Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Newly Elected Pro Abortion Congressman ARCURI is honored in Church
Observer Dispatch | Novemeber 26, 2006 | Observer Dispatch

Posted on 11/27/2006 4:54:01 AM PST by RightoLIfe

The Observer Dispatch reported Sunday that newly elected Congressman, Michael Arcuri, was honored after Mass for his service to the Church.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: abortion; arcuri; catholic; congress; prolife
Contrary to stated policy of the Diocese of Syracuse, Rev Rose invited or allowed Michael Arcuri to be honored at Mt Carmel Church. In a letter to Clergy, Religious and Laity of the Diocese of Syracuse on November 20th 2003, Bishop Moynihan forbid, "any person who publicly supports abortion or holds that abortion is a right or a matter of choice, may not be invited to speak at diocesan functions or in diocesan/parish facilities (except at an academic symposium where both sides of the issue can be fairly presented). Neither may such inidividuals be appointed special ministers of the Eucharist, serve as lectors in Church, nor be otherwise honored by the church. Oneida County Right to Life has demanded an apology from Rev Rose of Mt. Carmel for the scandal and confusion this has caused. American Bishops in union with the Holy See have stated recently (again) that those who are not in conformity with Catholic teaching should refrain from receiving Communion.
1 posted on 11/27/2006 4:54:06 AM PST by RightoLIfe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: RightoLIfe

well God forbid anyone pro-abortion ever be considered of capable of doing good things!


2 posted on 11/27/2006 4:59:53 AM PST by HHKrepublican_2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HHKrepublican_2

good things or not, the Catholic Church should not laud those who break with its teaching. let the secular world praise him for whatever good he may do. it is time for the Church to call out those who work at cross purposes with Church teaching.


3 posted on 11/27/2006 5:01:53 AM PST by xsmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: xsmommy
the Catholic Church should not laud those who break with its teaching

Paging Ted Kennedy, paging Ted Kennedy...

4 posted on 11/27/2006 5:03:31 AM PST by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RightoLIfe

The parishioners should have got up and walked out. That message would have been heard loud and clear.


5 posted on 11/27/2006 5:05:58 AM PST by KenmcG414
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rhombus

you know, several years back i was at the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception here in DC, helping to chaperone my then Kindergartener's field trip and i saw him there [they were just opening the new JP2 center there] and i exclaimed aloud that i was expecting a thunderbolt from the sky at any minute.


6 posted on 11/27/2006 5:08:42 AM PST by xsmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: RightoLIfe; drstevej; Gamecock; Jean Chauvin; OrthodoxPresbyterian; CCWoody; Wrigley; jboot; ...

I AM NOT CATHOLIC BASHING!

INSTEAD OF A RICK WARREN PING LIST,MAYBE A "ASHAMED OF THE GOSPEL PING LIST"

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1744480/posts

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1744418/posts

7 SOLAS!


7 posted on 11/27/2006 5:12:31 AM PST by alpha-8-25-02 ("SAVED BY GRACE AND GRACE ALONE")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xsmommy
good things or not, the Catholic Church should not laud those who break with its teaching. let the secular world praise him for whatever good he may do. it is time for the Church to call out those who work at cross purposes with Church teaching.

All churches need to start using their power to excommunicate members who support immoral acts especially ones who hold elected office. I'm not just saying the Catholic I'm saying all of them. The Christian Churches also need to openly denounce Apostate Churches such as the most liberal ones like United Church of Christ.

8 posted on 11/27/2006 5:25:48 AM PST by cva66snipe (If it was wrong for Clinton why do some support it for Bush? Party over nation destroys the nation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: cva66snipe

exactly. stop letting them hide behind the mantle of their religious faith, when clearly they are members of their respective faiths IN NAME ONLY.


9 posted on 11/27/2006 5:29:00 AM PST by xsmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: HHKrepublican_2

"well God forbid anyone pro-abortion ever be considered of capable of doing good things!"

Abortion is one of those dogmas that are absolute. Satan is also willing to give you a worldly win so he can give you the boils to go with it.

I'm not saying that pro-abortionists are Satan, just that there is no good done with an unredeemed wrong fixed in place.


