But the Bishops are the leaders and teachers of dogma. When their moral credibility is damaged, then their ability to teach is weakened.They might, but one must remember the difference between holding to a dogma vs. hypocrisy in committing scandal. Priests and bishops are not perfect in their actions but the dogmas of the Church cannot be ignored without fault.
Where did I say this?Unfortunately, not all induced labors are done for the purpose of killing the child
Are you saying all induced labor should be done for the purpose of killing the child? I don’t understand.
But at no time, at least as far as I know, has a Catholic pro-choice politician, been specifically told not to receive communion.The stance of the Catholic Church has always been pro-life, anti-abortion. The Pope has stated this, more than one Pope, more than only one time. If our “intelligent” representatives can’t hear, or read, about this AND understand, they have no right to be in office.
QuoteBut at no time, at least as far as I know, has a Catholic pro-choice politician, been specifically told not to receive communion.
In no way, should an EMHC make the decision on their own, to deny a person Holy Communion. Its not their place.
Jim
Chaput isn’t his Bishop, so the suggestion is out of place.Quote
Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver has said that B**** should refrain from Communion.
Catholicnewsagency.com
Aug 25, 2008/02/24 pm
Matters concerning the Eucharist are of overriding concern to every bishop.Chaput isn’t his Bishop, so the suggestion is out of place.
A follow-up to posting 128 and those who took issue with it.
2. "Whatever you bind on earth is bound in heaven". I guess I have to reject the notion that priests can serve as minigods, deciding who is just and unjust, sinful or not. Here the 12 disciples were being addressed. Too many priests in our time don't have the right to tie the shoelaces of the original group of followers of Christ. I leave the question of whose communion is valid up to God. I recall Catholic Nazis who attended mass regularly and no one turned them away from the Eucharist.
4. War is not on the same level as abortion? That is debatable. I only know that many of the same people who sharply condemn abortion (justly, by the way) also are ready to shout "Bomb Iran!" at this stage of history. It seems to me that Christ said that peacemakers are blessed and strongly condemned killing in his Sermon on the Mount. Why do so many Christians get so pious when it comes to abortion but applaud "shock and awe" which slaughters so many innocents. At least we have the promise that babies who are aborted automatically go to heaven.
5. True, a doctor should try to save both mother and baby, but when s/he is put in the difficult position of having to choose, a mother who will leave behind a loving husband and seven young children surely should be given preference. Any other choice borders on insanity or the twisted perversion of the Christian faith.
9. Of course abortions should be rare, and, if possible, zero. To condemn abortion and then condemn artificial birth control as well, however, is irresponsible. Family planning is especially important in poorer countries where so many little ones die because of hunger and other scourges. Only one or two methods of birth control could be interpreted as akin to abortion. But what about all the other ones? Why is the Church so blind on this issue that has so weakened the commitment of responsible married Catholics who choose to limit their families in these times of high prices and $30,000-a-year college costs?
Some of you are slavish when it comes to pronouncements of the church. This infallibility thing is carried too far. Look at how Pius IX, for example, firmly condemned democracy and church-state separation ("Syllabus of Errors"), only to have Vatican II come along and take an opposite position. The Church can change, and informed, intelligent Catholics should work toward that goal when change is for the benefit of humanity.This slavish, unintelligent Catholic will place you in her prayers.SOME RESPONSES IN SELF-DEFENSE
A follow-up to posting 128 and those who took issue with it.
Some of you are slavish when it comes to pronouncements of the church. This infallibility thing is carried too far. Look at how Pius IX, for example, firmly condemned democracy and church-state separation (“Syllabus of Errors”), only to have Vatican II come along and take an opposite position. The Church can change, and informed, intelligent Catholics should work toward that goal when change is for the benefit of humanity.
- “Whatever you bind on earth is bound in heaven”. I guess I have to reject the notion that priests can serve as minigods, deciding who is just and unjust, sinful or not. Here the 12 disciples were being addressed. Too many priests in our time don’t have the right to tie the shoelaces of the original group of followers of Christ. I leave the question of whose communion is valid up to God. I recall Catholic Nazis who attended mass regularly and no one turned them away from the Eucharist.
- War is not on the same level as abortion? That is debatable. I only know that many of the same people who sharply condemn abortion (justly, by the way) also are ready to shout “Bomb Iran!” at this stage of history. It seems to me that Christ said that peacemakers are blessed and strongly condemned killing in his Sermon on the Mount. Why do so many Christians get so pious when it comes to abortion but applaud “shock and awe” which slaughters so many innocents. At least we have the promise that babies who are aborted automatically go to heaven.
- True, a doctor should try to save both mother and baby, but when s/he is put in the difficult position of having to choose, a mother who will leave behind a loving husband and seven young children surely should be given preference. Any other choice borders on insanity or the twisted perversion of the Christian faith.
- Of course abortions should be rare, and, if possible, zero. To condemn abortion and then condemn artificial birth control as well, however, is irresponsible. Family planning is especially important in poorer countries where so many little ones die because of hunger and other scourges. Only one or two methods of birth control could be interpreted as akin to abortion. But what about all the other ones? Why is the Church so blind on this issue that has so weakened the commitment of responsible married Catholics who choose to limit their families in these times of high prices and $30,000-a-year college costs? Sorry don’t worship at the money god of secularism.
