U.S. Catholic Bishops: Biden Shouldn't Be Allowed to Take Communion Because of Abortion Views.

[AUDub 11,148]

5 hours ago, CoffeeTiger said:

How does the Catholic rejection of contraceptives and birth control come into play here? From what I understand, rejection of contraceptives is still official Catholic policy, but at the same time is not really followed by a majority of practicing Catholics. 

Humanae Vitae remains one of the most controversial encyclicals, and one need only look at the fact that the vast majority of Catholics are living in a state of mortal sin to realize it.

"Refuse them communion, and if repentance isn't coming excommunicate them! Those people aren't true Catholics!" they'll exclaim.

(Yes there are a lot of cries from the trad caths for this.)

Then you're left with a handful of monarchists and fascists that think "Deus Vult" is a cool slogan and want to do to the Chi Rho what the Nazis did to the swastika, or fundamentalists like the Quiverfull movement.

[aubearcat 2,137]

5 hours ago, CoffeeTiger said:

 

 

How does the Catholic rejection of contraceptives and birth control come into play here? From what I understand, rejection of contraceptives is still official Catholic policy, but at the same time is not really followed by a majority of practicing Catholics. 

https://www.catholic.com/tract/birth-control
 

a little more depth concerning the birth control issue. Also, birth control is not an excommunicable offense. It is a grave offense but not excommunicable. 

[AUDub 11,148]

58 minutes ago, aubearcat said:

https://www.catholic.com/tract/birth-control
 

a little more depth concerning the birth control issue. Also, birth control is not an excommunicable offense. It is a grave offense but not excommunicable. 

It depends. Any method that prevents implantation after fertilization could by definition be considered an "abortifacient" depending on who you ask. At that point Canon 1398 is the relevant law: "Qui abortum procurat, effectu secuto, in excommunicationem, latae sententiae, incurrat (Those who successfully abort a living human fetus bring on themselves instant excommunication)"

Edited May 7, 2021 by AUDub

[aubearcat 2,137]

39 minutes ago, AUDub said:

It depends. Any method that prevents implantation after fertilization could by definition be considered an "abortifacient" depending on who you ask. At that point Canon 1398 is the relevant law: "Qui abortum procurat, effectu secuto, in excommunicationem, latae sententiae, incurrat (Those who successfully abort a living human fetus bring on themselves instant excommunication)"

Perhaps you could extend that to the plan B pill or perhaps just the “pill”. However I don’t think that’s a bridge I could use to connect that theory. Plus, the remedy would of course be penance. As the church teaches, the only unforgivable sin is to believe sin is unforgivable. Even Judas could’ve received God’s mercy had he sought it. 

[AUDub 11,148]

27 minutes ago, aubearcat said:

Perhaps you could extend that to the plan B pill or perhaps just the “pill”. However I don’t think that’s a bridge I could use to connect that theory.

Don't have to extend. This is a popular angle of attack against the pill.

It's a known secondary mechanism with Plan B, IUDs that utilize the same drug, and pills that include progestins like norethindrone. IUDs utilizing copper may have a similar secondary mechanism. That is, they likely have the effect of altering the lining of the uterus to prevent implantation of a fertilized egg.

These drugs are not "abortifacients" by design but they can have the effect of preventing implantation. That's "good enough" for folks that would like to see people utilizing such contraceptives out of communion with the Church.

[AUDub 11,148]

1 hour ago, aubearcat said:

Plus, the remedy would of course be penance. As the church teaches, the only unforgivable sin is to believe sin is unforgivable. Even Judas could’ve received God’s mercy had he sought it. 

We're talking about the vast majority of the laity with regard to contraception here, man.

Sensus fidelium apparently never was worth much, even after the reforms of Vatican II. 

[aubearcat 2,137]

6 hours ago, AUDub said:

 

Sensus fidelium apparently never was worth much, even after the reforms of Vatican II. 

I understand it’s probably the opinion of a large group of the lay people but as the article says it is biblically based. I’m actually a convert. I came into the church during Easter Vigil ‘01 at OLS (Father Muller at the time). I also worked at EWTN (which is where my conversion began) for 7 years prior to policing  so the birth control issue was a hurdle I had to clear. It came down to believing in Apastolic succession and the teaching arm of the church. My youngest son was a BIG surprise and came at a really difficult time for my wife and I but he’s been such a great joy. 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

23 hours ago, AUDub said:

There's a line between active encouragement and recognition of the fact that it is a right codified by law. discovered by Seven attorneys dressed in black robes and which finds no support in the text of the document on which they relied. 

Fixed it. . 

Hope you are well Dub!

[AUDub 11,148]

5 hours ago, aubearcat said:

I understand it’s probably the opinion of a large group of the lay people but as the article says it is biblically based.

It was dissent from the laity that prevented the Arian heresy from becoming doctrine. Some would do well to remember that. It is imperative that the Sensus Fidelium not be cast by the wayside.