10 posted on 11/27/2006 6:02:33 AM PST by OpusatFR ( ALEA IACTA EST. We have just crossed the Rubicon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RightoLIfe

Why does not the Catholic Bishops practice what it preaches?

What is Cardinal Roger Mahony's position on this issue?


11 posted on 11/27/2006 6:06:03 AM PST by ethics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HHKrepublican_2

You can't possibly be serious?


12 posted on 11/27/2006 6:35:42 AM PST by vpintheak (Yep.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RightoLIfe

It is impossible to find a single human on the planet that hasn't done something right at least a few times in life. Nevertheless, murdering the most defenseless in society for profit is a barbaric practice deserving of condemnation by all sentient beings.


13 posted on 11/27/2006 6:47:47 AM PST by Neoliberalnot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vpintheak

No Im not entirley serious, however some of the reactions here show that maybe i shouldve been serious.


14 posted on 11/27/2006 6:48:37 AM PST by HHKrepublican_2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: HHKrepublican_2

You're right, I mean Hitler liked dogs.


15 posted on 11/27/2006 6:49:02 AM PST by Rumple4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: HHKrepublican_2

it strikes you as unreasonable that adherents of a faith propose to hold lawmakers of that same faith to the tenets thereof? let the kiwanis club fete him for his good deeds, or the Italian-American club, if they are so inclined. It is not appropriate for the Church to laud him when he is NOT IN COMMUNION with the Church.


16 posted on 11/27/2006 6:54:23 AM PST by xsmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: xsmommy

"it strikes you as unreasonable that adherents of a faith propose to hold lawmakers of that same faith to the tenets thereof?"

As long as they aren't surprised when the populace won't elect them. I do not want my legislators to legislate based on a faith I do not hold. I support the death penalty; if a Catholic politician follows the increasing voice of his church to strike it down, he loses my vote. That's just one example.

And a Southern Baptist who tries to bring back Prohibition is out of the question.


17 posted on 11/27/2006 6:57:23 AM PST by linda_22003
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: linda_22003

The Catholic Catechism provides for the death penalty. Vote for whomever you please. Catholics in name only who hold office should be unmasked as such. I vote for lawmakers who best represent my views irrespective of their faith. One cannot be Catholic and vote prochoice. One can only be catholic in name only, in such an instance.


18 posted on 11/27/2006 7:01:48 AM PST by xsmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: xsmommy

Well, the bishops keep clearing their throats about it, whatever the Catechism says. I also vote for those who represent my interests, irrespective of faith, but you are proposing a situation in which I might have to automatically not consider people of certain faiths.


19 posted on 11/27/2006 7:21:18 AM PST by linda_22003
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: linda_22003

if you are prochoice and vote on that basis then by all means vote for those candidates who share your view. Catholics, authentic catholics, do not share that view and if that means you vote against them on that basis, so be it. I am telling you that the Catholic Catechism provides for the death penalty, Catholic bishops spew a lot of crap, unfortunately. i have no problem with people who are prochoice, i DO have problems with people who try to pass themselves off as Catholics who are prochoice.


20 posted on 11/27/2006 7:28:34 AM PST by xsmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: xsmommy

Perhaps you should ask the priest and bishop concerned why the Congressman was honored, then.


21 posted on 11/27/2006 7:31:08 AM PST by linda_22003
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: HHKrepublican_2

I live in the city and very familiar with Mt. Carmel church, as far as I know, he hasn't done anything for the church expect maybe coach a team but irregardless, his being honored when he is publicly for ABORTION creates confusion among those who may be ignorant that abortion is a grave sin and for that reason alone he should NOT be honored instead publicly shunned.


22 posted on 11/27/2006 7:34:17 AM PST by RightoLIfe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: linda_22003

linda, as an authentic Catholic, i have problems with many priests and bishops and what they do, unfortunately. i am heartened that Pope Benedict is getting back to basics, however. i am puzzled why someone who is NOT an adherent of a particular faith would prefer that politicians and office holders of certain faiths NOT adhere to the beliefs of that faith. You'd rather NOT be certain that a catholic politician is voting with his conscience, in keeping with his faith, so that you could vote for him, hoping that he might secretly be prochoice?


