I’m glad the Catholic Church is taking a strong stance regarding abortion, but I think denying politicians communion based on their policy stances can be a dangerous precedent for both sides of the aisle.

I can see situations where a liberal church decides to deny communion to say Governors that carry through with capital punishment, or Senators that vote for wars the Church feels are unjust (like the Vatican’s position that the War in Iraq was unjust)

There are certain positions that the Catholic Church has that are quite liberal, imo. I’m not sure it’s all upside for Conservatives when the Catholic Church gets political.

I would like to see it taken a step further actually, but more things like this would certainly increase my respect for the Roman church.

Ultimately, I would like to see a much more pro-active approach, and see it come from the Pope himself. It’s not that I support the idea of dictatorship that exists by which one man has so much power within that church, but given the facts as they are, real action on this issue within the Roman church needs to come from the Pope.

First, he needs to make it clear that abortion trumps all other issues in politics, because it deals with life itself.

Second, ALL politicians who support on-demand abortion should be offered the chance to repent and recant, and upon refusal, should not only be denied communion, but should be excommunicated.

Finally, it needs to be clearly communicated to all faithful Catholics, that voting for candidates who support on-demand abortion (when there is an alternative candidate who does not) is a heinous sin, in and of itself.

The reason these steps are necessary if the church wants to have real impact is that first, most pro-abortion politicians could care less if they are denied communion, the only thing that will get their attention is a loss of votes. Second, so many Catholic voters rationalize voting for pro-abortion candidates based on the idea that “no candidate is perfect on all issues of faith”, so you can base your vote on faith, given that the pro-life candidate may be pro-capital punishment too, or something of that nature.

Basically, the Vatican needs to clear up ambiguity on this issue and have a take-no-prisoners attitude if it really wants to save the lives of the millions of precious little babies who are slaughtered under this disgrace of a “medical” procedure every year.

Yours is the fourth diary on this topic today and they all bring something a tad different to the subject.

First there was Kenny Solomon.

Then came mine.

And finally – and my personal favorite – by Crowe.

n/m

As if a Kennedy had a chance in hell of getting into heaven anyway.

Patrick Kennedy has violated the very clear law of the Roman Catholic Church concerning abortion (See Code of Canon Law, #1398, and the related canon 1329). Because it deals with two extremely serious things, namely playing an important role in allowing and even promoting the unjust taking of innocent human life (= murder) and the reception of communion, which Catholics hold to be the reception of not just a symbol, but a sacramental reception of Jesus Christ Himself (See the gospel of John, chapter 6), there are grave penalities attached. Once should not protect and promote millions of murders, and then receive Jesus Christ, the author of life. Bishop Tobin sees this clearly, unfortunately other bishops do not think the strong stance is the best way to proceed.

I can certainly appreciate the fear in some that this sort of use of power over the distribution of sacraments could spread into other areas and become abused, but Canon Law, which is rarely altered (the most recent version came out in 1983, before that it was revised in 1917) is not nearly so changeable in its interpretation and application. The strength of Canon Law on this point and a few others (like attacking the Pope or desecrating the Eucharist) is a reflection of the gravity of the situation. Health care and other issues, as serious as they are, come nowhere close to qualifying for such special attention.

It is only fair to add that in spite of the softness of many U.S. bishops on topics like immigration and health care, the Catholic Church is a most fierce opponent of three related political schools: Nihilism, Socialism, and Communism. Think back to the much rumored ( and true) stories of the cooperation between President Reagan and Pope John Paul II in the overthrow of Communism in Poland, and look back at the writings of the Popes on Socialism and Communism. There is tremendous intellectual firepower in those works for those of you looking for resources.

Reverend Red

I wrote a longer post here on RedState on this very topic earlier today.

Support of government healthcare, or government programs to feed the hungry, clothe the poor, whatever, is an ABROGATION of the individual’s call to do these things.

here’s a link to the letter.

http://thericatholic.com/news/detail.html?sub_id=2632

Mario: “Kennedy wasn’t asked to stop taking communion because of his policy stance but because he publicly announced that he could both support abortion and be a good Catholic; very few people, even abortion supporters, would make that claim.”

If you recall, Nancy Pelosi’s public statement perverting the Catholic church’s stance on abortion also got her in big trouble. She was summoned by the bishop in San Francisco for a private meeting in which she was repremanded for her statement to say the least.

As a Catholic, I think the church has been too lenient on politicians who support abortion as well as priests in political activist roles. Also, since the beginning of the entire health care debate, I’ve only read of one bishop who was questioning the entire idea of taxpayers being forced to pay for a mandated health care program. His name is Bishop Nickless of Colorado and he is fantastic.

And then there is 1 Corinthians 11 to contend with.