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

Ignatius the Kiwi · Jun 21, 2021

JimR-OCDS said:
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.

The problem is Joe Biden and the Catholic democrats with him, is that they want to overturn the Hyde Amendment and if they could they would enshrine abortion into US law. Not just leave it to the judgement of the Supreme court.

If a politician supports these efforts and is not guilty of sin, then there is no limit on the types of laws one might pass since one could always argue that they are not directly supporting it or doing the deed themselves.

What Kings in the past would have killed for to gain this sort of freedom from the consequences of the laws they signed into being. That is, they put it into law and enforce it, but are not at all responsible for it. Seems to me, if one belongs to a religion and views their calling in life to serve the public good, be they a politician or a King or whatever, the Church which they belong to should call out the person in question if said person is enacting laws against the ideal for which that religion stands.

There is a long history of this within Catholicism and Christianity more broadly and why shy away from this except on the pretense of separating religion from the levers of power? In which case, when you become a politician in such a system you cease to be part of that religion for all intents and purposes. While you might believe in the ideas of your religion (perhaps Biden thinks abortion is evil, I don't know but let's use him as an example), you are essentially a marionette controlled by ideas and thoughts which you don't really believe.

What do we get from Catholic Democrats? Silence on the issue of abortion. I am convinced that no Catholic Democrat will ever outright condemn abortion.

JimR-OCDS · Jun 21, 2021

Ignatius the Kiwi said:
The problem is Joe Biden and the Catholic democrats with him want to overturn the Hyde Amendment and if they could they would enshrine abortion into US law.

.

Oh and I don't disagree with you, Biden showed he really has no principles when he supported the Hyde Amendment from the beginning and didn't state he was opposed to
it until he decided to run for president in 2019.

He's a politician who'll say what the political winds tell him to say. Unfortunately, it's the winds from the leftist of his base support.

civilwarbuff · Jun 21, 2021

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

Maybe you could quote a few verses since the Gospels and Epistles speak very sparingly about Communion......IIRC........

JimR-OCDS · Jun 21, 2021

civilwarbuff said:
Maybe you could quote a few verses since the Gospels and Epistles speak very sparingly about Communion......IIRC........

I gave you the gospel quotes of Jesus himself from the Gospel of Matthew.
See also; Mk 14:22-24, Lk 22:17-20

Here's one from 1 Corinthians 11:23-25

For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus, on the night he was handed over, took bread,

and, after he had given thanks, broke it and said, “This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”

In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.”

civilwarbuff · Jun 21, 2021

JimR-OCDS said:
I gave you the gospel quotes of Jesus himself from the Gospel of Matthew.
See also; Mk 14:22-24, Lk 22:17-20

Before the crucifixtion.....yes....
So, it has always puzzled me as to why, in Acts when Jesus is amongst them, is not communion even mentioned? Was it not celebrated? One would think WOW, what a celebration that should be.......yet not a word. I gotta scratch my head over that.......

parousia70 · Jun 21, 2021

As soon as the Bishops start denying communion to (the mostly Republican) Catholic politicians who support the Death penalty, which, unlike abortion, is something Jesus personally spoke out against, then I'll entertain their desires as legitimately fair toward all Catholic Politicians, and not totally biased against Democrats only.

Of course if they would be interested in giving up their tax exempt status, then I'd be perfectly fine with them taking a public stance on whichever side of the Political Isle they want.

tulc · Jun 21, 2021

Ignatius the Kiwi said:
Look, I don't know who you are but I want to speak to tulc directly. Till then, I guess this conversation is over. Whoever you are.

So that would be a "No, I'm not going to give out any names of the "us" I said she had to be believed by."?
tulc(is just making sure that's Ignatius the Kiwi's point)

chevyontheriver · Jun 21, 2021

civilwarbuff said:
That didn't answer the question......