23 posted on 11/27/2006 7:36:29 AM PST by xsmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: linda_22003
I do not want my legislators to legislate based on a faith I do not hold.

One generally votes for legislators that one agrees with on most issues. Therefore, it is legitimate that a candidate's view on abortion or the death penalty would factor into the decision on whom to vote for. But this article concerns a church, and if that church should sanction it's members for opposing it's views.

24 posted on 11/27/2006 7:36:38 AM PST by outofstyle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: xsmommy

thank you to all for your support. I encourage all others confront this issue with protests and press releases, form an organization and be heard. We can't just let these things go, we have to take action. The babies are counting on us and divine law demands it of us. Oneida County Right to Life has demanded an apology from Rev Rose of Mt. Carmel Church for allowing Michael Arcuri to be honored , we have informed our Bishop of this and will send out the policy statement to all churches in the area so that they cannot say they weren't aware of the policy.


25 posted on 11/27/2006 7:41:24 AM PST by RightoLIfe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: xsmommy

No; I'm asking where it stops. A Muslim congressman has been elected in Minnesota, for example. Do you want him to be true to the Koran when he sponsors or votes on legislation? This country was not founded on favoring the laws of any one faith over the others.


26 posted on 11/27/2006 7:42:05 AM PST by linda_22003
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: cva66snipe

Yes, they should be publicly ex communicated


27 posted on 11/27/2006 7:42:51 AM PST by RightoLIfe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: RightoLIfe

i am not remotely surprised that this is the Syracuse diocesse, they are ridiculously liberal up there. my husband is from upstate NY and we have been fairly appalled at what we have heard from the pulpits up there. We live in Northern VA and while not perfect it is certainly much more conservative. there are active prolife committees in many of the parishes in the Arlington diocese. we just had a priest leave our parish for JIM MORAN'S and i have no doubt he would refuse him communion if it came down to it.


28 posted on 11/27/2006 7:44:46 AM PST by xsmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: linda_22003
i assume[i> that people vote with their conscience and in keeping with their faith and for that reason would not vote for a muslim. if that means that prochoice voters don't vote for catholic politicians, then i can respect that.
29 posted on 11/27/2006 7:46:40 AM PST by xsmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: xsmommy

I'll certainly watch the Metro section, since I'm sure that will be reported in the Post if it ever happens!


30 posted on 11/27/2006 7:48:17 AM PST by linda_22003
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: linda_22003; RecallMoran

of course it will. i think there was some contratemps at St Mary's several years ago when Moran and some other politician attended Mass during the election season and the priest made a point of discussing it during the sermon. I am thinking recallmoran knows that story, i can't recall it in detail.


31 posted on 11/27/2006 7:50:34 AM PST by xsmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: linda_22003; RecallMoran

of course it will. i think there was some contratemps at St Mary's several years ago when Moran and some other politician attended Mass during the election season and the priest made a point of discussing it during the sermon. I am thinking recallmoran knows that story, i can't recall it in detail.


32 posted on 11/27/2006 7:50:35 AM PST by xsmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: linda_22003
I also vote for those who represent my interests, irrespective of faith, but you are proposing a situation in which I might have to automatically not consider people of certain faiths.

So what? Wouldn't it clarify things for all involved if people wore accurate labels?

So you'd never vote for a Catholic because you want the baby-killing to go on. That's your right.

SD

33 posted on 11/27/2006 8:00:41 AM PST by SoothingDave (Save the Cheerleader. Save the World.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: HHKrepublican_2
"God forbid anyone pro-abortion ever be considered of capable of doing good things!"

Friend, if anyone who supports killing of innocents is given a podium in any church that purports to be followers of Jesus Christ, then that congregation does not stand for Jesus Christ and needs to remove His name from their denomination. His teachings are very clear, "Thou shalt not murder." Abortion falls clearly under the heading of murder, in fact, it is premeditated murder.

Merely because 5 U.S. lawyers in black robes in 1973 declared that is not murder, does not for one moment make it anything other than murder.

34 posted on 11/27/2006 8:02:37 AM PST by zerosix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave

I did not say that; I specifically used other examples. If people wore accurate labels we probably couldn't have politicians at all. ;)


35 posted on 11/27/2006 8:07:42 AM PST by linda_22003
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: zerosix

It was not five justices in 1973; Roe v. Wade was a 7-2 decision, on a court with six Republican appointees. Where did you get the number five?


