Is Wuerl leaving for post in Rome?

[fix]

Some U.S. bishops had said that church law required that Catholic politicians who support abortion rights be refused communion. Bishop Wuerl was a leading advocate of the position that such politicians should abstain from communion, but that priests cannot pass instant judgment if they do come forward.

The synod’s proposition said that such politicians lacked “Eucharistic coherence” but “in applying this guidance, the bishops should exercise the virtues of courage and wisdom, bearing in mind actual local situations.”

Bishop Wuerl was the relator – secretary-consensus builder – for 30 English-speaking bishops from nations as far-flung as Hong Kong, Pakistan, Uganda and the Caribbean.

“In our small group … they did not see this as an issue,” he said of politicians.

Denial of communion "was not seen as the church’s traditional response to people who do not live out the faith in its entirety. What the synod fathers said looks very much like what our own conference of bishops said.post-gazette.com/pg/05306/599059.stm

As a member of the laity should I assume it is reasonable to be pro choice? By the standards I read here the Church does not take these matters very seriously.

What does not living out the faith in it’s entirety really mean? How much may I reject it publicly and embrace error before the bishops think it is really a bad idea?

 

[tee_eff_em]

fix:

Some U.S. bishops had said that church law required that Catholic politicians who support abortion rights be refused communion. Bishop Wuerl was a leading advocate of the position that such politicians should abstain from communion, but that priests cannot pass instant judgment if they do come forward.

It’s disappointing to see Bishop Wuerl’s stand described that way. I thought he made a very good point when he wrote:

While most people know that the Catholic Church opposes abortion, what the doctrinal note highlighted is the need to teach clearly and forcefully that for a politician to support pro-abortion legislation is also morally wrong. No one can defend legislation that attacks human life and the “very inviolability of human life”

Holding politicians accountable for living their convictions

Although I suppose it is more disappointing that the bishops still have not taught this clearly and forcefully.

:twocents:
tee

 

[fix]

I think the article described his position accurately? He will not refuse communion to manifest sinners; is that not what the article implies?

 

[tee_eff_em]

fix:

I think the article described his position accurately? He will not refuse communion to manifest sinners; is that not what the article implies?

I suppose it may have. As I’d added: I am more disappointed that our bishops, including Bishop Wuerl, have not followed up on what I felt was a very astute comment from the article I cited.

But I did not mean to hijack the thread.

In respect to your question, “How much may I reject it publicly and embrace error before the bishops think it is really a bad idea?” I feel it is laudable that the bishops show mercy when dealing with the results of the abysmal catechesis of recent years. But even while they are manifesting that mercy, I wish they would fix the catechesis.

I suppose it did not go bad overnight, but still pray that it may be corrected more quickly.

:twocents:
tee

 

[fix]

tee_eff_em:

I suppose it may have. As I’d added: I am more disappointed that our bishops, including Bishop Wuerl, have not followed up on what I felt was a very astute comment from the article I cited.

But I did not mean to hijack the thread.

In respect to your question, “How much may I reject it publicly and embrace error before the bishops think it is really a bad idea?” I feel it is laudable that the bishops show mercy when dealing with the results of the abysmal catechesis of recent years. But even while they are manifesting that mercy, I wish they would fix the catechesis.

I suppose it did not go bad overnight, but still pray that it may be corrected more quickly.

:twocents:
tee

I do not see you as hijacking the thread. Your points are relevant. It would seem the relative inaction of the bishops to address these issues, for so many decades, really leads many to think it is of little importance.

Catechesis has been poor becuase the bishops have not tried to do anything about it. It is a self made catch 22. They fail to catechize, then claim they can’t discipline because few are catechized???