Are Bad Catholics Still Catholics? (Jimmy Akin article)

FireDragon76 · Feb 2, 2019

James Murphy said:
Yeah, he certainly doesn't speak for my Lutheran synod. Apparently he's in one of the apostate Modernist Lutheran churches.

I am a member of the ELCA but we actually do not have some kind of dogma about abortion, liberal or otherwise. We do respect peoples individual conscience, however.

And implying we are apostate is against the forum rules.

FireDragon76 · Feb 2, 2019

chevyontheriver said:
Do ALL varieties of Lutheran have the same opinion?

On the issue of church infallibility, yes, obviously so, looking to Luther as an example.

Concord1968 · Feb 2, 2019

And that solves that.

chevyontheriver · Feb 2, 2019

SolomonVII said:
To participate knowingly in an abortion is to automatically excommunicate oneself.

Agreed.

But two problems with that.

First is the idea of automatic excommunication. What does it mean for one to be automatically excommunicated? If I did something that merits automatic excommunication but I don't feel excommunicated, can I still go to communion? Who is to say? It's a bit of a quagmire. Basically the bishop has to declare that an excommunication has occurred or it has no teeth. The priest would be in his right to deny communion as well. We laity can holler, rightly, about the scandalous behavior of a very bad Catholic, but the bishop and the priest needs to act. We laity do not excommunicate. A person without the sense to know he excommunicated himself needs to be told by the bishop that it's already a done deal. We still need a strong bishop, and lacking that it quickly becomes a farce.

Second is that voting to allow abortion is a step removed from actually doing an abortion or paying for an abortion or otherwise participating in a particular abortion. I do happen to think that one who votes for abortion is doing something as rotten as an actual abortion, or worse, and one should be excommunicated for that or at least be forbidden the Eucharist under canon 915. But that's not how the Church law is written. There is wiggle room and the devious use that wiggle room to their purposes. It is common sense enough to know that voting for abortion is gravely evil.

chevyontheriver · Feb 2, 2019

FireDragon76 said:
On the issue of church infallibility, yes, obviously so, looking to Luther as an example.

The question, sorry if I was not absolutely clear, was whether ALL Lutherans have the same opinion about abortion as you and yours have. I suspect that is not so, based on the replies of others here.

Vicomte13 · Feb 2, 2019

James Murphy said:
Now, if you were to go over to Catholic Answers Forum and say that the Catholic Church has changed it's teaching, you'd set off a crapstorm of epic proportions and would probably be banned.

Probably. So I won't go over there. Life's too short, y'know?

Vicomte13 · Feb 2, 2019

redleghunter said:
First I did qualify this is not just a Catholic problem set and believe me I know this well.

Maybe you can opine more on this as a Catholic, but does Dolan need to give the Eucharist to Cuomo who is not in obedience to the church?

What’s happening now is the very threat you speak of, Cuomo knows Dolan won’t rock the boat. He knew it as he was grinning ear to ear singing Satan’s bill into law. And then lit up the altar of the Tower of Babel pink.

I agree these vindictive politicians would make life legally miserable, but then what does that say to the faithful? As long as I don’t take my public sin to church I’m ok?

When I opine on things regarding the Catholic church, my fellow Catholics get angry at me and some of them come after me with as close to "book, bell and candle" as they can.

Because I'm in no position to reform anything about the Church myself, and my fellow Catholics do not agree with me, for the most part, on the things that I think need to be reformed in order to right the ship, my opining in any depth on this subject would do little more than raise some of my fellow Catholics' blood pressure, and who needs that.

The Church leadership are gonna do what they're gonna do. They're not going to ask me. That's for sure. So really, anything I have to say as an individual Catholic is pretty irrelevant. Nobody else on my side cares what I think.

Vicomte13 · Feb 2, 2019

chevyontheriver said:
Agreed.

But two problems with that.

