Pope Francis Clear on Denying Communion to Politicians Who Facilitate Abortion

[turzovka]

Since the Roman Church totally misconstrues what 'communion' as describe by Jesus even means, it is hardly a punishment to be denied it by that organization.

A 'true Christian' has communion every meal. Read what Jesus said.

forget it.

you're mistaken.

and so is your break away religious community

but we still believe you have many good graces and teachings

so do not despair

 

[there4eyeM]

Since the Roman Church totally misconstrues what 'communion' as describe by Jesus even means, it is hardly a punishment to be denied it by that organization.

A 'true Christian' has communion every meal. Read what Jesus said.

forget it.

you're mistaken.

and so is your break away religious community

but we still believe you have many good graces and teachings

so do not despair

If I despair, it is only of folks who make gross assumptions without any reason. There are also others that state a case with all assurance and no substance.

"you're mistaken"

How? In what? What does Jesus say at the last supper?

My breakaway religious community? If you call reason a religion and using it breaking away, perhaps.

Desperation should be saved for those establishments that continue to promulgate false and out dated precepts.

 

[turzovka]

Since the Roman Church totally misconstrues what 'communion' as describe by Jesus even means, it is hardly a punishment to be denied it by that organization.

A 'true Christian' has communion every meal. Read what Jesus said.

forget it.

you're mistaken.

and so is your break away religious community

but we still believe you have many good graces and teachings

so do not despair

If I despair, it is only of folks who make gross assumptions without any reason. There are also others that state a case with all assurance and no substance.

"you're mistaken"

How? In what? What does Jesus say at the last supper?

My breakaway religious community? If you call reason a religion and using it breaking away, perhaps.

Desperation should be saved for those establishments that continue to promulgate false and out dated precepts.

"There are also others that state a case with all assurance and no substance."

No substance... sure... whatever you say.

If you want substance to my charges, you well know they are legion. You can start with John Chapter 6 of which our Lord's words can either be taken as given or twisted as hoped for by non-Catholics. Recall in those passages many of the Jews walked away in disgust because they well knew what Jesus was referring to when He said you must eat my flesh and drink my blood. It was not a symbolic entreaty.

Beyond that, there are untold volumes of books from saints and theologians explaining the truth of the Holy Eucharist, it's value and the miracles and events that validate its authenticity.

 

[LittleNipper]

by Jim Hoft
March 14, 2013

Francis I – Jorge Bergoglio

The far left may be disappointed when they discover that the cardinals elected another pope pro-life social conservative as pope. Francis has previously condemned offering communion to those politicians who facilitate in abortion.

Breitbart.com reported:
New Pope Francis I is a conservative in the mold of his predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI and Pope John Paul II. That’s especially true on the issue of abortion, which he called a “death sentence” for the unborn in 2007. “We aren’t in agreement with the death penalty,” he said during that speech, “but in Argentina we have the death penalty. A child conceived by the rape of a mentally ill or retarded woman can be condemned to death.”

In the Aparecida Document, a document that represents a joint statement by Latin American church leaders but presented by Francis in 2007, the leaders stated, “we should commit ourselves to ‘eucharistic coherence,’ that is, we should be conscious that people cannot receive holy communion and at the same time act or speak against the commandments, in particular when abortions, euthanasia, and other serious crimes against life and family are facilitated. This responsibility applies particularly to legislators, governors, and health professionals.”


Read more:
Pope Francis Clear on Denying Communion to Politicians Who Facilitate Abortion | The Gateway Pundit

Maybe ex-communication is in store for Marxists like Pelosi and Biden. Oops, I meant Democrats. Hehehe

Only a sick **** would want a mentally disabled woman, or a victim of rape, to be forced to carry the fetus to term. Francis is just as sick as the insane lifers who bomb abortion clinics.

Interesting that he has a problem with politicians supporting abortion. Refuse communion to them but he will still hand out communion and blessings to pedophile priests.