36 posted on 11/27/2006 8:08:45 AM PST by linda_22003
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: linda_22003
I did not say that; I specifically used other examples.

Then you need to explain how having known public "Catholics" be true to their faith would force you to "automatically not consider people of certain faiths. "

If it isn't about abortion, what is it about?

What about a devout, serious Catholic scares you?

SD

37 posted on 11/27/2006 8:09:51 AM PST by SoothingDave (Save the Cheerleader. Save the World.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: linda_22003

I stand corrected. The number 5 (as in 5 to 4)came to mind over the last Partial Birth Abortion Ban.


38 posted on 11/27/2006 8:10:39 AM PST by zerosix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: zerosix
Also meant to add, that whether the number was 3, 5, 7, 9 or 1 million!

Abortion is still murder no matter who declares that it is not, no matter how many people do it, no matter which government sanctions it and finally, no matter how many years it is "acceptable" to people, God will never accept it.

39 posted on 11/27/2006 8:15:02 AM PST by zerosix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave

I used the death penalty example; I support it, and if a politician says that because of his faith he'll try to end it, he loses my vote. If a Mormon or Southern Baptist tried to keep the rest of us from drinking because his religion thinks it's wrong, he's also out of line, as far as I am concerned.

People of other faiths don't "scare" me; they just shouldn't try to make me live according to their faith.


40 posted on 11/27/2006 8:34:02 AM PST by linda_22003
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: linda_22003
I used the death penalty example; I support it, and if a politician says that because of his faith he'll try to end it, he loses my vote. If a Mormon or Southern Baptist tried to keep the rest of us from drinking because his religion thinks it's wrong, he's also out of line, as far as I am concerned.

Let me make sure I have this straight. You won't vote for politicians whose ideas differ from your own.

That's not really stunning, ya know. Few people do vote for people they don't agree with.

People of other faiths don't "scare" me; they just shouldn't try to make me live according to their faith.

It's got nothing to do with "faith" or not. If someone's ideology (whether derived from divine revelation or secular human sources) is one to try to force unpopular changes upon the general population, he is not long for the political life.

That you single out "faith" as a source for fear betrays more than just the fact that you apparently haven't studied the damage to liberty done in the name of secular ideologies in the past century.

SD

41 posted on 11/27/2006 8:42:26 AM PST by SoothingDave (Save the Cheerleader. Save the World.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: cva66snipe

All churches need to start using their power to excommunicate members who support immoral acts especially ones who hold elected office.

AMEN!


42 posted on 11/27/2006 8:45:44 AM PST by Polyxene (For where God built a church, there the Devil would also build a chapel - Martin Luther)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave

No, I've only studied the Constitution. :)


43 posted on 11/27/2006 9:02:41 AM PST by linda_22003
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: linda_22003

then you know there is no right to an abortion provided therein.


44 posted on 11/27/2006 9:05:26 AM PST by xsmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: xsmommy

There's no right to any specific medical procedure, controversial or non- . :)


45 posted on 11/27/2006 9:11:58 AM PST by linda_22003
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: linda_22003
No, I've only studied the Constitution.

Does your Constitution forbid elected officials from having religious thoughts?

SD

46 posted on 11/27/2006 9:37:58 AM PST by SoothingDave (Save the Cheerleader. Save the World.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave

Nope, just from enforcing everyone subscribing to them. :)


47 posted on 11/27/2006 10:03:09 AM PST by linda_22003
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: linda_22003
Nope, just from enforcing everyone subscribing to them.

Where does it say that, exactly? Is it unconstitutional to have federal statutes against perjury, for example, because of the religious injunction to not bear false witness?

SD

48 posted on 11/27/2006 10:10:01 AM PST by SoothingDave (Save the Cheerleader. Save the World.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave

You need more to do; you're obviously bored and looking for something to talk about. I would have assumed (erroneously, as it turns out) that you would understand I was speaking, as before, about any ONE religion's mandates.

Now, I suggest you take an interest in something else for awhile. :)


49 posted on 11/27/2006 10:17:17 AM PST by linda_22003
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson