it is not seen as wrong in their world. Now I prayed that if God wanted me to stop…please give me a sliver…minut as it might be…of want for a child…nothing…so I took that as a sign and continued with contracption. Eventually my husband got a permenant fix to that. Then two years after that…went back to the Catholic Church…sitting in a Catholics Can Come Home class…find out that contraception is wrong…and a grave sin…never knew that before…quite honestly…I did take it into confession…but as I did not have full knowledge…it was not a mortal sin on my part. But good to take into confession none the less… You may say that I had a responsibility to find out everything that the Catholic Church teaches as a child of 8 on up…but I don’t believe that is what the church says…she realizes that its on ongoing process for many people…

 

[PaulinVA]

Thanks You Annabelle Marie and Elizabeth for your responses.

Yes, It is confusing. As I said previously, when I read that a woman died from complications during a late-abortion, I was not surprised at all that she was Catholic. It just figures, you know?

We have a crisis of belief, but as you and others have brought up, it’s actually a crisis of catechesis. We can’t follow what we don’t know. Although, sometimes it seems like it better not to know. I’m not advocating that, but the lukewarm cultural Catholic who never does any reading or research on their own are sort of indemnified against the bad consequences, you know?

 

[JamesCaruso]

Thanks You Annabelle Marie and Elizabeth for your responses.

Yes, It is confusing. As I said previously, when I read that a woman died from complications during a late-abortion, I was not surprised at all that she was Catholic. It just figures, you know?

We have a crisis of belief, but as you and others have brought up, it’s actually a crisis of catechesis. We can’t follow what we don’t know. Although, sometimes it seems like it better not to know. I’m not advocating that, but the lukewarm cultural Catholic who never does any reading or research on their own are sort of indemnified against the bad consequences, you know?

But how can a person who unknowingly goes against God’s Will in their life be better off than a person who knows God’s Will and complies with it? It’s a worldly view that what is easier is therefore better, but far better off is the person who knows every moral requirement of God’s Will and happily obeys. The Cross turns the world upside down so that what the world shuns, the Christian embraces, as gift, not as sorrow. For example, a Christian can understand celibacy as gift, but to the world this is absurd.

No one is indemnified against all the bad consequences of going against God’s Will, since they (1) fail to gain the extra graces of doing God’s Will, which they do not know, and (2) since going against God’s Will, even unknowingly, can bring bad things into one’s life and the lives of others who may be involved. So for example, a woman has an abortion believing it to be okay to do so in God’s eyes. She may still suffer the trauma and psychological ramifications of such an act, and those around her, for example, her husband, may also be deeply affected by the act, not to mention, an innocent, unborn child will never come into the world to fulfill whatever destiny God had otherwise planned for him. In this last respect, millions can be affected by an unknowing act against the Will of God.

 

[Cojuanco]

But, as it has been repeated numerous times, the woman was dead, so why not disregard sending that warning to others?

Honestly, part of me gets the idea that we disregard the rule since she was dead already. However, it also makes the warning of automatic excommmunication unclear and confusing to others. If the priest can always choose to override it, people think, “how serious can it really be”?. Where do we draw the line? Let’s say someone was excommunicated years ago and dies. Do we always give that person a Funeral Mass despite the fact that the person had years to repent and return to the Church? Are Funeral Masses the only way to pray for this person’s soul? I know Paul and NEP have talked about this a little bit, but they seem to have left the conversation. I am still questioning how we balance this.

So, when a politician such as Ted Kennedy promotes abortion for YEARS and then is given a Funeral Mass, what message does that send? If he repented, why wasn’t he (as a public figure) made to make it public as canon law also requires? If he didn’t, why couldn’t Church leaders have said something along the lines of “unfortunately we are unable to give Senator Kennedy a Funeral Mass due to his unwavering support of abortion which automatically excommunicated him from the life of the Church. However, we will pray for his soul”? That would show mercy, but it would also still send the message of the seriousness of supporting abortion until the day you die.

One possibility is that EMK made amends at the last. He did receive the Last Rites, after all. Obviously Father would not have been able to publicize the Senator’s repentance, due to the Seal of the Confessional.

Also, merely supporting abortion legislation is not an excommunicable offense in Canon Law. In order to be excommunicated you have to either procure or perform the act, or directly facilitate such an act, i.e. directly paying for the specific act, or driving there with intent of allowing them to procure an abortion. Now is it a sin? Most likely. But not all mortal sins warrant excommunication. Think it should be changed? That’s up for the next Pope to decide.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Thanks You Annabelle Marie and Elizabeth for your responses.

Yes, It is confusing. As I said previously, when I read that a woman died from complications during a late-abortion, I was not surprised at all that she was Catholic. It just figures, you know?

We have a crisis of belief, but as you and others have brought up, it’s actually a crisis of catechesis. We can’t follow what we don’t know. Although, sometimes it seems like it better not to know. I’m not advocating that, but the lukewarm cultural Catholic who never does any reading or research on their own are sort of indemnified against the bad consequences, you know?

