Ash Wednesday Posted July 2, 2004 Posted July 2, 2004 Someone has to draw the line at stopping what is public scandal. "Conscience Catholicism" doesn't cut the mustard with serious issues like this. Most of all, the Eucharist is not something that is "owed" to us. It isn't a "right" for just anybody. It is a privilege.
EcceNovaFacioOmni Posted July 2, 2004 Posted July 2, 2004 I don't like letting them come to Mass and then rejecting them at communion. I think they should be excommunicated instead.
Iacobus Posted July 2, 2004 Author Posted July 2, 2004 [quote name='thedude' date='Jul 2 2004, 01:43 PM'] I don't like letting them come to Mass and then rejecting them at communion. I think they should be excommunicated instead. [/quote] Thedude, canon law in the Church has been more about bringing people who are fighting the Church back to the Church. The Church doesn't want to expell someone and leave them damned, her goal is to save them. She wants to re-educate them and return them to the Church. Therefore, in this case, I think outright excom would be bad. LD, that would be a workable peance. LOL!
EcceNovaFacioOmni Posted July 3, 2004 Posted July 3, 2004 (edited) The reason I say that is that I don't think the Church's rules allow people to be barred from communion so excommunication is the only way of keeping them from receiving, if that's what the Church wants. [url="http://www.newadvent.org/summa/502102.htm"]http://www.newadvent.org/summa/502102.htm[/url] Edited July 3, 2004 by thedude
BurkeFan Posted July 3, 2004 Posted July 3, 2004 Thedude, Canon Law does allow for the prohibition of Communion without excommunication. What you cited from Thomas just states that the Church can and sometimes should excommunicate people. Iacobus - Excommunication can be a loving action. It's much like kicking a rebellious, wayward teenager out of the house, it can ultimately be the best thing for them. If Kerry keeps thinking he can delight over the slaughter of innocents and recieve the Body and Blood of Our Lord, then, he should be excommunicated, and hopefully that will get the point across to him. In Christ, Dave
Iacobus Posted July 3, 2004 Author Posted July 3, 2004 Yeh I guess that could happen. But I just can't see Mr. Kerry doing what one of the kings did (before the British split one of the kings stood outside the Pope's resdince in the snow for two weeks begging to be let back into the Church after being excomed). So yeh excom can be meant as a healing act, but it appears to be a drasitic and final act. At least that is how it would be covered. Which would not only make a scandal for Kerry but also for the Church (appears to be disreagrading teachings on forgiveness).
BurkeFan Posted July 3, 2004 Posted July 3, 2004 Iacobus, you seem really focused on how the Church is perceived and it's PR. We're not here to be liked. Geez, in some senses, anti-Catholicism is a sign that we're doing something right! We have to take the steps that we know are right, for we have too long been controlled by secular interests. I for one pray that the Church does not run away in fear of being percieved poorly by the secularists.
qfnol31 Posted July 3, 2004 Posted July 3, 2004 [quote name='Iacobus' date='Jul 2 2004, 11:45 PM'] Yeh I guess that could happen. But I just can't see Mr. Kerry doing what one of the kings did (before the British split one of the kings stood outside the Pope's resdince in the snow for two weeks begging to be let back into the Church after being excomed). So yeh excom can be meant as a healing act, but it appears to be a drasitic and final act. At least that is how it would be covered. Which would not only make a scandal for Kerry but also for the Church (appears to be disreagrading teachings on forgiveness). [/quote] Excommunication isn't drastic nor is it a final option. It's the penalty set down by Canon Law, which is to be followed.
littleflower+JMJ Posted July 3, 2004 Posted July 3, 2004 [quote name='Iacobus' date='Jul 2 2004, 11:45 PM'] Yeh I guess that could happen. But I just can't see Mr. Kerry doing what one of the kings did (before the British split one of the kings stood outside the Pope's resdince in the snow for two weeks begging to be let back into the Church after being excomed). So yeh excom can be meant as a healing act, but it appears to be a drasitic and final act. At least that is how it would be covered. Which would not only make a scandal for Kerry but also for the Church (appears to be disreagrading teachings on forgiveness). [/quote] excommunication doesn't bring scandal to the Church iacobus, it rids Herself of it. if your hand is what causes you to sin, rid of it. yes, your right the Church teaches forgiveness, but She also teachs and models the Fullness of Truth.
qfnol31 Posted July 3, 2004 Posted July 3, 2004 [quote name='Iacobus' date='Jul 2 2004, 05:42 PM'] Thedude, canon law in the Church has been more about bringing people who are fighting the Church back to the Church. The Church doesn't want to expell someone and leave them damned, her goal is to save them. She wants to re-educate them and return them to the Church. Therefore, in this case, I think outright excom would be bad. [/quote] How does keeping them in the Church and allowing them to receive Holy Communion not hurt the person? I think that to continue the Blessed Sacrament in the state of a mortal sin is a good way to bring damnation on yourself....
littleflower+JMJ Posted July 3, 2004 Posted July 3, 2004 [quote name='Iacobus' date='Jul 2 2004, 11:45 PM'] Yeh I guess that could happen. But I just can't see Mr. Kerry doing what one of the kings did (before the British split one of the kings stood outside the Pope's resdince in the snow for two weeks begging to be let back into the Church after being excomed). So yeh excom can be meant as a healing act, but it appears to be a drasitic and final act. At least that is how it would be covered. Which would not only make a scandal for Kerry but also for the Church (appears to be disreagrading teachings on forgiveness). [/quote] i know about excommuncation beacuse not too long ago our Bishop had to warn a Catholic person with excommuncation. why? cuz she worked as a secretary/nurse in an Abortion Clinic. it was drasctic, it was powerful and its the right thing to do. he wrote a letter, letting everyone know the wrong that was being done and that she needed to stop what evil she was aiding, what happened? it bought awareness of what the Church taught and stood for....made aware of the wrong that she was doing and what others may have been dong as well if they too played a part in abortion....so i know my bishop did the right thing. and when doing the right thing, good does happen! j. kerry publicly announced that his catholic and then publicably announced, endorsed and is going to be having NON-catholic stances than he is held, as a leader in the public eye held in the higher standard. cmom is right, they should nto be recieving communion. for all the souls that may/could/have gone astray by this, means this cannot be something reconciled in private. the priest, as vehicle and protector of the Eucharist, can refuse to give communion to anyone who he blieves/knows is not in a state of grace.... God bless....
EcceNovaFacioOmni Posted July 3, 2004 Posted July 3, 2004 (edited) [quote]Thedude, Canon Law does allow for the prohibition of Communion without excommunication. What you cited from Thomas just states that the Church can and sometimes should excommunicate people.[/quote] My reason for providing a link to that page in the Summa Theologica was to show that excommunication isn't an out of date practice, and should be practiced today. Edited July 3, 2004 by thedude
cappie Posted July 8, 2004 Posted July 8, 2004 Interesting [url="http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0403722.htm"]Cardinal Ratzinger[/url]
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now