First is the idea of automatic excommunication. What does it mean for one to be automatically excommunicated? If I did something that merits automatic excommunication but I don't feel excommunicated, can I still go to communion? Who is to say? .

You say. You decide. You go to communion or not. It's up to you. That's the way it really is.

chevyontheriver · Feb 2, 2019

Vicomte13 said:
You say. You decide. You go to communion or not. It's up to you. That's the way it really is.

Yup. Open communion. Almost impossible to be declared a heretic even if I were a full blown Arian these days. Everything is what I want. The cafeteria is open. Do you agree?

Mountainmike · Feb 2, 2019

redleghunter said:
Is on demand abortion moral?

What do you think the teachings of the Catholic Church are on abortion?

Even the earliest Christian documents say it is not.

Take the didache.

It's not even up for debate. Wrong with capital W. It is the way of death.

chevyontheriver · Feb 2, 2019

redleghunter said:
Governor Cuomo Directs One World Trade Center and Other Landmarks to be Lit in Pink to Celebrate Signing of the Reproductive Health Act

No he ordered it.

And notice one of the buildings was One World Trade Center. Fitting as there are some 3,000 people buried deep below.

AND he ordered it at the Al Smith building in Albany. Al Smith was the Democratic Party nominee in 1928, and would have made an awesome president. Instead we got Herbert Hoover. Oh well, Smith was a Catholic, back in the day when that actually meant something. For Cuomo to light that building up pink was a slap in the face for the memory of Al Smith and for any actual Catholics left in this country. Worse than lighting the World Trade Center pink. Shame on Cuomo.

Athanasius377 · Feb 2, 2019

Vicomte13 said:
When I opine on things regarding the Catholic church, my fellow Catholics get angry at me and some of them come after me with as close to "book, bell and candle" as they can.

Because I'm in no position to reform anything about the Church myself, and my fellow Catholics do not agree with me, for the most part, on the things that I think need to be reformed in order to right the ship, my opining in any depth on this subject would do little more than raise some of my fellow Catholics' blood pressure, and who needs that.

The Church leadership are gonna do what they're gonna do. They're not going to ask me. That's for sure. So really, anything I have to say as an individual Catholic is pretty irrelevant. Nobody else on my side cares what I think.

An honest if not pragmatic statement. Sadly I sometimes wonder if some of my own Synod Lutheran leadership would stand for life or surrender to the whims of our age in exchange for a seat at the table of cultural relevance.

redleghunter · Feb 2, 2019

chevyontheriver said:
AND he ordered it at the Al Smith building in Albany. Al Smith was the Democratic Party nominee in 1928, and would have made an awesome president. Instead we got Herbert Hoover. Oh well, Smith was a Catholic, back in the day when that actually meant something. For Cuomo to light that building up pink was a slap in the face for the memory of Al Smith and for any actual Catholics left in this country. Worse than lighting the World Trade Center pink. Shame on Cuomo.

Know the history of Al Smith well. My grandparents were big fans of the Governor. They used to campaign for him. My father would tell us of the days of Al Smith who had a big heart for the poor. Yeah he was quite Irish and Catholic. My grand uncles and grand father on my mother’s side were in the same Irish society with the governor.

Pethesedzao · Feb 2, 2019

redleghunter said:
Whoa before you hit the report button, this is a piece by Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin. I won't put up a survey because not everyone is Catholic in this forum (like yours truly).

A lot of words exchanged over the past week or so with Gov Cuomo gleefully signing a bill into Law expanding abortion to be a state constitutional right. We've seen the political threads and some Catholics calling for excommunication of Cuomo and pressure put on Cardinal Dolan.

Jimmy Akin addresses all of issues from a Catholic apologist perspective here is some of what he said in his titled piece "Are Bad Catholics Still Catholics?"

So, are such people still Catholics? Let’s start with the statement that Cuomo-type figures aren’t Catholics and that it’s an insult to say that they are.

