Catholic House Democrats prepare to send bishops 'statement of principles' on Communion vote

Ignatius the Kiwi said:

I might be able to buy into this idea, if I believed that these Catholic politicians cared about limiting abortion, but they clearly don't. The goal of the democratic party which these Catholic public officials have signed on to is to expand abortion rights, access and even directly fund it via the government.

Nancy Pelosi will never say a negative thing publicly about abortion and will always say it's a private matter. This makes many of us deny the seriousness of her professed faith or that she is in anyway an orthodox Catholic.

You would have to acknowledge though, if the Bishops do nothing, if things continue as they are then to be a Catholic democrat means nothing. Why should Christians be for this? Why should Catholics sacrifice their morality at the altar of progressive thinking in order to engage in the common good of society?

I understand why secularists prefer it this way. They want religion out of the public space and to have little to no influence, but why should Catholics desire this outcome when in the end it will only serve to weaken the Catholic Church?

Click to expand...

A politician's goal is to be popular among their constituents in order to be elected/reelected.

If the majority of the people wanted abortion outlawed, Democrats would support outlawing it. However, the majority try to walk in a neutral position in calling it women's reproductive rights and are therefore, "pro-choice." Of course being pro-choice is false as we are all connected to each other and what we do has an effect on the rest of society. When a person says they're pro-choice, they're essentially giving moral support
toward abortion. It's not direct abortion which would place one in mortal sin, for they don't have the full knowledge of what they're doing. However, it's the position many people take today. "I personally oppose abortion, but don't want to force my beliefs onto others," is the mantra many people, especially pro-choice politicians hold. Again, it's a flawed position, but the popular one which they'll use to get reelected.

civilwarbuff said:

How could it be his body if he had not yet been crucified?

Click to expand...

Because Christ said so and the Apostles continued to consecrate the bread and wine as Jesus taught them, "do this in memory of me."

Fantine said:

I am Catholic, and even I would not presume to speak for "all Catholics." Since about 50% of Catholics voted for Biden last November, presumably because of his good character and policy priorities which encompass most of the social justice priorities of the Catholic Church.

I just found a letter by Judith Valente, a Benedictine Oblate author and retreat leader, written after attending a weekend retreat. If you want to know what Catholics think about mixing ideology with theology, please read this:
An Open Letter To Catholic Bishops | by Judith Valente | Jun, 2021 | Medium

Click to expand...

The letter by Judith Valente is nice, but goes off topic and is a little judgmental in itself toward Catholic Priest.

I would urge the Bishops to advice that the pastors use pastoral guidance with regards to
those who wish to receive, but are not in union with the Church. Let the person who wants to receive approach the pastor and ask for permission. An Episcopal Friend of mine did just that and the pastor gave her permission. Some would want the pastor tared and feathered for this, as I have experienced in other Catholic forums.

In all, let's pray that the Bishops follow the guidance from the Holy Spirit to make the right decision.

I will follow the direction the Church goes with. To do otherwise would place fear in me that I was following my own agenda, which I often do.

And remembering, of course, that the Vatican must give final approval, and the three Cardinals appointed by Pope Francis--Tobin, Cupich, and Gregory--believe this approach to weaponize the Eucharist is wrong.

Fantine said:

And remembering, of course, that the Vatican must give final approval, and the three Cardinals appointed by Pope Francis--Tobin, Cupich, and Gregory--believe this approach to weaponize the Eucharist is wrong.

Click to expand...

Cardinal Cupich is the chief weaponizer.

Guy's, realistically is there something in the Canon Law about this we could be referencing rather than our own opinions as lay Catholics?

Landon Caeli said:

Guy's, realistically is there something in the Canon Law about this we could be referencing rather than our own opinions as lay Catholics?

Click to expand...

It’s already in canon law. Canon 915 I think. Problem is not that canon law is lacking. Problem is episcopal spine is lacking.

tulc said:

more like Luthor arguing for much needed reformation in the Church and being ignored and the results that came from that. Honestly, dissidents often rise up only to get slapped down but then eventually, low and behold, those very same dissident voices become respected "reformers bringing about renewal in the Church!".
tulc(is going to need more coffee soon)

Click to expand...

Then I guess the next question (and real test) is are these 'new' reformers willing to pay a price along the lines that the Protestant Reformers did?.....or will they simply fall by the wayside when required to justify their positions according to scripture?......Remember Jesus said you will be hated for my names sake so let's see if they can support their position using the word of God........

Ignatius the Kiwi said:

Mercy to all, except the unborn.

Click to expand...

Guess some people don't understand the word 'unworthily'.........

Canon 915, one of the canons in the 1983 Code of Canon Law of the Latin Church of the Catholic Church, forbids the administration of Holy Communion to those upon whom the penalty of excommunication or interdict has been imposed or declared or who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin :

Click to expand...

The text is vague enough to allow for interpretation by the Vatican, cardinals, and bishops. All evidence indicates that Pope Francis and the American Cardinals he appointed interpret "obstinately persisting in manifest grave sin" very differently from Bishop Naumann and his episcopal supporters.

Justices Roberts, Coney-Barrett, and Kavanaugh will soon have an opportunity to make rulings on dozens of abortion restrictions passed by red states. Roberts has already sided with the dwindling number of liberal justices in denying one of these restrictions. This trio of Catholic justices seems to be shaping a "center right" coalition within the court, and recently crafted a decision on religious freedom in an extremely narrow way.

President Biden and the Supreme Court justices all took an oath on the Bible to "uphold the Constitution." At the moment, the Constitution allows abortion--and it would take a Human Rights Amendment to make abortion illegal in every state.

So they are in a hard place. They solemnly swore to uphold the Constitution, and neglecting that oath would be, in my view, a manifest grave sin.

