Communion To Pro-choice Politicians

[qfnol31]

I have had to do the same towards my parents.

[socalscout]

[quote name='Ash Wednesday' date='Aug 9 2004, 06:33 PM'] I'm not really sure, someone out there on the boards would be better versed than I would. But it's my understanding that a priest can reserve the right to reserve communion to anyone he suspects is unfit. Wouldn't it be better for a priest to be safe than sorry? Communion is a privilege, not a "right."

I guess I don't see how a public scandal could be repaired "privately." The sin itself can be forgiven privately, but given public damage, I would think that unless the politician wants to be denied communion by mistaken but cautious priests, he would need to inform people that his stance has changed to end the confusion. [/quote]
I appreciate everything you are saying but it does not fit into what I was taught about the Sacrament. Every sin can be construde against your fellow man but we are not made to make public reparations. Also denying communion to a person who is without Mortal sin "just to be safe" is in itself a sin, I believe.

I don't like the answer to the question I brought up but to me, unless it is stated by the Church, how can they be denied Communion?

[socalscout]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Aug 9 2004, 06:34 PM'] 1424 It is called the sacrament of confession, since the disclosure or confession of sins to a priest is an essential element of this sacrament. In a profound sense it is also a "confession" - acknowledgment and praise - of the holiness of God and of his mercy toward sinful man.
It is called the sacrament of forgiveness, since by the priest's sacramental absolution God grants the penitent "pardon and peace."6
It is called the sacrament of Reconciliation, because it imparts to the sinner the live of God who reconciles: "Be reconciled to God."7 He who lives by God's merciful love is ready to respond to the Lord's call: [b]"Go; first be reconciled to your brother."8[/b]

1450 "Penance requires . . . the sinner to endure all things willingly, be contrite of heart, [b]confess with the lips[/b], and practice complete humility and fruitful satisfaction."

1459 Many sins wrong our neighbor. One must do what is possible in order to repair the harm (e.g., return stolen goods, restore the reputation of someone slandered, pay compensation for injuries). Simple justice requires as much. But sin also injures and weakens the sinner himself, as well as his relationships with God and neighbor. Absolution takes away sin, but it does not remedy all the disorders sin has caused.62 Raised up from sin, the sinner must still recover his full spiritual health by doing something more to make amends for the sin: he must "make satisfaction for" or "expiate" his sins. This satisfaction is also called "penance." [/quote]
Yes and we are given pennance by our confessor but where does it state we must do it publicaly and by who's criteria? If the Confessor tells him to do 5 Hail Mary's and he does then you are telling me he is not absolved of his sin when he leaves that confessional unless he goes public?

[qfnol31]

Last paragraph:

[quote]Raised up from sin, the sinner must still recover his full spiritual health by doing something more to make amends for the sin: he must "make satisfaction for" or "expiate" his sins. This satisfaction is also called "penance." [/quote]

He is not absolved if he doesn't promise to do penance (in the act of Contrition) and follow through on that promise. Up above, it says that he must make amends for the sin, and later calls that penance. Part of making amends for supporting abortion would require a public renunciation.

[Ash Wednesday]

[quote name='socalscout' date='Aug 9 2004, 07:40 PM'] I appreciate everything you are saying but it does not fit into what I was taught about the Sacrament. Every sin can be construde against your fellow man but we are not made to make public reparations. Also denying communion to a person who is without Mortal sin "just to be safe" is in itself a sin, I believe.

I don't like the answer to the question I brought up but to me, unless it is stated by the Church, how can they be denied Communion? [/quote]
How can we "not be made" to make public reparations when we have created public scandal? That doesn't add up at all. If they wish to repair their public standing with the church and remain a public figure, then they will have to resolve the matter PUBLICLY.

And a priest denying communion is not committing sin UNLESS they KNEW the person was not in a state of mortal sin. Otherwise, this is up to the priest's discretion and one should be obedient. Whether they are right or wrong in the matter, the saints in history have practiced obedience with their superiors.

This is apparently a foreign concept to Catholics nowdays.

(off to practice for now, so this is my last post for a while)

[qfnol31]

And Americans. No offense to anyone of course! I'm guilty too.

