Fr. Pavone resigns from Trump campaign roles

[F_Marturana]

I’ve never gone to a funeral or wake with the deceased draped over the altar naked.

That’s what was done to the baby.

My parish periodically has funerals for abandoned babies. They are given a name and a funeral mass with casket.

That’s how you bury the dead.

 

[pnewton]

The Church and the Holy See have declared the seriousness of the abortion issue many times, they have called it something like the preeminent problem of our time. The Pope speaks on abortion I would say a few times about every year,

That is not the point, the exception or what Father Pavone did. He could preach about this all he wanted without a problem. What he did was help a presidential campaign and specifically speak against a political party as a group. The only person who can decide this (not anti-abortion activities in general) is acceptable is a bishop

Abortion and Trump cannot be equated, at least by a priest. It would take a bishop to equate the two to the point a priest can campaign for a presidential candidate.

 

[Victoria33]

Father Pavon asked if he should remain with that committee of what?? Advisory committee or something. 36 Catholics or so and I guess they asked him to step down.

A true Crusader for the sanctity of life.

 

[carmelitequotes]

I will say that he has made a good case for having his non-profit, tax-exempt status removed, should that pursued in the future.

@Tis_Bearself I just reacquainted myself with the Johnson Amendment, that historic amendment introduced on July 2, 1954 by then-Senator Lyndon Baines Johnson of Texas.

We’ve all heard of 501c(3) non-profit organizations. I’ve worked for non-profits for nearly all of my adult life, either full-time or part-time, so the Johnson Amendment is old hat to me, but I never researched its history.

Here are excerpts from what the IRS website has to say:

Organizations described in section 501c(3) are commonly referred to as charitable organizations . Organizations described in section 501c(3), other than testing for public safety organizations, are eligible to receive tax-deductible contributions in accordance with Code section 170. […] Section 501c(3) organizations are restricted in how much political and legislative ( lobbying ) activities they may conduct. For a detailed discussion, see Political and Lobbying Activities. For more information about lobbying activities by charities, see the article Lobbying Issues; for more information about political activities of charities, see the FY-2002 CPE topic Election Year Issues.

When Senator Lyndon Baines Johnson introduced his famous amendment on Thursday, July 2 (they worked right up to the last minute before going on recess that year!), he said:

[T]his amendment seeks to extend the provisions of section 501 of the House bill, denying tax-exempt status to not only those people who influence legislation but also to those who intervene in any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for any public office. I have discussed the matter with the chairman of the committee, the minority ranking member of the committee, and several other members of the committee, and I understand that the amendment is acceptable to them. I hope the chairman will take it to conference and that it will be included in the final bill which Congress passes.

The committee chair, Senator Millikin stated that he was willing to take the amendment to conference, and the Senate agreed to LBJ’s amendment.

Since 1954, the US tax code has included a restriction against lobbying.

 

[Victoria33]

That is not the point, the exception or what Father Pavone did. He could preach about this all he wanted without a problem. What he did was help a presidential campaign and specifically speak against a political party as a group. The only person who can decide this (not anti-abortion activities in general) is acceptable is a bishop

Abortion and Trump cannot be equated, at least by a priest. It would take a bishop to equate the two to the point a priest can campaign for a presidential candidate.

You will need an exact citation for this. You have not provided one.

 

[Victoria33]

I’ve never gone to a funeral or wake with the deceased draped over the altar naked.

That’s what was done to the baby.

My parish periodically has funerals for abandoned babies. They are given a name and a funeral mass with casket.

That’s how you bury the dead.

I asked yesterday, can you please provide your information that the baby was not given a proper burial?

The Church investigated and did not deal out any discipline from what I know.

Do you deny that Christ was crucified naked by some accounts? And we as Catholics celebrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass?

 

[pnewton]

You will need an exact citation for this. You have not provided one.

I have provided the exact citation, the canon law. Seems cut and dry. I will leave this to his bishop to correct him again if he sees the need. He is the “competent ecclesial authority” after all. Most people who supervise others have those that take more time and effort.

Worse case scenario for Fr. Pavone, if he did something things contrary to canon law, used the corpse of a baby as a prop, or anything else, and it is “wrong”, I like to remind myself that the only people who never do anything wrong are those who never do anything at all. I may not agree with him on the best way to change or culture, but but golly, he is busting a gut doing what he can to fight abortion. That alone should earn him respect even with criticism.

 

[Victoria33]

The story goes that Father Pavone asked permission to stay on the Catholic committee. He was not given that permission and dutifully resigned.

Until there is an exact hearing on a violation of Canon law though., I pass on judgement.

Those laws are written in the Vatican and quotations have been posted that the interpretation of the laws vary by country. South America is used as an example above, so, no, I Don’t think it is cut and dry.

Yes, Priests are obedient to the Bishop and Pope. Sometimes, one may hear of a Bishop reining in a Priest over something. It is often, no big deal.

 

[Victoria33]

Canon law states a Priest not to be active in a political party.

Check, however, I would have to learn more about the said commitee. Merely being on the board of say, a physical fitness counsel for example, might not be enough to say that one is being active in a party. The Presudent’s council on Physical Fitness has been in the US for decades.

