Kennedy: Barred from Communion

[California Girl]

Too funny. Apparently she's vindictive. I'll rep you to make up for it.

You two are kinda sad, aren't ya? Don't worry about what stupidity Zona negged me for, just make an assumption.

The stupidity is palpable.

awwwwwww.....tissue?

No thanks, I'm not clearing up your shit.

 

[California Girl]

Boy, am I glad my Reformed/Presbyterian Church, despite being pretty conservative in theology, doesn't deny its members access to the Lord's Table for having different political views...

It's not about having different political views, you assclown. It's about his support for something that is against the teachings of the Church. Maybe that's above your intellectual paygrade.

 

[Care4all]

I heard a Franciscan Priest say that barring sinners from communion seems to be the EXACT OPPOSITE of what the Lord taught us....that those sinners need the Grace of the Sacraments MORE than the average abiding Catholic and it seemed wrong to bar sinners, because sinners ARE WHO CHRIST DIED FOR, not for all the "perfect" people.

I happen to agree with him...his name is Father Groechel, and is on EWTN.

 

[Oscar Wao]

Boy, am I glad my Reformed/Presbyterian Church, despite being pretty conservative in theology, doesn't deny its members access to the Lord's Table for having different political views...

It's not about having different political views, you assclown. It's about his support for something that is against the teachings of the Church. Maybe that's above your intellectual paygrade.

Hey, abortion is against the views of our Church too. But we follow the guidelines for communion laid out in 1 Corinthians 11:23-31, basically stating that any member of Christ's Church can take communion, as long as they are not living in unrepentant sin. Or is it that anyone who is pro-choice is either unsaved or is a backslidden Christian?

As far as I know, being pro-choice isn't sin or "unrepentant" sin.

 

[Anguille]

I believe that the Sacraments are a means of Grace. I do not believe that we here on Earth should be standing between God's Grace and those who seek it.




Immie

I do not believe in Sacraments or God but if I did I would feel the same as you about access to god's grace, whatever that is. I suppose I have latent Protestant tendencies.

 

[Care4all]

Boy, am I glad my Reformed/Presbyterian Church, despite being pretty conservative in theology, doesn't deny its members access to the Lord's Table for having different political views...

It's not about having different political views, you assclown. It's about his support for something that is against the teachings of the Church. Maybe that's above your intellectual paygrade.

I still think that is ABSOLUTE B.S.

Half the Catholic parishioners take the same stance as him and are not barred from communion....THIS IS A POLITICAL STANCE by his parish/bishop imo.

as pointed out, the Death penalty is as equally against the rules of the church, who is banned from communion for supporting it?

 

[Anguille]

I heard a Franciscan Priest say that barring sinners from communion seems to be the EXACT OPPOSITE of what the Lord taught us....that those sinners need the Grace of the Sacraments MORE than the average abiding Catholic and it seemed wrong to bar sinners, because sinners ARE WHO CHRIST DIED FOR, not for all the "perfect" people.

I happen to agree with him...his name is Father Groechel, and is on EWTN.

The more I read your posts, Care, the more I think the Catholic Church is making a grave oversight in not recognizing you ought to be Pope.
Seriously!!!!

 

[Anguille]

Churches have the right to enforce morality among their members in any non-violent manner they choose. Denying communion is a very minor punishment unless you REALLY want to have communion. If that is the case, follow church rules.
Simple and legal.

True it is legal but is it ethical?

An elected official's responsibility is to honestly represent the will of the voters and to uphold the Constitution, not abuse the powers of his office to further the agenda of his Church.

 

[Ravi]

Boy, am I glad my Reformed/Presbyterian Church, despite being pretty conservative in theology, doesn't deny its members access to the Lord's Table for having different political views...

It's not about having different political views, you assclown. It's about his support for something that is against the teachings of the Church. Maybe that's above your intellectual paygrade.

I still think that is ABSOLUTE B.S.

Half the Catholic parishioners take the same stance as him and are not barred from communion....THIS IS A POLITICAL STANCE by his parish/bishop imo.

as pointed out, the Death penalty is as equally against the rules of the church, who is banned from communion for supporting it?

