Priests Told: Deny Communion to Politicians Who Support Abortion

[fix]

What does that mean exactly though? Is it that hell is worse for those whose sins are public and cause scandal?

It means it endangers more souls. It teaches wrongly.

Is it harder to be forgiven for the public sins and easier for private sins?This appears to make hell into a punishment that’s metted out by an angry God. It also leaves room for folks to point to others and say “they are much bigger sinners than me!”.

Again It is about scandal.

 

[fix]

So who determines that “abortion should be rare” is a manifest public sin while “abortion should be illegal except for rape, incest, etc.” is not?

And how do you explain this distinction to a Polish or Hispanic immigrant who doesn’t understand English very well?

Why the distinction? If they support abortion that is wrong.

 

[einna]

The fact is manifest public sin causes scandal. We have a distinction right there.

As an aside the CCC says some grave sins are worse than others.

All the talk about “equality” stems from our modern mind that values that over all else.

It sounds like you assume that in this case by making all sins “equal” we are bring them down equal to all lesser sins, which I am not (I cannot speak for the others). Having an affair can ruin a family, cause great mental and emotional harm for years, poverty in some cases, and even death by suicide or murder, but many would say supporting abortion is a graver sin than having an affair. So if they are not equal, which one would be consider graver? Again where is the list?

 

[ProVobis]

Why the distinction? If they support abortion that is wrong.

In theory everyone should understand it the same way, regardless of language. But many can’t seem to agree on what exactly “support” means here and that’s the problem as I see it.

 

[einna]

Do you need a list? Is genocide worse than impure thoughts? Both are objectively mortal sins. But, that is not the issue. The issue is scandal.

To me they are not the same, but I have not heard the church speak on what sins are more scandalous if publicly known.

 

[Elizabeth502]

What does that mean exactly though? Is it that hell is worse for those whose sins are public and cause scandal? Is it harder to be forgiven for the public sins and easier for private sins?This appears to make hell into a punishment that’s metted out by an angry God. It also leaves room for folks to point to others and say “they are much bigger sinners than me!”.

No it doesn’t. It makes hell into a consequence for self-chosen actions which always have a community effect. The repercussions of even so-called “private” sin are these:

~to self
~to one’s community of associates (we affect others, even if we are not aware how, by our sinfulness); we affect our own families, friends, and other interactions when we sin and when we are in a state of sin; we limit and toxify those relationsihps
~to the Church
~to the cosmos

Therefore, the wider impact of whatever that sin is, such as taking a heterodox public position on a moral teaching, has greater intrinsic consequences, apart from anything God “does.” We earn our own hells and purgatories, here and after our deaths.

 

[fix]

It sounds like you assume that in this case by making all sins “equal” we are bring them down equal to all lesser sins, which I am not (I cannot speak for the others).

No, what I said is that public manifest sins are worthy to be denied communion. Others have said if that is so why not deny every other sin. As I pointed out not all sins are public, manifest, or cause scandal.

Having an affair can ruin a family, cause great mental and emotional harm for years, poverty in some cases, and even death by suicide or murder, but many would say supporting abortion is a graver sin than having an affair.

That is not the issue at all. The issue is teaching others to sin which is what pro abortion pols do. If one is a manifest adulterer, then that may rise to a public sin that deserves to be denied as well. Please note that has been discussed by canon lawyers regarding the NYS governor and his marriage situation.

So if they are not equal, which one would be consider graver? Again where is the list?

This is two separate issues. One issue is the public manifest nature of some sins. The other non related issue is that sins very in gravity.

1858 Grave matter is specified by the Ten Commandments, corresponding to the answer of Jesus to the rich young man: "Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and your mother."132 The gravity of sins is more or less great: murder is graver than theft. One must also take into account who is wronged: violence against parents is in itself graver than violence against a stranger.

 

[fix]

In theory everyone should understand it the same way, regardless of language. But many can’t seem to agree on what exactly “support” means here and that’s the problem as I see it.

Let us use some examples. Is there any doubt Pelosi supports abortion?

 

[fix]

To me they are not the same, but I have not heard the church speak on what sins are more scandalous if publicly known.

As one example Cardinal Burke has explained it quite well.

 

[einna]

No, what I said is that public manifest sins are worthy to be denied communion. Others have said if that is so why not deny every other sin. As I pointed out not all sins are public, manifest, or cause scandal.

That is not the issue at all. The issue is teaching others to sin which is what pro abortion pols do. If one is a manifest adulterer, then that may rise to a public sin that deserves to be denied as well. Please not that has been discussed by canon lawyers regarding the NYS governor and his marriage situation.

This is two separate issues. One issue is the public manifest nature of some sins. The other non related issue is that sins very in gravity.

1858 Grave matter is specified by the Ten Commandments, corresponding to the answer of Jesus to the rich young man: "Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and your mother."132 The gravity of sins is more or less great: murder is graver than theft. One must also take into account who is wronged: violence against parents is in itself graver than violence against a stranger.

Sorry, I missed that last part in my twelve years of Catholic school. Why is it a graver sin against parents over strangers, are they not both children of God? The Commandment says thou shall not kill, is there an amendment to that I missed?

 

[fix]

Sorry, I missed that last part in my twelve years of Catholic school. Why is it a graver sin against parents over strangers, are they not both children of God? The Commandment says thou shall not kill, is there an amendment to that I missed?

My advice is pick up the CCC as a start and then some encyclicals and perhaps some orthodox moral theology books.

