Biden, Pelosi Recieve Communion, For Now
As expected, pro-abortion politicians from the U.S. received communion during the Pope's inaugural mass yesterday.
Of course, this is not a uniquely American problem. Countries from all over the world sent delegations to the inaugural mass and probably more than a few contained pro-abortion pols. Now I don't know if any announcement was made at the hugely attended mass about those, in general terms, that are not prepared to receive communion should abstain. They do this at Christmas and weddings now, thankfully, so I hope they did it there.
At the very least, the Pope avoided the dreaded photo-op of giving communion to one of these pro-abortion pols by not distributing communion himself.
But this issue has to come to a head at some point and perhaps Pope Francis is the one to do it. LiveAction reports that as the former Jorge Cardinal Bergoglio, Pope Francis wrote that more than mere reminders not to receive may be needed.
The Catholic Church is clear on its stance against abortion. Yet denying Communion to those who are known to facilitate in an abortion is not always as clear as it should be. Such situations are at times dealt with on a case-by-case basis. Often, the pro-abortion Catholics in question are reminded or encouraged not to partake in Holy Communion. In going against the Church, in these cases by facilitating in an abortion, a person is excommunicated by his or her own actions. More than a mere reminder or sense of encouragement may be needed.
The text itself states:
"we should commit ourselves to ‘eucharistic coherence’, that is, we should be conscious that people cannot receive holy communion and at the same time act or speak against the commandments, in particular when abortion, euthanasia, and other serious crimes against life and family are facilitated. This responsibility applies particularly to legislators, governors, and health professionals."
So just perhaps, Pope Francis, now so appreciated by the pro-abortion left, may be the Pope to finally put them in their place.
49 comments:
I was disappointed that they did. We need leadership that makes clear that such a thing as sacrilege against the Eucharist.
This terrible, damaging scandal is so much the worse because the Holy See was in control of the organisation of attendees, etc. and knew who was coming and the notoriety of some. This was wholly foreseeable and avoidable, therefore the Holy See has much responsibility for any legalisers or supporters of abortion, etc., that received Our Lord. Where's Fr Guarnizo when you need him?!!!
I remember when Ted Kennedy took Communion at a Mass in the US. 30 days later he was diagnosed with terminal cancer. Wondering if there is a precedent for this kind of . . . oh wait,
"So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves. That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep." I Corinthians 11: 27-30
I agree that they probably shouldn't have received Communion, but on the other hand, how do we know that they have had Reconcilation and in fact can receive it? That would be a private matter between them and their confessor, and not something we as member of the public would be privy to.
If these individuals were truly Catholic and profess to be so, their own conscience and informed judgment *should* prevent them from receiving the Eucharist. I'm not saying it does, but it should. I found myself in that position over another grave matter and didn't receive the Eucharist for nearly 2 years until the matter was rectified.
As they receive unworthily, St Paul reminds us that they call the wrath of God upon themselves and become answerable for the cross. In all charity, our angst would be better spent praying for their conversion and in reminding them what they do in presenting themselves for communion. In this the shepherds need to do a better job.
Carolyn, the difference is that your sin probably wasn't a manifest and repeated public sin. It would actually require a willingness to renounce their prior position in public before they should be readmitted to communion because otherwise they cause scandal.
However, it was as I feared it would be, just as the homily, as good as it was, was much weaker than it could have been. Pope Francis had the bully pulpit, and could have made some important points without even getting really vitriolic. If he had included among those to be protected the unborn, the children being exposed to violence and pornography, and people at the end of life it would have gone a long way to making the point crystal clear. If you've read some of his earlier homilies you know what he meant when he was talking about the Herods out there, but it was really easy for someone who hadn't read that to believe that he was moving away from Benedict and John Paul's emphasis on the most vulnerable among us.
It's going to be so much easier for Pope Francis to go for style over substance, in the same way that it was easy for Pope Benedict in a different way to go for style over substance. It's so much easier for a Pope to make a stylistic statement than it is for him to really say what needs to be said and it's even harder for him do what needs to be done. Can you imagine a Pope truly attempting to get the Vatican out of the banking business for example, or actually reining in those bishops and cardinals who have been sloppy at best and heterodox at worst in their teaching and in their policies?
If even Benedict who had spent years in the Curia wasn't able to accomplish what needed to be done, I honestly fear that Pope Francis has a herculean task ahead of him. He desperately needs our prayers that he won't flee before the wolves.
Father Bill is right though, shepherds need to do a better job because it truly is not charitable to simply wink at someone who's taking communion when they have taken such strong pro-abortion positions, it's also not charitable to simply wink at it when someone has denied a belief in the Real Presence as Nancy Pelosi has. These people are harming their own souls each time they receive Communion in a state of mortal sin. We need to pray for bold shepherds, top to bottom.
