Nancy Pelosi barred from communion for abortion support

[KCfromNC]

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

I never said anything about what they believed, just how they were acting as political lobbyists for and against specific candidates.

 

[Larniavc]

That's a "Christians only" forum.

Interesting. The Archbishop is turning Pelosi away not because she had an abortion herself--which would be a Christian sin--but because she is not striving to criminalize a Christian sin for the non-Christian citizens of a secular state.

We really need to keep Christianity out of American politics. This would be a non-issue in the UK.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

I never said anything about what they believed, just how they were acting as political lobbyists for and against specific candidates.

Christians have political interests. Why would they not advocate for those who are for their position or at the very least not punish those who are in line with the Church on a given subject and not causing scandal? Do you want Christians to be part of society or not?

If you are opposed to the Church being political you ought also be opposed to Nancy Pelosi using her Catholicism as a prop to advertise herself. She may or may not be sincere, but if she's going to do that and advocate for positions the Church finds abominable, what else is the Catholic Church to do? They have a duty not only to God but to their congregants to make sure they know said positions on abortion are unacceptable.

 

[Goonie]

And yet the Catholic Church aren't withholding communion for the most serious infractions. Heck though shalt not kill does not even make the top 5 of sins.

 

[KCfromNC]

Christians have political interests. Why would they not advocate for those who are for their position or at the very least not punish those who are in line with the Church on a given subject and not causing scandal?

I never said they couldn't. Just that if they create organizations used to lobby for or against particular candidates they need to follow the same rules as everyone else. Wouldn't be fair otherwise.

If you are opposed to the Church being political you ought also be opposed to Nancy Pelosi using her Catholicism as a prop to advertise herself.

Thanks for the advice, but I think I'll ignore it. I can see there's a large difference between a candidate admitting one is a particular religion versus the leadership of that religious group attempting to sway elections via implied threats against their members.

 

[ottawak]

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.

I have no disagreement in principle with a law being informed by a Christian perspective, or indeed any perspective provided the law meets Constitutional requirements but the Christian perspective is not priviledged in that regard.

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.

That's just silly. Laws are not moral statements and many laws are entirely uninformed by morality.

 

[ottawak]

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.

Why should I bother explaining what Episcopalians believe when you are having so much fun making it up?

 

[hedrick]

This is a symptom of a broader problem. Roughly half of American Catholics disagree with the Church on gender and sexual issues.

In my view the Church should either live with the disagreement or make a serious effort to get members to conform, being willing to pay the cost in membership.

To excommunicate just a few politicians looks more like interfering in politics than a serious attempt to get people to conform to the Church's position.

 

[ottawak]

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.

No, it does not forbid churches to hold up Christian standards but it is held to forbid them from making a political show out of it.

 

[NxNW]

I don't think anyone should be taking communion.

Well, then, you'll be pleased to know that I've never taken communion in my life.

 

[durangodawood]

Why in the world dont we just have a theocracy and be done with all this iniquity?

 

[cow451]

Never implied as such. Only offered wider context. People pretend this is a uniquely Catholic problem when it's a human problem in multiple institutions, secular and religious. Yet few people are willing to cast aspersions on public schooling because of sexual abuse that goes on in them.

The Catholic sex abuse cover up is not such a bad thing since everyone does it, like Protestant churches, too?

 

[cow451]

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.

Catholic Priests were known by the Church leadership to have violated parishioners but allowed to continue participating in all sacraments. Period.

 

[cow451]

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

Politics

 

[cow451]

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?

Catholic politicians from all parties have voted over the years to remove legal statutes against adultery. Why are they allowed to take communion?

 

[cow451]

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.

I strongly encourage Christians to abstain from voting in this case.

 

[civilwarbuff]

And that makes it ok for the Catholic church to cover up rampant abuse of children? Fascinating justification.

More whataboutism's I see. Why not try sticking to the OP for a change.

 

[Valletta]

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.

We all have freedom of will to obey God's laws or not. The bishop's duty is to care for those under his charge, there is no "blackmail" in play, it is the bishop's concern for her soul.
“Whoever eats the bread and drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself. That is why many among you are ill and infirm, and a considerable number are dying.” (I Cor. 11:27-30)

 

[civilwarbuff]

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

Probably on scripture like this:

Dealing With Sin in the Church
15“If your brother or sister b sins, c go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over. 16But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ d 17If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.
NIV

 

[Goonie]

We all have freedom of will to obey God's laws or not. The bishop's duty is to care for those under his charge, there is no "blackmail" in play, it is the bishop's concern for her soul.
“Whoever eats the bread and drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself. That is why many among you are ill and infirm, and a considerable number are dying.” (I Cor. 11:27-30)

Yet weirdly I can't remember a case where a politician was denied communion for any of the other sins, including off cause the 5 sins the ten commandments declare worse that though shalt not kill.