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

Skip to comments.

Vatican denies it responded to lawyer seeking Kerry's excommunication.
Catholic News Service ^ | October 19, 2004 | Cindy Wooden

Posted on 10/19/2004 7:32:20 AM PDT by Remole

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-110 next last
To: Pyro7480

That'll work, it's ecumenical.....


41 posted on 10/19/2004 8:43:37 AM PDT by NeoCaveman (John Kerry mispoke, he meant to say she was a thespian.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Remole

So WHY doesn't he excommunicate Kerry from the Catholic Church?

WHY?

He should he shunned and excommunicated.


42 posted on 10/19/2004 8:45:01 AM PDT by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sitetest

Going down this road is a losing proposition. There are many undecided voters who will be turned off. It will make pro-lifers feel good but they're already voting for Bush. No gain with this approach.


43 posted on 10/19/2004 8:45:06 AM PDT by ladyjane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: nmh

The best explanation for this situation is that the Vatican avoids direct confrontation at all costs; and all the more when such confrontation could be interpreted as interference with the internal political situation in the US. As others on this and other threads have said: as a practical matter, Kerry is already outside the community of Catholic faithful and doctrine (= excommunication laetae sententiae, i.e., by the very act of speaking and voting pro-choice and on other matters). But a formal declaration of excommunication would involve a formal legal process, and I am sure that the Vatican wants to avoid that. The question remains: if (horribile visu!) Kerry is elected president, then at some point the Church authorities in Boston, Washington or Rome will have to make some clear statement about his belonging to the Catholic community; and when that happens, there will be many on this forum who will cry out, well, why then didn't the Vatican speak out before the election??


44 posted on 10/19/2004 8:53:18 AM PDT by Remole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: ladyjane

Dear ladyjane,

Frankly, if they asked me, I'd PREFER they do this after the election. Nov 3. So that it would be clear that the bishops and the Vatican aren't playing politics.

But for devout Catholics who try to be obedient to the binding teachings of our Church, and who fight for the right to life, it is important that the Church finally make clear what the truth is.

There are people in my own parish who believe it is acceptable to favor abortion rights and nonetheless be a "practicing Catholic." It's difficult to persuade them otherwise when the bishops do little concerning folks who loudly proclaim both that they favor abortion rights and that they are practicing, devout, faithful Catholics.

When Ted Kennedy is asked about this, he says it isn't his problem, after all, it's the bishops. THEY let him persist in his position.

He's right.

It comes down to a matter of integrity, a matter of honesty. It ought not to come down to a matter of politics. That's why I think this ought to be done after Nov 2.

But as a matter of integrity and honesty, the Church needs to say formally, officially, loudly, if you can't agree with the Church's teaching on this rather foundational issue of morality, human rights, and social justice, then stop pretending to be a Catholic. We no longer recognize you as a Catholic in good standing.

It's just simple honesty.

As to the repercussions, let the chips fall where they may. Oh well. The Church has suffered worse things. If folks rise up and drive devout Catholics back into the catacombs, if they drive us from civil society, and punish us for being faithful witnesses to the Gospel of Jesus, so be it. I'd hate that. I'd personally find it gravely difficult. I don't ask for it, I don't want it.

I'd need God's grace to bear it. For God's grace, I'd pray.

But even persecution is to be preferred to the current state of dishonesty.


sitetest


45 posted on 10/19/2004 8:55:35 AM PDT by sitetest (Why does everyone get so uptight about toasted heretics??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: patent

I suppose you are correct, but the facts in the letter accurately reflect Catholic thought, the reason they are 'un-official' is that the requestor was unofficial and more, the response was due to a request TO the Vatican so it was a Vatican response, unofficially.


46 posted on 10/19/2004 8:55:59 AM PDT by narses (If you want ON or OFF my Catholic Ping List email me. + http://www.alamo-girl.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: dubyaismypresident

The old Holy Roman Empire banner perhaps?


47 posted on 10/19/2004 8:57:03 AM PDT by narses (If you want ON or OFF my Catholic Ping List email me. + http://www.alamo-girl.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: ladyjane; MineralMan; GatorGirl; maryz; afraidfortherepublic; Antoninus; Aquinasfan; livius; ...