I wasn’t intending to answer your question directly. Just to say that lots of people were convinced God could not become a human and yet with God even that was possible. Traditional Christians take Jesus at his word on the matter. You don’t. That’s cool. But with your position does it matter if I support abortion and go up to receive communion? It does matter if we think we are receiving Jesus.

Ignatius the Kiwi · Jun 21, 2021

parousia70 said:
As soon as the Bishops start denying communion to (the mostly Republican) Catholic politicians who support the Death penalty, which, unlike abortion, is something Jesus personally spoke out against, then I'll entertain their desires as legitimately fair toward all Catholic Politicians, and not totally biased against Democrats only.

Of course if they would be interested in giving up their tax exempt status, then I'd be perfectly fine with them taking a public stance on whichever side of the Political Isle they want.

Given that there have been popes who have endorsed and used the death penalty, there is at least a historic argument and precedent for it's use. Certainty Christian realms used the death penalty through much of Christian history and it is only today that people have a problem with it.

Still, this is an attempt to deflect rather than actually address the issue of abortion and why Catholic (and Christian ) Democrats in large part support it. Absolutely advocate that public figures who support the death penalty be denied communion, but why try to save your particular political side rather than stand on the principle itself?

Is abortion evil? Why do Catholic Democrats seek to expand it's reach? Should the Church do anything if it cannot bar them communion?

chevyontheriver · Jun 21, 2021

Ignatius the Kiwi said:
Still, this is an attempt to deflect rather than actually address the issue of abortion and why Catholic (and Christian ) Democrats in large part support it. Absolutely advocate that public figures who support the death penalty be denied communion, but why try to save your particular political side rather than stand on the principle itself?

I recall a move by some of the same folks who want to be sure Biden can go to communion to stop other Catholics from going to communion because they had some wrong positions on immigration. They were not shy in ‘weaponizing’ the Eucharist then.

Fantine · Jun 21, 2021

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

When the Constitution was first drafted, not even African-American slaves had the rights and protections of citizenship. The 14th Amendment granted them that status:

14th Amendment: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.

Now if the 14th Amendment said "all persons conceived" that might have affected the Roe v. Wade decision. But Republicans want to subtract categories from the 14th Amendment. They would like it to say "all persons born to at least one parent who is an American citizen..." They call some of our citizens under the 14th Amendment "anchor babies."

Overturning Roe v. Wade would just allow each individual state to make a decision about abortion, and so blue states would have legal abortion and red states would have no abortion--but many red states are close enough to blue states that the effect would not be that great.

A Human Life Amendment could change the Constitution. It would have to be ratified by 38 states after being passed by Congress.

So you can see the dilemma this places politicians and justices in. Would Amy Coney Barrett deny the Constitution to make abortion illegal in however many states have strong untouchable Republican majorities? If she didn't, would the bishops suggest she be denied Communion? If she was denied Communion, would she retire into private life?

I do think that conservative Catholics were disappointed that Coney Barrett and Roberts didn't rule that the Catholic Charities Philadelphia case meant that the butcher, the baker, the candlestick maker, Hobby Lobby, Chick Fil A, and My Pillow could stop serving gays. Not sure if they were disappointed in Kavanaugh. I would not put him in the same category, personally, but others might.

hedrick · Jun 21, 2021

Fantine said:
When the Constitution was first drafted, not even African-American slaves had the rights and protections of citizenship. The 14th Amendment granted them that status:

Now if the 14th Amendment said "all persons conceived" that might have affected the Roe v. Wade decision. But Republicans want to subtract categories from the 14th Amendment. They would like it to say "all persons born to at least one parent who is an American citizen..." They call some of our citizens under the 14th Amendment "anchor babies."

Overturning Roe v. Wade would just allow each individual state to make a decision about abortion, and so blue states would have legal abortion and red states would have no abortion--but many red states are close enough to blue states that the effect would not be that great.

A Human Life Amendment could change the Constitution. It would have to be ratified by 38 states after being passed by Congress.