This sentiment expresses a truth. When a public figure uses his fame and influence to betray the Faith, he is acting in an un-Catholic or even anti-Catholic way. And the profound contradiction between what he is doing and what he should be doing as a Catholic generates an objective insult to God. It adds injury to insult, for it wounds the body of Christ.

However, it isn’t literally true to say he’s not a Catholic. That’s hyperbole.

“But wait,” someone might say. “If someone betrays the Faith in this way, how can he still be a Catholic?”

To answer this question, we need to look at the Church’s official documents. According to the Second Vatican Council:

He is not saved . . . who, though part of the body of the Church, does not persevere in charity. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but, as it were, only in a “bodily” manner and not “in his heart” (Lumen Gentium 14).
By losing the gift of charity, a bad Catholic ceases to be a member of the Church “in his heart,” but he remains in it “bodily.”

The Church thus recognizes that there is a sense in which a bad Catholic ceases to be truly or fully Catholic, but there is another sense in which he still is Catholic.

So Jimmy is making a distinction here citing Vatican II between a 'bodily' manner and "in his heart' manner.

He continues:

Are there ways to lose that status altogether? Here the Code of Canon Law becomes relevant. According to it:

Merely ecclesiastical laws bind those who have been baptized in the Catholic Church or received into it, possess the efficient use of reason, and, unless the law expressly provides otherwise, have completed seven years of age (can. 11).

By being baptized in the Church—or by being received into it after being baptized elsewhere—one becomes subject to the laws of the Church, and these obligations remain even when one betrays the Faith in fundamental ways. This even applies in cases where one has committed heresy, apostasy, or schism, which the Code defines as follows:

Heresy is the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him (can. 751).
There are penalties for committing these crimes, including excommunication (can. 1364 §1). However, even excommunication does not mean that one ceases to be a member of the Church. Instead, as the Catechism explains, excommunication is “the most severe ecclesiastical penalty.” It “impedes the reception of the sacraments and the exercise of certain ecclesiastical acts” (CCC 1463).

This is verified by the Code’s explanation of the effects of excommunication (can. 1331), which lists the inability to participate in the sacraments and the inability to exercise ecclesiastical offices, ministries, functions, etc. However, the canon does not list ceasing to be a Catholic or being released from the Church’s laws as a result.

A person who has committed heresy, apostasy, or schism may no longer identify himself as a Catholic, but he’s still bound by the Church’s laws—including, for example, the obligation to attend Mass every Sunday (without receiving Holy Communion, of course).

This brings to mind the old saying, “Once a Catholic, always a Catholic.” There’s a sense in which that’s true, since the legal obligations we acquire upon being baptized or received into the Church continue to exist even if we renounce the Faith and no longer regard ourselves as Catholic.

It is even more clear that someone who still professes to be Catholic—even unfaithfully—remains so, even if it is purely in a “bodily” way and not “in his heart.”

Although there is no doubt that public figures—as well as private individuals—gravely compromise their communion with the Church when they reject key Catholic teachings and values, this doesn’t mean that they literally cease to be Catholics.

Bad Catholics are still Catholics. And that just makes their betrayal of the Faith worse.
Jimmy Akin source link: Are Bad Catholics Still Catholics? | Catholic Answers

Don't know about you, but this second quoted area from Akin is not convincing. Considering in the history of the church (and as many Catholics argue here vigorously the church does not change her doctrines) we have this:

"The sacrosanct Roman Church...firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that..not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life but will depart into everlasting fire...unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that..no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.” — Pope Eugene IV and the Council of Florence (Seventeenth Ecumenical Council), Cantate Domino, Bull

Jimmy vs, Pope Eugene. Who is right here?

I would love to discuss this without flame wars because the problem set facing the Roman Catholic church is every Christian church's challenge. We ALL have Mario Cuomo's sitting in our pews, serving in government and even in the clergy and ministry.

So (1) Catholic thoughts on this and (2) Protestant/Evangelicals lets take the beam out of our eyes too as we 'know' this is our problem set too within the church.

