Posted on 05/21/2004 6:18:48 AM PDT by Know your rights
PHOENIX- Two Arizona bishops say they won't deny Communion to Catholic politicians who support abortion rights.
Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted of Phoenix told The Arizona Republic that instead of refusing to offer Communion, he will attempt to use persuasion to educate politicians about church teachings.
"My job is to get to know the key people in the state and appeal to their consciences," he said.
Olmsted's position puts him at odds with several conservative bishops, including Archbishop Raymond Burke of St. Louis and Bishop Michael Sheridan of Colorado Springs, who in a letter earlier this week said any Catholic who votes for a politician who backs abortion rights cannot receive Communion.
Olmsted's stand is more in line with Bishop Gerald Kicanas of Tucson, who on Thursday said sanctions against politicians would be "premature."
The issue gained prominence earlier this year with John F. Kerry's presidential candidacy. The Catholic from Massachusetts has consistently voted for abortion rights.
A committee of Catholic bishops, including McCarrick as chairman and Kicanas as a member, began considering the church's response to Catholic politicians whose public positions are at odds with Catholic doctrine.
Catholic doctrine teaches that abortion is "intrinsically evil" under all circumstances, and Catholic organizations have led the battle to overturn the legal decision that established abortion rights.
On Tuesday, 48 House Democrats sent a letter to McCarrick arguing that denying Communion as a way of getting Catholic politicians in line would be counterproductive and possibly prompt anti-Catholic bigotry. Signing the letter were two Arizona congressmen, Ed Pastor of Phoenix and Raul Grijalva of Tucson.
(Say, why hasn't Rep. Peter King claimed it's hypocritical for the Church to condemn pro-abort pols in light of the sex abuse scandal?)
Bill of Rights
Amendment I
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
The first phrase has been used by liberals to exclude prayer in schools, to remove monuments containing the ten commandments in courts, and to attack the inclusion of "under God" in the pledge of allegiance.
Based on that series of precedents, it seems that the second phrase in the above amendment to the Constitution should prohibit a group of congressmen from trying to influence the catholic church.
The Church blinks...
Should a husband deny sex to a wife that voted for Clinton?
A word of advice to Bishop Olmstead:
"I tell you the truth, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to Christ will certainly not lose his reward.
"And if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone tied around his neck. If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out."
--Gospel according to Luke
Has she repented?
Abortion is not a "political" issue - it is a moral and spiritual issue, and the Church MUST deal with it. Those that claim to be members of Christ's Body and reject the teachings of the Head of the Body should be admonished and disciplined!
A false dichotomy.
You might want to note that abortion is a political issue.
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.