Kentucky Bishop on Denying Pelosi Communion: "We've Been Patient Enough"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pro_Life_News
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It is inexcusable what the so-called ‘Catholic’ politicians are doing in supporting the murder of abortion. True folly that will all come out in the end. I believe it is equally inexcusable for the Bishop’s inaction in the face of blatant, public sin in supporting and introducing immoral policies. Perhaps we ought to fast and pray more.
 
This is a double edgeed sword and like the good bishop, I too am glad that I’m not Ms. Pelosi’s bishop. On the one hand the bishop should not make her a martyr and on the other we have an obligation to maintain discipline. Ms. Pelosi certainly doesn’t help matters by announcing that she is “a practicing Catholic.” There is going to be a point where she’s going to push so far that there won’t be anything else that the bishop can say to her, except, “Do not present yourself for communion.” She’s playing the same card that Patrick Kennedy played and it’s going to get old with the bishop. At some point he’s going to tire of talking to her. You’d think some people who are smart enough to get themselves elected to positions such as her’s would be just as smart in other areas.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
Methinks she needs a LOT more “practice” at being a Catholic. :rolleyes:
 
I don’t understand why a Catholic considers it more important to follow their party than their Church. What Pelosi and Biden support is wrong. Having said that, I think that denying communion is wrong. Christ dined with sinners and was criticized for this. Christ shared the first eucharist with Judas. I think he would have shared it with Ms Pelosi and Mr. Biden.
You appear to have missunderstood what was going on when Jesus ate and drank with sinners. If you take a look at Luke 5: 30-32 you will see that his purpose to associate with sinners was and is to call them or us to repentance. He would never support them in their or our sins, but calls all to repentance and reformation in our lives.

You might also take a look at John 5:14 where you see an example of someone being healed but note Jesus told him to sin no more “lest a worse thing come upon you.”

In the case of Judas you have to remember Judas had still not actually betrayed Jesus. He still had time to reconsider and repent of what he was about to do. Even after Judas did what he did Jesus would have forgiven Judas if Judas would have seriously repented, but Judas hardened his heart and hung himself.

The Church must discipline these wayward politicians so that they may hopefully come to their senses and repent lest they continue in the same way as Judas.
 
I don’t understand why a Catholic considers it more important to follow their party than their Church. What Pelosi and Biden support is wrong. Having said that, I think that denying communion is wrong. Christ dined with sinners and was criticized for this. Christ shared the first eucharist with Judas. I think he would have shared it with Ms Pelosi and Mr. Biden.
I am not sure, but wasn’t Judas gone when communion made?🤷
 
I am not sure, but wasn’t Judas gone when communion made?🤷
It’s a matter of dispute that is not really important. Exegetes are not sure because the seder meal had severa cups of wine. Some argue that Judas does receive the consecrated wine and others argue that the consecration of the wine took place at the third cup, not at the first cup and that Judas was not in the room by that time. But that’s a whole other story and not really that interesting for CAF. It more importatnt for biblical historians. There is no doubt that he did partake of the consecrated bread, because of its place in the sder, which is early on in the meal.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
What sickens me most about Nancy Pelosi, even more than her fanatical devotion to abortion, is the way she is committed to ramming abortion in healthcare through Congress, despite the opposition of the majority of Americans to paying for abortions with our tax dollars. She not only strongly believes in this great evil of abortion, she wants all Americans to participate in it by paying for it. I pray that she will wake up and realize the error of her ways. I can’t understand it. 😦
 
I agree with the Lord Bishop. Just because Pelosi is famous dosen’t mean she should have an exception to the rules of the Church.
 
Miss Pelosi is a public figure. When she is asked about abortion and replies that the Church hasn’t got things figured out on that subject, it makes me wonder exactly who she is listening to. People in power, like her, are constantly being approached by intelligent, well spoken tools of the devil who try to convince people in power why they are right. But after the Church did correct her, she should reconsider her position.

Even President Obama said that if his daughter ended up pregnant because of a mistake, he wouldn’t want her to be punished by the burden of a child. Sometimes intelligent minds are convinced by the general evil that surrounds them and lobbies them.

And if her Bishop said that she should be refused communion, how is that anybody else’s business? It is up to the Bishop to decide.

Peace,
Ed
 
Even President Obama said that if his daughter ended up pregnant because of a mistake, he wouldn’t want her to be punished by the burden of a child. Sometimes intelligent minds are convinced by the general evil that surrounds them and lobbies them.