 

[puer.dei]

however, I would have to learn more about the said commitee. Merely being on the board of say, a physical fitness counsel for example, might not be enough to say that one is being active in a party. The Presudent’s council on Physical Fitness has been in the US for decades.

The article clearly describes the committees Fr. Pavone was on. Serving on re-election committees for political candidate is certainly “enough to say that one is being active in a party,” and bears no resemblance to being on the President’s Council on Physical Fitness.

 

[Victoria33]

I think some people just may not like Trump, it may be their own views. They may not like his immigration views but that is another topic. It seems some will go against Trump in any case.

I am only concerned with the life issue.

You have 800,000-900,000 abortions a year. We have laws that are so lax, we are among a foursome with Canada, North Korea and China.

We have one party that has supported to the hilt, Planned Parenthood.

Who in turn, have their clinics overwhelmingly, 80% or more in minority neighborhoods or within walking distance.

Planned Parenthood, who in turn, was founded by Margaret Sanger, said to be a white supremacist herself with racist writings and it is said her eugenics writings were taken up by the Third Reich.

And the Democrats support this??

And half of African American babies are aborted but the Democrats have abortion law in their platform, on demand?

Oh, yeah, let’s not make it political.

 

[billsherman]

Sadly I don’t think we’re going to get an answer to this very simple and important question.

Have you ever before encountered a priest (or deacon) who declines to identify the diocese in which he is incardinated? I certainly haven’t.

 

[Victoria33]

Father Pavone asked for permission to stay on this committee which I would like to know more about.

Thus, one would have to be in good standing to ask this and get a response it would seem to me.

Could a Church be targeted by extremists if they knew they were supporting Father Pavone? It seems possible.

We should have free speech in America without fearing repercussions. I mean, you stay something, you should owe up to it but it should never be a matter of retaliation in the form of harassment, vandalism and so on.

Did one think of that??

 

[puer.dei]

Father Pavone asked for permission to say on this committee which I would like to know more about.

You keep repeating that you’d “like to know more about” them, although both committees are named in the article. With the committee names, anyone interested can easily find them on the internet.

 

[billsherman]

Could a Church be targeted by extremists if they knew they were supporting Father Pavone?

The reason I, and others, would like to know in which diocese he is incardinated is because we would like to know for CERTAIN if he is or is not a priest in good standing. The ONLY way to do that is to ask his diocese. If he refuses to say which diocese - which he currently does - there is NO way to know his status.

Catholics, I believe, have a right to know if priests are in good standing or not. Currently with Fr. Pavone, this information is concealed. I can’t think of a good reason for this, nor am I aware of any priest who refuses to disclose this information - even other controversial priests (think Fr. Z, Fr. Martin, etc.).

 

[TMC]

Catholics, I believe, have a right to know if priests are in good standing or not.

I think that the refusal to answer the question supplies the answer.

 

[Feanor2]

Victoria33:

Could a Church be targeted by extremists if they knew they were supporting Father Pavone?

The reason I, and others, would like to know in which diocese he is incardinated is because we would like to know for CERTAIN if he is or is not a priest in good standing. The ONLY way to do that is to ask his diocese. If he refuses to say which diocese - which he currently does - there is NO way to know his status.

Catholics, I believe, have a right to know if priests are in good standing or not. Currently with Fr. Pavone, this information is concealed. I can’t think of a good reason for this, nor am I aware of any priest who refuses to disclose this information - even other controversial priests (think Fr. Z, Fr. Martin, etc.).

Yes, why the secrecy?

 

[AlNg]

People supporting the right to abortions does offend me however.

Does it offend you when elected officials or appointed administrators support the right to torture? Is it not true that the Catholic Church teaches that torture is an intrinsic evil ? From the news reports it appears that the current president and at least one of his appointees, Gina Haspel, support the use of torture. It looks to me like both Democrats and Republicans have supported torture. And of course, Democrats are almost solidly pro abortion rights. So i don’t know how to vote since in either case, if i vote Republican or Democrat I am supporting intrinsic evil.

 

[Dr_Meinheimer]

It is a tough call…

So, I did a comparison and I used data from 2016 as an example, since wiki is handy. There were 652k deaths from abortion confirmed in 2016 in the US. There were zero confirmed deaths from torture.

Makes my decision a little easier.

 

[AlNg]

Makes my decision a little easier.

Now what should be done about the 651k women who contracted a doctor to murder their unborn children in 2016 ?
A slap on the wrist with a talk : Please don’t murder any more of your children?
Take away her driver’s license for a month or so.
A large fine: $25,000.
Time in jail: 1 year in jail.
Community service: 120 days of community service for murdering her child.
Life in prison with or without hard labor?
Solitary confinement ?
Death by hanging or some other method.
Or nothing - don’t do anything at all. Don’t even talk about it or mention the names of the women who contracted to murder their unborn child?

Anyway according to church teaching torture is intrinsically evil, No? So I personally am not inclined to support it. I think that there is at least one Senator or other politician who refuses to accept torture. I might write in his name.
With torture, it is a government employee who is ordered to carry it out. It is a government job.
With abortion, the government is not ordering the mother to murder her child. Isn’t the government just saying that if you abort your child, then we won’t punish you or the doctor who you contracted.
The government does not force women to abort their children, No?
The government does force torture on some unlucky people. i read that sometimes mistakes were made and the wrong person was tortured.