Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

With these words, Pope Benedict XVI has shredded the Seamless Garment:

Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.

1 posted on 04/27/2005 9:49:28 AM PDT by Diago
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Diago

I think we'll see more pro-life libs in the future. However, I think it is probably too late for the Dems to really get back the pro-life vote. My wife always leaned a little liberal, but 30+ years of Death-loving intolerant Dems has caused her to distrust government in general. She no longer has any delusions of a nanny-state being utopia.


2 posted on 04/27/2005 10:01:44 AM PDT by old and tired
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Diago
All other concerns pale in comparison with abortion and euthanasia. These actions are an abomination and inconsistent with the faith
3 posted on 04/27/2005 10:09:17 AM PDT by Mikey_1962
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Diago

I hope he tells this to the US bishops, who have started an anti-death penalty campaign. Last week's "Prayer of the Faithful" (which is usually full of revolting stuff sent out by "headquarters") had us praying for all "who have died an unjust death as a result of abortion, capital punishment, war, etc..." Aside from the fact that I couldn't figure out what the word "unjust" meant in that context, it was obvious that the good ol'lefty USCCB is trying to put everything on the same level.

This is because many of the bishops, in their heart of hearts, are not really that opposed to abortion, which is why you so rarely hear in mentioned in many dioceses and why they are so eager to hang out with the likes of Kerry.


5 posted on 04/27/2005 10:27:20 AM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Diago
[Note: The following memorandum was sent by Cardinal Ratzinger to Cardinal McCarrick and was made public in the first week of July 2004.]

Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion. General Principles

by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger

1. Presenting oneself to receive Holy Communion should be a conscious decision, based on a reasoned judgement regarding one’s worthiness to do so, according to the Church’s objective criteria, asking such questions as: "Am I in full communion with the Catholic Church? Am I guilty of grave sin? Have I incurred a penalty (e.g. excommunication, interdict) that forbids me to receive Holy Communion? Have I prepared myself by fasting for at least an hour?" The practice of indiscriminately presenting oneself to receive Holy Communion, merely as a consequence of being present at Mass, is an abuse that must be corrected (cf. Instruction "Redemptionis Sacramentum," nos. 81, 83).

2. The Church teaches that abortion or euthanasia is a grave sin. The Encyclical Letter Evangelium vitae, with reference to judicial decisions or civil laws that authorise or promote abortion or euthanasia, states that there is a "grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection. [...] In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to ‘take part in a propoganda campaign in favour of such a law or vote for it’" (no. 73). Christians have a "grave obligation of conscience not to cooperate formally in practices which, even if permitted by civil legislation, are contrary to God’s law. Indeed, from the moral standpoint, it is never licit to cooperate formally in evil. [...] This cooperation can never be justified either by invoking respect for the freedom of others or by appealing to the fact that civil law permits it or requires it" (no. 74).

3. Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.

4. Apart from an individuals’s judgement about his worthiness to present himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, the minister of Holy Communion may find himself in the situation where he must refuse to distribute Holy Communion to someone, such as in cases of a declared excommunication, a declared interdict, or an obstinate persistence in manifest grave sin (cf. can. 915).

5. Regarding the grave sin of abortion or euthanasia, when a person’s formal cooperation becomes manifest (understood, in the case of a Catholic politician, as his consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws), his Pastor should meet with him, instructing him about the Church’s teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Eucharist.

6. When "these precautionary measures have not had their effect or in which they were not possible," and the person in question, with obstinate persistence, still presents himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, "the minister of Holy Communion must refuse to distribute it" (cf. Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts Declaration "Holy Communion and Divorced, Civilly Remarried Catholics" [2002], nos. 3-4). This decision, properly speaking, is not a sanction or a penalty. Nor is the minister of Holy Communion passing judgement on the person’s subjective guilt, but rather is reacting to the person’s public unworthiness to receive Holy Communion due to an objective situation of sin.

[N.B. A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.]

Priests for Life
PO Box 141172
Staten Island, NY 10314
Tel. 888-PFL-3448, (718) 980-4400
Fax 718-980-6515
Email mail@priestsforlife.org

Subscribe to Fr. Frank's bi-weekly prolife column (free): subscribe@priestsforlife.org 

Click here to See What Abortion Looks Like!

Home
Search  || Crisis Pregnancy Help || About Us ll Support our Work
Latest News  || Guestbook || About Other Groups ll Online Store

This site is updated daily!

Online Hosting by: Catholic Online

 

8 posted on 04/27/2005 10:39:35 AM PDT by DBeers (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Diago
When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons

I don't understand what situation would permit someone to vote for a pro-abort? What situation is worse than the innocent mass slaughter of millions of unbaptized babies?

13 posted on 04/27/2005 10:59:58 AM PDT by Judica me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Diago

A HUGE bump!


14 posted on 04/27/2005 11:04:01 AM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Diago

Didn't Cardinal Bernardin request a known, homosexual men's choir to sing at his funeral?


28 posted on 04/27/2005 6:57:43 PM PDT by Coleus (God Bless our New Pope, Benedict XVI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Diago
CHAPTER 84 THE SEAMLESS GARMENT: DEATH FOR THE PRO-LIFE MOVEMENT
American Life League

Straight Guy with the Catholic Eye: Priest parades 'seamless garment' while students walk for life

"Catholic" John Kerry's 'seamless garment'

The Legacy of Cardinal Bernardin’s Common Ground Seamless Garment, Which is a Rag!

Attorney: Bernardin lied, visited crime scene/ Why did Wisconsin priest commit suicide?

John Kerry’s ‘Seamless Garment’

Seamless Garment or Political Comforter?

Militant Secularists Even-Handed Yardsticks

A Primer on Canon 915

30 posted on 04/27/2005 9:39:38 PM PDT by Coleus (God Bless our New Pope, Benedict XVI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


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