Pro Abortion Catholic Politicians... NO HOLY COMMUNION FOR YOU!

Jadow

Diamond Member
Feb 12, 2003
5,962
2
0
http://www.lacrossetribune.com/articles/2004/01/09/news/00lead.txt


Burke directs priests to withhold sacraments to Catholic lawmakers who support abortion, euthanasia

By GAYDA HOLLNAGEL, La Crosse Tribune

Priests in the Diocese of La Crosse must withhold Communion to Catholic lawmakers who support abortion or euthanasia, according to a decree from Bishop Raymond L. Burke. Advertisement

Advertise Here Directory
It's an act some worry will hurt the future of Catholics in politics.

"I just don't know where this will go, and, frankly, I'm shocked by it," said La Crosse Mayor John Medinger, who describes himself as an active Catholic.

"If they're going to tell Catholic politicians if they vote in a certain way, are they also going to say that Catholics have to vote for certain politicians or they can't receive the sacraments," he said. "I just think it's very dangerous ice they're walking on."

The diocese on Thursday made public a pastoral letter signed in November by Burke advising Catholics in the diocese of their political responsibility in upholding human life and also his notice ordering parish priests to withhold Communion to Catholic legislators who support abortion or euthanasia.

The release of the two documents follows news reports last month that Burke had sent private letters to three Catholic legislators in the diocese warning them of danger to their spiritual health if they support abortion rights.

According to an article in Thursday's diocesan newspaper, the Catholic Times, Burke said the need for the documents became clear to him after the legislators turned down his offers for private meetings and indicated they did not intend to change how they voted.

"After several exchanges of letters, it became clear in all three cases that there was no willingness to conform to the teaching of the church," Burke said. "So the notification became a necessity in order that the faithful of the diocese not be scandalized, thinking that it is acceptable for a devout Catholic to also be pro-abortion."

The La Crosse area has no Catholic legislators, but Medinger said he was troubled by the bishop's actions.

Medinger said he worries that the action might mean that fewer Catholics will run for public office, and if they do run, non-Catholic voters will be unwilling to vote for them because of concerns that the Catholic politician will listen to the church rather than constituents.

"It seems like we fought this battle when John Kennedy was president," Medinger said.

"I love the Catholic church, but I also take an oath of office to uphold the Constitution. ... I think the Constitution is also a powerful document that we are sworn to uphold."

Medinger said he read the Catholic Times article and the canonical notice about withholding Communion from politicians who refuse to follow church teaching on any issue.

"What is the role of an individual to work within the realm of his own conscience?" he asked.

Both documents were signed Nov. 23 before Burke's appointment Dec. 2 as archbishop of St. Louis. Burke is to be installed in St. Louis on Jan. 26.

Rose Hammes, director of communications for the La Crosse diocese, said the decree is binding on priests.

She also said the bishop's decree serves to remind all Catholics that the church has teachings they should abide by. For example, she said, women using birth control should also "not in good conscience" receive Communion if they consider themselves a Catholic in good faith.

State Sen. Julie Lassa, D-Stevens Point, who received a letter from Burke, issued a statement Thursday night reiterating her position that she would not let religion decide how she served her constituents.

"I hold Bishop Burke in high regard; however, I believe any effort to pressure legislators by threatening to deny them the sacraments is contrary to the principles of democracy," she said.

In a statement last month, U.S. Rep. David Obey, a Democrat from Wausau, said he respects the effort of the bishop and any other clergy member to try to influence him through advocacy and reason.

"The votes I cast are driven by my own independent judgment and conscience, not by a set of marching orders given by any church hierarchy, prelate or associated lobby group," Obey said.

Exactly how many Catholic legislators live in the diocese was unknown, said Arthur Hippler, the diocese's director of the office of justice and peace.

Judie Brown, president of the Washington, D.C.-based American Life League, praised Burke for using his authority to deal with a "grave public scandal" and called his move a "historic first step forward in dealing with the problem of pro-abortion Catholic political figures."
 

Jadow

Diamond Member
Feb 12, 2003
5,962
2
0
I agree with the Bishop on this.

