A South Carolina Roman Catholic priest has told his parishioners that they should refrain from receiving Holy Communion if they voted for Barack Obama because the Democratic president-elect supports abortion, and supporting him “constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil.”
The Rev. Jay Scott Newman said in a letter distributed Sunday to parishioners at St. Mary's Catholic Church in Greenville that they are putting their souls at risk if they take Holy Communion before doing penance for their vote.
“Our nation has chosen for its chief executive the most radical pro-abortion politician ever to serve in the United States Senate or to run for president,” Newman wrote, referring to Obama by his full name, including his middle name of Hussein.
“Voting for a pro-abortion politician when a plausible pro-life alternative exits constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil, and those Catholics who do so place themselves outside of the full communion of Christ's Church and under the judgment of divine law. Persons in this condition should not receive Holy Communion until and unless they are reconciled to God in the Sacrament of Penance, lest they eat and drink their own condemnation. . . .”
This is love. Real love. Unselfish love. Fatherly love.
Love that lays down it's own life for the sheep.
This is love. Real love. Unselfish love. Fatherly love.
Love that lays down it's own life for the sheep.
16 comments:
A priest that disobey's his local ordinary?
A priest that holds the eucharist hostage?
Nice
Where you been, under a rock?
There are new rules. Actually, they are the same rules that have always been but the ordinaries who told priests to cover up the good old boy network of pedophiles have drawn the line in the sand.
No more obeying an ordinary when his orders violate criminal law, canon law or a order a commission of a moral or spiritual evil.
If your ordinary is still operating a good old boy network, I wouldn't let my children go to the bathrooms by themselves because the pedophiles will flock to be under his "supervision"
Whatever happenned to "fidelity"?
Fidelity to the Holy Father in Rome, through his Cardinal Archbishops?
Oh, that's right, that's only when you need to put others under some kind of burden
Others need to obey the Cardinal Archbishop even when they disagree...but when YOU disagree...it's a different story.
**No more obeying an ordinary when his orders violate criminal law, canon law or a order a commission of a moral or spiritual evil.**
Please contact Rome and ask them if you should obey the Cardinal...or simply decide policy for yourself.
Fidelity? Yeah, right.
Whatever happenned to "fidelity"?
"Fidelity to the Holy Father in Rome, through his Cardinal Archbishops?
Oh, that's right, that's only when you need to put others under some kind of burden
Others need to obey the Cardinal Archbishop even when they disagree...but when YOU disagree...it's a different story."
No difference to you between Christ and Ciaphas, eh?
Sadly, your indoctrination into dissent has left a fog which leaves you incapable of distinguishing when an ordinary is in communion with Rome. What confusion and bitterness.
And, by the way..nobody who knows the value of the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity would spell Eucharist with a little "e".
:O)
LOVE THE NEW BLOG GIRL!!!
How true! It is an act of love (charity) for a priest to tell his flock the truth.
Voting for a pro-abortion politician is a sin and if you care about your soul, it would behoove you to get to confession asap...
Sadly, your indoctrination into dissent has left a fog which leaves you incapable of distinguishing when an ordinary is in communion with Rome.
I see it's the same old Carol. Attack the messenger.
I said nothing about dissent. I spoke of obedience.
But feel free to attack anyone that causes you to think. It might make you feel better.
Lynne, I love your icon! Thanks for the kind words about my humor in the post about the story in the Globe about you know who!
>,"I see it's the same old Carol. Attack the messenger.
I said nothing about dissent. I spoke of obedience.">
You don't like the fact that I'm correcting the errors you are posting and it's eating away at your ego. This doesn't mean I'm attacking your personhood.
You were speaking about obedience to some Monsignor whom you cannot distinguish from Mother Church and the Pope. Neither the Monsignor nor the usher is "the Church".
The Church is the Deposit of Faith which is clear about the duty to confess and repent prior to receiving the Blessed Sacrament - which you referred to as the 'eucharist' with a little "e".
Your posts aren't about "obedience", they're about attacking people who are obedient.
Stop being an old sourpuss!
Seems the number of priests (and Bishops) that "love like this" are increasing in numbers while the "Catholic Democrats" glamorize unworthy Eucharistic reception?
Please quote me one Bishop who has instructed his priests that it is OK to withhold communion from people based on their vote.
Since you know so much about "Fidelity" please find where a Bishop has instructed his priests to do this...
So much for "Fidelity", eh?
"Since you know so much about "Fidelity" please find where a Bishop has instructed his priests to do this..."
Have you read Ratzinger on the subject?
There's plenty of Bishops now in line with him. Like it or lump it, if you voted for Obama, this priest is telling you the truth.
Line up the priests who will tell the people in the pews that anyone using contraception needs to confess and refrain from the Blessed Sacrament until they stop, repent and amend their lives.
Count up the Bishops instructing their priests to do withhold the Blessed Sacrament from hardened sinners.
Matters not the numbers who don't.
The truth is the truth any way you slice it.
Have you read Ratzinger on the subject?
Please quote where Ratzinger tells priests to withhold communion based on one's vote.
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger wrote the navigator, "Worthiness to receive Holy Communion".
In it, he clarifies that politicians must be refused and unless there is a proportionate reason to vote for a proabort politician, the voter is guilty of formal cooperation. He spelled out what does not qualify as a proportionate reason:
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 individual's judgment 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).
-----
You seems to be under the impression our priests who have not taught from the pulpit any of the teachings of the Church about contraception, promiscuity, living together (and sexuality) outside of the Sacrament of Marriage - and their Bishops who are culpable for this grave misfeasance and malfeasance - their silences on these subjects is the Deposit of Faith.
This is an old fable left over from the Kinsey days at St. John's Seminary.
Here's a few general principles which may come in handy:
1. If the Bishop doesn't say it's not okay to Transubstantiate the Eucharist in your mother's dress and high heels, the absence of his admonition does not give you license to do it.
2. If you rob a bank, kill the tellers and the police and you mosey on into a Communion line where the priest gives you the Blessed Sacrament, this isn't a secret covenant that reveals you are in a state of grace.
p.s.
You are trying to make the thesis work that Obama voters had a proportionate reason to vote for Obama and are therefore not formal cooperators in the evil of every abortion advanced during his tenure.
This is false and whoever told you this has misled you. If you told others this, you have misled them. Seek the Sacrament of penance for it and correct your errors to everyone you misled.
There wasn't any reason, or any number of reasons to vote for Obama in a race where the alternative candidate would have saved hundreds of thousands of lives.
Post a Comment