Coney-Barrett is exceptionally religious. Roberts seems to be religious. Not so sure about Kavanaugh.

My point is that all political and judicial leaders who take that oath seriously are in a very hard place.

I think of the words of St. Francis: "Preach the Gospel at all times. Use words when necessary." And so you have President Biden, who, when ordinary people encounter great tragedies, not only visits them personally but gives them his phone number if they need to talk to an empathetic friend. Someone who was praying in the situation room when Navy Seals were pursuing Osama Bin Laden. Someone who says, "God love ya'" as naturally and sincerely as former President Trump says "loser!" Someone who makes Mass and the Eucharist a priority in his busy schedule, and who, in undoing dozens of Trump policies, has improved the lives of millions of people.

You--and some bishops--are looking at Biden through a microscope at one flaw. I call it "spiritual glaucoma." Everyone else sees him preaching the Gospel by his actions.

If he lives until he is 97 like Jimmy Carter he may eventually uplift, inspire, and transform as many people's hearts as Carter has.

Fantine said:

Let's take President Biden, for example, who was described by political opponent Lindsay Graham as "as good a man as God ever created." Many of us see that authenticity, goodness, and compassion at work in his behavior, his words, and his legendary empathy towards suffering people.

Click to expand...

maybe from man's perspective but what did Jesus say?.......
New International Version
“Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone.
Mark 10:18

chevyontheriver said:

How could God have become human?

Click to expand...

That didn't answer the question......

Fantine said:

President Biden and the Supreme Court justices all took an oath on the Bible to "uphold the Constitution." At the moment, the Constitution allows abortion--and it would take a Human Rights Amendment to make abortion illegal in every state.

So they are in a hard place. They solemnly swore to uphold the Constitution, and neglecting that oath would be, in my view, a manifest grave sin.

Click to expand...

So maybe you could explain to us how protecting the unborn from abortion is not upholding the Constitution?

Landon Caeli said:

Guy's, realistically is there something in the Canon Law about this we could be referencing rather than our own opinions as lay Catholics?

Click to expand...

Most conservative Catholics refer to Canon 915 and 916

CIC 915. Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion

CIC 916. A person who is conscious of grave sin is not to celebrate Mass or receive the body of the Lord without previous sacramental confession unless there is a grave reason and there is no opportunity to confess; in this case the person is to remember the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition which includes the resolution of confessing as soon as possible.

The question which will be argued is what does being "conscious of grave sin" actually mean ?

Is it just being told it's a sin by a priest or Bishop, or is it understanding fully how grave it is and that it offends God ?

Three conditions must exist for a sin to be mortal.

It must be grave
Committed with full knowledge
Committed with consent, that is, free will.

Mortal sin always requires the will of the person to commit the act. Freedom of will is the thing the evil one hates most about humans.

Only a person in the state of mortal sin prohibits a person from receiving Holy Communion until they go to confession to a priest and receive the sacrament of Reconciliation or Penance as it is often called.

Ignatius the Kiwi said:

What is neutral about seeking to expand access to abortion? To fund it via government tax dollars and never condemn the action as a moral concern but always refer to it as a private matter? Many things are private in this life but that doesn't prevent the Christian from having to call it out if it is discovered. Sex is a private thing yet it is often done immorally and there is a duty on behalf of the Christian to say it is immoral.

Catholic Democrats never condemn abortion. Yet when you say it's not direct support, I cannot agree. By seeking to do what I said in the first sentence, they are giving abortion, as a practice, material support. They aren't just allowing it to happen, they aren't trying to make abortion 'safe, legal and rare,' but rather enshrine it in law and encourage it's use.

This is perhaps the biggest problem Christians should have with any politician, any person, who claims to believe abortion is immoral but does everything in their power to support it. But like I said earlier, I know they are trying to get elected. I know they are trying to hold on to power. Biden does not have a principled position on abortion, he once did years ago when he said he wanted the Hyde amendment to remain intact. He realizes now that it is impossible within his own party to hold that position anymore, thus he gave up holding it. The last influence of Christianity on his career disappeared there and then. He has, you could say, sold his soul for a position of power.

Is that ever worth the cost?

Click to expand...

There is nothing neutral about supporting abortion. My statement is that it's what "pro-choice," Catholics believe they're doing.

Funding of abortion ? Few if any pieces of legislation directly fund abortion. In fact the Hyde Amendment prohibited the federal funding of abortions.

Generally, the funding has to do with a health clinic or hospital. It happens that those institutions provide health services, but some also include abortion services. But the legislation never mentions what will be provided exactly, but just healthcare services. A politician who votes for such legislation is not voting to fund abortion directly and is not guilty of grave sin.

JimR-OCDS said:

Because Christ said so and the Apostles continued to consecrate the bread and wine as Jesus taught them, "do this in memory of me."

Click to expand...

Not exactly what I was expecting (maybe something a little more theologically deeper) but OK, but I can see how someone could arrive at that.....
So would that mean that Jesus is actually a door because he says he is?.......
John 10:9
“I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.”

Or should we take these as allegorical statements?

civilwarbuff said:

Not exactly what I was expecting (maybe something a little more theologically deeper) but OK, but I can see how someone could arrive at that.....
So would that mean that Jesus is actually a door because he says he is?.......
John 10:9
“I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.”

Or should we take these as allegorical statements?

Click to expand...

Jesus did say this;

While they were eating, Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said, “Take and eat; this is my body.” Matthew 26:26

Then he took a cup, gave thanks,* and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you,l for this is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins. Matthew 26:27-28

The Church from the first apostles on celebrated the Eucharist and believed it was the Body and Blood of Christ.

The writings of the Apostles and their disciples say clearly that they believed in the real presence of Christ in the bread and wine.