God bless you all!

ONLY those of the holy catholic and apostolic Church will see God

redleghunter · Feb 2, 2019

Ignatius the Kiwi said:
In other words, religious beliefs are not real and therefore cannot be used to determine the laws or ways we live by in society.

The going impression I encounter in our postmodern society is faith and religion is like some club like the Kiwanis.

redleghunter · Feb 2, 2019

Athanasius377 said:
While I believe this statement encapsulates your position on abortion I do not think that you fully appreciate just how monstrous this statement really is. If one is to take this statement at face value those who cannot articulate their lived experience is at risk for liquidation. That would include infants, severely mentally retarded, comatose, the aged, etc based on the whims of a stakeholder. In other words the most vulnerable (least) members of society. How Contrast with the Lord's own words:

Luk 18:15–17 (ESV)
15 Now they were bringing even infants to him that he might touch them. And when the disciples saw it, they rebuked them. 16 But Jesus called them to him, saying, “Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of God. 17 Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it.”

Matt 25:31–40
31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 And he will place the sheep on his right, but the goats on the left. 34 Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ 37 Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? 38 And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? 39 And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ 40 And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’

Don’t know what to say but Amen! What you addressed is how monstrous doctrines and regimes such as Marxism, Nazi Germany and Pol Pot rose to power.

redleghunter · Feb 2, 2019

SPF said:
The morality of abortion has absolutely nothing to do with a woman’s opinion. The morality of abortion has everything to do with the nature of the unborn human.

If you want to take the secular law approach then this reality becomes even more apparent.

For example, Americans believe we all have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Yet, we all agree that these rights can be limited, restricted, or even revoked.

If I’m a kleptomaniac, then my pursuit of happiness is denied because it can potentially harm another person. If I’m an alcoholic and my favorite thing to do is drive drunk, I’m told I can’t. The law seeks to protect the innocent.

If I break the law my right to liberty may be temporarily suspended. Every person in jail is experiencing this. And if my crime against another innocent human is bad enough I may lose my right to life.

So the question as it relates to abortion is simple - what is the nature of the unborn human? Is the unborn baby actually morally valuable? If it is, then surely it’s right to life trumps a woman’s right to pursuit of happiness?

For people who call themselves Christians this should be easy.

1. All humans are created in the image of God and possess inherent moral worth and value.
2. Scientifically we know that a new and unique human being comes into existence st fertilization.
3. All unborn human beings are innocent of any wrong doing.
Conclusion: Killing an unborn human for convenience sake (99% of abortions) is immoral.

Agree brother.

Just to clarify the 1% would be for triage medical situations?

redleghunter · Feb 2, 2019

FireDragon76 said:
I am a member of the ELCA but we actually do not have some kind of dogma about abortion, liberal or otherwise. We do respect peoples individual conscience, however.

And implying we are apostate is against the forum rules.

The ECLA has contradictory beliefs on the sanctity of human life in the womb.

Excerpt:

After setting the stage for moral deliberation over abortion and acknowledging the controversial, potentially divisive character of the issue, the statement explains the convictions of our faith, on which we base judgments on abortion:
• Human beings are endowed with dignity, created in God’s image, and they bear the responsibility of stewardship;
• The gift of human life comes from God, has intrinsic value, worth and dignity in all phases of development, and is guided by God’s law;
• Sin has corrupted God’s creation, leaving us “caught up in a web of sin in which we both sin and are sinned against” (p. 3);
• God calls us to lives of repentance and renewal, seeking to manifest the fruit of the Spirit; and
• As a community of forgiven sinners, “our love for neighbor embraces especially those who are most vulnerable, including both the pregnant woman and the life in her womb” (p.3).
The social statement describes how this church, as a community supportive of life,
responds to the reality of abortion. Its fundamental judgment about abortion is that: “Abortion ought to be an option only of last resort. Therefore, as a church we seek to reduce the need to turn to abortion as the answer to unintended pregnancies” (p.4). We “live out our support for life in all its dimensions” (p.4) through hospitality, keeping sexual intercourse in its proper setting and using contraception, action and education. By contrast, attitudes such as irresponsible sexual activity, individualism and materialism are life-degrading.
The statement reminds this church of its call to be a compassionate community that recognizes the moral complexity of individual situations. In most circumstances, the church encourages women with unintended pregnancies to continue the pregnancy while assessing the situation realistically and considering adoption as a positive option.
When considering ending a pregnancy, a woman or couple should consider factors such as unwilling participation in the sexual act leading to conception, threat to the life of the mother,

