Pope warns Catholic politicians who back abortion

[smokey_17]

May the grace of Our Lord Jesus Christ the Love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all. Good night

 

[dmelosi]

I see folks on here are leaving it up to God to end abortion. I think the Holy Father is saying abortion is against Gods teachings and it is time all followers of Christ help God out.

Not folks…was only 1 comment from 1 poster.

 

[GreenJeans]

Let’s get one thing straight – the Catholic Church is not a “foreign power.”

Who cares?

The Church may not be a foreign power, but the Vatican is. The pope is head of state. It guards its nation/state status very carefully. It is the remnant of the Papal States that covered a much larger area for hundreds of year.

Who cares? If a legislator stopped showing up for six months, people who are interested in whether their legislator is actually representing them in the legislature would care. Also, the opposition who could use dereliction of duty as a club in an election. The media. Other legislators. Some politicians take their responsibility seriously. Others don’t care.

 

[GreenJeans]

As I said in one of my other responses, some would take a hit, others might very well prosper under a different political party. Either way, no-one would be able to absolutely pin the Pope’s statement on any smart politician because those people would never own-up to it…it would all be charges and denials, charges and denials. In fact, I could see the dems attacking a polilitician and then that politician using that attack to gerner sympathy…“I just changed my mind and now I am being blasted with all this false Pope stuff…people hate us Catholics.”

Nothing is ever absolutely pinned on a politician. It doesn’t have to be. The game is to influence voters to the extent they give you their vote.

 

[Elzee]

I haven’t read all the posts so sorry if this is a repeat, but sounds like a great topic for the Pope to discuss during his New York visit!

 

[mommyof4]

I just found this update:
kwwl.com/News/index.php?ID=11126

 

[rien]

ABOARD THE PAPAL PLANE (Reuters) - Pope Benedict on Wednesday warned Catholic politicians they risked excommunication from the Church and should not receive communion if they support abortion. It was the first time that the Pope, speaking to reporters aboard the plane taking him on a trip to Brazil, dealt in depth with a controversial topic that has come up in many countries, including the United States, Mexico, and Italy.

The Pope was asked whether he supported Mexican Church leaders threatening to excommunicate leftist parliamentarians who last month voted to legalize abortion in Mexico City.

“Yes, this excommunication was not an arbitrary one but is allowed by Canon (church) law which says that the killing of an innocent child is incompatible with receiving communion, which is receiving the body of Christ,” he said.

reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSL0956318820070509?feedType=RSS&rpc=22

Few if any American bishops will listen. IMO the church in the US and Europe is in defacto-schism. Rome does not excommunicate or even try to enforce (and didn’t under the previous Pope) as it would loose its main funding source. JMHO. If anyone else has a better explanation please by all means let me know.

 

[cor]

Apparently some Vatican officials are trying to soften the impression given by the pope’s words.

ncrcafe.org/node/1080

*Vatican efforts to soften this hard line, however, were quick in coming.

Just moments after Benedict finished his brief in-flight news conference, Vatican spokesperson Fr. Federico Lombard played down the significance of the statement, saying it was not Benedict’s intent to issue a new policy on the vexed question of communion for pro-choice politicians. Instead, Lombardi said, Benedict’s views are best expressed in the recent document Sacramentum caritatis, which does not deal with excommunication, but rather with the individual responsibility of a Catholic lawmaker to be “coherent.”*

ncrcafe.org/node/1083

Confusion created today on the papal plane – after Pope Benedict XVI appeared to say that politicians who vote in favor of abortion rights should be considered excommunicated, only to have Vatican officials back away from that interpretation – is nothing new. Attempts to discern the mind of Joseph Ratzinger on this question have long been complicated.

 

[mary_bobo]

Not folks…was only 1 comment from 1 poster.

I think the term “folks” was used here so as not to single out a single poster. I think many of us use that term to make a point without getting into a “discussion” with some of our more strident posters.

 

[frommi]

I do think there is a difference between Mexico and the United States.

Politicians in Mexico voted to legalize a procedure that was not part of their culture.

Politicians in the United States are more often faced with legislation that would encroach on something that constitutional precedent tells us is a ‘right’. Thus voting for that legislation could be viewed as a waste of time.

As Tom Reese pointed out this week, more than a few canon lawyers see a difference between being for abortion and against criminalizing it.

BTW…this is usually when Vern starts telling me I don’t understand the holocaustal nature of what is going on. Just to warn everyone.

 

[Tom317]

Few if any American bishops will listen. IMO the church in the US and Europe is in defacto-schism. Rome does not excommunicate or even try to enforce (and didn’t under the previous Pope) as it would loose its main funding source. JMHO. If anyone else has a better explanation please by all means let me know.

I agree.

 

[Tom317]

I do think there is a difference between Mexico and the United States.

Politicians in Mexico voted to legalize a procedure that was not part of their culture.

Politicians in the United States are more often faced with legislation that would encroach on something that constitutional precedent tells us is a ‘right’. Thus voting for that legislation could be viewed as a waste of time.

