A Communion Question

[Guest]

To our Catholic friends: I have a question about your faith (formerly mine, but I've been out of the loop for four decades, now):

Apparently, some bishops have called for Joe Biden to be denied communion due to his support for abortion rights, contrary to the teaching of the Catholic Church:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27663929/

...Debate over communion
While the bishops agree on the goal of ending abortion, they differ on how they should persuade lawmakers — of Catholic and other faiths — to agree.

A few bishops have said Biden should not receive Holy Communion.

To his credit, the bishop of Biden's home diocese refuses "to politicize the Eucharist."

Here's my question: If memory serves me, back in "the bad old days" we were taught by the Church that the the specific disqualifying factors for Communion were to not be in a state of grace (unconfessed sin), or to have committed a mortal sin. Sins were listed pretty clearly.

Is this still true? If so, is supporting abortion rights now listed as a sin? If it's not, how can bishops threaten to withold a sacrament for disagreeing with Church teaching?

Thanks for any light you can shed.

 

[Safe_Bet]

To our Catholic friends: I have a question about your faith (formerly mine, but I've been out of the loop for four decades, now):

Apparently, some bishops have called for Joe Biden to be denied communion due to his support for abortion rights, contrary to the teaching of the Catholic Church:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27663929/



To his credit, the bishop of Biden's home diocese refuses "to politicize the Eucharist."

Here's my question: If memory serves me, back in "the bad old days" we were taught by the Church that the the specific disqualifying factors for Communion were to not be in a state of grace (unconfessed sin), or to have committed a mortal sin. Sins were listed pretty clearly.

Is this still true? If so, is supporting abortion rights now listed as a sin? If it's not, how can bishops threaten to withold a sacrament for disagreeing with Church teaching?

Thanks for any light you can shed.

He walked past Barney Frank without spitting on him so Biden is definitely going straight to hell!
(STRAIGHT to hell??? Does that mean you go QUEER to heaven??? That would be a major joke on the Fundies!)

 

[Guest]

He walked past Barney Frank without spitting on him so Biden is definitely going straight to hell!

Of course--he gets VIP treatment, which means he gets to bypass security and board early...

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Hardly makes much of a difference what the bishops want to do. All Biden has to do is head next door to the Anglicans. Even the clerical garments will be familiar and they'll welcome him with open arms.

And they have a woman for chief bishop and a gay one as well. How progressive can you get?

Meanwhile, the current Curia seems dead set on narrowing down the Faithful to a narrow, obedient, ignorant tiny minority so that Doctrine and Dogma may be served.

 

[Guest]

Hardly makes much of a difference what the bishops want to do. All Biden has to do is head next door to the Anglicans. Even the clerical garments will be familiar and they'll welcome him with open arms.

And they have a woman for chief bishop and a gay one as well. How progressive can you get?

Meanwhile, the current Curia seems dead set on narrowing down the Faithful to a narrow, obedient, ignorant tiny minority so that Doctrine and Dogma may be served.

OK, I'm tired--I had to read that twice, because I got a sudden flash of ol' Joe walking into the Anglican church wearing clerical garb...

(Is it bedtime, yet?)

 

[PrincessErin]

.....

 

[john-the-author]

The church teaching on when you can and can not have communion hasn't changed. If you have not confessed to committing any mortal sins then your mind and body are not in the right place to have communion.

What should happen is that the person needs to go to confession and then get communion.

Realistically speaking a bishop can say whatever they want regarding politics and the rules of the church. Some clergy are more vocal about politics then others. We could get into a church and state conversation but that's not needed.

I lived in Seattle when Archbishop Hunthausen was in full force. He actually believed in helping the poor and being ecumenical (what the Second Vatican Council was all about) and being accepting of homosexuality and a lot of other things that were, um, very progressive and exactly what the 2nd V.C. was trying to accomplish. As such, he really pissed off Cardinal Ratzinger (who's now Pope Benedict the whatever'th), who is just as nasty and uptight a man as you'd think he is from his pictures. So it really depends on who's in the driver's seat at that point, yup.

