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

[pdudgeon]

So to sum up, when it comes to politicians and the abortion issue, you might say that this weekend will be the dividing point.
This weekend the parishes will be reopened. That means that confession and reconciliation will be available to all Catholics who are able to come to their parish.
So this weekend, if Nancy Pelosi or Joe Biden [or anyone else] presents themselves to receive the Eucharist, and have not decided to change their stance on abortion, then they knowingly sin against the Body and Blood of Christ. That would be a grave sin, but it could be forgiven.
But if they present themselves as changed, but then knowingly and willingly act against those convictions, that is a serious matter indeed.[ie. the dog revisiting it's own vomit].
That is where the parable of the Good Shepherd comes into play.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Yes, he had that thought. But the telling point here is that he did come to the Supper. So at that point he may have had thoughts about the matter, but he did not do the deed until after he received, and after satan entered him.
A sin is not sin until it is committed.

Jesus would disagree with you.......
Matthew 5:27-32

New King James Version

Adultery in the Heart
27 “You have heard that it was said a]">[a]to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to b]">[b]sin, pluck it out and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to c]">[c]sin, cut it off and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell.

 

[pdudgeon]

I agree though, that this might be better in the Catholic only forum if for no other reason then I'm not sure how noncatholics opinions about the Catholic church and communion wont just lead to some serious arguing which, while those who know me know I don't have a lot of trouble with arguing about things, I'm not sure this wont eventually become a fight over Catholics vrs Protestants. And that's never very pretty.
tulc(just a thought)

But if we post with clarity and grace, then we may have an opportunity to let God's light shine. Right?

 

[civilwarbuff]

But if we post with clarity and grace, then we may have an opportunity to let God's light shine. Right?

Agreed.......

 

[pdudgeon]

Jesus would disagree with you.......
Matthew 5:27-32
You have quoted correctly, but you have forgotten one very important thing;
When He spoke thusly, Jesus had not yet died for our sins.
So yes, for that time and place, Jesus did indeed speak correctly, and all those that He spoke to were indeed guilty as charged.
But! [And it's a very important "but"] Jesus died for our sins, He rose triumphant over all of them, and He lives to give us new life.
That doesn't mean that we get off Scot free, for there is always a penalty for sin.
It does mean that it is possible to be forgiven of all but one sin; that sin against The Holy Spirit.
For all else there is a remedy.
New King James Version

Adultery in the Heart
27 “You have heard that it was said a]">[a]to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to b]">[b]sin, pluck it out and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to c]">[c]sin, cut it off and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell.

 

[pdudgeon]

P.s. my sincere apologies for messing up your quote by posting in the middle of it in my response.

 

[tulc]

But if we post with clarity and grace, then we may have an opportunity to let God's light shine. Right?

...okay...
tulc(is going to make coffee and watch)

 

[Landon Caeli]

Are you talking about them being "wolves in sheep's clothing", saying that they are against abortion when in reality they support it? Or just the opposite?
Either way is deception, and a mortal sin. So either way, they could not rightly receive.
That predicament also points back to the purpose of baptism and cleansing from one's old sinfull life: enter dirty, come out clean.
Even after baptism as we participate in the Affairs of the World, we are bound to have some of it's dirt and corruption brush off onto us.
Recognizing that fact, we are aware of our state, are urged by what we are taught to change and renew our original intentions: to be clean once more before The Lord.
So we come before Him either as hobbled lambs, or as wolves in sheep's clothing.

I was referring to them as possible "sheep in wolves clothing".

 

[JimR-OCDS]

The Catholic Bishops are divided over this as much as we in this forum are.

Cardinal Dolan, when he was president of the USCCB refused to deny pro-choice
politicians communion. He clearly stated that using the Eucharist as a whipping to
to get Catholics in line is not what the Sacrament is about.

Other Bishops have come out and directly addressed Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi and said they should not present themselves to receive Holy Communion. Of course those Bishops were out of line and only the person's Bishop can tell the person not to receive. Neither Biden's nor Pelosi's Bishop has done so, although Nancy Pelosi's Bishop has come out with some words of caution for her.

Myself, I'm with Cardinal Dolan. For centuries the Church officials have often used the Sacrament as a whipping tool to get Catholics in line and often it was with the Bishop's
personal agenda.

When St Paul wrote to the Roman's about not receiving unworthily, he was addressing the church there that they were treating the Eucharist celebration like a party with drinking and eating. There were people attending and receiving, who were not even Christians and had no idea about what they were doing when they received the consecrated Bread and Wine.

It wasn't about a priest in today's word denying Christ in the Eucharist, to a person who presents themselves with humility and sincere belief in the real presence of Jesus in the bread and wine.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

The Catholic Bishops are divided over this as much as we in this forum are.

