Posted on 08/05/2004 1:59:26 PM PDT by topher
This is an extremely strong statement because even if a politician or one running for office , who is Catholic, changes their stand on abortion, they still must go a process to get the Bishop to grant permission.
Part of the process is making a public statement against abortion.
So Archbishop Donoghue and Bishops Baker and Jugis are making it clear to Catholics that abortion is wrong by Church teaching and that those who confuse Catholics because they are in a leadership position are hurting the church.
This is probably the strongest statement yet against the Pro-Abortion politicians because of what it takes to be allowed once again to receive Holy Communion.
hmmmm they should apply this to ALL of the country
There are so many black churches in the Atlanta area for Kerry to pander to anyway. He'd never get around to doing his Catholic thing.
I could not find this on FreeRepublic, but I searched on
communion and Atlanta. Maybe I should have looked at the
AJC article to see if it had been posted, but I strongly
dislike the Atlanta Journal Constitution that I will not
visit their web site unless absolutely necessary.
Wonder if this policy also applies to politicians who differ from the Church's accepted policy on the death penalty?
This only makes people feel sorry for Kerry. But I do agree that the Roman Catholic Church has every right to do this, in fact you are not suppose to take communion in such an unrepentant state and he obviously feels no ill will for his rabbid pro-death abortion votes.
The Pope should censure Kerry. First strike Divorced Catholic. Second Strike Pro-Abortion. Third Strike Pro-Gay. Any one of these alone gets him excommunicated. There should be more of an outcry from the Catholics about his nomination.
This really is extraordinary. I have long been disappointed in the Catholic Church for its wobbly attitude toward pro-abortion politicians. Although I think it is questionable for a priest to refuse Communion to anyone, in this type of case I do see the rationale. The priest and the bishop must be morally accountable for the example they would set by serving Communion to an unrepentant advocate of abortion.
The death penalty is NOT AGAINST THE TEACHINGS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.
ABORTION IS.
The policy only applies to abortion because it is unquestionably wrong and the victim is unquestionably innocent.
The right to impose the death penalty, on the other hand, is supported in principle as a just punishment by Church teachings, but opposed by the Pope and most bishops in most circumstances in today's world since there are more merciful options like max security life imprisonment.
I'm not a Roman Catholic so I do not know what that policy is, but by the use of a modifier in the following phrase there is leeway for a different view with respect to the death penalty.
A law, therefore, which legitimizes the direct killing of innocent human beings
BRAVO!!!!The Bishops should have done this in 1973. I am proud to be aligned with them. It is scandalous that they have allowed this hypocrisy to fester for so long. You either follow the teachings of the Church--or you leave and go find a permissive sect...but don't continue to call yourself "Catholic."
A pro-life woman saw a number of blacks (or Afro-Americans) being "bused" to the headquarters before the election. She was able to talk to them, and found out that these people were from "good Christian churches" in Georgia. When she explained that the now "ex-Governor" and Senator Cleland were both for abortion and how wrong it would for Christians to vote for them, these blacks (or Afro-Americans) agreed.
It might have made an impact in that election because these were "black Christian church leaders" who agreed it was wrong to support these Democrats -- because the Democratic politicians supported aboriton .
At this point in the game, Georgia is a strong Bush state. The South, the exception of Florida will all vote Bush in November -- without question of the outcome. Florida is the only state that is close either way, but leans to Bush and has his brother as governor (with a Hispanic First Lady as Jeb's wife).
The Bush administration needs to target Pennsylvannia and New Jersey, which he might win, especially with the Vets coming out against Kerry. At least, the above is my opinion, and information about the last statewide election that saw a Republican become Governor.
Incorrect on the first. Divorce in and of itself does not warrant either a latae or ferendae sententiae excommunication. Divorcing and remarrying without an annulment, which Kerry requested but no record exists that one was granted, could garner an individual the "E" ticket.
dont forget, Pope John Paul II and the Church were (and still are) tough on communist states, and Kerry 'provided aid and comfort to the enemy.'
I'm Catholic, and I'm forwarding this to my priest. I already know he disapproves of Kerry in just about every aspect, so hopefully he can reach quite a few members of the congregation, without actually endorsing any one candidate, of course. but the message should be read, loud and clear.
of course, it wont matter much; I'm in Texas, and Bush has these 34 electoral votes in the bag!
I hope God will forgive me. But I was thinking more in general terms of the subject...
How can he give talks in these churches and the ACLU and those for separation of church and state say NOTHING????
The Catholic Church recognizes the right of the state to impose the death penalty and states so in the Catechism.
therein lies the devils deception
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.