So you can see the dilemma this places politicians and justices in. Would Amy Coney Barrett deny the Constitution to make abortion illegal in however many states have strong untouchable Republican majorities? If she didn't, would the bishops suggest she be denied Communion? If she was denied Communion, would she retire into private life?

I do think that conservative Catholics were disappointed that Coney Barrett and Roberts didn't rule that the Catholic Charities Philadelphia case meant that the butcher, the baker, the candlestick maker, Hobby Lobby, Chick Fil A, and My Pillow could stop serving gays. Not sure if they were disappointed in Kavanaugh. I would not put him in the same category, personally, but others might.

Actually, the Supreme Court could say that one is a citizen at conception, and laws against murder apply. There is nothing requiring them to leave it up to the states. I don’t expect that, but it’s always a bit dangerous to predict what they will,do.

Fantine · Jun 21, 2021

hedrick said:
Actually, the Supreme Court could say that one is a citizen at conception, and laws against murder apply. There is nothing requiring them to leave it up to the states. I don’t expect that, but it’s always a bit dangerous to predict what they will,do.

I looked for the most conservative source I could find--the Federalist Society--and saw this debate on that very question.
https://fedsoc.org/commentary/publications/abortion-and-the-courts

parousia70 · Jun 21, 2021

hedrick said:
Actually, the Supreme Court could say that one is a citizen at conception, and laws against murder apply.

I'm all for that.
Then we can institute a national Menstruation registry, where all women of Child bearing age must submit a sample of their monthly menstrual cycle for examination and possible prosecution if any fetal tissue is present.

We can also put very strict behavioral requirements for pregnant women to follow, so we can better insure the health and welfare of the fetus takes top priority as it would be a crime to endanger them in any way.. We should outlaw certain foods, (junk foods) outlaw smoking, Alcohol consumption, outlaw certain activities for the mother that may endanger the Fetus (Car racing, Ice skating, Rock Climbing, etc). And Bishops should certainly deny communion to any mother who is found guilty of violating those laws.

I definitely think it is Government's Job to regulate all pregnancies with a fine tooth comb, conception through delivery, if we believe Fetal life is truly important enough.
Government should not stop at simply banning abortion.
Fully 1/2 to 2/3s of all pregnancies end in miscarriage, astronomically dwarfing the number of abortions.
Government should definitely step in to regulate every minute of every pregnancy with an iron fist.

Ignatius the Kiwi · Jun 21, 2021

parousia70 said:
I'm all for that.
Then we can institute a national Menstruation registry, where all women of Child bearing age must submit a sample of their monthly menstrual cycle for examination and possible prosecution if any fetal tissue is present.

We can also put very strict behavioral requirements for pregnant women to follow, so we can better insure the health and welfare of the fetus takes top priority as it would be a crime to endanger them in any way.. We should outlaw certain foods, (junk foods) outlaw smoking, Alcohol consumption, outlaw certain activities for the mother that may endanger the Fetus (Car racing, Ice skating, Rock Climbing, etc). And Bishops should certainly deny communion to any mother who is found guilty of violating those laws.

I definitely think it is Government's Job to regulate all pregnancies with a fine tooth comb, conception through delivery, if we believe Fetal life is truly important enough.
Government should not stop at simply banning apportion.
Fully 1/2 to 2/3s of all pregnancies end in miscarriage, astronomically dwarfing the number of abortions.
Government should definitely step in to regulate every minute of every pregnancy with an iron fist.

Let's be serious for a moment. What is the actual Catholic argument for defending access to abortion and getting rid of the Hyde amendment? Do you think this is a good thing for Catholics like Joe Biden to advocate for?

Ignatius the Kiwi · Jun 21, 2021

tulc said:
So that would be a "No, I'm not going to give out any names of the "us" I said she had to be believed by."?
tulc(is just making sure that's Ignatius the Kiwi's point)

I don't understand anything you just said, whoever you are.

parousia70 · Jun 21, 2021

Ignatius the Kiwi said:
Given that there have been popes who have endorsed and used the death penalty, there is at least a historic argument and precedent for it's use. Certainty Christian realms used the death penalty through much of Christian history and it is only today that people have a problem with it.