“the lukewarm I will spit out of my mouth”

It may seem like that in this life…that they are indemnified against the bad consequences…but not necessarily…both in what they are missing in this life. I myself wish I had come back to the church years ago…but I can’t change that…but I missed out. And in the next life. Certainly there will be a penalty to pay…even with confession. My contraception was not a mortal sin as I did not know better…but what children would I have had? What blessing might be in my life that is not? Who might the world have known that is not here? Those are things that will have to be as they are. It certainly is a lack of catechesis…and we are seeing it all catch up now…IMHO. Certainly it is much easier now with the internet to find some of these things out and to search for answers…much easier then it was before. For me, I was a child…who ended up in protective custody from my mom…I was just struggling to survive…and to hang onto God as best I could…and I think God knows my heart on that. What can I do about the contraception now? Nothing…but it does free up time for my husband and I to volunteer at the Church that other people can not do that have kids. So He can turn things into blessings…regardless of our circumstances.

 

[Pepband_Mom]

Well, in a Church that is anti-abortion but gives a funeral Mass to a woman who dies while having an abortion, I guess there is really no reason to enforce any other rules.

Remember the parable of the vineyard owner who hired people in the morning, at noon, in the afternoon, and in the evening, and then paid them all the same? The people who had been working in the hot sun all day were not happy. Well, those of us who have been toiling in the hot sun all day really try to understand this parable, but it is hard.

The Church has never judged anyone to be in hell. If the woman repented as she was fading out, she may be saved as God’s MERCY knows no boundaries. The right thing is to bury the dead (a corporal work of mercy) and have a Mass for her - this poor soul obviously made a horrible mistake. After all, the Church believes in MERCY, that’s the reason why it exists, why Jesus left the Church for us!

 

[PaulinVA]

The Church has never judged anyone to be in hell. If the woman repented as she was fading out, she may be saved as God’s MERCY knows no boundaries. The right thing is to bury the dead (a corporal work of mercy) and have a Mass for her - this poor soul obviously made a horrible mistake. After all, the Church believes in MERCY, that’s the reason why it exists, why Jesus left the Church for us!

No, but the Church does say that procuring an abortion incurs automatic excommunication. That makes one ineligible for public prayers by the Church and ineligible for Catholic burial. So, the question is whether *mercy *overrules the law.

A secondary point - can one really repent of a sin that causes their death? I am dying from procuring an abortion, I’m sorry I had the abortion. What am I sorry for - going against God’s law or my resulting death?

 

[Lucky7]

The Church has never judged anyone to be in hell. If the woman repented as she was fading out, she may be saved as God’s MERCY knows no boundaries. The right thing is to bury the dead (a corporal work of mercy) and have a Mass for her - this poor soul obviously made a horrible mistake. After all, the Church believes in MERCY, that’s the reason why it exists, why Jesus left the Church for us!

Is that the only reason why He left the Church for us?

 

[Lucky7]

One possibility is that EMK made amends at the last. He did receive the Last Rites, after all. Obviously Father would not have been able to publicize the Senator’s repentance, due to the Seal of the Confessional.

Also, merely supporting abortion legislation is not an excommunicable offense in Canon Law. In order to be excommunicated you have to either procure or perform the act, or directly facilitate such an act, i.e. directly paying for the specific act, or driving there with intent of allowing them to procure an abortion. Now is it a sin? Most likely. But not all mortal sins warrant excommunication. Think it should be changed? That’s up for the next Pope to decide.

(1) I am not referring to the priest publicizing a confession. I’m talking about a publilc confession by the politician himself (required by canon law).

(2) This bishop disagrees with you:

lifesitenews.com/news/archive//ldn/2009/nov/09111308

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

(1) I am not referring to the priest publicizing a confession. I’m talking about a publilc confession by the politician himself (required by canon law).

(2) This bishop disagrees with you:

lifesitenews.com/news/archive//ldn/2009/nov/09111308

Either Canon Law applies or it doesn’t. This seems to be out of both sides…i.e…in one instance people argue Canon Law applies and the women who had the abortion and died should be excommunication. But in the instance…it appears that we want to go off one Bishops thoughts…on something that is not in his diocese. You can’t have it both ways in the arguement.

Fact of the matter is…voting for abortion “rights” does not automatically excomunicate with current Canon Law…therefore it would make Senator’s Kennedy “public” confession irrelavent.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

No, but the Church does say that procuring an abortion incurs automatic excommunication. That makes one ineligible for public prayers by the Church and ineligible for Catholic burial. So, the question is whether *mercy *overrules the law.

A secondary point - can one really repent of a sin that causes their death? I am dying from procuring an abortion, I’m sorry I had the abortion. What am I sorry for - going against God’s law or my resulting death?

no…actually its says a completed abortion excommunicates. Was it completed when she died? Did she receive last rites before she died? Maybe she confessed it? Do we know? No…so we leave it up to the priest to decide…which is in his purview.

 

[allhers]

Late term abortions are not performed anywhere except where the mother’s life is in imminent danger.

It is certainly not a form of birth control.

…and what have you been smokin?