Quote

I’m actually a convert. I came into the church during Easter Vigil ‘01 at OLS (Father Muller at the time). I also worked at EWTN (which is where my conversion began) for 7 years prior to policing  so the birth control issue was a hurdle I had to clear. It came down to believing in Apastolic succession and the teaching arm of the church. My youngest son was a BIG surprise and came at a really difficult time for my wife and I but he’s been such a great joy. 

Married in, myself. Long story. My wife was raised Catholic and was separated from the Church due to a very bad marriage and a cult (the Witnesses). I was confirmed shortly after we were married. So June will mark 7 years since confirmation.

I was raised Methodist and identified as an atheist at the time. What really got me was how open minded and friendly the clergy was. Fr Fallon at POP is truly one of the most wonderful individuals I've ever had the pleasure of knowing and he's the one that married us and guided me home. I had thumbed my nose at priests, thought them stodgy and out of touch, but Fr Fallon made a huge mark on me and Fr Deasy here at HIOP has only deepened that. I can honestly say I've never had a bad interaction with any of the clergy.

The one thing I will say is that I think the priests "on the ground" for lack of a better term generally have a much better feel for the reality of life for the laity than those further up the hierarchy. My wife is a divorcee, and we didn't seek an annulment at the time out of ignorance, you see, and there's a lot of confusion surrounding divorcees even after Amoris Lætitia due to its vagueness. According to the Magisterium, we should have been living as brother and sister and abstain from intimacy in order to partake in the Eucharist, or have confessed every time we have sex, lest we were in a state of mortal sin. But you'll find in Gaudium et Spes from Vatican II that in marriages without intimacy "it often happens that faithfulness is endangered and the good of the children suffers." How does one find a middle ground here? You really can't. I have asked about this, and thankfully priests aren't stupid. So we are in good standing, have healthy, happy kids (aside from typical teenage drama) and a healthy, respectful and very much exclusive sex life.

Unfortunately this sort of discernment isn't popular, particularly among the conservative Bishops that look to undercut him at every turn (consider the dubia), so His Holiness actually gave them a lot of ammunition to the conservative,  traditionalist wing here in America in spite of Amoris Lætitia's vagueness.

As you can probably tell, I dove in headlong lol. 

[AUDub 11,148]

3 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Fixed it. . 

Hope you are well Dub!

A distinction without a difference, law boy. 

How've you been, brother? Haven't seen you in a while. 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

1 minute ago, AUDub said:

A distinction without a difference, law boy. 

How've you been, brother? Haven't seen you in a while. 

I am well. Staying busy but suppose that's a good thing! Good to see everyone still holding down the fort on here. 

[aubearcat 2,137]

1 hour ago, AUDub said:

It was dissent from the laity that prevented the Arian heresy from becoming doctrine. Some would do well to remember that. It is imperative that the Sensus Fidelium not be cast by the wayside.

Married in, myself. Long story. My wife was raised Catholic and was separated from the Church due to a very bad marriage and a cult (the Witnesses). I was confirmed shortly after we were married. So June will mark 7 years since confirmation.

I was raised Methodist and identified as an atheist at the time. What really got me was how open minded and friendly the clergy was. Fr Fallon at POP is truly one of the most wonderful individuals I've ever had the pleasure of knowing and he's the one that married us and guided me home. I had thumbed my nose at priests, thought them stodgy and out of touch, but Fr Fallon made a huge mark on me and Fr Deasy here at HIOP has only deepened that. I can honestly say I've never had a bad interaction with any of the clergy.

The one thing I will say is that I think the priests "on the ground" for lack of a better term generally have a much better feel for the reality of life for the laity than those further up the hierarchy. My wife is a divorcee, and we didn't seek an annulment at the time out of ignorance, you see, and there's a lot of confusion surrounding divorcees even after Amoris Lætitia due to its vagueness. According to the Magisterium, we should have been living as brother and sister and abstain from intimacy in order to partake in the Eucharist, or have confessed every time we have sex, lest we were in a state of mortal sin. But you'll find in Gaudium et Spes from Vatican II that in marriages without intimacy "it often happens that faithfulness is endangered and the good of the children suffers." How does one find a middle ground here? You really can't. I have asked about this, and thankfully priests aren't stupid. So we are in good standing, have healthy, happy kids (aside from typical teenage drama) and a healthy, respectful and very much exclusive sex life.

Unfortunately this sort of discernment isn't popular, particularly among the conservative Bishops that look to undercut him at every turn (consider the dubia), so His Holiness actually gave them a lot of ammunition to the conservative,  traditionalist wing here in America in spite of Amoris Lætitia's vagueness.

As you can probably tell, I dove in headlong lol. 

I read a lot of Newman, Sheen (one of my sons is named Fulton), Ratzinger, and Sarah for spiritual readings and listen to Bishop Barron’s sermons. 

[AUDub 11,148]

2 minutes ago, aubearcat said:

I read a lot of Newman, Sheen (one of my sons is named Fulton), Ratzinger, and Sarah for spiritual readings and listen to Bishop Barron’s sermons. 