Only as sick person would have sex with a mentally disabled person. Only a sick society would listen to the demands of mentally disturded individuals. Only a sick government would allow an innocent fetus to be killed but make excuses for the perpetrator of the act to be allowed to live. Only ignorant individuals would use foul language to express themselves. And honestly, I imagine that the homosexual priests will find themselves out of a job soon enough and without a sacrament to their name. And to top it off, it is insane to believe that to rape a woman twice will make her feel any better about herself under the circumstances --- but hey, that's just me...

 

[there4eyeM]

It is irrelevant how many have misconstrued Jesus' meaning.

What are the words he said?

Just because Jewish authorities misunderstood is no reason to think others didn't.

 

[there4eyeM]

Jesus said of the elements he was using, "This is my body....this is my blood."
The present simple, not future or conditional.
He didn't say someone in the future would turn these things into his body.
His statement was clear and simple, too much so for the Pharisees and too much so for the Church of Rome and most other 'Christian' sects.

He was talking about the unity of all, not the separation into opposing forces that is 'evil'. Since he was claiming to be one with God, and as all is in and of God, then bread and wine and all else are, indeed, 'his body'. And he said to do it at every incidence, every meal, not just from time to time with a special feeling of sanctity.

 

[editec]

The degree to which one gives a damn about Papal announcement depends entirely on your POV about Papal infallability.

Personally I think, and history bears me out on this, that the entire concept is freaking nuts.

 

[longknife]

He is NOT Francis I! He is simply Francis and I think he will bring many people back to church - and not just the Catholic church.

 

[turzovka]

The degree to which one gives a damn about Papal announcement depends entirely on your POV about Papal infallability.

Personally I think, and history bears me out on this, that the entire concept is freaking nuts.

That may be because you have no clue what papal infallibility is referring to? There are some infallible statements in the Bible, do those trouble you as well? If not, then maybe the two or three the popes have ever added to it (the immaculate conception of Mary, and her bodily assumption into heaven) are not such a huge matter by comparison?

 

[Katzndogz]

Waxman? LOL The pope is not going to give Waxman communion? LOL Waxman is Jewish!!!





Henry Waxman - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What's with the large red text? Are you so insecure that you need to make sure everyone sees your drivel?

How very.... well... liberal of you.

Quite amazing in this day and age people follow a religion that has men in dresses with pointee hats who "think" by mumbling some magic words over crackers and wine it becomes human.


The theophagy (god eating) of course did not come first from the Catholics but had occurred throughout pagan religions long before Christianity. The notion that eating another living human being lies at the belief of absorbing his nature into his own, thus becoming, in some sense, more godlike, similar to the even more primitive belief that eating one's enemies makes one more powerful.

Eating that wafer and drinking the wine in Church actually means truly and really eating human meat and blood. In fact, it's the entire body: eyes, brains, gall bladder, spleen, etc. Everything. According to the Council of Trent, if you deny the Transubstantiation, then you are accursed (anathema). You will also get to spend eternity in hell.

So how does transubstantiation actually work; what process does the Church use to transform bread and wine into human flesh and blood (and guts, etc.)? Apparently this remains a deep Church secret. However, we do know that the priests make verbal incantations, pass smoking incense about, and pray a lot during a rite they call "Offertory" (Offertorium). Apparently the actual transformation occurs during the Prayer of Consecration, by which the bread and wine cease to be bread and wine, and are converted into the flesh and blood of Christ. At just what miraculous moment during the prayer it turns into human flesh, I haven't a clue and I suspect the priests don't either. Apparently Jesus does the actual conversion, but I haven't discovered the method of how the priests know when this occurs or what test procedures they use to insure that Jesus made the transubstantiation (what if Jesus got lazy that day or just decided, enough is enough?).

In any case, by the time the priest places the wafer into your mouth, you can rest assured that you are actually eating Christ's meat. (It tastes like chicken.)

Bon appetit!

Spoken by someone who never read the Bible and certainly doesn't understand it. No the bread, or wafer and wine does not mean eating flesh and blood and the Bible is quite clear on that, in dozens of places and every Bible, including new age Bibles.

