Nancy Pelosi barred from communion for abortion support

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Threatening to deprive her of something which she values very highly and doing it publically.

Well it's not a threat. It's something Bishop Cordileone has done. She's already barred from receiving communion. Who values the Eucharist more? Someone who would hand it out to everyone? Like your Church would? Or someone who understands communion to be closed, not subject merely to individual decision but oversight from the Church? Does the Church have no right to protect it's sacraments from people like Mrs Pelosi who deride Church teaching publicly by advocating against it?


What is the Church to do if it wants to maintain it's position on abortion? You won't let it act in it's interests in it's sphere of religious authority, so what now? Does Pelosi decide for Catholics what is true and what is not?

Subject to Constitutional safeguards, yes.

Do you think non-Christians should obey Christian laws put on them by Christians if they pass constitutional safeguards?

A law is a lay. All citizens must obey, subject to Constutional safeguards. If you've got the votes, pass a law against abortion. But remember that your religious views on the subject are not a justification for it any anybody else's eyes but yours.

My religious views are a justification for my views on abortion. Why should I subordinate my religious views to your secular or non-Christian morality?

 

[Hans Blaster]

My statement only implies that Episcopalians prefer non-Christian morality in the law. I think this is justifiable based on Episcopalians themselves who for the most part agree with you. They don't agree with Christians before them or Christians like me, who see some interest and utility in Christians having a say in the law. I will note, you don't even have to be a Christian to be an Episcopalian in good standing in that Church. See John Shelby Spong as the prime example of a such non-Christian Bishop in the Episcopalian Church. He was never removed, never condemned and was buried in an Episcopalian Church. My statement is very careful and very technical. If it's against the rules I will remove it, but I stand by it in any case.

As far as encoding morality goes, we do this all the time. It is wrong to murder and therefore it is outlawed. It's not purely utilitarianism that makes us outlaw murder. Law and morality are not inseparable and plenty of politicians speak of the need to enforce certain laws or create new ones for moral principles and reasons. Nancy Pelosi is devoted to abortion. She derives this from a moral principle in which she believes it to be the fundamental core of liberty to kill one's child in the womb. The Catholic Church and most Christendom disagrees with Mrs Pelosi. I don't see how we can escape such a conclusion and think of law as a purely neutral thing free of moral consequence. Nor can be said to be universally dangerous.

1. You don't know my morality, so you have no idea how much Episcopalians agree with me or not. (I don't either as I'm not really sure what their church thinks. I've never had any reason to care.)

2. I'm not sure that you actually know Speaker Pelosi's position on the *morality* of abortion. She does think women have a right to make that choice for themselves. I believe she also thinks people should have the right to divorce. Her church also thinks that is immoral.

3. Roughly half of those who identify as Catholics in the US agree with the Speaker about abortion as do at least half of US Protestants. I have no idea what non-America Christians think.

 

[HARK!]

MOD HAT ON

MOD HAT OFF​

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

1. You don't know my morality, so you have no idea how much Episcopalians agree with me or not. (I don't either as I'm not really sure what their church thinks. I've never had any reason to care.)

2. I'm not sure that you actually know Speaker Pelosi's position on the *morality* of abortion. She does think women have a right to make that choice for themselves. I believe she also thinks people should have the right to divorce. Her church also thinks that is immoral.

3. Roughly half of those who identify as Catholics in the US agree with the Speaker about abortion as do at least half of US Protestants. I have no idea what non-America Christians think.

1. You're an atheist and a secularist. I guarantee you, most Episcopalians agree with you on how government should be run. As little Christianity as possible influencing outcomes. Ask the Episcopalians here.

2. Given that she supports abortion at any stage and does not want states to govern themselves concerning this question. I think I am safe to say I understand her position quite clearly. It is, as you say, likely rooted in feminism. The idea that to be autonomous as woman is to master the biological limitations of one's body and one can do this by having complete control over reproduction. The Catholic and wider Christian view is not this. So her justifications and private ideas about abortion don't give her a right to have the Eucharist from a Christian standpoint.

3. The Catholic Church isn't a democracy. The Catholic Church is basically a monarchy and the majority does not decide what the Church believes. Pro-abortion Catholics on Christian forums struggle desperately to avoid their Church's own teachings. Because they know the history of the Church is against them.

(edited to be in line with the rules of the forum)

 

[Eloy Craft]

The “honor” system. Did the Church authorities take communion while they were covering up widespread sex abuse? Probably.

Sexual scandal aside, a conscience deserves honor doesn't it?

 

[ottawak]

You don't seem to be understanding Hans. Ottowak has a problem with the idea that Christians might wish to criminalize activities that Christians find sinful.