 

[Lucky7]

Either Canon Law applies or it doesn’t. This seems to be out of both sides…i.e…in one instance people argue Canon Law applies and the women who had the abortion and died should be excommunication. But in the instance…it appears that we want to go off one Bishops thoughts…on something that is not in his diocese. You can’t have it both ways in the arguement.

Fact of the matter is…voting for abortion “rights” does not automatically excomunicate with current Canon Law…therefore it would make Senator’s Kennedy “public” confession irrelavent.

Talk about irrelevant. This is a bishop speaking on how this canon applies…and he applies it to politicians who support legalizing abortion. I can’t think of a better way to directly support massive numbers of abortion than voting to legalize it. Now if you can come up with a Church leader who supports your view then by all means post it. But don’t disregard this Bishop simply because he is from some other diocese/Spain.

And I just don’t get why this Bishop’s view somehow is the opposite/irrelevant when talking about the woman who had an abortion. He wasn’t referring to women having an abortion. The Canon law obviously includes those who actually procure an abortion.

I get how you feel about her. I get really do get it. I get the mercy part. However, she had an abortion. Your feelings for her are getting in the way of that fact…and that act automatically excommunicated her whether we like it or not.

No one said she does not need our prayer. No one wishes to condemn her to Hell. My issue is that every time the Church goes against its own laws (and the public hears about it) it causes, at the very least, confusion. If the laws can be broken, then why do we have them? And if the Church breaks its own laws what message does that give to the Catholics who seem to think they can break the Church rules they think don’t apply?

 

[JamesCaruso]

Talk about irrelevant. This is a bishop speaking on how this canon applies…and he applies it to politicians who support legalizing abortion. I can’t think of a better way to directly support massive numbers of abortion than voting to legalize it. Now if you can come up with a Church leader who supports your view then by all means post it. But don’t disregard this Bishop simply because he is from some other diocese/Spain.

And I just don’t get why this Bishop’s view somehow is the opposite/irrelevant when talking about the woman who had an abortion. He wasn’t referring to women having an abortion. The Canon law obviously includes those who actually procure an abortion.

I get how you feel about her. I get really do get it. I get the mercy part. However, she had an abortion. Your feelings for her are getting in the way of that fact…and that act automatically excommunicated her whether we like it or not.

No one said she does not need our prayer. No one wishes to condemn her to Hell. My issue is that every time the Church goes against its own laws (and the public hears about it) it causes, at the very least, confusion. If the laws can be broken, then why do we have them? And if the Church breaks its own laws what message does that give to the Catholics who seem to think they can break the Church rules they think don’t apply?

The following is entirely opinion and I do not pretend it to be Church policy.

LIke anything else, the law applies “all things being equal,” that is to say, the woman was fully aware of the gravity of her sin and fully exercising her free will in going through with it. I say this because I do not believe the Church wishes to excommunicate members for things that are not even grave sins from the person’s perspective. I used the language I used because it is the language used to describe mortal sin. If a person could be excommunicated for committing a venial sin, Oh, what a mess we would have! This is my take on it anyway. There is always some assumptions implicit in the making of any law. Not going to Mass on Sunday is a mortal sin, but if you’re sick, forget, or are in a place where there is no Mass, well, that’s a different story. The Church is not a monster, even if we want to make her out to be one. She is our Mother and she does things in our best interest, not in the interest of exacting disproportionate punishments for noncompliance with its rules.

And being a good Mother, there is also the possibility that the Church would carry through with an excommunication of a person having an abortion even though the person did not think it to be a sin. This might be so as to not scandalize the faithful, not appear indifferent to serious departures from Church teaching and tolerant of deliberate misbehavior in matters of extreme gravity. In this case, the excommunication would be both for the purpose of instructing the faithful, and for the one being excommunicated, to instruct them as to the seriousness of their action and the need to reevaluate what it is that the Church is forbidding them to do, to discover its wrongness, and to repent of it. I don’t see this as double talk. I think you have to put yourself in the position of a Mother doing what is best for their misbehaving child and all her other children, as well. In this case, excommunication would not carry with it the penalty of hell for the unrepentant (i.e., no mortal sin), and so it would also allow for a Catholic burial.

 

[JamesCaruso]

And how could I leave out the most important thing of all. Mother Church as to do whatever is in her power to protect the innocent life of the unborn, the weakest and most defenseless of her children. Put yourself in the position of the Church-- what would you do to stress the seriousness of this life and death matter. It is so easy to forget the innocent unborn victim, just as I did in commenting on this issue above. The unborn child is unseen, they have no voice, no personality, no loving ways, no twinkle in their eye that we can observe. We cannot cuddle them, we cannot entertain them, we cannot rock them to sleep in our arms. But they are every bit as much a child of God as the one we can. The Church has done the right thing in invoking automatic excommunication on those who abort one of these unborn, precious little ones. But all the reasoning above still applies.

 

[Carolus_Martell]

While that response may be OK for Joe jerk the ragman, it is unbecoming for an ordained Cardinal, a possible vicar of Christ. He should shut his pie hole and observe that edict of silence.