 

[Guest]

The church teaching on when you can and can not have communion hasn't changed. If you have not confessed to committing any mortal sins then your mind and body are not in the right place to have communion.

What should happen is that the person needs to go to confession and then get communion.

Realistically speaking a bishop can say whatever they want regarding politics and the rules of the church. Some clergy are more vocal about politics then others. We could get into a church and state conversation but that's not needed.

Thanks for your post.

So, if I understand you correctly, a bishop could order his parish priests to withhold communion because the bishop didn't like someone's politics and the priests would be bound by their vows of obedience to comply?

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Uh-huh, unless they want to change denominations!

 

[Guest]

Uh-huh, unless they want to change denominations!

Make mine a hundred!

Thanks.

 

[PrincessErin]

.....

 

[Pure]

Here's my question: If memory serves me, back in "the bad old days" we were taught by the Church that the the specific disqualifying factors for Communion were to not be in a state of grace (unconfessed sin), or to have committed a mortal sin. Sins were listed pretty clearly.

Is this still true? If so, is supporting abortion rights now listed as a sin? If it's not, how can bishops threaten to withold a sacrament for disagreeing with Church teaching?

i think arguably a mortal sin is involved *in the case of a legislator.* this isn't just someone saying 'abortion is ok.' as a senator, he'd vote for legislation allowing termination of the life of the unborn. since taking the life of an unborn 'soul' is a sin, the legislator whose voting faciliatate that is mortally sinning.

for an analogy, consider a legislator whose votes promoted slavery. keeping slaves is now against church law. hence the legislator who votes so as to permit slavery (e.g. opposes its abolition) is breaking the same law, though at one remove, as it were.

this is NOT quite the same as a bishop saying, 'he's a left democrat and so we're going to withhold communion."

 

[Guest]

Here's my question: If memory serves me, back in "the bad old days" we were taught by the Church that the the specific disqualifying factors for Communion were to not be in a state of grace (unconfessed sin), or to have committed a mortal sin. Sins were listed pretty clearly.

Is this still true? If so, is supporting abortion rights now listed as a sin? If it's not, how can bishops threaten to withold a sacrament for disagreeing with Church teaching?

i think arguably a mortal sin is involved *in the case of a legislator.* this isn't just someone saying 'abortion is ok.' as a senator, he'd vote for legislation allowing termination of the life of the unborn. since taking the life of an unborn 'soul' is a sin, the legislator whose voting faciliatate that is mortally sinning.

for an analogy, consider a legislator whose votes promoted slavery. keeping slaves is now against church law. hence the legislator who votes so as to permit slavery (e.g. opposes its abolition) is breaking the same law, though at one remove, as it were.

this is NOT quite the same as a bishop saying, 'he's a left democrat and so we're going to withhold communion."

Hmm... so, under Catholic doctrine, someone who facilitates the commission of a sin is guilty of sin?

ETA: I should have read more carefully--you already answered that. OK, I looked it up, and found this:

The Catholic Church has not relaxed her strict prohibition of all abortion; but, as we have seen above, she has made it more definite. As to the penalties she inflicts upon the guilty parties, her present legislation was fixed by the Bull of Pius IX "Apostolicae Sedis". It decrees excommunication -- that is, deprivation of the Sacraments and of the Prayers of the Church in the case of any of her members, and other privations besides in the case of clergymen -- against all who seek to procure abortion, if their action produces the effect. Penalties must always be strictly interpreted. Therefore, while anyone who voluntarily aids in procuring abortion, in any way whatever, does morally wrong, only those incur the excommunication who themselves actually and efficaciously procure the abortion.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01046b.htm

So, I'm still confused, I'm afraid. Based on the above, I don't see where facilitating the availability of abortion disqualifies a Catholic from receiving Communion.