*"There is no responsibility of the Church’s shepherds which is greater than that of teaching the truth about the Holy Eucharist, celebrating worthily the Holy Eucharist, and directing the flock in the worship and care of the Most Blessed Sacrament. Can. 915 of the Code of Canon Law and can. 712 of the **Code of Canons of the Eastern *Churches articulate an essential element of the shepherds’ responsibility, namely, the perennial discipline of the Church by which the minister of Holy Communion is to deny the Sacrament to those who obstinately persevere in manifest grave sin."I leave the question of whose communion is valid up to God.
Of course thats not what I meant and I think you’re stretching to come up with that definition, from what I posted.
Jim
Exactly, not untill recently has the Church taken a stand against pro-choice politicians. Just because it had never happened doesn’t mean to ignore the problem was the right thing to do.But at no time, at least as far as I know, has a Catholic pro-choice politician, been specifically told not to receive communion.
In no way, should an EMHC make the decision on their own, to deny a person Holy Communion. Its not their place.
Jim
Whose place is it?But at no time, at least as far as I know, has a Catholic pro-choice politician, been specifically told not to receive communion.
In no way, should an EMHC make the decision on their own, to deny a person Holy Communion. Its not their place.
Jim
To the responsibility of the local Bishop of the particular politician, to deal with it. A bishop across country can not deny communion to a Catholic in another dioceses.Matters concerning the Eucharist are of overriding concern to every bishop.
"There is no responsibility of the Church’s shepherds which is greater than that of teaching the truth about the Holy Eucharist, celebrating worthily the Holy Eucharist, and directing the flock in the worship and care of the Most Blessed Sacrament. Can. 915 of the Code of Canon Law and can. 712 of the **Code of Canons of the Eastern **Churches articulate an essential element of the shepherds’ responsibility, namely, the perennial discipline of the Church by which the minister of Holy Communion is to deny the Sacrament to those who obstinately persevere in manifest grave sin."
Archbishop Raymond Burke, 2007
Ender
The local Bishop.Whose place is it?
You replace God’s dogmas with your own. Why are you the authority?SOME RESPONSES IN SELF-DEFENSE
Code:A follow-up to posting 128 and those who took issue with it.Some of you are slavish when it comes to pronouncements of the church. This infallibility thing is carried too far. Look at how Pius IX, for example, firmly condemned democracy and church-state separation (“Syllabus of Errors”), only to have Vatican II come along and take an opposite position. The Church can change, and informed, intelligent Catholics should work toward that goal when change is for the benefit of humanity.
- “Whatever you bind on earth is bound in heaven”. I guess I have to reject the notion that priests can serve as minigods, deciding who is just and unjust, sinful or not. Here the 12 disciples were being addressed. Too many priests in our time don’t have the right to tie the shoelaces of the original group of followers of Christ. I leave the question of whose communion is valid up to God. I recall Catholic Nazis who attended mass regularly and no one turned them away from the Eucharist.
- War is not on the same level as abortion? That is debatable. I only know that many of the same people who sharply condemn abortion (justly, by the way) also are ready to shout “Bomb Iran!” at this stage of history. It seems to me that Christ said that peacemakers are blessed and strongly condemned killing in his Sermon on the Mount. Why do so many Christians get so pious when it comes to abortion but applaud “shock and awe” which slaughters so many innocents. At least we have the promise that babies who are aborted automatically go to heaven.
- True, a doctor should try to save both mother and baby, but when s/he is put in the difficult position of having to choose, a mother who will leave behind a loving husband and seven young children surely should be given preference. Any other choice borders on insanity or the twisted perversion of the Christian faith.
- Of course abortions should be rare, and, if possible, zero. To condemn abortion and then condemn artificial birth control as well, however, is irresponsible. Family planning is especially important in poorer countries where so many little ones die because of hunger and other scourges. Only one or two methods of birth control could be interpreted as akin to abortion. But what about all the other ones? Why is the Church so blind on this issue that has so weakened the commitment of responsible married Catholics who choose to limit their families in these times of high prices and $30,000-a-year college costs?
A lot goes on behind the scenes that none of us may know. Since the title of this thread is about a certain Prelate in the Vatican who is above the Diocesan Bishop, the answer is clear now. Like I said earlier, watch the fur fly now!!The local Bishop.
In fact, the local Bishop should meet with the politician, to get all the facts, before banning them from Holy Communion.
That has not happened, as far as I know.
BTW, I think its important, that when you see what is called anti-abortion legislation, to read the bill, and see if it targets specific kinds of abortion, or is it written so vaguely, that it would include induced labor, done out of medical necessity.
I think you will see that many in the GOP, are playing games with this issue, and do not have any intention of putting the government in the way of abortion. In fact, some Republicans who have voted in favor of anti-abortion bills, which never passed, have also made public statements, that they would never vote to have Roe V Wade overturned. It seems that they voted for the legislation, out of political expediency, knowing it would not pass anyway. These people are not as pro-life as you liked to believe they are.
Jim
I presume any initial meetings between bishop/pastor and congregant/penitent would take place in private, so we may very well never know.The local Bishop.
In fact, the local Bishop should meet with the politician, to get all the facts, before banning them from Holy Communion.
That has not happened, as far as I know.
Jim
You second statement is contradicted by the new prefect of the Apostolic Signatura (basically the Supreme Court of canon law.)To the responsibility of the local Bishop of the particular politician, to deal with it. A bishop across country can not deny communion to a Catholic in another dioceses.