And St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, believed that the fetus did not become a person (or become “ensouled”) until later in the pregnancy. For much of the church’s history, popes made clear distinctions between ensouled and unensouled fetuses. The Vatican’s total ban on abortion was not codified until 1917. But I expect you won't likewise champion the notation of this use of the "historic argument and precedent" you are hanging your hat on above, because it doesnt seem to be about the principle to you. It seem to be about: "Democrat = Evil" and "Catholic Democrat = Worst of all evil"

Still, this is an attempt to deflect rather than actually address the issue of abortion and why Catholic (and Christian ) Democrats in large part support it.

Catholic And Christian Democrats largely want abortion to be safe, legal and RARE.

It is a ruse and strawman to assert that "democrats want more abortions". They Don't, as evidenced by their support of a strong social safety net. In fact I'd argue that Republican politicians demonstrably want "more abortions" based on their lockstep denial of any strengthening of the social safety net.

The stronger the social safety net, the fewer the number of abortions.

Maybe Catholic Bishops should deny communion to Republican politicians who vote against bills that strengthen the social safety net, because defeating social safety net bills results in an increased abortion rate.
But they won't because they aren't "standing of principle".

Absolutely advocate that public figures who support the death penalty be denied communion, but why try to save your particular political side rather than stand on the principle itself?

You make my point.
Why demonize and castigate the "not your political side" rather than stand on the principle itself?

hedrick · Jun 21, 2021

Fantine said:
I looked for the most conservative source I could find--the Federalist Society--and saw this debate on that very question.
https://fedsoc.org/commentary/publications/abortion-and-the-courts

Yeah, but neither person actually supported it. I’m not so convinced about Republican state legislatures though.

JimR-OCDS · Jun 21, 2021

civilwarbuff said:
Before the crucifixtion.....yes....
So, it has always puzzled me as to why, in Acts when Jesus is amongst them, is not communion even mentioned? Was it not celebrated? One would think WOW, what a celebration that should be.......yet not a word. I gotta scratch my head over that.......

Jesus established the sacrament of the Holy Eucharist at the "Last Supper." It was the last Passover meal he celebrated with the Apostles before his passion and death.

He didn't do it before as it was not his time yet.

Ignatius the Kiwi · Jun 21, 2021

parousia70 said:
Did God always have a problem with it, or has His stance changed?

Catholic And Christian Democrats largely want abortion to be safe, legal and RARE.

It is a ruse and strawman to assert that "democrats want more abortions". They Don't, as evidenced by their support of a strong social safety net. In fact I'd argue that Republican politicians demonstrably want "more abortions" based on their lockstep denial of any strengthening of the social safety net.

The stronger the social safety net, the fewer the number of abortions.

Maybe Catholic Bishops should deny communion to Republican politicians who vote against bills that strengthen the social safety net, because defeating social safety net bills results in an increased abortion rate.
But they won't because they aren't "standing of principle".

You make my point.
Why demonize and castigate the "not your political side" rather than stand on the principle itself?

I won't demonize anyone, only point out the inconsistency. If you want to condemn the Republicans go do so. I don't view them to be much better than democrats, the only difference is that they are more slow.

Still, can you explain to me the rationale for Biden wanted to remove the Hyde amendment and forcing you to pay for it?

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

Should Catholic politicians who support abortion be denied communion?

Yes

No

Dissident

God Cannot Be Grasped, Except Through Love

Well-Known Member

God Cannot Be Grasped, Except Through Love

Well-Known Member

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow

loves "SO'S YER MOM!! posts!

Well-Known Member

Dissident

Well-Known Member

Dona Quixote

Senior Veteran

Dona Quixote

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow

Dissident

Dissident

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow

Senior Veteran

God Cannot Be Grasped, Except Through Love

Dissident

Similar threads