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

Skip to comments.

Catholics Who Vote for Freedom of Choice Act Could Face Automatic Excommunication ( 'bout time! )
cnsnews.com ^ | November 19, 2008 | Matt Hadro

Posted on 11/19/2008 9:11:02 AM PST by kellynla

Catholic members of Congress who vote for the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) could face “automatic excommunication” if the act is determined to be “formal cooperation” in the evil of abortion.

(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; Government
KEYWORDS: 111th; abortion; bho2008; catholic; catholicism; catholicpoliticians; catholics; foca; politicians
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 201-214 next last
To: CottShop

In Baptism we are forgiven our past sins. It does not forgive our future sins. That’s what repentance is all about. In the Catholic church that would be confession and absolution...

But if you are Baptized yet have no intention of following Christ, even that doesn’t work.


121 posted on 11/19/2008 11:39:12 AM PST by babygene (It seems that stupidity is the most abundant element in the universe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: dbz77

Abortion is MURDER. PERIOD

And the systematic murder of tens of millions of babies for the past 35 years is genocide.

Nothing to “argue!”


122 posted on 11/19/2008 11:40:37 AM PST by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: FreedomFerret
I personally find this anti-American, anti-democracy. Since when can the church tell the state what to do, “or else”.

Any time it wants. The Constitution protects freedom of speech and belief, doesn't it?

Our founding fathers made seperation of church and state for a very good reason.

Which means what? Did you know that that phrase does not appear in the Constitution? With the First Amendment, the Founders wanted to promote religious freedom while preventing the establishment of a national church, like the Church of England. Period. Did you know that many individual states had established churches at the time of the revolution, and well into the 1800s?

The State couldn’t tell the church what to think or do, and the church couldn’t tell the State what to think or do.

This passes for conventional wisdom because it's what's taught in government schools, but it's unrelated to the Constitution and the historical facts. In practice, the State rightly restricts the extent of some religious practices (i.e., polygamy, human sacrifice), while giving churches wide authority over their members with regard to religious doctrines and practices. This is what the Founders intended.

Finally, the Church is simply exercising its religious disciplinary authority over its own members. Moreover, the Church is not using violence, or the threat of violence, to enforce its teachings. The Church is simply using moral suasion.

123 posted on 11/19/2008 11:41:05 AM PST by Aquinasfan (When you find "Sola Scriptura" in the Bible, let me know)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: TCH

What an amazing story. Thank you for calling it to my attention.


124 posted on 11/19/2008 11:42:46 AM PST by Welcome2thejungle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: dbz77
"...that if unborn feti/born persons are an unjust threat to innocent life,..."

Define threat. The perverse, weak and twisted mind would say "economic" as well as self defense (Life is in direct peril which in today's industrialized medically advance world, becoming increasingly rare). Do you subscribe to this view? Your implication of comparing an unborn baby to a foreign invader (Assuming the mother was not raped) reeks of NARAL speak.
125 posted on 11/19/2008 11:43:52 AM PST by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Excommunication is always a last drastic act against a person who has fallen away from the Church. Making it automatic means no chance at redemption exists.

That's absolutely false and contrary to Church teaching. Redemption is always a possibility, through the "actual graces" that God may offer.

"Automatic excommunication" differs from "formal excommunication," in that excommunication occurs without a formal, public, act of the Church, that is, a formal pronouncement from a priest or bishop.

126 posted on 11/19/2008 11:45:09 AM PST by Aquinasfan (When you find "Sola Scriptura" in the Bible, let me know)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: dbz77
“The American government allows people to bow to statues of Ba’al, Odin, or the Blessed Virgin Mary. This does not mean the government approves of idolatry or sanctions idolatry. If you read the Bible, idolatry has always been considered to be a grave sin. God even commanded the judges of Israel to stone idolaters to death?”

Do you think Catholics are idolaters because we pray to Our Blessed Mother Mary for her help?

127 posted on 11/19/2008 11:47:22 AM PST by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom

yea, well I’m getting ready to hand this clown his lunch in about 60 seconds...
he sounds about as Catholic as my cat! LOL


128 posted on 11/19/2008 11:50:04 AM PST by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: FreedomFerret
They are just men, failable and weak. The have no leverage on my, or anyones, relationship with God.

How do you know this? Didn't Christ establish a Church against which the gates of hell would not prevail? If so, then that Church must exist to this day. And if it exists, we must take our disputes "to the Church," as Christ commanded, since, as Christ said, anyone who fails to "listen to the Church" should be treated as a "pagan or tax collector."

