Joe Biden Denied Holy Communion

  • Thread starter Thread starter Donald_S
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
We will have to disagree. This is a discipline. It abrogates the general rule that a Baptised Catholic in good standing should never be denied the real presence. That the notion of worthiness to receive is antagonistic to the reality that we are all rank unworthy to begin with. This is the “spirit of the law.” In fact the only places Jesus ever gets angry in scripture is when someone takes a position they are more worthy than someone else.
Let me make it clear. I do not think this action should be applauded as it did not follow the procedures and concerns layed out by the commentators.
 
You’re wrong. Imprudent or prudent are your only options. But let’s keep this on topic. You have plenty of posts on the matter where it is topical.
 
Ender said:
40.png
gracepoole:
Great. I’m sure you understand that I’m not going to search through various threads to read your thoughts on the issue when the Church has made Herself clear.
Click to expand...
”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.”…There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty" (Cardinal Ratzinger, 2004)

Francis’ change to the catechism has not changed this.
Click to expand...
I know this is your favorite topic, Ender, but I don’t have any interest in having an extremely repetitive discussion with you that we had years ago.
 
If there exists no permissible examples, the you cannot permissibly.
 
915 applies to priests. The issue of Biden’s own obligation not to receive is seperate.
You negate what Cardinal Burke and then Cardinal Ratzinger wrote in their official capacities with your position. You ignore those Archbishop’s who wrote that these actions should not first be conducted at the Communion rail. You effectively determine this exception to subsume everything they wrote. Cardinal Burke carefully examined precedent and found that the support in tradition for application to politicians always involve the person’s pastor. That is why it is not whimsical surplus that he expressly included it.
Pope Benedict included voting FOR A REASON. You disagree.
They were not addressing obstinent persistence for everyone. They addressed it for politicians. Apparently you do not share their express position of distinction.
You cite an ecclesiastic body to negate the value of writings of other bodies.
You state that 915 does not apply to Bishops but the writings of Cardinal Burke and Ratzinger speak of pastors. Why bother, if any priest can and must do it?
 
Last edited:
I cited then Cardinal Ratzinger, Prefect of the Congregation For The Doctrine of Faith.
I cited Cardinal Burke.
I cited the Catholic Bishops.
I cited the Cannon.
I quoted and discussed the plain meaning of unambiguous language.
Where did I go wrong. My sources to liberal?
 
Maximus1 said:
915 applies to priests. The issue of Biden’s own obligation not to receive is seperate.
Click to expand...
Canon 915 applies to all ministers of communion, but yes, it surely applies to priests. Canon 916 applies to the individual (e.g. Biden).
You negate what Cardinal Burke and then Cardinal Ratzinger wrote in their official capacities with your position. You ignore those Archbishop’s who wrote that these actions should not first be conducted at the Communion rail. You effectively determine this exception to subsume everything they wrote.
Click to expand...
You conflate two related but different issues: how communion was denied, and that communion was denied. We don’t know the details regarding communication between the priest and Biden before communion, and it is possible this part of the priest’s duty was mishandled. Regarding the fact that communion was withheld, however, it seems unarguable that Biden’s behavior satisfies the criteria of 915, therefore the priest had the obligation of refusing communion.
Cardinal Burke carefully examined precedent and found that the support in tradition for application to politicians always involve the person’s pastor.
Click to expand...
I disagree with your interpretation. Burke said: “public support of policies and laws which, in the teaching of the Magisterium, are in grave violation of the natural moral law falls under the discipline.” There is nothing unique to politicians in the canon.
They were not addressing obstinent persistence for everyone. They addressed it for politicians. Apparently you do not share their express position of distinction.
Click to expand...
I do not share your understanding of their position.
You cite an ecclesiastic body to negate the value of writings of other bodies.
Click to expand...
That you think one ecclesial body contradicts others suggests that your interpretation is flawed. I see no such contradiction.
You state that 915 does not apply to Bishops…
Click to expand...
I’ve never said that. The canon applies to ALL ministers of communion. I did say that no one - even a bishop - can dispense a minister from that obligation.
 
gracepoole said:
I know this is your favorite topic, Ender, but I don’t have any interest in having an extremely repetitive discussion with you that we had years ago.
Click to expand...
I agree with MiserereMeiDei about keeping this thread on topic, which is not capital punishment. Nonetheless if you feel justified in making a claim that it is immoral you should not be surprised that I make the contrary claim. I’m willing to drop the topic entirely…so long as others do the same.
 
JoeShlabotnik said:
We have all done things we are not proud of. I try not to judge others. I have enough of my own sins to worry about.
Click to expand...
Me too.
I am grateful the Church offers the possibility of repentance and reparation. And the sacrament of confession. If the Church had not presented a holier way of living I might still be wallowing in sin.
Discipline is charitable.
 
When did it become political? Am I supposed to believe you are shocked. . . .
Reread what I said about our Lord. You missed it
 
Last edited:
Joe Biden supports abortion. His policies (including those he is now holding for his presidential campaign) prove it. There can be no legitimate doubt that this is serious matter. It’s bad enough to personally feel that abortion is anything but immoral, but Joe Biden has done (and will continue to do) everything in his power to make abortion more accessible.

As such, per Canon 915, a minister of communion should withhold the Eucharist from such an individual as Joe Biden. Per Canon 916, individuals such as Joe Biden shouldn’t be approaching the altar to receive in the first place (so perhaps he exemplifies why we have Canon 915 to begin with).

Any questions?
 
Last edited:
Since we agree this is an how it was handled, still not a word about Pastor. Silent each time I point out the problem.
I dont conflate HOW WITH WHY. I am arguing how.
If this way was inappropriate. Everybody wants to respond to what I am not arguing.
 
Last edited:
This act was not charitable to Biden. The reason involves HOW it was done.
 
Maximus1 said:
How do you know he won’t change his mind after the primary?
Click to expand...
He hasn’t changed his mind yet, has he? He hadn’t changed his mind prior to being refused communion, either, which is why it was denied him.
 
So the steps that are prescribed can be ignored?
Then, the priest makes a press release?
It sounds like the Conference of Catholic Bishops hit the nail on the head.
 
Maximus1 said:
So the steps that are prescribed can be ignored?
Then, the priest makes a press release?
It sounds like the Conference of Catholic Bishops hit the nail on the head.
Click to expand...
What steps were “ignored”?

Also, how did you go from “how do you know he won’t change his mind?” to “the priest ignored steps!”. With all due charity, your jumping around on the subject makes you appear deadset on defending Joe Biden rather than the laws of the Church.
 
Last edited:
The denial of communion should awaken him to the fact that he is not in communion with the Church. That would be an act of charity. I don’t know what was in the priest’s heart.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top