Cardinal Dolan, when he was president of the USCCB refused to deny pro-choice
politicians communion. He clearly stated that using the Eucharist as a whipping to
to get Catholics in line is not what the Sacrament is about.

Other Bishops have come out and directly addressed Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi and said they should not present themselves to receive Holy Communion. Of course those Bishops were out of line and only the person's Bishop can tell the person not to receive. Neither Biden's nor Pelosi's Bishop has done so, although Nancy Pelosi's Bishop has come out with some words of caution for her.

Myself, I'm with Cardinal Dolan. For centuries the Church officials have often used the Sacrament as a whipping tool to get Catholics in line and often it was with the Bishop's
personal agenda.

When St Paul wrote to the Roman's about not receiving unworthily, he was addressing the church there that they were treating the Eucharist celebration like a party with drinking and eating. There were people attending and receiving, who were not even Christians and had no idea about what they were doing when they received the consecrated Bread and Wine.

It wasn't about a priest in today's word denying Christ in the Eucharist, to a person who presents themselves with humility and sincere belief in the real presence of Jesus in the bread and wine.

This sort of conclusion would mean there is no consequence for the public Catholic who violates the teaching of the Church in any sense. Abortion is not just any sin, yet you have Catholic officials and even Catholics on these forums enthusiastically embrace abortion. Not on the grounds of Catholic teaching, but on the grounds of progressive secular ideology.

Take for instance congressman Ted Lieu : "Dear USCCB, I’m Catholic and I support contraception, a woman’s right to choose, treatments for infertility, the right for people to get a divorce, the right of same sex marriage,"

One wonders what Ted Lieu supports that is actually Catholic. It is also necessary to point out that excommunication or denial of the Eucharist has been used in the past on political figures. If the idea is that anyone in public standing must be treated as a private individual then the Catholic Church, for the majority of it's history has been at the centre of great evil.

Think about Ambrose making Theodosius repent before he could receive communion. Or Thomas Becket insisting on the rights of the Church and being a thorn in the side of Henry the II. Perhaps Henry was quite right in his desire to see Becket dead and quite wrong to be publicly scourged when Becket was killed. Or what about the Papal states and the laws Popes enforced there? It could never be said that the Catholic Church was above Political concerns but they did act to bind secular consciences when they felt compelled to. Why shouldn't they on the Catholic Church's understanding of itself?

In doing nothing to these Catholic democrats, you open the door to gradual acceptance of these ideas. It's no wonder a majority of Catholics feel themselves comfortable supporting Homosexuality and abortion rights, because there is no spiritual consequence for holding such an idea. You will see the Catholic Church become more and more like the Episcopalian Church and then die much in the same way.

 

[iarwain]

Myself, I'm with Cardinal Dolan. For centuries the Church officials have often used the Sacrament as a whipping tool to get Catholics in line and often it was with the Bishop's personal agenda.

Personally, I think the Communion should be offered to everyone. I find the Catholic Mass to be beautiful, and I would love to go to a Mass and receive Communion, as the Lord commanded. But if you are not a practicing Catholic, you are not supposed to receive Communion, so I feel I have to respect that. When in Rome, as they say.

I guess my merely questioning the practice of denying Communion makes me ineligible to receive it, according to church doctrine.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Personally, I think the Communion should be offered to everyone. I find the Catholic Mass to be beautiful, and I would love to go to a Mass and receive Communion, as the Lord commanded. But if you are not a practicing Catholic, you are not supposed to receive Communion, so I feel I have to respect that. When in Rome, as they say.

I guess my merely questioning the practice of denying Communion makes me ineligible to receive it, according to church doctrine.

It should be offered to those who know who they are receiving in the Eucharist. Not just anyone who goes up and thinks it's just a symbol or social construct.

 

[Michie]

It should not be given to anyone that remains in obstinate sin and publicly promotes things the Church teaches against.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

This sort of conclusion would mean there is no consequence for the public Catholic who violates the teaching of the Church in any sense. Abortion is not just any sin, yet you have Catholic officials and even Catholics on these forums enthusiastically embrace abortion. Not on the grounds of Catholic teaching, but on the grounds of progressive secular ideology.

Take for instance congressman Ted Lieu : "Dear USCCB, I’m Catholic and I support contraception, a woman’s right to choose, treatments for infertility, the right for people to get a divorce, the right of same sex marriage,"

One wonders what Ted Lieu supports that is actually Catholic. It is also necessary to point out that excommunication or denial of the Eucharist has been used in the past on political figures. If the idea is that anyone in public standing must be treated as a private individual then the Catholic Church, for the majority of it's history has been at the centre of great evil.