[socalscout]

[quote name='Ash Wednesday' date='Aug 9 2004, 06:49 PM'] How can we "not be made" to make public reparations when we have created public scandal? That doesn't add up at all. If they wish to repair their public standing with the church and remain a public figure, then they will have to resolve the matter PUBLICLY.

And a priest denying communion is not committing sin UNLESS they KNEW the person was not in a state of mortal sin. Otherwise, this is up to the priest's discretion and one should be obedient. Whether they are right or wrong in the matter, the saints in history have practiced obedience with their superiors.

This is apparently a foreign concept to Catholics nowdays.

(off to practice for now, so this is my last post for a while) [/quote]
Well I'm stumped really. I agree with you but I need someone to prove it.

[ironmonk]

[quote name='socalscout' date='Aug 9 2004, 08:55 PM'] That makes sense but like I said you have to prove that to me. Where does it say that?

I want to be wrong. [/quote]
She's correct.


[quote]Canon 915  Those who are excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion.

Who are those who must be refused, that is, "are not to be admitted to Holy Communion"? The moral and canonical tradition of the Church explains it as those who are "publicly unworthy" (1917 Code c. 855, 1), that is, who despite having been warned [b]have not repented [/b]and [b]repaired the public scandal [/b]("obstinately persist") in some public condition of grave sinfulness ("manifest grave sin"). This certainly applies to anyone, and not just politicians, who publicly and unrepentantly promote and advance grave evils, such as abortion, which the Church has formally identified as such.

Answered by Colin B. Donovan, STL
[url="http://www.ewtn.com/vote/Catholic_Politicians/Questions1.asp"]http://www.ewtn.com/vote/Catholic_Politicians/Questions1.asp[/url][/quote]




God Bless,
ironmonk

[socalscout]

[quote name='ironmonk' date='Aug 9 2004, 06:59 PM'] She's correct.







God Bless,
ironmonk [/quote]
Answered!

Thanks Ash, qfnol31 and Ironmonk. Like I said I wanted to be wrong but I am one of those "Prove it" people.

Edited August 10, 2004 by socalscout

[dUSt]

Also, a priest wouldn't have to absolve Kerry of his sins unless he's made a public announcement stating that he's changed his stance. So therefore, it wouldn't be part of the penance, but it would be a validation that he's truly sorry (a priest should not absolve sins if they know that the sinner is not truly sorry for their sins).

[socalscout]

[quote name='dUSt' date='Aug 9 2004, 07:11 PM'] Also, a priest wouldn't have to absolve Kerry of his sins unless he's made a public announcement stating that he's changed his stance. So therefore, it wouldn't be part of the penance, but it would be a validation that he's truly sorry (a priest should not absolve sins if they know that the sinner is not truly sorry for their sins). [/quote]
I agree but if he is contrite which means he will not vote again then absolution should be granted right? What if there were no more issues on abortion to vote otherwise? Lets say the damage is done what then should the priest do if Kerry is contrite?

Lets say he is absolved by his Confessor, does he then have to say that he renounces his sin publically to receive Communion?

Here is another question. What if he renounces his sin publically but does not go to Confession. How does a Priest or Extra Ordinary Minsiter know that?

Ironmonk answered the question on public announcement but what if he is not required by his confessor to do that? What if he is absolved and privateley reinstated into the Church? How does a Priest or Extra Ordinary Minster know that without knowing the Confession? A Priest or Bishop would be breaking the secrecy of Confession if he told the public that Kerry is absolved right?

Edited August 10, 2004 by socalscout

[qfnol31]

EMHCs can't deny Holy Communion.

The Priest won't necessarily know, it would be up to the communicant to inform him.

He only has to say that he's against abortion and say that he'll stop voting for it.

The Priest should tell him, but it's stated by the Church, so it would be the person who's making the Confession's job to find out and do it either way.

[Ash Wednesday]

[quote name='socalscout' date='Aug 9 2004, 08:04 PM']Answered!

Thanks Ash, qfnol31 and Ironmonk. Like I said I wanted to be wrong but I am one of those "Prove it" people.[/quote]
I know what you're saying. I have a friend that is like that, too. :read:


Thanks everyone.

