NCR Report "Analysis: Archbishop Gregory Says He Won’t Deny Biden Communion. How Will Catholics Respond?"

[BigBoom]

And just how are you the authority on when someone you don’t even know has committed a mortal sin? I would think that would be between him and his confessor. It’s not for you to judge, assuming you’re not his confessor (in which case you shouldn’t be breaking the seal of confession posting about this).

Simple. We know it’s a grave mortal sin to support abortion. Biden supports abortion.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Even if that was grave matter (questionable), we never presume that grave matter is mortal because we don’t know the state of mind of the person.

Especially when it’s some public figure and not someone we know well, like our family member.

Anyway, we’ve been over this 100 times on the forum already, so no need for me to say it again.

 

[stpurl]

However, we can state that a sin is objectively mortal sin.

Abortion is an objective mortal sin. It meets the criteria of grave matter and if entered into with full knowledge and full consent, it is mortal.

It is also objective mortal sin to assist or cooperate with a person getting an abortion.

And objectively speaking, as a Catholic, Mr. Biden’s actions since his rejection of the Hyde amendment and his promotion of ‘abortion rights’ and his expressed intentions with regards to what he will change with his presidency indicate that he will greatly assist any woman to have access to an abortion. Furthermore as he is Catholic this scandalously promotes the impression that a ‘Good Catholic” finds no problem with abortion. Since he has been approached by and communicated with both lay Catholics and the hierarchy who have reiterated the Catholic position on abortion, and since those positions have been communicated in public as well, it is an even deeper scandal.

It is of course possible that Mr. Biden, as did Mario Cuomo years ago, deludes himself that if he ‘personally’ rejects abortion that he is adhering to Catholic teaching and thus, “not doing anything wrong himself’. However as others to include Archbishop Chaput have very recently made it clear that there are those in authority who reject that position, Mr. Biden is aware of grave matter, and has full knowledge. Thus if he continues to fully consent to what he has been told is gravely wrong, ‘we’ may not be able to comment on his ‘heart’ but we can certainly comment on the objectivity of his actions being mortally sinful.

 

[ReaderT]

Who is correct about the Church’s practices and doctrines; and who is in a better position to make pastoral judgments based on those doctrines?

Fine, then commune those who defend the literal serial killing of innocents (because if you are a Catholic, that’s what you have to believe it is). But it doesn’t exactly help your position.

“Personally, I believe if we commune Himmler and Goebbels, it may lead to productive dialogue…”

 

[StudentMI]

Hmmm, let me think this through. Who is correct about the Church’s practices and doctrines; and who is in a better position to make pastoral judgments based on those doctrines? At least the last three Popes, and the majority of the current and recent bishops? Or ReaderT? That is a tough choice… I will go with the Popes, I guess, thanks.

In defense of @ReaderT, it is necessary to say that x = x. We can’t ignore blatantly obvious reality.

 

[RootKitWarrior]

I think I have seen it all now.

You would be amazed at the things one finds in the Bible. Very few have read the Book from beginning to End. I have 19 times. I start off each new year doing this. I don’t remember everything I have read, but I do discover new things of interest that I did not notice on previous readings.

Every Priest I’ve asked if they have read the Bible from Beginning to End at least once. None in 30 years have said they have. It makes you wonder why.

 

[stpurl]

To be fair, exactly how many priests have you asked? I’ve asked five different priests this question and every one has responded yes, at least yearly.

And if the priests you asked as still available (living), may I suggest that to satisfy your wonder, you simply ask them “why not?” Quite possibly each will have a different answer. In fact the one you asked 30 years ago might have in the last 30 years have read it —more than once!

 

[MNathaniel]

We know it’s a grave mortal sin to support abortion.

Even if that was grave matter (questionable), we never presume that grave matter is mortal because we don’t know the state of mind of the person.

Tis is correct that we can only identify grave matter. We cannot know, in this life, whether another person internally meets the ‘mortal’ sin criteria of full knowledge or full consent of the will.

That said, my objection to communing Biden doesn’t require my holding a belief that he has the full knowledge or full consent of the will to be in mortal sin.

I don’t go around assuming Biden is in mortal sin. I hope he isn’t.

That said, the scandal caused by a high-ranking cleric publicly offering him Communion while he publicly, unrepentantly promotes child-killing, is enough. My problem is primarily with Church hierarchy for failing to protect their flock from scandal, and failing to effectively use their office to clearly teach one united message on matters of faith and morals.

Biden’s situation is between him and God. I don’t primarily take issue with Biden. I primarily take issue with the hierarchical clerics publicly clouding the waters about Catholic teaching on matters of faith and morals. It’s less Biden’s fault approaching for Communion, than it’s Archbishop Gregory’s fault for publicly announcing to the entire planet that this publicly and persistently abortion-pushing politician is welcome to step forward and receive Communion.