and severe fetal abnormalities. However, “This church opposes ending intrauterine life when a fetus is developed enough to live outside a uterus with the aid of reasonable and necessary technology” (p. 7).
The statement also speaks of public policy issues related to abortion. The ELCA participates in public debate about abortion while seeking justice for all. It advocates aid in preventing unwanted pregnancies, through education and contraception. Next, it supports a better life for the child and parents through improved social services and initiatives such as parental leave.
Regulation of abortion, the statement recognizes, is where members of this church disagree widely. The statement declares that the government has a legitimate role in regulating abortion. It states, “Because of our conviction that both the life of the woman and the life in her womb must be respected by law, this church opposes:
• the total lack of regulation of abortion;
• legislation that would outlaw abortion in all circumstances;
• laws that prevent access to information about all options available to women faced with
unintended pregnancies;
• laws that deny access to safe and affordable services for morally justifiable abortions;
• mandatory or coerced abortion or sterilization;
• laws that prevent couples from practicing contraception;
• laws that are primarily intended to harass those contemplating or deciding for an
abortion” (pp. 9-10).

http://download.elca.org/ELCA Resource Repository/AbortionSS_Summary.pdf

redleghunter · Feb 2, 2019

chevyontheriver said:
Agreed.

But two problems with that.

First is the idea of automatic excommunication. What does it mean for one to be automatically excommunicated? If I did something that merits automatic excommunication but I don't feel excommunicated, can I still go to communion? Who is to say? It's a bit of a quagmire. Basically the bishop has to declare that an excommunication has occurred or it has no teeth. The priest would be in his right to deny communion as well. We laity can holler, rightly, about the scandalous behavior of a very bad Catholic, but the bishop and the priest needs to act. We laity do not excommunicate. A person without the sense to know he excommunicated himself needs to be told by the bishop that it's already a done deal. We still need a strong bishop, and lacking that it quickly becomes a farce.

Second is that voting to allow abortion is a step removed from actually doing an abortion or paying for an abortion or otherwise participating in a particular abortion. I do happen to think that one who votes for abortion is doing something as rotten as an actual abortion, or worse, and one should be excommunicated for that or at least be forbidden the Eucharist under canon 915. But that's not how the Church law is written. There is wiggle room and the devious use that wiggle room to their purposes. It is common sense enough to know that voting for abortion is gravely evil.

Matthew 18:15-18 comes to mind. Did an individual confront Cuomo? If he refused to listen, did three witnesses confront in love? If he did not listen did they take it to the church? If he will not listen to the church, well you know the rest of the story.

Jesus gave us the guidelines clearly.

redleghunter · Feb 2, 2019

James Murphy said:
Now, if you were to go over to Catholic Answers Forum and say that the Catholic Church has changed it's teaching, you'd set off a crapstorm of epic proportions and would probably be banned.

Chuckling a bit at how you said that but you are right. I’m told often on some other threads the doctrine never changes.

Are Bad Catholics Still Catholics? (Jimmy Akin article)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

LCMS Lutheran

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Out of the deep I called unto thee O Lord

Thank You Jesus!

Well-Known Member

Thank You Jesus!

Thank You Jesus!

Thank You Jesus!

Thank You Jesus!

Thank You Jesus!

Thank You Jesus!

Similar threads