Think about Ambrose making Theodosius repent before he could receive communion. Or Thomas Becket insisting on the rights of the Church and being a thorn in the side of Henry the II. Perhaps Henry was quite right in his desire to see Becket dead and quite wrong to be publicly scourged when Becket was killed. Or what about the Papal states and the laws Popes enforced there? It could never be said that the Catholic Church was above Political concerns but they did act to bind secular consciences when they felt compelled to. Why shouldn't they on the Catholic Church's understanding of itself?

In doing nothing to these Catholic democrats, you open the door to gradual acceptance of these ideas. It's no wonder a majority of Catholics feel themselves comfortable supporting Homosexuality and abortion rights, because there is no spiritual consequence for holding such an idea. You will see the Catholic Church become more and more like the Episcopalian Church and then die much in the same way.

As Cardinal Dolan also stated, such Catholics need pastoral guidance.

There are Catholics who indeed directly support abortion, but they can be forgiven as soon as they turn to God and ask for God's mercy and forgiveness.

However, most of the pro-Choice Catholic Politicians never directly support, assist or help to provide a direct abortion.

Fact is, after watching Bishop Tobin of RI on Hardball with Chris Matthews years back when he told Congressman Patrick Kennedy not to receive Holy Communion, Matthews asked the Bishop if he had the druthers would he outlaw abortion ? The Bishop quickly affirmed that he would. Matthews asked him, so if you were a member of Congress, what would you put into the penalty phase of the law making abortion illegal ? Would you have women who violate the law go to jail ? The Bishop couldn't answer and said he didn't have the expertise on writing law. Matthews then said to the Bishop, "yet you feel you have the expertise to tell the Congressman not to receive Communion because he hasn't written a law making abortion illegal. The Bishop stumbled over his own tongue and couldn't give an answer.

I agree, the Church says it's a sin to directly obtain, provide or support abortion directly. But when it comes to how laws are written in our legislature, it's not a direct support, but mostly indirect.

Try getting abortion banned in the US before viability of a fetus, and you won't even get a hearing in the Senate or House of Representatives.

That being the case, should Catholics not serve in office of the United States Government ?

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

As Cardinal Dolan also stated, such Catholics need pastoral guidance.

There are Catholics who indeed directly support abortion, but they can be forgiven as soon as they turn to God and ask for God's mercy and forgiveness.

However, most of the pro-Choice Catholic Politicians never directly support, assist or help to provide a direct abortion.

Fact is, after watching Bishop Tobin of RI on Hardball with Chris Matthews years back when he told Congressman Patrick Kennedy not to receive Holy Communion, Matthews asked the Bishop if he had the druthers would he outlaw abortion ? The Bishop quickly affirmed that he would. Matthews asked him, so if you were a member of Congress, what would you put into the penalty phase of the law making abortion illegal ? Would you have women who violate the law go to jail ? The Bishop couldn't answer and said he didn't have the expertise on writing law. Matthews then said to the Bishop, "yet you feel you have the expertise to tell the Congressman not to receive Communion because he hasn't written a law making abortion illegal. The Bishop stumbled over his own tongue and couldn't give an answer.

I agree, the Church says it's a sin to directly obtain, provide or support abortion directly. But when it comes to how laws are written in our legislature, it's not a direct support, but mostly indirect.

Try getting abortion banned in the US before viability of a fetus, and you won't even get a hearing in the Senate or House of Representatives.

That being the case, should Catholics not serve in office of the United States Government ?

Bishop Tobin's inability to articulate the reason why the Catholic Bishops should consider this doesn't convince me. It seems if we were to follow this sort of reasoning there could be no Christians in secular governments unless they are willing to give up their own moral prerogatives and surrender the law to the domain of unbelievers only. Only on secular grounds, may law be established and how does that help Catholics or Christians in general?

Tobin should have said, yes, the consequences for performing abortion and acquiring one would be jail or perhaps even the death sentence for the murder of another human being (since according to Catholicism it is a human being which is being aborted). Tobin perhaps was thinking politically and how it would make himself appear to the outside world to be seeming so harsh and that's unfortunate that a cleric would feel such pressure. But then again, I don't know or care to know much more about that exchange.

You bring up an interesting notion. If the cost of doing politics in the USA, at least doing politics in the democratic party is the selling of one's soul to the abortion industry and propping it up, why should any Catholic be in the democratic party? I wouldn't recommend being in the Republican party as a solution, but if the entire system is designed to grind down and spit out your Catholic values and make Catholics ordinary Americans, why be part of it at all? In exchange for being assimilated into the Babylonians you have lost your inheritance as an Israelite.

It would be an interesting thought experiment, imagine telling Catholics a hundred years ago in the USA that they would have two US presidents. They would perhaps cheer and be happy at this news. You then proceed to tell them that in order for a Catholic to become a president he had to lay his Catholicism at the door and operate on a different value system. Would they be happy at this? Would they continue cheering when learning that Joe Biden wants to publicly fund Abortion, supports homosexuality, thinks boys and girls should have life altering surgery and chemical treatments?

