That's all fine from a Church legalese perspective. Doesn't change that it was un-christ like and hypocritical and inappropriate for the Priest to inject the Church into politics. But as long as some theologians worked out the legal pretzels, you can rest self-satisfied.
This is why the Church is losing members, you know.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Receiving communion in a state of mortal sin is deeply spiritually harmful to the recipient. It’s not a punishment.
Wait, hold up there spiritual Sally. Mortal sin as in skipping one of the sacraments, breaking a commandment, stealing holy water to give to grandma, bogarting the palm on Palm Sunday?
And where does systemic child rape and an institutional cover-up fall on the sinfulness scale?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Receiving communion in a state of mortal sin is deeply spiritually harmful to the recipient. It’s not a punishment.
Wait, hold up there spiritual Sally. Mortal sin as in skipping one of the sacraments, breaking a commandment, stealing holy water to give to grandma, bogarting the palm on Palm Sunday?
Anonymous wrote:Receiving communion in a state of mortal sin is deeply spiritually harmful to the recipient. It’s not a punishment.
Anonymous wrote:Catholics believe that faith has a personal and a public dimension. Whatever Biden's interior state may be, he is objectively and publicly denying a fundamental tenet of the faith, and doing so as a public figure. Whether he and others in a similar position should be permitted to receive the Eucharist has been debated at length in canon law circles. The better argument clearly is that the priest actually has a duty to deny Biden the Eucharist because of the public nature of his dissent, his longstanding persistence in his positions despite numerous private and public admonitions, and his contumacious refusal voluntarily to refrain from coming forward at communion time. Biden's assertion that he privately holds beliefs different than his public positions but does not want to "impose" them on others is entirely specious. He regularly imposes his own beliefs via legislation on other subjects. His attempted dodge is nothing more than a "Nuremburg defense," and equally ineffectual.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Grateful for this priest!
My former dc pastor, rip, used to bristle when Ted Kennedy took communion , and he was ordered to provide it to Kennedy by the homosexual, abusive cardinal, Mccarick.
and yet, somehow they tolerated McCarick for decades when they *knew* he was raping boys. But sure, let's bristle over Ted Kennedy.
Are you sure about the boys part? People need to be sure that they aren’t conflating two different sexually-related crimes here. I believe he was involved with young men, not prepubescent boys.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Receiving communion in a state of mortal sin is deeply spiritually harmful to the recipient. It’s not a punishment.
Judge not. Did joe Biden have an abortion?
The priest and the Church are hypocrites and un-christ like.
+100 And anyway does the priest know whether or not Joe went to confession (not that I personally believe he committed a sin anyway)? Frankly, the priest seems to be abusing his position for political reasons (sound familiar)? He's going to have to deal with his God on this issue or become one of many priests whose bones line the path to hell.
This is absolutely a political play and is being bantered around politically. As a Catholic I am absolutely disgusted by these so-called Catholics who are using one's very personal faith as a weapon. May God have mercy on their souls.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Catholics believe that faith has a personal and a public dimension. Whatever Biden's interior state may be, he is objectively and publicly denying a fundamental tenet of the faith, and doing so as a public figure. Whether he and others in a similar position should be permitted to receive the Eucharist has been debated at length in canon law circles. The better argument clearly is that the priest actually has a duty to deny Biden the Eucharist because of the public nature of his dissent, his longstanding persistence in his positions despite numerous private and public admonitions, and his contumacious refusal voluntarily to refrain from coming forward at communion time. Biden's assertion that he privately holds beliefs different than his public positions but does not want to "impose" them on others is entirely specious. He regularly imposes his own beliefs via legislation on other subjects. His attempted dodge is nothing more than a "Nuremburg defense," and equally ineffectual.
That's all fine from a Church legalese perspective. Doesn't change that it was un-christ like and hypocritical and inappropriate for the Priest to inject the Church into politics. But as long as some theologians worked out the legal pretzels, you can rest self-satisfied.
This is why the Church is losing members, you know.
Anonymous wrote:The Catholic Church cares about power and protection, protecting pedophile priests and embryos. It does not care about emulating Christ.
Anonymous wrote:Catholics believe that faith has a personal and a public dimension. Whatever Biden's interior state may be, he is objectively and publicly denying a fundamental tenet of the faith, and doing so as a public figure. Whether he and others in a similar position should be permitted to receive the Eucharist has been debated at length in canon law circles. The better argument clearly is that the priest actually has a duty to deny Biden the Eucharist because of the public nature of his dissent, his longstanding persistence in his positions despite numerous private and public admonitions, and his contumacious refusal voluntarily to refrain from coming forward at communion time. Biden's assertion that he privately holds beliefs different than his public positions but does not want to "impose" them on others is entirely specious. He regularly imposes his own beliefs via legislation on other subjects. His attempted dodge is nothing more than a "Nuremburg defense," and equally ineffectual.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Grateful for this priest!
My former dc pastor, rip, used to bristle when Ted Kennedy took communion , and he was ordered to provide it to Kennedy by the homosexual, abusive cardinal, Mccarick.
and yet, somehow they tolerated McCarick for decades when they *knew* he was raping boys. But sure, let's bristle over Ted Kennedy.
Are you sure about the boys part? People need to be sure that they aren’t conflating two different sexually-related crimes here. I believe he was involved with young men, not prepubescent boys.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Grateful for this priest!
My former dc pastor, rip, used to bristle when Ted Kennedy took communion , and he was ordered to provide it to Kennedy by the homosexual, abusive cardinal, Mccarick.
and yet, somehow they tolerated McCarick for decades when they *knew* he was raping boys. But sure, let's bristle over Ted Kennedy.
Anonymous wrote:Grateful for this priest!
My former dc pastor, rip, used to bristle when Ted Kennedy took communion , and he was ordered to provide it to Kennedy by the homosexual, abusive cardinal, Mccarick.