Am I mistaken, or wasn’t Pres. Obama a mistake?
 
I did a little searching through canon law, and came up with this: (I added bolding, and the remarks in italics.)
Why Pelosi, and others like her, may not receive the Host:
Can. 1398 A person who actually procures an abortion incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.
Can. 1329 §2 In the case of a latae sententiae penalty attached to an offence, accomplices, even though not mentioned in the law or precept, incur the same penalty if, without their assistance, the crime would not have been committed, and if the penalty is of such a nature as to be able to affect them; otherwise, they can be punished with ferendae sententiae penalties.
Voting to legalize abortion certainly makes them accomplices.
Can. 1369 A person is to be punished with a just penalty, who, at a public event or assembly, or in a published writing, or by otherwise using the means of social communication, utters blasphemy, or gravely harms public morals, or rails at or excites hatred of or contempt for religion or the Church.
Can. 915 Those upon whom the penalty of excommunication or interdict has been imposed or declared, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin, are not to be admitted to holy communion.
Can. 916 Anyone who is conscious of grave sin may not celebrate Mass or receive the Body of the Lord without previously having been to sacramental confession…
Reasons the Bishops might have for not publicly excommunicating them:
Can. 1318 A legislator is not to threaten latae sententiae penalties, except perhaps for some outstanding and malicious offences which may be either more grave by reason of scandal or such that they cannot be effectively punished by ferendae sententiae penalties. He is not, however, to constitute censures, especially excommunication, except with the greatest moderation, and only for the more grave offences.
While a Bishop’s definition of grave may differ from mine, I feel that this is often used as an excuse for inaction.
Can. 1323 No one is liable to a penalty who, when violating a law or precept:
… 4° acted under the compulsion of grave fear, even if only relative, or by reason of necessity or grave inconvenience, unless, however, the act is intrinsically evil or tends to be harmful to souls…
There is some mitigation if the reason they support abortion is only because they are afraid they will not be re-elected if they don’t; but there is no mitigation if “the act is intrinsically evil or tends to be harmful to souls.”
Can. 1325 Ignorance which is crass or supine or affected can never be taken into account when applying the provisions of cann. 1323 and 1324.
Claiming that abortion is a matter of Free Will is certainly a matter of ignorance; but how can they claim ignorance after their Bishops have publicly corrected them?
There is also a canon saying that publicly imposing a penalty shouldn’t be done if doing so would cause scandal for the Church. But I feel that this can be used as an excuse. How does it harm the Church, if it publicly shows that she stands up for her precepts? Especially when silence is interpreted as consent. THAT is grave scandal.

Praying for Pelosi and her ilk,

Ruthie
 
In fairness to bishops around the world we have to understand that they have to grapple with these questions at many levels: theology, law, pastoral practice, and hermaneutics. All bishops are either theologians or lawyers. You have to be one or the other to be a bishop. When they look at these issues they see many rules and principles that we in the pews do not see and it becomes very difficult to make calls. This is especially true since there is not clear guidance from the Holy Father himself.

The Holy Father insists that reason must be applied. This means that the bishops cannot simply act on faith and morals. They must think about faith and morals using reason and come up with rationally justifiable arguments for their actions, especially when it comes to excommunicating. In other words, they must prove that their actions rationally conform to the faith of the Church. The key word here is “prove.” The faith of the Church is clear. You have to prove that your actions are consistent. Using Pope Benedict’s model of reason and faith, you do not assume that an action is justified on faith alone. You have to show the rational connection with the faith. This is called faith enlightening reason.

There is a moral principal that is a tough one to argue here. One can be remotely culpable or materially culpable. The person who votes for legal aboriton is not culpable for the choice that another person makes to procure or perform an abortion. He is materially culpable, for cooperating in creating a law that permits people to make such choices. Howeer, the other argument of moral theology is whether or not the law is sufficient to deter the individual. This argument creates a problem for the moral theologian and the canonist. The bishops have to sort out these questions in their own heads, because there is no universally applicable response coming from the Apostolic See.