 

[t_polkow]

What's with the large red text? Are you so insecure that you need to make sure everyone sees your drivel?

How very.... well... liberal of you.

Quite amazing in this day and age people follow a religion that has men in dresses with pointee hats who "think" by mumbling some magic words over crackers and wine it becomes human.


The theophagy (god eating) of course did not come first from the Catholics but had occurred throughout pagan religions long before Christianity. The notion that eating another living human being lies at the belief of absorbing his nature into his own, thus becoming, in some sense, more godlike, similar to the even more primitive belief that eating one's enemies makes one more powerful.

Eating that wafer and drinking the wine in Church actually means truly and really eating human meat and blood. In fact, it's the entire body: eyes, brains, gall bladder, spleen, etc. Everything. According to the Council of Trent, if you deny the Transubstantiation, then you are accursed (anathema). You will also get to spend eternity in hell.

So how does transubstantiation actually work; what process does the Church use to transform bread and wine into human flesh and blood (and guts, etc.)? Apparently this remains a deep Church secret. However, we do know that the priests make verbal incantations, pass smoking incense about, and pray a lot during a rite they call "Offertory" (Offertorium). Apparently the actual transformation occurs during the Prayer of Consecration, by which the bread and wine cease to be bread and wine, and are converted into the flesh and blood of Christ. At just what miraculous moment during the prayer it turns into human flesh, I haven't a clue and I suspect the priests don't either. Apparently Jesus does the actual conversion, but I haven't discovered the method of how the priests know when this occurs or what test procedures they use to insure that Jesus made the transubstantiation (what if Jesus got lazy that day or just decided, enough is enough?).

In any case, by the time the priest places the wafer into your mouth, you can rest assured that you are actually eating Christ's meat. (It tastes like chicken.)

Bon appetit!

Spoken by someone who never read the Bible and certainly doesn't understand it. No the bread, or wafer and wine does not mean eating flesh and blood and the Bible is quite clear on that, in dozens of places and every Bible, including new age Bibles.

Oh I have read your book of mythology and studied religions in depth, it's quite entertaining too!! That people in this day and age would buy that nonsense explains a lot about the person who believe it as fact. No different then if you we born in a muslim country, you would be quoting the qua-ran. same mentality


In Roman Catholic theology, transubstantiation is the doctrine that, in the Eucharist, the substance of the bread and the wine used in the sacrament is changed into the substance of the Body and the Blood of Jesus, while all that is accessible to the senses remains as before.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/


Roman Catholics freak out when man takes Eucharist “hostage.”
http://stupidevilbastard.com/2008/07/roman_catholics_freak_out_when_man_takes_eucharist_hostage/

 

[AmyNation]

If you go by the OP no Catholic politician in America will ever take communion again.

And which of them should?

Liars and whores with very few exceptions.

And Jesus hated liars and whores! Stone them!

 

[Katzndogz]

Jesus said of the elements he was using, "This is my body....this is my blood."
The present simple, not future or conditional.
He didn't say someone in the future would turn these things into his body.
His statement was clear and simple, too much so for the Pharisees and too much so for the Church of Rome and most other 'Christian' sects.

He was talking about the unity of all, not the separation into opposing forces that is 'evil'. Since he was claiming to be one with God, and as all is in and of God, then bread and wine and all else are, indeed, 'his body'. And he said to do it at every incidence, every meal, not just from time to time with a special feeling of sanctity.

1 Corinthians 11:24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me."

and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me."
New Living Translation (©2007)
and gave thanks to God for it. Then he broke it in pieces and said, "This is my body, which is given for you. Do this to remember me."

English Standard Version (©2001)
and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, "This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me."

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

There are a couple of dozen other examples of what Jesus said and it is clear that he said Do this in Remembrance of me.

It is the bread and wine of faith.