If Teddy Kennedy wants to support abortion, he shouldn't call himself a catholic.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Hmmm If you're religion is Roman Catholic I think you understand/believe the Church is faithful to the message of Jesus, which was one of inclusion, not exclusion. I don't know about this plan. Least he's not calling for excommunication which I've heard some lay church people call for.
 

Corn

Diamond Member
Nov 12, 1999
6,390
29
91
I find this all very interesting--perhaps because I'm not religious at all. I wonder though, why would someone practice a religion that does not align with their personal beliefs and morals?

Sure, a politician takes an oath to uphold the constitution. I would expect they do so. However, why would a politician belong to a religion if he didn't subscribe to a significant precept of their faith?

The fact is that the Catholic church teaches that abortion is murder (I happen to believe the same, but not for religious reasons). How could a practicing Catholic with a conscience (not saying that anyone who would support abortion doesn't have a conscience mind you, this relates to a specific sense of someone's faith in the teachings of the Catholic church) support the murder of innocent children?

Personally, I believe that the Catholic church should excommunicate anyone who publicly supports the murder of innocent children. As a matter of fact, if the Catholic church was more concerned with principle instead of worrying about potential loss of revenue, this would already be happening.

I guess I question the point of participating in religion if you don't have the principles to act according to your faith--probably the reason that organized religion turns me off so--too much hypocrisy.
 

Genesys

Golden Member
Nov 10, 2003
1,536
0
0
Originally posted by: Zebo
Hmmm If you're religion is Roman Catholic I think you understand/believe the Church is faithful to the message of Jesus, which was one of inclusion, not exclusion. I don't know about this plan. Least he's not calling for excommunication which I've heard some lay church people call for.

mmmm, but if you're truly wanting to call yourself religious [meaning you take the teachings of the bible seriously and you dont just attent church for the social benefit] then you also hate the meaningless loss of life.

not only that, but how often does someone seeking an abortion provide a truly justifiable reason [as in not that 'its a womans body and her right to choose' argument] for getting one in the first place?
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: Corn
I find this all very interesting--perhaps because I'm not religious at all. I wonder though, why would someone practice a religion that does not align with their personal beliefs and morals?

Sure, a politician takes an oath to uphold the constitution. I would expect they do so. However, why would a politician belong to a religion if he didn't subscribe to a significant precept of their faith?

The fact is that the Catholic church teaches that abortion is murder (I happen to believe the same, but not for religious reasons). How could a practicing Catholic with a conscience (not saying that anyone who would support abortion doesn't have a conscience mind you, this relates to a specific sense of someone's faith in the teachings of the Catholic church) support the murder of innocent children?

Personally, I believe that the Catholic church should excommunicate anyone who publicly supports the murder of innocent children. As a matter of fact, if the Catholic church was more concerned with principle instead of worrying about potential loss of revenue, this would already be happening.

I guess I question the point of participating in religion if you don't have the principles to act according to your faith--probably the reason that organized religion turns me off so--too much hypocrisy.
You are right about the revenue. If they excommunicated all who believe in a women's right to choose they'd lose out on all the revenue they need to pay off the settlements incurred by their priests buggering children!
 

MovingTarget

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2003
9,002
115
106
I'm Catholic myself, but I see that kind of action as more of a pandora's box. If you take this to its maximum, you could infer that the church could force politicians (by withholding sacrememts/excommunication) to vote any certain way the church pleases. The same could be said for the congregation. Sure the church can support a certain position (in this case, pro-life), but that is taking it too far, especially in the case of the politician. Politicians are not supposed to vote how they feel anyway, they are supposed to vote to represent their constituents and not their personal views. Integration of religious position and political power is in this case a step backward. If they want to see choice taken away, they should present their arguement to the population and change their minds first instead of forcing the politicians to do so. If said politicians have said mandate, then they should vote the position of the church, but not before then.
 

Zephyr106

Banned
Jul 2, 2003
1,309
0
0
Hahaha maybe the Sacraments should be withheld from Catholic clergy who fondle, molest, and rape little children. Maybe those clergy should even be excommunicated. But of course they won't because they are "men of faith," and abuses by the religious are nothing new.