The position of the Apostolic See is that those who are pro-abortion legislation should not present themselves for communion. This the same rule that applies to anyone who is in a state of grave sin. It is not the same as excommunication. The Apostolic See has never decreed that those who support abortion legislation are excommunicated. That has been left for the individual bishops to sort out at the local level. This is what our Holy Father Benedict referst to as the Principal of Subsidiarity. It’s an ancient form that the papacy has used to say to bishops and major superiors of religoius, “Solve your own problems and when you cannot do so, then come to us.”

Until the bishops of the world say to the pope, “We’re at a dead end here.” The pope is not going to get directly involved. He may get directly involved if the bishops were not talking to these people. But even there, he does not get involved with the individual politician, but with the individual bishops. We really do not know what conversations the bishops and the popes have had on this issue. We only know what the Pope has said in public. Nor do we really know what the bishops have said to these people in private.

We have to pray for forgiveness of those involved in abortion, healing for those who need it, and for clarity for the bishops. If I were a bishop I would be having the worse migraine in the world right about now. The people expect one thing and the theologian in you expects another and there is not clear guidance from the Vatican. Bishops are good men and they want to do the right thing. They often make mistakes, sometimes whoppers. But they are not bad men. I believe that they are really trying and struggling.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
I have heard that the reason that individual bishops are not excommunicating people is that other bishops do not want to take that step, and it would be awkward if an ex-communicated politician showed up at one of their churches?
 
I have heard that the reason that individual bishops are not excommunicating people is that other bishops do not want to take that step, and it would be awkward if an ex-communicated politician showed up at one of their churches?
When you don’t have a uniform ruling for the entire Church, it places the individual bishops in a difficult situation. We have to remember, this is not an American problem. This is a worldwide problem. The bishops of the world are grappling with this.

We have to be gentle enough not to place so much blame on our bishops in the USA. The bishops around the world are not sure how to best handle this situation. Rome continues to give the same response, “subsidiarity.”

I would imagine that at some point the Curia will ammend Canon Law with some specific statement on how to proceed on this matter. Until that happens, each bishop must discern how to best handle situations on a case by case basis.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Until the bishops of the world say to the pope, “We’re at a dead end here.” The pope is not going to get directly involved.
Nancy Pelosi has been in congress and an outspoken supporter of abortion for the past 23 years. This should have provided sufficient time for the bishop or bishops to close in on the problem. She openly uses national forums to contradict the church. How many other people has she influenced with her babble on free will and freedom of choice?

You state that until the bishops say they have reached a dead end the pope will stay out of it. Well the U.S. is at 50 million dead, how high does the number need to go before they call on him?
 
Nancy Pelosi has been in congress and an outspoken supporter of abortion for the past 23 years. This should have provided sufficient time for the bishop or bishops to close in on the problem. She openly uses national forums to contradict the church. How many other people has she influenced with her babble on free will and freedom of choice?

You state that until the bishops say they have reached a dead end the pope will stay out of it. Well the U.S. is at 50 million dead, how high does the number need to go before they call on him?
There are two sides to everything. One is that the bishops ask for help and the other is the pope’s willingness to step in. Generally, popes are not that eager to step into the middle of an issue that they believe can be worked out by the local bishops, even if it takes a long time. Pope have a high respect for the sacramental autonomy of bishops. They do not like to step on bishops’ toes. They will do so if they have to. But as long as the bishoops keep teaching the teachings of the Church, the popes try to keep their distance so as not to complicate matters. We do not know what conversations take place between the bishops and the pope.

We have to pray that the grace of wisdom will guide both the bishops and the pope.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Miss Pelosi is a public figure. When she is asked about abortion and replies that the Church hasn’t got things figured out on that subject, it makes me wonder exactly who she is listening to. People in power, like her, are constantly being approached by intelligent, well spoken tools of the devil who try to convince people in power why they are right. But after the Church did correct her, she should reconsider her position.

Even President Obama said that if his daughter ended up pregnant because of a mistake, he wouldn’t want her to be punished by the burden of a child. Sometimes intelligent minds are convinced by the general evil that surrounds them and lobbies them.

And if her Bishop said that she should be refused communion, how is that anybody else’s business? It is up to the Bishop to decide.

Peace,
Ed
Why, if Pelosi and others do not want to adhere to the teachings of the Church call themselves Catholic. What is the point? why bother, go join some other religion who views they can agree with.
It is obvious that they do not believe, know, or accept the fact that The Eucharist is The body and blood of Christ If they believed that there is no way they would recieve while being in mortal sins.
 
