Florence pastor refuses to give communion to Presidential Hopeful Joe Biden

  • Thread starter Thread starter _Abyssinia
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ok. What about Catholics who publically support the death penalty? Or are publically against immigration? Or are living in a non-marital relationship?

I don’t disagree, per se, with what the priest did. I just think that if we are going to publically deny one sinner, we should be doing it to all.
The priest did what he is required to do, neither more nor less. Canon 915 states that those “obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion.”

That’s not phrased as a suggestion. The key characteristics are “obstinate perseverance” in “grave sin” that is “manifest”, all of which applies to Biden. He wasn’t denied communion because he is a sinner; as you said, that would be to deny us all. He was denied because his actions satisfy the criteria laid out by canon law.
 
Do they, though?

I know a few Canon lawyers and they are completely split on this issue.

Again, I am not saying I disagree, I am just saying that this sets a very dangerous precedent by making this whole thing a public spectacle.
 
Well, obviously those things are not always sinful. It has been a great success of the progressives to equate these things with abortion. I am against current “immigration” And some countries throughout history can and have been against virtually any immigrations at all. Inclusing a certain city state I know of. I am against open borderes. This is not anywhere equal to the public scandal and horror of abortion. Can an anti immigration stance be sinful? Sure, when coupled with racism or an us vs them mentality. With the non marital relationship again, what is public should be public. If people are professing thier sexual sins publically and advocating that for others then publically the Church should respond.

There’s politics, theres privacy and then there is advocating for the murder of babies as a platform to recieve millions of enough votes to be elected president. Not exactly the same as my aunt suzie who is misled and thinks a pink hat is cute and PP provides important health services.
 
Last edited:
I do believe that Pope Francis has said that the death penalty is off the table.
I also thought that the use of ABC was intrinsically evil for a Catholic.
And as far as living together outside the bonds of marriage, that is also a very public sin. Does anyone know of anyone who has been publicly denied Communion because of that?

Also, even my Canon lawyer friends are split on this issue. Is supporting laws that the people who elected you support the same thing as being a party to procuring an abortion? What about those Catholic politicians who supported same-sex marriage? Were any of them refused Communion? How is supporting that not being an “obstinate, manifest, sinner”?
 
I know a few Canon lawyers and they are completely split on this issue.
Lawyers may be split on whether it is wise to apply the canon, but it seems impossible for there to be any disagreement on whether Biden’s (et al) behavior satisfies the criteria.
Again, I am not saying I disagree, I am just saying that this sets a very dangerous precedent by making this whole thing a public spectacle.
The reason for this canon is precisely the danger to the church of the scandal involved in offering communion to those who publicly support grave sin. It is a public spectacle only because Biden presented himself for communion when he should have known better, and for that we can thank all the bishops who have had the opportunity to do what this parish priest did, and decided instead to walk away from their obligation.
 
Im not debating this here on this thread. If you think Biden’s theological rights were violated because he presented himself for communion in an unworthy manner and was denied so be it. Anything else has nothing to do with the issue.
 
There are also letters and statements from Pope Benedict and CDF over the years that support the priest’s action and his interpretation of Canon 915. Some would probably argue that things have changed since then and that Pope Francis would favor a different approach, and while that might not be an inaccurate supposition, he’s never bothered to change the law, so it remains in effect.

There is no doubt that there are many bishops out there that are allergic to Canon 915, but their unwillingness to carry out the law of the Church doesn’t affect the validity of the decision here of the priest to carry out his obligation to refuse communion to someone who meets the criteria. If this priest had been in a different diocese, he might have been shipped off to a mental institution by now. Fortunately, this priest’s bishop, seems to be supportive of him, at least for now, given that he hasn’t made any public statement against the priest’s action.
 
I think its almost guaranteed a staffer will call ahead next time and joe will be visiting a parish that will not enforce.
 
Nice that he seems to take it so seriously that he makes a joke out of it. A joke that stopped being funny about 1900 years ago when someone first said it.
 
Ok. What about Catholics who publically support the death penalty? Or are publically against immigration? Or are living in a non-marital relationship?