St. Newman was my first great foray into Catholic theology and the one I consider the primary driver of my ruminations on the Faith. Had we had a son, he probably would have been named John.

As it stands my wife blessed me with a daughter and her name is Cecilia lol.

[DKW 86 7,423]

<<< Admittedly not a Catholic Scholar, but was "The Sin of Onan" (i said that in my Big Scary Voice) not excommunicable? I honestly do not know, but remember one family friend of mine going so off the trail on TSOO that she pretty much had been taught by the Good Sisters that masturbation was worthy of death. Afterall,  didnt Onan die?

Anyway, I was so incensed that it must have taken my 16-17 year-old self at least two hours and 2-3 beers to get over it. 

Big Scary Voice, Chicken Little:

 

Edited May 8, 2021 by DKW 86

[AUDub 11,148]

Onan's crime wasn't masturbation but impertinence and self-interest. I'll go deeper in a bit. Working right now. 

[DKW 86 7,423]

22 hours ago, AUDub said:

Onan's crime wasn't masturbation but impertinence and self-interest. I'll go deeper in a bit. Working right now. 

The Sin was in not doing as instructed for his brother, that was my take on it as well. But, as usual, some religionists had to and have to misstate the reality and claim something crazy to get it to bend to their literally perverted view of the scriptures. Onan was supposed to take his brother's wife and raise sons for his dead brother. That was the OT instructions. He spilled his seed rather than give his brother's wife the children. He was punished by death. 

Only if you really twist the scriptures do you get that masturbation was unnatural. I have seen horses, dogs, cattle, etc all engage in it. The idea that what is physically natural is sinful is kind of crazy.

Edited May 8, 2021 by DKW 86

[aubearcat 2,137]

@AUDub …

 

Edited May 8, 2021 by aubearcat

[AUDub 11,148]

31 minutes ago, aubearcat said:

@AUDub 

 

*Dub before clicking link*

"Bishop McElroy going to be a Jesuit or Jesuit educated, isn't he..."

*clicks link*

"Yep"

[aubearcat 2,137]

1 hour ago, AUDub said:

*Dub before clicking link*

"Bishop McElroy going to be a Jesuit or Jesuit educated, isn't he..."

*clicks link*

"Yep"

I know that they have lately been labeled “liberal” but the Jesuits have a lot of historical influence on North and South America. They’re considered the founders of Western education. As a side, one of the most intelligent priest I ever met was a Jesuit, Fr Mitch Pacwa. Incredibly smart and holy priest. He’s now the host of the show that Mother Angelica hosted on EWTN. 

[AUDub 11,148]

1 hour ago, aubearcat said:

I know that they have lately been labeled “liberal” but the Jesuits have a lot of historical influence on North and South America. They’re considered the founders of Western education. As a side, one of the most intelligent priest I ever met was a Jesuit, Fr Mitch Pacwa. Incredibly smart and holy priest. He’s now the host of the show that Mother Angelica hosted on EWTN. 

The Jesuits at large catch a LOT of s*** from trad caths for their "liberalism" but their attitude toward education, activism, skeptical inquiry and proclivity for "rocking the boat" has given the Church a good kick in the ass to get on the right path on some very important social justice issues, segregation here in Alabama among them. 

https://www.ncronline.org/news/opinion/south-and-civil-rights-jesuit-fr-albert-foleys-resistance-taught-me

Edited May 8, 2021 by AUDub

[aubearcat 2,137]

4 hours ago, AUDub said:

The Jesuits at large catch a LOT of s*** from trad caths for their "liberalism" but their attitude toward education, activism, skeptical inquiry and proclivity for "rocking the boat" has given the Church a good kick in the ass to get on the right path on some very important social justice issues, segregation here in Alabama among them. 

https://www.ncronline.org/news/opinion/south-and-civil-rights-jesuit-fr-albert-foleys-resistance-taught-me

All the Jesuits I know are solid and friends of The Church and society as a whole. The most exposure I have are to Franciscans, Benedictans, and Jesuits. Our parish, Sacred Heart, is a Benedictan parish. 

[AUDub 11,148]

11 minutes ago, aubearcat said:

All the Jesuits I know are solid and friends of The Church and society as a whole. The most exposure I have are to Franciscans, Benedictans, and Jesuits. Our parish, Sacred Heart, is a Benedictan parish. 

Yep. They're a good, pious people doing great work. Someone here once mentioned I come off as a Jesuit lol.

Now I invite you to Google "reddit Catholicism Jesuits" to get a feel for just how twisted our online presence on the most active forum around is.

There are the top results. As you can see the general sentiment is pretty negative.

As I said, our online presence is strange.

[homersapien 11,373]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof............"

[AU9377 4,930]

When I lived in New Orleans, a Catholic Bishop actually allowed me to participate in communion, knowing that I wasn't Catholic.  He asked me two questions and then urged me to participate.  I was surprised at the time, but even moreso looking back.

[aubearcat 2,137]

7 hours ago, homersapien said:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof............"

Has absolutely ZERO to do with the issue/subject at hand.