As Christians, then, we have a grave obligation to find Christ's Church, and to obey Its teachings. At the very least, we are not permitted to throw up our hands and abandon our search for Christ's Church. A good place to begin a search for the historical Church of Christ would be to study the history of the early Church.

As you know, Catholics believe that the Catholic Church is, in fact, Christ's Church, which is why we are obligated to obey its teachings.

129 posted on 11/19/2008 11:55:10 AM PST by Aquinasfan (When you find "Sola Scriptura" in the Bible, let me know)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

About time! Nancy Pelosi and the other Abortion Rights “Catholics” needed to get booted from the church. It is one thing to quietly dissent, but another to publicly advacate a position diametrically opposed by the church.


130 posted on 11/19/2008 11:55:15 AM PST by kgrif_Salinas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rollo tomasi
The perverse, weak and twisted mind would say "economic" as well as self defense (Life is in direct peril which in today's industrialized medically advance world, becoming increasingly rare).
Yes, they would, just as robbers and bandits would make that same argument to justify killing people to take their stuff.
Do you subscribe to this view?
No.
131 posted on 11/19/2008 11:55:23 AM PST by dbz77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: FreedomFerret
Since when can the church tell the state what to do, “or else”.

When the people doing the doing claim to be Catholics, the church is absolutely right to tell them they will cease to be Catholics in good standing.

That isn't telling "the state" anything. That's telling Catholics what's required of them to be faithful Catholics.

132 posted on 11/19/2008 11:56:19 AM PST by Campion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Welcome2thejungle

You are welcome. I enjoy engaging the hysterical anti-Catholic bigotry that flies about here; but, alas, I must suspend further discussion and get back to my duties. Debating and debunking Protestant misinformation or disinformation usually proves futile... but I stay the course in Faith, Hope and Charity (Though sometimes, admittedly, I am not so charitable).


133 posted on 11/19/2008 11:56:43 AM PST by TCH (Another redneck clinging to guns and religion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: dbz77
I am a Catholic.

I've been reading your posts on this thread and figured I'd see this sooner or later.

I can call myself Queen of England. I can even convince myself that I AM the Queen of England, if I try really hard.

Doesn't make it so.

From what you've posted on this thread, I gather you're Catholic in the same way that Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden are Catholic.

You can claim to be anything you like, but that only makes it true in your mind. If you want to be taken seriously as a Catholic--and, more importantly, if you want to have a truly faithful relationship with God through the Catholic Church--I suggest you make an appointment to speak with a member of clergy, pronto. Maybe take some RCIA-like classes. Whatever you do, don't blaspheme yourself further by presenting yourself for Communion. By your own admission, you are not in Communion.

134 posted on 11/19/2008 11:58:49 AM PST by grellis (I am Jill's overwhelming sense of disgust.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
I should have read further down the thread!!! I was thinking along exactly those same lines.

How've you been? My youngest has pinkeye, ugh

135 posted on 11/19/2008 12:00:24 PM PST by grellis (I am Jill's overwhelming sense of disgust.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: grellis
From what you've posted on this thread, I gather you're Catholic in the same way that Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden are Catholic.
What is your impression of my position on abortion, and what quotes do you have to back up that impression?
136 posted on 11/19/2008 12:05:20 PM PST by dbz77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: dbz77

LOL!


137 posted on 11/19/2008 12:06:44 PM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: dbz77

“Thus, we can conclude, based on this thesis, that if unborn feti/born persons are an unjust threat to innocent life, it is ethical to kill them?”

“unjust threat?”

Babies are NEVER an “unjust threat!”
Babies and life are gifts from God!

I don’t where the hell you came up with such a “thesis” but it is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! PERIOD.

Ya know what newbie...you’re about as “Catholic” as my cat!

And I suggest you take your ideas elsewhere because they are neither “Catholic” or Christian.

Good day!


138 posted on 11/19/2008 12:07:34 PM PST by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: xkaydet65

The preponderance of evidence is that unborn human feti are human and alive. And that is good enough to treat it as such.


139 posted on 11/19/2008 12:09:23 PM PST by dbz77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: kellynla
Abortion is MURDER. PERIOD
Killing born people is MURDER. PERIOD. Same ethical principles apply to killing born people as they do to unborn feti, remember?
140 posted on 11/19/2008 12:11:21 PM PST by dbz77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 201-214 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