I would say you are on to something. Not just Catholics, but Christians in general should stop propping up the US government if they believe their values as Christians matter more than the state.

 

[civilwarbuff]

But when it comes to how laws are written in our legislature, it's not a direct support, but mostly indirect.

So laws that allow abortion, including OTC abortion pills to minors, or supporting the passage of laws where the federal government uses tax money to pay for abortions isn't direct support? What then is your idea of direct support?.......do they need to perform the abortion themselves?

 

[iarwain]

So laws that allow abortion, including OTC abortion pills to minors, or supporting the passage of laws where the federal government uses tax money to pay for abortions isn't direct support? What then is your idea of direct support?.......do they need to perform the abortion themselves?

Yeah, I mean if you say "I support a woman's right to choose" as part of your political campaign, that seems like supporting abortion to me. Maybe that politician is not performing the surgery, but he is saying he will work to maintain an environment where abortions are readily available.

It should be offered to those who know who they are receiving in the Eucharist. Not just anyone who goes up and thinks it's just a symbol or social construct.

As a Christian, I feel that Communion should be given to those who want it. Obviously they should receive it in a respectful manner. I don't know why anyone who wanted it would want to receive it in a disrespectful manner, but I wouldn't be surprised at anything these days. The Catholic Church has its own specific rules, which I respect, even if I might disagree with them.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Bishop Tobin's inability to articulate the reason why the Catholic Bishops should consider this doesn't convince me. It seems if we were to follow this sort of reasoning there could be no Christians in secular governments unless they are willing to give up their own moral prerogatives and surrender the law to the domain of unbelievers only. Only on secular grounds, may law be established and how does that help Catholics or Christians in general?

Tobin should have said, yes, the consequences for performing abortion and acquiring one would be jail or perhaps even the death sentence for the murder of another human being (since according to Catholicism it is a human being which is being aborted). Tobin perhaps was thinking politically and how it would make himself appear to the outside world to be seeming so harsh and that's unfortunate that a cleric would feel such pressure. But then again, I don't know or care to know much more about that exchange.

You bring up an interesting notion. If the cost of doing politics in the USA, at least doing politics in the democratic party is the selling of one's soul to the abortion industry and propping it up, why should any Catholic be in the democratic party? I wouldn't recommend being in the Republican party as a solution, but if the entire system is designed to grind down and spit out your Catholic values and make Catholics ordinary Americans, why be part of it at all? In exchange for being assimilated into the Babylonians you have lost your inheritance as an Israelite.

It would be an interesting thought experiment, imagine telling Catholics a hundred years ago in the USA that they would have two US presidents. They would perhaps cheer and be happy at this news. You then proceed to tell them that in order for a Catholic to become a president he had to lay his Catholicism at the door and operate on a different value system. Would they be happy at this? Would they continue cheering when learning that Joe Biden wants to publicly fund Abortion, supports homosexuality, thinks boys and girls should have life altering surgery and chemical treatments?

I would say you are on to something. Not just Catholics, but Christians in general should stop propping up the US government if they believe their values as Christians matter more than the state.

Not being able to answer what the penalty would be for a woman who obtains an abortion is critical in the discussion. No one would advocate throwing a woman in jail or the death penalty for her for having an abortion, especially before viability.

As it is, we do have regulations on late term abortions and even after viability.

For many states, unless it's to save the life of the mother, it's not allowed.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

So laws that allow abortion, including OTC abortion pills to minors, or supporting the passage of laws where the federal government uses tax money to pay for abortions isn't direct support? What then is your idea of direct support?.......do they need to perform the abortion themselves?

Not really.

Direct support would be doing the abortion itself, or assisting in it. Even driving the woman to an abortion clinic would be direct support for her obtaining an abortion.

Taking an abortion pill, that's her choice.\

However, I think Congress should at least include a conscience clause in any abortion legislation which allows doctors and pharmacists to opt out

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Yeah, I mean if you say "I support a woman's right to choose" as part of your political campaign, that seems like supporting abortion to me. Maybe that politician is not performing the surgery, but he is saying he will work to maintain an environment where abortions are readily available.


As a Christian, I feel that Communion should be given to those who want it. Obviously they should receive it in a respectful manner. I don't know why anyone who wanted it would want to receive it in a disrespectful manner, but I wouldn't be surprised at anything these days. The Catholic Church has its own specific rules, which I respect, even if I might disagree with them.

But for Catholics, we believe in the real presence of Christ in the bread and wine, the Eucharist.

Not believing this would be fraudulent when the minister or priest presents the host and says, "the body of Christ." And the communicant says, "Amen," or so be it. In other words, the communicant is agreeing that it is the body of Christ.

Not believing it would be a lack of knowledge in just what the person is agreeing to