 

[RootKitWarrior]

To be fair, exactly how many priests have you asked?

The first year I visited every parish in the state. That was over 300. I was on a mission that year because I was still a Protestant Anti-Catholic in those early years. So I would wait until the Mass was over before I pounced.
After that when ever I came across a new Priest. In airports I came across a lot during my business travels. So based on those about 25 to 50 a year for about 20 years.

I’ve asked five different priests this question and every one has responded yes, at least yearly.

Initially that was the answer too. I knew they had a different concept of what reading the Bible meant. So I narrowed the question down. Did you actually pick up A Bible and read it Front to Back? The answer was either a no or they just walked away at that point which I took as a no. So in following years, I would follow up with a better question before asked the former question. In what manner do you read the Bible? via the Breviary? via the Daily Mass? They would reply yes. Then I would ask the other question. Not one so far has said yes. I guess after all the readings of the hours and doing Masses, Church Functions and meetings, etc, who has time to actually sit time to read the Bible.
That is my experience.

Later on I became Catholic (20 years ago) and stop asking the question( the wife made me). I can tell you that in 20 years of being Catholic I have never witnessed a Priest holding A Bible and reading it. It makes still wonder if they have ever.

It is a daunting task to begin each new year, to read the thing from front to back. Some books are completely boring. Some books are very Interesting. And some books like Ezekiel are strange.

 

[MikeInVA]

To be fair, exactly how many priests have you asked? I’ve asked five different priests this question and every one has responded yes, at least yearly.

I bought (and read) “The Bible in a Year” from the Augustine Institute after a homily about how to read the Bible in a year. I found the formatting of the Augustine Institute book was very good for keeping me on track.

 

[stpurl]

You know, not every person reads the Bible ‘front to back’. In fact, that can be a very POOR way to read the Bible.

Many if not most of us start out with the NT. Then the first 5 books of the OT, or Psalms, and Proverbs. Then perhaps the prophets. Kings. Isaiah. Surprise, people suddenly figure out after they have read through and enjoyed book after book that, oh hey, I’ve read the whole Bible!

Perhaps those priests who walked away sensed that you might not be interested in somebody who approached the Bible in any other way but your ‘cover to cover’ and didn’t want to get into a long discussion.

 

[RootKitWarrior]

I bought (and read) “The Bible in a Year” from the Augustine Institute after a homily about how to read the Bible in a year. I found the formatting of the Augustine Institute book was very good for keeping me on track.

It takes just 70 hours and 40 minutes to read the Bible through “at pulpit rate,” and aloud!
It takes only 52 hours and 20 minutes to read the Old Testament, and just 18 hours and 20 minutes to read the New Testament.
The longest book, Psalms, will take just 4 hours and 28 minutes. It takes a mere 2 hours and 43 minutes to read Luke.

 

[MikeInVA]

Sorry, but I don’t think the purpose of reading the Bible is to complete a speed run.

 

[RootKitWarrior]

Sorry, but I don’t think the purpose of reading the Bible is to complete a speed run.

True, but it should not take a year if one is serious about.

70 hours and 40 minutes is based on reading it out loud.
Reading silently takes less time.

And hour a day reading silently should take 60 days or less.

 

[stpurl]

Perhaps if all one does is read word after word after word.

What about reading with a commentary? What about reading and meditating on what is being said? What about reading one passage and comparing it with others?

See this is the thing as it appears to me: You have your ‘personal expectations’ of HOW to ‘read the Bible’. You have your personal expectation of how LONG it ‘must take’ to ‘read the Bible. You then keep on insisting that if people would just ‘buckle down and do it your way’ that everybody could ‘read the Bible in 60 days or less’.

You know I read the entire text of War and Peace, cover to cover, in 12 hours (I read very quickly). But while I have an excellent memory I did not retain or appreciate that so much as I did sitting down, taking a week to read it at a speed of about 3 hours per day with some of that time spent looking at maps of Russia in imperial times, looking at the dictionary and reading about Napoleon’s life, about Russian aristocracy (most of them at that time spoke French in court situations rather than Russian, did you know?), etc.

If your system works for you, great, but don’t foist it onto others who may have different ways. Everybody has a different learning style. And everybody has a different ‘worship’ style, yes, even us Catholics. I’m traditionalist myself.

 

[OraLabora]

What about reading with a commentary? What about reading and meditating on what is being said? What about reading one passage and comparing it with others?

When I came back to the Church after a 22 year absence (that was already 23 years ago!), what brought me back was reading the entire New Testament, and a good part of the Old, in one summer. Not with commentary, not even an “approved translation”. Just reading it through. It resonated, and a lot of aspects of our culture suddenly became clear to me.