 

[t_polkow]

Jesus said of the elements he was using, "This is my body....this is my blood."
The present simple, not future or conditional.
He didn't say someone in the future would turn these things into his body.
His statement was clear and simple, too much so for the Pharisees and too much so for the Church of Rome and most other 'Christian' sects.

He was talking about the unity of all, not the separation into opposing forces that is 'evil'. Since he was claiming to be one with God, and as all is in and of God, then bread and wine and all else are, indeed, 'his body'. And he said to do it at every incidence, every meal, not just from time to time with a special feeling of sanctity.

1 Corinthians 11:24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me."

and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me."
New Living Translation (©2007)
and gave thanks to God for it. Then he broke it in pieces and said, "This is my body, which is given for you. Do this to remember me."

English Standard Version (©2001)
and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, "This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me."

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

There are a couple of dozen other examples of what Jesus said and it is clear that he said Do this in Remembrance of me.

It is the bread and wine of faith.

Amazing isn't it that the all powerful sky fairy has so many versions (bibles) of what he supposedly said and so many denominations too

 

[AmyNation]

I've never understood some peoples desire to actively fight against someone else's religion. Why do you care so much what other people believe?

 

[there4eyeM]

Jesus said of the elements he was using, "This is my body....this is my blood."
The present simple, not future or conditional.
He didn't say someone in the future would turn these things into his body.
His statement was clear and simple, too much so for the Pharisees and too much so for the Church of Rome and most other 'Christian' sects.

He was talking about the unity of all, not the separation into opposing forces that is 'evil'. Since he was claiming to be one with God, and as all is in and of God, then bread and wine and all else are, indeed, 'his body'. And he said to do it at every incidence, every meal, not just from time to time with a special feeling of sanctity.

1 Corinthians 11:24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me."

and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me."
New Living Translation (©2007)
and gave thanks to God for it. Then he broke it in pieces and said, "This is my body, which is given for you. Do this to remember me."

English Standard Version (©2001)
and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, "This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me."

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

There are a couple of dozen other examples of what Jesus said and it is clear that he said Do this in Remembrance of me.

It is the bread and wine of faith.

Corinthians with the part you (mysteriously?) left out.
"“Take, eat;[a] this is My body which is broken for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 25 In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.”

Doctrine has made the simple indigestible and the complex, simple. Requiring people believe in cannibalism and that hocus-pocus transforms bread into meat is a stumbling block put in place by those who either do not understand or who seek to control the masses (play on words). It is also possible that they seek to subvert Jesus' real message.

 

[t_polkow]

I've never understood some peoples desire to actively fight against someone else's religion. Why do you care so much what other people believe?

Not only is there nothing to be gained by believing an untruth, but there is everything to
lose when we sacrifice the indispensable tool of reason on the altar of superstition

In the first Christian century Jesus is not mentioned by a single Greek or Roman Historian, Religion Scholar, Politician, Philosopher, or Poet. His name never occurs, in a single inscription, and it is never found in a single piece of private correspondence, zero, zip references! The first time Jesus is mentioned in a Roman Source or a Greek Source, is by a Roman Governor, of a Province of Asia Minor, Governor Pliney in the year 112, eighty years after the death of Jesus, and even then he does not call him by name, but calls him Christ in passing. This is the only reference within 80 years of his death

 

[there4eyeM]

I am not a 'Christian' or member of any formal faith. I do regard the words atributed to Jesus as enlightened. The religion associated with him, however, does not have a lot to recommend it.

 

[AmyNation]

So you've decided religious people must have sacrificed reason in order to believe? How do you explain great minds like Sir Robert Boyd, William Pollard, George Price. History is filled with religious individuals who were also able to retain their ability to reason.

It sounds like you aren't capable of being a believer and a thinker, and are putting your own inabilities onto others.

 

[turzovka]

I am not a 'Christian' or member of any formal faith. I do regard the words atributed to Jesus as enlightened. The religion associated with him, however, does not have a lot to recommend it.

True faith cannot be measured in what it says to others without first measuring what those adherents have done for others.

It is disenguous how so much gets ignored, 2000 years cannot be told only in the negative.