Is genocide worse than impure thoughts? Is killing 50 people worse than killing one person? Is arson worse than cheating on a math test?

 

[einna]

My advice is pick up the CCC as a start and then some encyclicals and perhaps some orthodox moral theology books.

Is genocide worse than impure thoughts? Is killing 50 people worse than killing one person? Is arson worse than cheating on a math test?

There is that drama again. I didn’t ask if killing 50 was worse than killing one. You stated it was worse to commit violence against a parent over a stranger. So where does it state in the Church’s doctrine does it say it is worse to kill a parent over a strange/ Can you be specific in source?

 

[ProVobis]

Let us use some examples. Is there any doubt Pelosi supports abortion?

Yes, let’s use examples but let’s pick on Republicans for a change. Would you have denied Henry Hyde (whose district I happened to live in, by the way) communion because he compromised to keep abortion legal for rape, incest, and saving the life of the mother? The pro-life forces were all over him for doing that at the time, even though he initiated the pro-life bill in the first place. But is this so much morally different than making abortions “rare”? I’m afraid your use of the word “support” is wearing quite thin.

 

[fix]

There is that drama again. I didn’t ask if killing 50 was worse than killing one. You stated it was worse to commit violence against a parent over a stranger. So where does it state in the Church’s doctrine does it say it is worse to kill a parent over a strange/ Can you be specific in source?

I gave you the section from the catechism. Those are not my words.

 

[Teelynn]

I’m curious- in the US context does this include Republican Catholic politicians such as former Governors like Arnold Schwarzenegger (California), Tom Ridge (Pennsyvlania), New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Senator Lisa Murkowski( who mysteriously seem to get a “free pass” from the Bishops) or just their Democratic counterparts like VP Joe Biden or the late Teddy Kennedy- denial of the Sacrament and possible excommunication is WAY too serious to be left to the vagaries of party politics!

Terry

This would apply to ANY POLITICIAN who has a public platform and has anti life policies. Doesn’t matter if they are R or D or Green Party or ANY PARTY. Rudy Giuliani should also be told “No Communion for You Please”, and anyone else who supports anti life policies. I can believe that Lisa Murkowski may have a “pass”, but Nancy Pelosi was actually bold enough to march herself up to Communion when we had a Papal visit. John Kerry had a pass also when he ran for President. Doesn’t matter the Party, these people ALL OF THEM are arrogant beyond words when they expect to receive the Body of Christ and are promoting mortal sin. Personally, I think THEY SHOULD ALL be formally EXCOMMUNICATED.

 

[ProVobis]

This would apply to ANY POLITICIAN who has a public platform and has anti life policies. Doesn’t matter if they are R or D or Green Party or ANY PARTY. Rudy Giuliani should also be told “No Communion for You Please”, and anyone else who supports anti life policies. I can believe that Lisa Murkowski may have a “pass”, but Nancy Pelosi was actually bold enough to march herself up to Communion when we had a Papal visit. John Kerry had a pass also when he ran for President. Doesn’t matter the Party, these people ALL OF THEM are arrogant beyond words when they expect to receive the Body of Christ and are promoting mortal sin. Personally, I think THEY SHOULD ALL be formally EXCOMMUNICATED.

It seems most politicians are pro-status-quo even though they may state or reverse their position for political purposes or to gain financially from either the pro-life or pro-abortion forces. I find the whole thing rather disturbing as it drains resources from where they are more needed, such as aiding pregnant women in distress or aiding adoption processes. Politicians need to come clean and admit most of their time is spent in fundraising.

 

[mydogjake]

If the church is going to do that why don’t they refuse communion to the priests that are pedophiles? Not only are they taking away the innocence of the child they are also causing them to have trouble most of their life. The picture is always in the child’s mind. Not only that but the children were abused by the church because the Bishops and the existing pope tried to cover pedophilia up.

I know because I had a Catholic priest mess around with me from 8 to 12 years old.

Pray for all those people that were molested by the priests

Richard

 

[CMatt25]

The Church teaches that once a person is Baptized Catholic, they haven an indelible mark on their souls that makes them forever Catholic, no matter what they have done, or what they think. So being ‘excommunicated’ doesn’t mean they’re no longer Catholic because according to the teachings of the Church, that’s not possible.

Rence, thank you for explaining this to forum readers. It’s the correct Catholic answer as you said according to the teachings of the Catholic Church and the best I’ve seen it explained on this forum. God bless you.

 

[Ender]

"Rence:

The Church teaches that once a person is Baptized Catholic, they haven an indelible mark on their souls that makes them forever Catholic, no matter what they have done, or what they think.

Rence, thank you for explaining this to forum readers. It’s the correct Catholic answer as you said according to the teachings of the Catholic Church and the best I’ve seen it explained on this forum. God bless you.

This claim does not appear to be accurate.*Actually only those are to be included (annumerandi) as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body (neque a Corporis compage semet ipsos misere separarunt), or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed. *(Pius XII - Mystici Corporus Christi)
It seems evident that those who reject basic and infallible teachings of the church have in fact “separated themselves from the unity of the Body.”

Ender

 

[brierpatch1974]

Could it be that politicians are not denied communion or reprimanded of their false beliefs because local churches prefer to keep the donations coming in? Seems like its wrong and everyone knows it but for some reason choose to do nothing about it other than a word here and there. Some debates go on forever when really there is no need. Time to take a stance and enforce it. Don’t let money talk but let Gods will talk.