Maybe I read the story wrong...but what I got is the Bishop said he shouldn't take communion not that he couldn't. He certainly hasn't been formally excommunicated.

 

[California Girl]

Boy, am I glad my Reformed/Presbyterian Church, despite being pretty conservative in theology, doesn't deny its members access to the Lord's Table for having different political views...

It's not about having different political views, you assclown. It's about his support for something that is against the teachings of the Church. Maybe that's above your intellectual paygrade.

I still think that is ABSOLUTE B.S.

Half the Catholic parishioners take the same stance as him and are not barred from communion....THIS IS A POLITICAL STANCE by his parish/bishop imo.

as pointed out, the Death penalty is as equally against the rules of the church, who is banned from communion for supporting it?

That is between the Church and the person supporting the DP. As is this instance. The only reason we are discussing it is because Kennedy made public something which is a private matter between him and his Church. No doubt he did this for political advantage.

 

[Anguille]

Boy, am I glad my Reformed/Presbyterian Church, despite being pretty conservative in theology, doesn't deny its members access to the Lord's Table for having different political views...

It's not about having different political views, you assclown. It's about his support for something that is against the teachings of the Church. Maybe that's above your intellectual paygrade.

Hey, abortion is against the views of our Church too. But we follow the guidelines for communion laid out in 1 Corinthians 11:23-31, basically stating that any member of Christ's Church can take communion, as long as they are not living in unrepentant sin. Or is it that anyone who is pro-choice is either unsaved or is a backslidden Christian?

As far as I know, being pro-choice isn't sin or "unrepentant" sin.

I would agree, though I am hardly a religious scholar. Pro choice simply means the choice is is up to the woman and her conscience or God if she has one. A person who votes pro choice is not performing or having an abortion which some Christian churches consider to be a sin. there would be the sin, if any. Supporting freedom would not be a sin. IMO.

 

[Mr. Capitalism]

I would be totally on board for this if they treated social justice and death penalty issues the same way. But of course they don't.

 

[Immanuel]

I heard a Franciscan Priest say that barring sinners from communion seems to be the EXACT OPPOSITE of what the Lord taught us....that those sinners need the Grace of the Sacraments MORE than the average abiding Catholic and it seemed wrong to bar sinners, because sinners ARE WHO CHRIST DIED FOR, not for all the "perfect" people.

I happen to agree with him...his name is Father Groechel, and is on EWTN.

That is pretty much how I look at this.

My church practices closed communion which means that only people who believe as we do (note: not necessarily LCMS, but profess to hold our beliefs) are given communion. This is one doctrine of my church that I don't really agree with. We believe that the Sacrament is a means of Grace. That being said, why would we want to interfere with that means?

Immie

 

[Anguille]

It's not about having different political views, you assclown. It's about his support for something that is against the teachings of the Church. Maybe that's above your intellectual paygrade.

I still think that is ABSOLUTE B.S.

Half the Catholic parishioners take the same stance as him and are not barred from communion....THIS IS A POLITICAL STANCE by his parish/bishop imo.

as pointed out, the Death penalty is as equally against the rules of the church, who is banned from communion for supporting it?

That is between the Church and the person supporting the DP. As is this instance. The only reason we are discussing it is because Kennedy made public something which is a private matter between him and his Church. No doubt he did this for political advantage.

He had no choice but to make it public. It's not as if people take or don't take Communion in private. It's public act. His declining to take it would have raised questions or maybe it did. I don't know all the details but I do no that a bishop expecting a prominent Catholic to stop taking Communion and then not answer questions as to why he has stopped taking Communion is a bishop who wants to have his cake and eat it too. He wants to pressure Kennedy to vote anti choice but he doesn't want anyone to know he is doing it.

 

[Anguille]

The only reason we are discussing it is because Kennedy made public something which is a private matter between him and his Church. No doubt he did this for political advantage.