Zephyr
 

NesuD

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,999
106
106
Most pro abortion Catholic politicians were Anti abortion to begin with but apparently decided it would be politically advantageous to change sides and be Pro Abortion. Actually makes me wonder about their integrity, strenth of conviction, and honesty when they can so easily change position on such a serious subject and be at odds with their faith for political gain.
 

maluckey

Platinum Member
Jan 31, 2003
2,933
0
71
Why excommunicate? Refusal of the sacrament is the same thing. According to church doctrine and beliefs, without the sacraments, you cannot be resurrected at the second coming. No extreme unction (sp?), no communion, no absolution, no State of Grace. You will die, and that is the end of it.

The Roman Catholics have a right to enforce their church laws, and if a member does not wish to follow the rules, they have a right to exclude them. The Press has a field day on these issues, but the fact is that they also scream bloody hell if someone wants to supress freedom of religion, which this is a clear case of.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Originally posted by: maluckey
Why excommunicate? Refusal of the sacrament is the same thing. According to church doctrine and beliefs, without the sacraments, you cannot be resurrected at the second coming. No extreme unction (sp?), no communion, no absolution, no State of Grace. You will die, and that is the end of it.

The Roman Catholics have a right to enforce their church laws, and if a member does not wish to follow the rules, they have a right to exclude them. The Press has a field day on these issues, but the fact is that they also scream bloody hell if someone wants to supress freedom of religion, which this is a clear case of.

That's my point, with excommunication you are done..the church belives the the sinner needs the church at least as much as the sinless. And dispite the money roll people which to assign, which has nothing to do with it IMO, there is still hope for them since they hav'nt actually commited an excommunicatable offence. eg. having or performing an abortion.
 

preCRT

Platinum Member
Apr 12, 2000
2,340
123
106
IMHO, the Church should clean up its own house before faulting others' morals.
Seems they just don't want anyone interferring in the supply line of future molestation victims.
 

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,484
33
86
This is wrong, and nothing more than a political show. Of course the Catholic Church is basically coming around and imitating what it helped create by putting political pressure on legislators (if you never noticed, the Church is basically a model for modern corporations).
If someone in a state of mortal sin, which indirectly causing abortions and such could be made out to be, then it is the lawmaker getting himself into deeper trouble by taking the sacrement, since it is also an equal sin to partake of it while in that state of sin.
So why not let him and be done with it? If they truly believe what they preach about the afterlife, then Kennedy and Friends will have a lot to own up to, and will probably get thrown into an alley of Hell by Benny.
 

mithrandir2001

Diamond Member
May 1, 2001
6,545
1
0
The Roman Catholic Church isn't the only business in town. Other churches will give out communion to pro-choice public figures.
 

maluckey

Platinum Member
Jan 31, 2003
2,933
0
71
Perhaps, but to a Confirmed Catholic, there is only one Sacrament for the forgiveness of sins, so it won't help to receive in another Church.

This is nothing more than a move to pressure those the church beleoves to be contrary to it's teachings, to straighten up their act. Excommunication is normally a permanent thing, and is reserved for the absolute dregs of the earth. In this case, the church likely feels that they are not beyond salvation, and may still return to the church if given guidance.
 

mithrandir2001

Diamond Member
May 1, 2001
6,545
1
0
I am an ex-Catholic and I know others like me who want to move beyond the absolutism that the church is grounded in. Too much "we-know-it-all-and-anything-else-is-wrong". Spirituality is a journey, often a personal one, and I think the church will continue to lose parishiners by refusing to reach out to those who disagree with them. I can understand the whole Protestant movement.
 

maluckey

Platinum Member
Jan 31, 2003
2,933
0
71
Be that as it may, the point is that they can and will do as they wish. Infexibility can be either a strength or a weakness, depending on how it's used. Standing a moral ground is generally good though.

There are always the Episcopalians for those who wish a kinder, gentler Catholic style religion. They accept any Confirmed Roman Catholic as a full member of the congregation, but have softened views in comparison to the Roman Catholics. Even they have certain moral inflexibilities however. All churches will at a certain point. To a Christian, The Messiah's commands or teachings are generally not subject to negotiation, or changing to suit the current politically correct times.
 

xochi

Senior member
Jan 18, 2000
891
6
81

I don?t have a problem with it as long as they put the same restrictions on those that support the death penalty.