"This whole line of stuff should be dropped
And never should have been started in the first place."

How is this different from the SwiftVets and their pursuit of Truth and Honor? Should they have remained silent?


48 posted on 10/19/2004 9:00:18 AM PDT by narses (If you want ON or OFF my Catholic Ping List email me. + http://www.alamo-girl.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: narses

"How is this different from the SwiftVets and their pursuit of Truth and Honor? Should they have remained silent? "


That's pretty simple, really. In the case of the Swiftboat Veterans for Truth, it was a matter of a bunch of people who did the same job Kerry did stating the information they had. No official body is needed, nor is one invoked.

In the case of this so-called excommunication, the pretense was that the Church had, somehow, spoken. It had not. It has now. And what they said to this unofficial spokesperson was to STFU. It's that simple. If you read the whole article, you'd see that.

One is true; the other false. One may argue that Kerry has excommunicated himself, but one may not argue that the Church has acted.


49 posted on 10/19/2004 9:03:47 AM PDT by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan; GatorGirl; maryz; afraidfortherepublic; Antoninus; Aquinasfan; livius; ...
This was a hoax, essentially.

Wrong.

Now we have the real story, direct from the Vatican.

The story remains as it has been told. An official request was answered unofficially.

There is no excommunication. There will be no excommunication.

False. Objectively false. There has been no FORMAL excommunication. Senator Kerry and the other abortion supporting Catholic politicians have excommunicated themselves by their actions.

50 posted on 10/19/2004 9:04:28 AM PDT by narses (If you want ON or OFF my Catholic Ping List email me. + http://www.alamo-girl.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: narses

Not so fast. From the original article at the top of this thread (you did read it, didn't you?:



"Vatican officials contacted by CNS Oct. 19 said they did not agree with Father Cole's conclusion that Kerry has incurred excommunication.

"You can incur excommunication 'latae sententiae' (automatically) only if you procure or perform an abortion," one said."



So, you have one opinion, and the Vatican apparently has another. I doubt that Kerry has ever had an abortion or procured one.

He does support abortion. That is a fact. That he is excommunicated in any way is not a fact. It is an opinion. You see a different one above, from a Vatican official.


51 posted on 10/19/2004 9:07:43 AM PDT by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
One may argue that Kerry has excommunicated himself, ...

He has. And a formal action before his Bishop has opened to recognize de jure that fact.

...but one may not argue that the Church has acted.

Wrong. The Vatican was asked. They answered unofficially. Their unofficial answer lays out the clear, objective tests that render the heresy trial judgment a foregone conclusion.

"This whole line of stuff should be dropped And never should have been started in the first place."

Since you admit that the essential issue, self-excommunication, is a valid argument, why do you state the above? How again is that different that the Swift Vets? As a Catholic I am injured by sKerry's conduct just as the Vets were injured by his conduct. The difference? The Vets were injured three decades ago, babies die daily and my faith is assaulted daily by these CINO politicians.

52 posted on 10/19/2004 9:08:55 AM PDT by narses (If you want ON or OFF my Catholic Ping List email me. + http://www.alamo-girl.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan

"...and the Vatican apparently has another..."

The liberal Europhile faction may say that, but the OFFICIAL position of the Church can be found in the Catechism and Canon Law, and there is NO support for that 'vatican officials' position in either. Further, if Card. McCarrick had properly shared Rome's OFFICIAL position with the USCCB, the truth would have been preached from every pulpit this year. Read Card. Ratzinger's OFFICIAL letter to the USCCB in it's entirety.


53 posted on 10/19/2004 9:11:39 AM PDT by narses (If you want ON or OFF my Catholic Ping List email me. + http://www.alamo-girl.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: narses

"Since you admit that the essential issue, self-excommunication, is a valid argument, why do you state the above? "

Ah, but I don't admit that, and neither do Vatican spokespersons. Lacking any official Vatican pronouncement on the matter, I must say it is an opinion, held by some Catholics, but not an official declaration. It is a matter for interpretation.