It's the bishop who in acting in hopes of gaining political advantage. I think it has backfired on him, since Kennedy is not giving in to the blackmail.

 

[Anguille]

I would be totally on board for this if they treated social justice and death penalty issues the same way. But of course they don't.

They'd have to treat anyone who masturbates or uses birth control the same way too.

 

[JenyEliza]

The only reason we are discussing it is because Kennedy made public something which is a private matter between him and his Church. No doubt he did this for political advantage.

It's the bishop who in acting in hopes of gaining political advantage. I think it has backfired on him, since Kennedy is not giving in to the blackmail.

Bullshit.

The Bishop counseled Kennedy PRIVATELY and CONFIDENTIALLY-- THREE (3) YEARS AGO.

Kennedy chose recently to go public with this Pastoral Counseling.

IT is KENNEDY who has a political angle with this.. NOT the Bishop.

Read the WHOLE FUCKING THREAD.......I posted the Bishop's response/letter to Kennedy pages and pages ago.

You're absolutely ignorant and full of shit.

 

[Si modo]

Boy, am I glad my Reformed/Presbyterian Church, despite being pretty conservative in theology, doesn't deny its members access to the Lord's Table for having different political views...

It's not about having different political views, you assclown. It's about his support for something that is against the teachings of the Church. Maybe that's above your intellectual paygrade.

I still think that is ABSOLUTE B.S.

Half the Catholic parishioners take the same stance as him and are not barred from communion....THIS IS A POLITICAL STANCE by his parish/bishop imo.

as pointed out, the Death penalty is as equally against the rules of the church, who is banned from communion for supporting it?

I found an interesting story about a memo Cardinal Ratzinger circulated which attempts to distinguish between denying communion to a politician who supports choice and a voter who votes for that politician. Apparently, the politician who supports choice should be denied communion because s/he actively participates in effecting that policy whereas a voter who votes for that pro-choice politician is taking other issues into consideration that must outweigh the pro-choice position, thus that voter's vote is not sinful. (Here's the article on that memo when the Pope was a cardinal). I have not been successful in finding a release from His Holiness about this issue, but the memo when he was cardinal may give some insight into the rationale.

I like this Pope because I view him as scholarly and an intellectual, so I always find his encyclicals and other releases interesting to read. However, the denial of a politician's communion and not that of the voter as well, seems like very weak rationalization, IMO. Thus, I agree - bullshit, because of the weak rationalization to exempt the voters.

 

[Anguille]

The only reason we are discussing it is because Kennedy made public something which is a private matter between him and his Church. No doubt he did this for political advantage.

It's the bishop who in acting in hopes of gaining political advantage. I think it has backfired on him, since Kennedy is not giving in to the blackmail.

Bullshit.

The Bishop counseled Kennedy PRIVATELY and CONFIDENTIALLY-- THREE (3) YEARS AGO.

Kennedy chose recently to go public with this Pastoral Counseling.

IT is KENNEDY who has a political angle with this.. NOT the Bishop.

Read the WHOLE FUCKING THREAD.......I posted the Bishop's response/letter to Kennedy pages and pages ago.

You're absolutely ignorant and full of shit.

You fail to point out how Kennedy was supposed to comply with the bishop's request and yet not do so publicly.

 

[JenyEliza]

It's the bishop who in acting in hopes of gaining political advantage. I think it has backfired on him, since Kennedy is not giving in to the blackmail.

Bullshit.

The Bishop counseled Kennedy PRIVATELY and CONFIDENTIALLY-- THREE (3) YEARS AGO.

Kennedy chose recently to go public with this Pastoral Counseling.

IT is KENNEDY who has a political angle with this.. NOT the Bishop.

Read the WHOLE FUCKING THREAD.......I posted the Bishop's response/letter to Kennedy pages and pages ago.

You're absolutely ignorant and full of shit.

You fail to point out how Kennedy was supposed to comply with the bishop's request and yet not do so publicly.

Read the fucking letter from the Bishop, dumbass.

It's all there.

Or would you like me to send a copy of Hooked on Phonics to you for the holidays?

Dumbass.