As a strongly pro-life, Trinitarian Christian I would hate to get in the way of baby-killers and sodomites!
Staunch rules, which is good. A sharp delineation between Catholic and non-Catholic is critical.
However, how about denying communion to baby-killers and sodomites in your ranks, even though “Catholic?”
That's exactly what I was wondering.
That's a question that probably lingers in the minds of every Catholic who is neither a baby-killer nor a sodomite.
The Orthodox Churches are not Catholic, but may receive. The delineation is not so clear. The Catholic Church won’t lump those Orthodox Churches that have apostolic descent with Protestants and such; they aren’t regarded as heresies.
In my county here in NJ we just had a regional bishop host a Protestant she-bishop speak at his parish; I can’t believe he can expect anyone to respect any Church guidelines at all after that...
And don't forget the divorced, remarried as well.
As a strongly pro-life, Trinitarian Christian I would hate to get in the way of baby-killers and sodomites!
But this is the point of my earlier post. There are no such "staunch rules" or "sharp delineation" between Catholic and non-Catholic anymore. The Church once taught that non-Catholics MUST repent of their errors before receiving communion. No longer.
However, how about denying communion to baby-killers and sodomites in your ranks, even though “Catholic?”
And I believe the slippery slope already introduced in Canon 844 of the 1983 Code is partly to blame for this. It is also why I would not be surprised when the divorced and remarried join their ranks in the reception of Holy Communion.
Burke is no longer with the Apostolic Signature, and even when he was, most bishops/priests ignored this, and there was no way to monitor actual practice or force compliance. In other words, without active promotion, active discipline, unequivocal backing from the Chair of Peter, it was a dead letter.
However, the ruling is still there. It has never been overturned. The bishops are outlaws, I am sorry to say.
A “baby-killer” or sodomite, if they claim to be Catholic, could have went to confession and confessed this sin and told God they would never again partake in this sin, they are absolved of this sin. That is the reason they would receive communion. Now if this baby-killer or sodomite is practicing this sin, or if these same persons are politicians that believe in these sins and promote these sins, THEY HAVE EXCOMMUNICATED THEMSELVES and if they present themselves for communion GOD KNOWS they are committing a mortal sin by partaking in Holy Communion.
What about them? Who are they? How does one recognize them in the long line of communicants? What if the individual went to confession prior to the mass? How is that information communicated to the priest or EMHC distributing communion?
Only God can read the hearts of man. You will find your answer in Scripture. In 1 Corinthian 11:27, Paul says that eating or drinking in an unworthy manner is equivalent to profaning (literally, murdering) the Body and Blood of the Lord. In the same Chapter of 1 Corinthians, Paul continues by saying, ""For all who eat and drink without discerning the body, eat and drink judgment against tehmselves. For this reason many of you are weak and ill, and some have died." [1 Cor. 11:29-30] In other words, those who receive the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist in an unworthy manner, in a state of mortal sin, they can expect to be punished by God by illness or death.
If the sin is particularly scandalous, this is the time to talk privately with the pastor. Give him the information. Then trust him to handle it in an appropriate manner. It is unlikely that the pastor will be able to tell you anything about how he handles the matter. Give it over to him and then do your best to put the whole thing out of your mind.
..there's a question about whether this canon'' – the relevant church law – "was ever intended to be used'' to bring politicians to heel. He thinks not. "I stand with the great majority of American bishops and bishops around the world in saying this canon was never intended to be used this way.'' -- from the thread [Archbishop]
Albany Bishop Howard Hubbard says it is "unfair and imprudent" to conclude that Gov. Andrew Cuomo and his girlfriend, Sandra Lee, shouldn't receive Communion simply because they're living together. -- from the thread Bishop: None of your business (Hubbard rejects Catholic expert's criticism of Gov. Cuomo)
[Archbishop Timothy Dolan] also does not outright deny the sacrament to dissenting Catholic lawmakers, yet he is seen as an outspoken defender of church orthodoxy in a style favored by many theological conservatives. -- from the thread "US bishops elect NYC archbishop as head in upset (Catholic bloggers blamed)" http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2711746/posts?page=289#289
Another example is Ted Kennedy, who was given Masses in his own house at the same time he impenitently promoted abortion and homosexual rig hts. And then was honored with a glorious funeral, in which Pres, Obama gave a eulogy, contrary to canon law., and even offered a prayer for Teddy’s soul. (http://www.canonlaw.info/blogarch09.htm)
In a recent letter to the Pope which was read at his graveside, he insolently asserts he “never failed to believe and respect the fundamental teachings” of his church, and tried to be a faithful Catholic, etc.. The closest thing we get to any kind of contrition is the ambiguous, “I know that I have been an imperfect human being, but with the help of my faith, I have tried to right my path,” before he goes on to to defend his wonderful works, including universal health care. Not a word of remorse about supporting abortion or promoting homosexual rights, or indolence and a welfare state.
Nor did the pope censure him at all in his response, but “the Holy Father cordially imparts his Apostolic Blessing as a pledge of wisdom, comfort and strength in the Lord.” (http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/08/29/ted-kennedy-to-pope-benedict-i-am-writing-with-deep-humility/)
Which things example the RC pastorate interpreting itself, while SSPX types are accused of being Protestant because they presume to interpret Rome themselves, contrary to how leadership overall does.
For indeed,
"It follows that the Church is essentially an unequal society, that is, a society comprising two categories of per sons, the Pastors and the flock...the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors." - VEHEMENTER NOS, an Encyclical of Pope Pius X promulgated on February 11, 1906.
Something we are in 100% agreement on.