My goodness, what a falsehood. My point was, that Christian morality may be sufficient reason for Christians to desire a law, but it is no necessarily a reason for anyone else. Christian morality is not especially privilged in that regard.

Now there are laws which don't originate from a Christian concept of morality and are non-religious in their fundamental origin (Gay marriage for instance for instance or laws which liberalize divorce and make it easier). The question I asked Ottowak was whether we should obey said laws as Christians. If it is wrong for Christians to impose their standards on others, why should Christians accept the standards of others? Ottowak is an Episcopalian, he probably prefers non-Christian morality to Christianity but it's still a valid question.

Because we are talking about law, not morality.

 

[APersonWithNoName]

Pelosi banned from receiving communion in San Francisco archdiocese over her position on abortion - CNNPolitics

The conservative archbishop of San Francisco, Salvatore Cordileone, says House Speaker Nancy Pelosi may no longer receive the holy sacrament of Communion in the archdiocese, because she supports abortion rights.

this happened to Joe Biden as well I wonder which scripture do they base this on

 

[Hans Blaster]

1. You're an atheist and a secularist. I guarantee you, most Episcopalians agree with you on how government should be run. As little Christianity as possible influencing outcomes. Ask the Episcopalians here. They don't care for Christianity in the public sphere.

2. Given that she supports abortion at any stage and does not want states to govern themselves concerning this question. I think I am safe to say I understand her position quite clearly. It is, as you say, likely rooted in feminism. The idea that to be autonous as woman is to master the biological limitations of one's body and one can do this by having complete control over reproduction. The Catholic and wider Christian view is not this. So her justifications and private ideas about abortion, don't give her a right to have the Eucharist. She should honestly join the Episcopalian Church, she would be happier and more at home there. They are feminist and they pro-abortion and pro-LGBT. Everything Mrs Pelosi stands for in her role as a politician.

3. The Catholic Church isn't a democracy. The Catholic Church is basically a monarchy and the majority does not decide what the Church believes. Pro-abortion Catholics on Christian forums struggle desperately to avoid their Church's own teachings. Because they know the history of the Church is against them.

1. I am an atheist. So what?

All American should be secularists. Secularism is just keeping religion in its appropriate place. We have a legally secular government and have for 235 years. Secularism is keeping religion from controlling government and being controlled by government.

3. Everyone knows the the RCC is a authoritarian gerontocracy. I was talking about what *members* of the church thought on those issues. If there was no conflict between the hierarchy and the membership none of the things in the OP would be happening.

 

[Valletta]

Even if we take out the "supporting abortion rights" mortal sin, there are large numbers of Catholics taking communion without having properly dealt with their sins through confession each week. The priests know that. The bishops know that. When they know of a specific case, a priest will often tell someone in "mortal sin" not to approach for communion. (The big one is usually co-habitation or post-divorce romantic engagements.) But, even in those cases, an unfamiliar priest won't know to stop the same people.

A public pronouncement is definitely just political nonsense. At least a third of the communicants each Sunday have similar positions on abortion to the Speaker and some of them are also active with various support to choice groups or politicians. (I say "at least a third" despite at least half of self-identified Catholics having that position, since studies also show that regular mass attenders are less likely to be pro-choice. Just being conservative.)

It’s a sin to lie, cheat, steal, commit adultery, abuse children, etc. Is communion denied these Catholics?

Communion is rarely denied by a priest because in the vast majority of cases the priest has no idea whether an individual has repented from grave sin or not. In the rare cases where the grave sin is public and the individual refuses to repent, action is taken, whether it be from a Catholic school firing someone or the bishop denying them communion.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

My goodness, what a falsehood. My point was, that Christian morality may be sufficient reason for Christians to desire a law, but it is no necessarily a reason for anyone else. Christian morality is not especially privilged in that regard.

It is to be privledged if it is the law. It doesn't matter if it originates in Christian moral presumptions. If you believe Christians can seek to change law according to their standards, then we are not conflict. If you disagree, then we are in conflict. But I honestly don't believe you would approve of law being informed by a Christian perspective and enforced on others who are not Christian and who might dissagree with it.

Because we are talking about law, not morality.

I'll repeat my point. Morality informs the creation of law. I don't see politicians arguing on the basis of utilitarianism or neutrality for why we should have laws. They say, said law is right or said action is wrong and must be punished. This is rooted in moral presumptions. It's inseparable.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

1. I am an atheist. So what?

All American should be secularists. Secularism is just keeping religion in its appropriate place. We have a legally secular government and have for 235 years. Secularism is keeping religion from controlling government and being controlled by government.

3. Everyone knows the the RCC is a authoritarian gerontocracy. I was talking about what *members* of the church thought on those issues. If there was no conflict between the hierarchy and the membership none of the things in the OP would be happening.

1. That might be your vision for the world but it's not my vision nor do I think you can convince Christians that it's in their own best interest to surrender their place in society. That we should have no impact on law from morals rooted in our perspective. I think Americans Christians are kind of foolish if they think continuing down the path of pure secularism in a society because it only leads to less religion. You might like that, I don't.

3. RCC is actually quite weak on it's authority lately. Rarely do I see the pope or anyone place canonical penalties on people, especially heretics within the Church. They have become afraid to exercise their sacred duty. Hence why you have people like Francis greeting Joe Biden and refusing to contradict him when he tells the world the Pope called him a good Catholic. This is despite Joe doing everything in his power to advocate laws and policy positions which run counter to the Catholic Church.

So your classification of the RCC being authoritarian is wrong. It's monarchic in function, not authoritarian. It's not arbitrary in it's use of it's power either. There is clear precedent within the RCC for what Cordileone is doing and it's rooted in the previous Pope's directives on this subject. Cordileone gave Nancy Pelosi numerous chances to change her position and talk to him about this. She wouldn't, because she knows from a Catholic perspective she is wrong and Cordileone is right.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

Pelosi banned from receiving communion in San Francisco archdiocese over her position on abortion - CNNPolitics

The conservative archbishop of San Francisco, Salvatore Cordileone, says House Speaker Nancy Pelosi may no longer receive the holy sacrament of Communion in the archdiocese, because she supports abortion rights.

Why is the archdiocese giving personally info to the media on a member of their church?

 

[Valletta]

Why is the archdiocese giving personally info to the media on a member of their church?

In the rare cases where the grave sin is public and the individual refuses to repent, public action can be taken. Ms. Pelosi decided to make her anti-Catholic positions public, in the interests of transparency on a public Church matter it behooves the bishop to release as much information as possible. Some information that is private, such as Pelosi's personal phone number, etc. I would think should be kept private. What specific released information do you object to?

 

[stevil]

It’s a sin to lie, cheat, steal, commit adultery, abuse children, etc. Is communion denied these Catholics?

And remember, Pelosi isn't being punished for actually having an abortion but for refusing to make it illegal.
Are all politicians required to support making infidelity or sex out of marriage or blaspheme or working on the Sabbath illegal too?

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

In the rare cases where the grave sin is public and the individual refuses to repent, public action can be taken. Ms. Pelosi decided to make her anti-Catholic positions public, in the interests of transparency on a public Church matter it behooves the bishop to release as much information as possible. Some information that is private, such as Pelosi's personal phone number, etc. I would think should be kept private. What specific released information do you object to?

Her job isn't to please her religion. It's to protect my rights and other women right to get safe access to abortions and BC. I give credit for that. But her religion has no right to try to blackmail her not to do her job.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Her job isn't to please her religion. It's to protect my rights and other women right to get safe access to abortions and BC. I give credit for that. But her religion has no right to try to blackmail her not to do her job.

It's not blackmail. It's upholding Christian morality and making it clear to people that you cannot promote an idea the Catholic Church considers evil and at the same time present oneself for communion.

How does the Catholic Church not have the right to do this? Does the Constitution forbid Churches from punishing their members over abortion? Does it forbid Churches upholding Christian standards? If that's the case Christians ought to reconsider their loyalty to the US.

 

[That Guy 11200]

It's not blackmail. It's upholding Christian morality and making it clear to people that you cannot promote an idea the Catholic Church considers evil and at the same time present oneself for communion.

How does the Catholic Church not have the right to do this? Does the Constitution forbid Churches from punishing their members over abortion? Does it forbid Churches upholding Christian standards? If that's the case Christians ought to reconsider their loyalty to the US.

"It's upholding Christian morality..." selectively, in this case.

How many disgusting pedo priests were denied communion?

 

[KCfromNC]

Maybe the issue is actively encouraging lying, cheating stealing, comitting adultery, abusing children. If they are doing any of these then yes...

For example, the leadership of an organization that is lying to dodge tax laws by hiding their political lobbying behind a thin veneer of religion?

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

For example, the leadership of an organization that is lying to dodge tax laws by hiding their political lobbying behind a thin veneer of religion?

Or maybe Cordileone believes in Christianity. A shocking thought I know.

 

[KCfromNC]

Why is the archdiocese giving personally info to the media on a member of their church?

Can't really use force to try to coerce their members into voting for or against certain candidates if they keep their lobbying activities quiet.