Many years ago, the Church was admired for being rock solid on issues. People may not have agreed with the Church’s stance on some issues, but they admired her for her strength of character. Today, Pelosi is mocking the Church and people are saying if she is allowed to say the opposite of what the Church teaches, then perhaps the Church doesn’t really believe what it preaches. She needs to be made an example of. Out with her. Off with her head. Begone.
 
Many years ago, the Church was admired for being rock solid on issues. People may not have agreed with the Church’s stance on some issues, but they admired her for her strength of character. Today, Pelosi is mocking the Church and people are saying if she is allowed to say the opposite of what the Church teaches, then perhaps the Church doesn’t really believe what it preaches. She needs to be made an example of. Out with her. Off with her head. Begone.
I believe that the last person that the Church burned at the stake was Joan of Arc and there are serious questions as to how much the Church actually participated in that trial. That being said, this is not about making an example out of anyone. This is about saving a person’s soul and those of many other people.

We do not save souls by reacting to people. We save souls by converting people. The Church has not stopped being solid in her teaching and she has not used force to do so for hundreds of years. I doubt that she is about to begin now. This is not consistent with the mind of Pope Benedict. His mind works a little differently. He is about enlightening through the use of faith and reason working together, even though it may take a lifetime of work.

In my experience working with the Gospel of Life, I have found that it can take years to help people receive and use the grace of God. Not because God does not give the grace freely, but because we as human beings are not easily open to receive what is freely given. We take a little persuasion. OK, sometimes we require a lot of persuasion.

In this work I have seen greater sins than those of Nancey Pelosi. I have seen people who have had abortions, people who have performed abortions, those who have been involved in the adult entertainment industry, those who have been involved in violence, stealing, infidelity and multiple combinations of errors… When I look at them I can only see Christ as he is described in the Sorrowful Mysteries of the Rosary. He is tired, hungry, beaten, humiliated, exposed, vulnerable, bloody, and burdened with sin.

I have yet to make a convert out of any of these people by threatening to make examples out of them. We have fed their children, paid their rent, counseled them, spent time listening to their stories, even been insulted a few times. But as long as I can keep my calm, smile, listen, affirm the truth that comes out of their mouths, and admit to them that I am capable of greater sin than they are, if I can do this . . . then I have an inside path to their heart. Slowly, little by little, the walls come crumbling down and God’s grace begins to work on them. My job is to keep chipping away with great love, a lot of patience, a lot of prayer, and a lifetime of waiting. As we go along, little by little they hear me out. Somehow, in some mysterious way, they hear Christ. I have seen conversions and I believe that even Ms. Pelosi can be helped. But I have never seen conversions by making examples out of people. If we are to be true brothers and sisters of life, we must be willing to invest a lifetime of patience, charity and prayer in the other person.

Every conversion that I have seen has been the work of God’s grace, our prayers, patience and consistent presence in the person’s life. Sometimes I pick up where someone else has left off. Other times someone else picks up where I leave off. But the conversion comes when there is truth and charity, coupled with patience and prayer.

People don’t need to hear “Look at what a horrible person Ms. Pelosi is and the Church has not burnt her at the stake or has not excommunicated her.” This does nothing to help the faith of others. The correct message is, “Ms. Pelosi has believed the great lie about a woman’s right to choose and despite her mistake, look at the mercy of the Church and the patience of the Church. The Church continues to try and has not given up on her. This is the greatness of the Church, that she does not give up, but she continues to chip away at the stone.”

We really need to see the Church’s mercy and the Church’s patience. The Church is so great and wonderful, that she does not do violence to her children, but she sets the example of the mother who tries and tries over and over again. If we want to understand the Church’s behavior toward Ms. Pelosi and others of like mind, we should look at St. Monica. Monica was a wonderful example of the motherhood of the Church. Monica did not die until Augustine was spiritually safe. The Church does not give up until her children are spiritually safe.

Monica had other children. We can all speak about the scandal of it all. But we also know that the scandal of it all did not deter Monica and she did not give in to the temptation to disown Augustine, for the sake of her other children. Instead, Monica did what Jesus said about the Good Shepherd leaving his flock to go after the one lost sheep. Monica followed Augustine from Africa to Italy. We are not told what she did with her other children while she was tyring to save Augustine’s soul. But we know that she allowed herself to be used by God. She prayed and she had patience. God did the rest. I can’t think of a better example of the Church in this situation than Monica.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top