I don’t disagree, per se, with what the priest did. I just think that if we are going to publically deny one sinner, we should be doing it to all.
this has been spoken to…
“Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the -application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia” (WRHC 3). WRHC = Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion, General Principles
 
I don’t disagree, per se, with what the priest did. I just think that if we are going to publically deny one sinner, we should be doing it to all.
I would tend to agree.
However, the circumstances of this are exceedingly rare.
How often does someone that has an influence on abortion laws as well as public voice to influence so many present themselves.

If we are to do this to all, would we still see it happen this often?
I have my doubts.
 
Abortion isn’t the only grave issue though.
And in this case, Joe Biden is not getting or giving an abortion, he just supports pro abortion policy which is bad, but does not rise to the level of actually committing the act

People who violate marriage laws and use contraception are also guily of grave sin and scandal. When was the last time you saw someone in one of those sinful states publically denied the Eucharist?
 
Last edited:
Ok. What about Catholics who publically support the death penalty? Or are publically against immigration? Or are living in a non-marital relationship?

I don’t disagree, per se, with what the priest did. I just think that if we are going to publically deny one sinner, we should be doing it to all.
Not all people in non-marital relationships are sinning against chastity. Some older people “live together” and do not have illicit sexual relations — they may be physically unable to, or they may be cohabitating without benefit of marriage so as not to lose certain social benefits (tax advantages, pensions, Social Security, surviving spouse’s military insurance, etc.), or for mutual assistance. It is much easier for people of advanced age to live in “Josephite” situations. (There are exceptions.)

And it is entirely possible that a younger couple, who started out living together and fornicating, desire to repent and change their ways, but for reasons such as grave financial harm, care for one of the partners (one of them could be disabled and need the other one), or even having children together, could need to live in a “Josephite” situation. There are women who would be out on the streets with their small children if they didn’t have a partner to help them (whether the father or someone they met later). And so on.

People in these situations might be better off going to another parish where their marital status isn’t common knowledge, if they wish to receive the sacraments publicly. And of course they have to make the changes needed to minimize the possibility of succumbing to sexual temptation, where that temptation exists — separate bedrooms, modesty in dress, etc.
Abortion isn’t the only grave issue though.
And in this case, Joe Biden is not getting or giving an abortion, he just supports pro abortion policy which is bad, but does not rise to the level of actually committing the act

People who violate marriage laws and use contraception are also guily of grave sin and scandal. When was the last time you saw someone in one of those sinful states publically denied the Eucharist?
Unless it is a “Josephite” situation — and I would argue that the Josephite aspect of it needs to be disclosed by the partners if they are among people who know they aren’t “really married” — public adulterers (i.e., divorced and remarried couples with no annulment) most certainly should be denied communion.

Contraceptors aren’t generally known publicly — it can be suspected, but it is not the type of thing that can be known from outward circumstances. It’s a private sin by its nature. People who go around bragging “no more kids for me, I got fixed” — and I heard this time and again (in my former workplace) — are another story. I would hope people would never go around crowing like this at church.
 
Last edited:
I will vote for him. I disagree on abortion but I think Trump is truly dangerous and lawless
 
Last edited:
The politics of abortion has swallowed up everything else Catholic.
As a hypothetical, if Satan ran for president, he could run pro life, and capture the Catholic vote.
One issue! Then he can do his dirty work with Catholic support every other concievable way.
 
It’s mission territory haha
I don’t think the situation is as dire as what people normally think of when they hear the term “mission territory”. Florence is a modern, prosperous Southern city with a state university (Francis Marion) as well as not one, but two, parishes — St Anthony’s and St Ann’s, the latter a historically black parish that is now integrated. It is on Interstate 95 and even has daily Amtrak service (north and south) at reasonable daylight hours, something very few small towns in the US have anymore. They have a huge, highly regarded regional medical center. In short, it’s not a provincial backwater. I’ve traveled through there and even stayed overnight on two or three occasions, either passing through or sent there on business — two of the companies I worked for had operations there. Very pleasant and more cosmopolitan than you’d think.

And that was a very impressive article, obviously the reporter had a good grasp of the Catholic Faith and respect for it. Much secular reporting on Catholicism refers to our doctrines and perennial disciplines as “bans”, “policies”, and so on, as though they could be changed if only those ignorant old celibate codgers would get with the program.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top