54 posted on 10/19/2004 9:15:58 AM PDT by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: narses
How is this different from the SwiftVets and their pursuit of Truth and Honor? Should they have remained silent?

A better comparison would be the rathergate memos. Ask yourself: Should Rather have remained silent?

55 posted on 10/19/2004 9:22:55 AM PDT by ladyjane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Remole

It looks like the Catholic hierarchy has been taken over by a bunch of moral marshmallows, similar to a lot of our Congressmen.

Their primary interest is in covering their butt, not standing up for the principles upon which their church was founded.

The Catholic Church considers abortion murder. Ergo, anyone who supports or approves of abortion is guilty of murder.

Further, in the eyes of the Catholic Church, abortion exceeds normal murder in seriousness and is particularly abhorrent as it is a sin against salvation. Orthodox Catholic dogma states that all persons are born in "original" sin and cannot be saved without baptism. When you kill an unborn baby, you are consequently killing not only its body, but also its soul, consigning that innocent life to an eternity outside of God's presence.

Catholics believe that without baptism any soul is lost forever. That's why Catholic missonaries have risked their lives baptising babies and dying men and women in the face of invasions, war and plague in the past. That's why some Catholic priests have been arrested for digging through the refuse of abortion mills to baptise murdered babies on the outside chance that their souls might still be present in their trashed and mutiliated bodies.

That is why Kerry, Ted Kennedy, and other so-called "Catholics" are so repellent and unacceptable as Catholics when they defend, support, or encourage the murder of unborn children. Regardless of what some higher level Vatican apparatchniks may say or not say on this issue, politicians who support abortion are not Catholic - period.

Furthermore, they cannot even be considered Christians.


56 posted on 10/19/2004 9:34:09 AM PDT by ZULU (Fear the government which fears your guns. God, guts, and guns made America great.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
Cindy Wooden, the author of this article, wants things both ways. On the one hand, she is happy to report that Fr. Cole's letter was unofficial, but on the merits of Sen. Kerry's latae sententiae excommunication, she counters Fr. Cole's unofficial opinion with yet someone else's unofficial opinion by quoting an anonymous "Vatican official" -- implying in the process that that Anonymous' opinion is official but Fr. Cole's is not. Too clever by half.
57 posted on 10/19/2004 9:36:37 AM PDT by eastsider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan; sitetest; sinkspur
"Vatican officials contacted by CNS Oct. 19

Name them.

"You can incur excommunication 'latae sententiae' (automatically) only if you procure or perform an abortion," one said."

Patently false. Absurd. Ridiculous. There are many ways to incur excommunication 'latae sententiae' (automatically). Having an abortion is far from the "only" way to incur excommunication 'latae sententiae'; public heresy also incurs 'latae sententiae' excommunication.

This so-called "Vatican officials'" response is a joke, if not a complete fabrication on the part of Catholic News Service, the liberal news propaganda machine of the USCCB, a biased body trying to get Kerry elected.

The bottom line on this story has not been written yet, and won't be till after the election.

At that time, it will become abundantly clear the Vatican's intent in releasing this trial ballon at this time.

58 posted on 10/19/2004 9:47:26 AM PDT by St. Johann Tetzel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan; sitetest; sinkspur
"Vatican officials contacted by CNS Oct. 19

Name them.

"You can incur excommunication 'latae sententiae' (automatically) only if you procure or perform an abortion," one said."

Patently false. Absurd. Ridiculous. There are many ways to incur excommunication 'latae sententiae' (automatically). Having an abortion is far from the "only" way to incur excommunication 'latae sententiae'; public heresy also incurs 'latae sententiae' excommunication.

This so-called "Vatican officials'" response is a joke, if not a complete fabrication on the part of Catholic News Service, the liberal news propaganda machine of the USCCB, a biased body trying to get Kerry elected.

The bottom line on this story has not been written yet, and won't be till after the election.

At that time, it will become abundantly clear the Vatican's intent in releasing this trial ballon at this time.

59 posted on 10/19/2004 9:47:36 AM PDT by St. Johann Tetzel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

Comment #60 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-110 next last

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