[Ellenita]

This is an interesting debate!

The bishops in England are reported in the press to be divided as to whether they would deny communion to politicians - some have apparently said they don't think the Eucharist should be used as a political issue....

....of course, this may be 'mis-reporting' - I'm very cynical that the press ever faithfully reports anything these days!

Has there been agreement among the bishops in the US over the issue with Kerry?

[ironmonk]

[quote name='Ellenita' date='Aug 10 2004, 08:36 AM'] This is an interesting debate!

The bishops in England are reported in the press to be divided as to whether they would deny communion to politicians - some have apparently said they don't think the Eucharist should be used as a political issue....

....of course, this may be 'mis-reporting' - I'm very cynical that the press ever faithfully reports anything these days!

Has there been agreement among the bishops in the US over the issue with Kerry? [/quote]
There are a few bad bishops in the world that seem to forget what the Church teaches and seem to have their own foolish reasoning.

A bishop that goes against the Church is truely a sad thing.


God Bless,
ironmonk

[MorphRC]

Pro-Choice = No Communion

[socalscout]

[quote name='Ellenita' date='Aug 10 2004, 05:36 AM'] This is an interesting debate!

The bishops in England are reported in the press to be divided as to whether they would deny communion to politicians - some have apparently said they don't think the Eucharist should be used as a political issue....

....of course, this may be 'mis-reporting' - I'm very cynical that the press ever faithfully reports anything these days!

Has there been agreement among the bishops in the US over the issue with Kerry? [/quote]
The stance I am taking is not that they should receive Communion stained with that sin but that how do we know if they are not reconciled to the Church if the means is the secrecy of Confession. Assuming they stop voting the way they do.

[Ash Wednesday]

[quote name='Ellenita' date='Aug 10 2004, 06:36 AM'] This is an interesting debate!

The bishops in England are reported in the press to be divided as to whether they would deny communion to politicians - some have apparently said they don't think the Eucharist should be used as a political issue....

....of course, this may be 'mis-reporting' - I'm very cynical that the press ever faithfully reports anything these days!

Has there been agreement among the bishops in the US over the issue with Kerry? [/quote]
Unfortunately not. It's the same situation here as it is in the U.K.

[Ash Wednesday]

[quote name='socalscout' date='Aug 10 2004, 12:09 PM'] The stance I am taking is not that they should receive Communion stained with that sin but that how do we know if they are not reconciled to the Church if the means is the secrecy of Confession. Assuming they stop voting the way they do. [/quote]
I think we are discussing what would be the [b]correct[/b] thing to be done in the situation. Unfortunately in reality, that is not the way it is handled.

Unless the politician is totally and completely ignorant that he has to go to confession before receiving communion, even if he changed his position on abortion, he's committing grave sin and bringing judgement on himself by taking Eucharist without going to confession first.

Here's a question for you smarties: If someone is to be denied communion, wouldn't it be the bishop's responsibility to state to priests that the politician is to be denied communion in the first place? My guess is that is why a lot of priests do NOT deny communion to pro-choice politicians, because they are wary of "stirring up the pot" or doing it without the bishop's authority, if you will.

Ideally the pentitent would be publicly deemed unfit in the first place by the bishop(s). The confessor would have the pentitent make public reparation, and contact his bishop to make public notice to other bishops that he is back in communion with the church (given that he was publicly in opposition and stated by the bishops to be so in the first place.) The bishop is not publicly stating "He confessed it in confession," but what is publicly made known is that he is back in communion with the church and permitted to receive communion.

I would think this would be IDEALLY how it's handled. Anyone can correct me if I'm mistaken.

Lord, have mercy on us.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='socalscout' date='Aug 9 2004, 07:55 PM'] That makes sense but like I said you have to prove that to me. Where does it say that?

I want to be wrong. [/quote]
The Act of Contrition includes the promise to amend one's life. Not doing this by publicly denouncing those sins which were a cause of scandal is to have gone to Confession in vain without genuine intent. Until the sin is amended, the politician should not receive the Eucharist.