As Tom Reese pointed out this week, more than a few canon lawyers see a difference between being for abortion and against criminalizing it.

BTW…this is usually when Vern starts telling me I don’t understand the holocaustal nature of what is going on. Just to warn everyone.

And, Vern is correct to do that.

I wonder, would we ever legalize slaughter of the elderly?

I suppose in the end it is okay to slaughter that which we cannot see, right?

 

[frommi]

Few if any American bishops will listen. IMO the church in the US and Europe is in defacto-schism. Rome does not excommunicate or even try to enforce (and didn’t under the previous Pope) as it would loose its main funding source. JMHO. If anyone else has a better explanation please by all means let me know.

Financially speaking, Rome is pretty well off…with or without any money from US Dioceses.

To create the illusion of schism, which is what you are doing, is irresponsible.

I am yet to see a bishop who is not pro-life, and truly pro-life. How those bishops go about teaching about this issue and their pastoral response to those who do not align with it differs from bishop to bishop…

That does not equal schism.

It’s also worth noting that the pope and the college of bishops cannot exist without each other.

 

[Tom317]

Rudy won’t talk of pope, abortion

HUNTSVILLE, Ala. – Rudolph Giuliani said Wednesday that his differences with the Catholic Church over his support for abortion rights are between him, God and his spiritual adviser, not Pope Benedict XVI – seeking to avoid a head-on confrontation with the pontiff over the issue that has bedeviled Giuliani’s campaign.

newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-usrudy0510,0,3346090.story?coll=ny-leadnationalnews-headlines

 

[frommi]

Rudy won’t talk of pope, abortion

HUNTSVILLE, Ala. – Rudolph Giuliani said Wednesday that his differences with the Catholic Church over his support for abortion rights are between him, God and his spiritual adviser, not Pope Benedict XVI – seeking to avoid a head-on confrontation with the pontiff over the issue that has bedeviled Giuliani’s campaign.

newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-usrudy0510,0,3346090.story?coll=ny-leadnationalnews-headlines

Sounds accurate to me…it would be inappropriate and very un-B16 like for him to get involved in being Rudy Giuliani’s pastor or bishop…

 

[Tom317]

Financially speaking, Rome is pretty well off…with or without any money from US Dioceses.

To create the illusion of schism, which is what you are doing, is irresponsible.

I am yet to see a bishop who is not pro-life, and truly pro-life. How those bishops go about teaching about this issue and their pastoral response to those who do not align with it differs from bishop to bishop…

That does not equal schism.

It’s also worth noting that the pope and the college of bishops cannot exist without each other.

You are quite correct, it is not schism. Yet, abortion is either a true moral evil or it is not…it is either an absolute taking of life, or it is not. There is no room for grey in this and the Bishops (generally speaking) have done precious little to advance the cause of life. If someone was going around murdering people, no-one would have to debate what to do, they would find the killer and put a stop to the slaughter. Again, the unborn are not seen, so it is easy for some to let them be murdered. “Some” bishops have taken strong positions, most have not.

 

[Tom317]

Sounds accurate to me…it would be inappropriate and very un-B16 like for him to get involved in being Rudy Giuliani’s pastor or bishop…

He is Rudy’s chief Sheperd on earth!

 

[frommi]

He is Rudy’s chief Sheperd on earth!

Hmmm…not really…that seems to imply that Jesus retired…

Each bishop is a ‘vicar of Christ’ so to speak.

So this would be between Rudy and his bishop…whomever that is…

 

[frommi]

You are quite correct, it is not schism. Yet, abortion is either a true moral evil or it is not…it is either an absolute taking of life, or it is not. There is no room for grey in this and the Bishops (generally speaking) have done precious little to advance the cause of life. If someone was going around murdering people, no-one would have to debate what to do, they would find the killer and put a stop to the slaughter. Again, the unborn are not seen, so it is easy for some to let them be murdered. “Some” bishops have taken strong positions, most have not.

That’s where you are wrong…Some bishops have taken ‘strong’ (although some would say spotlight seeking) stances in public forums against members of their own flock.

You have no idea if a bishop is dealing with things a particular way behind closed doors.

How one can say bishops do little to advance these causes is quite amazing…when you consider most dioceses provide funding to help single mothers…have post-abortion counseling available…etc etc.

You are equating advancing the cause of life with sabre rattling against politicians.

Making something illegal won’t end it…changing minds and hearts will because no one will want it.

 

[Tom317]

That’s where you are wrong…Some bishops have taken ‘strong’ (although some would say spotlight seeking) stances in public forums against members of their own flock.

You have no idea if a bishop is dealing with things a particular way behind closed doors.

How one can say bishops do little to advance these causes is quite amazing…when you consider most dioceses provide funding to help single mothers…have post-abortion counseling available…etc etc.

You are equating advancing the cause of life with sabre rattling against politicians.

Making something illegal won’t end it…changing minds and hearts will because no one will want it.

I suppose you did not read my post, in which I stated: ““Some” bishops have taken strong positions, most have not.”