Moreover I was being bombarded by Evangelicals at the time who were proselytizing me big time. Just reading the Bible on its own, just as one would read any book that was an anthology of books, was enough to make me realize that if the Bible was right, Evangelicals were wrong and Catholics came closest to reflecting what was in the Bible.

Meditation, lectio, commentary… and even going back to Mass, all came later.

So I think there’s merit in simply reading the Bible as-is. It’s just one of a myriad of ways for the Holy Spirit to reach us (Gregorian chant was the other, for me). Of course, when hooked one wants to pursue a deeper understanding through the tools available to us.

 

[CaptFun]

1 Corinthians 11:27-30
I wonder if the severe warning given about receiving the Eucharist unworthily also applies to ministers who knowingly cast their pearls before swine at the level of being accesories to the mortal sin level crime of sacrilege.

Just because the merciful Lord doesn’t strike down the offending parties on the spot … doesn’t mean the Eucharist is not the most holy of “things”* and may be casually, thoughtlessly or blasphemously outraged as a public scandal.

I find it hard to believe that Gregory doesn’t know about Biden’s public approval and empowerment of abortion … or of his approving of and promoting so called “gay marriage” … even unto performing such services … not only publicly sinning mortally, but leading weak others into doing so too.

Jesus told the faithful of His time to abide by the teachings of those spiritual leaders who took their place on the “Seat of Moses” … but not to follow their evil examples.

“By their fruits you shall know them …” Jesus said of examining the good trees from the bad.

A Cardinal (Gregory) who bristled so much at a non-Catholic President (Trump) honoring a Catholic Pope at a “public” site with his Catholic wife … is breezily fine with green flagging a “Catholic” President-Elect’s future communions (Biden’s) without a word about him repenting from his widely trumpeted commitments to the mortal sins of

1. celebrating homosexual practices as a virtue … and
2. outraging the dignity of the most Holy Eucharist as a trivial thing

(that in opposition to St. Paul’s warnings) … may be lighty regarded and boldly procured in a

– sacrilegious display (that gives further scandal to others watching or involved) with the procurement.

Gregory’s promotion to Cardinal comes via a Pope (Francis) who once politicized a mass at the US border to oppose one U.S. cardidate’s proposed Immigration laws … after having barely counselled
a pro-abortion President in mid-persecution of the Little Sisters of the Poor … and/or the Communist leaders of Cuba (as he led an outdoor mass in Havana – with a several story high visage of terrorist Che Guevara – looming over the worshippers the entire time.

Now … if “Look, I’m a Catholic!” Joe Biden repented and became a pro-life champion who stopped “gay marrying” people to their spiritual detriment … I could rejoice in seeing an American Catholic leader reverently receive Communion.

Cc: Nancy Pulosi, John Kerry, Jerry Brown, Gavin Newsome, Xavier Becerra et al.

• The most Holy Eucharist IS not a THING but the very body, blood, soul and Divine Presence of Jesus Christ Himself.

But YOU knew that.

 

[stpurl]

Oh I agree. The poster to whom I was responding, however, was (if you follow back) pretty much pontificating that all people (especially priests whom he had ‘never’ found to read the Bible cover-to-cover) should have ‘time to read the Bible in 60 days doing his ‘front to back’ read 1 hour a day.

I mean, it’s great that he reads the Bible. I don’t care how he reads it. But that’s the difference —people can take their time and read whatever parts they choose and it’s still reading the Bible and worthwhile. It does not HAVE to be a marathon gotta put my hour in and just go from word to word, front to finish. He just didn’t want to hear about anybody reading the Bible in any other way but that.

 

[RootKitWarrior]

Oh I agree. The poster to whom I was responding, however, was (if you follow back) pretty much pontificating that all people (especially priests whom he had ‘never’ found to read the Bible cover-to-cover) should have ‘time to read the Bible in 60 days doing his ‘front to back’ read 1 hour a day.

That is your opinion.

 

[pnewton]

Every Priest I’ve asked if they have read the Bible from Beginning to End at least once.

Why would one read the Bible that way? It is not a book. It is a collection of books, each of which has subsections. Yes, the way you asked the question will probably affect the answer you get. But priests do read the whole Bible as the rotation of readings cover the whole Bible. I have done it both ways and I greatly prefer reading a book at a time, and not in the order of the Table of Contents.

You would be amazed at the things one finds in the Bible.

Rather than assume, you might be surprised at how much I know of the Bible. Which brings me full circle to the topic. When we start making assumptions about situations from a distance, we must be careful and respect what we do not know, as much as what we do know.