Pope Francis failed big time to act as a pope. He knew pro-aborts were coming to this ceremony and he could have prevented it. By failing to do so, he showed himself as a weakling, and sucker punched those of us who were hoping for a strong pope.
The bigger problem with this phenomenon is that such people who receive Our Lord are not only endangering their own souls, they are endangering many souls who are aware of the sacrilege, and damaging the reputation of those priests, Bishops, etc. who appear to have permitted it. And bringing the authenticity of Church teaching into disrepute.
@Steve Dalton: What was he supposed to do, stop the Mass? Bodily throw Biden and Pelosi out? Telepathically determine the identity of politicians he very well may never have seen before?
Neither Biden nor Pelosi is actually all that prominent in our politics, from the standpoint of people who do not live here. Do you know what Hu Jintao looks like? How about Angela Merkel? Yet both of them are a thousand times more important than Pelosi or Biden.
It's the individual's responsibility to abstain from communion, those administering it cannot realistically be expected to identify everyone who presents themselves unworthily.
How exactly will he "put them in their place" when he won't discipline them? With the marvelous speeches that cross his lips? Maybe he could have taken five out from bowing to Robert Mugabe in the VIP section yesterday to show Pelosi and Biden the other side of the door.
#popefail
"Neither Biden nor Pelosi is actually all that prominent in our politics."
Do you mean that seriously? Are we going to treat yet another pope like an idiot man-child that never reads the paper or picks up a book?
The man's been poor for a week. It really want his job to personally look up the abortion & gay marriage position of every dignitary in attendance for Pete's sake.
Father Bill, with respect, the fact that these people--not just these two--continue to receive, and continue to publicly espouse support for abortion and contraception IS inescapably a scandal. It is misleading to others, and may lead them into similar sin.
@ Sophia's Wisdom: Pelosi and Biden not well known?! On Mars yes, on Earth, very well known.
If he wanted to, he could have denied them Holy Communion. No priest in God's church is obligated to give it to a rank heretic, especially known pro-aborts.
Poor = pope, want = wasn't
@Steve Dalton: Get my name right, it's Sophia's Favorite.
And no, actually, the vice-president and a random parliamentarian, even of the US, are not well-known to the inhabitants of any other country. It is a near mathematical certainty you couldn't pick the top executives of any other country, except perhaps Russia, out of a lineup. Do you even recognize the name Li Yuanchao?
@Blackrep: Same story. Do you honestly think people for whom Obama is just "that one country's president" know what Joe Biden look like? Do you know what Dmitri Medvedev looks like? Do you know what some random member of the Russian parliament looks like—even a former majority leader?
SCANDALOUS!!! They did just to show how disobediant they could be!!! THIS WAS SATANS DIRECT CHALLANGE TO OUR HOLY FATHER BY ATTEMPTING TO RECEIVE THE HOLY COMMUNION DIRECTLY FROM HIM!!!! What a trap! A poison cup of offering from these snakes!!! THANK YOU BVM for keeping Pope Fransis safe. From one soul who is very proud of your lovely feet and what you can do to the enemies of your Son with them.
The responsibility of the Pope is to give general direction to make sure those directly responsible for dealing with delegates from sstates to the minutely-organised inauguration Mass, know they have to see that all foreseeable and avoidable sacrilege of the Eucharist is avoided. If this egregious scandal and damage to the Church can be avoided anywhere, at anytime, it can be avoided on such a major occasion as this. For one, all delegates should have been explicitly briefed on this prior to the Mass. Such occasions are choreographed in detail down to meeting each delegate prior to being lead into St Peter's.
Pro-abort Catholic is an oxymoron. Anyone who participates in abortion has excommunicated themselves.
Lynda said: "For one, all delegates should have been explicitly briefed on this prior to the Mass." It is also the duty of the individual's bishop to inform them of their inability to receive and I am sure this is going to be the case.
I just would like to point out that whilst Biden and Pelosi should have refrained from communion, that anyone in a state of mortal sin is to do so. As we live in a country where few go to confession and all go to communion ( and yes, I do preach on this many many times)...a country where mortal sin is seen as a dinosaur (and yes again..those words do come up often here) and we're too busy feeling self-esteem to be humble to entertain the fact we might sin. I would assume since those here who have seen fit to attack the pope for giving communion to such people are themselves in a state of grace when they receive?
I say this because as I was teaching the 7th and 8th graders this morning about the gifts and fruits of the Holy Spirit, given to us in the sacramental life of the Church that such fruits might be fully apparent in our responses to what happened yesterday, no?
So, it looks like we're going to do this again? Biden is the most prominent Catholic of the most powerful nation on earth, second in line for the most prominent position on earth, whose abortion position is the most infamous, and most imitated on the planet, whose reception on communion is the subject of articles worldwide... amazing.
It always astonishes me, this ability to render excuse after excuse for the papacy, so we don't have to confront the real truth about our hierarchy. They know. They overlook. Comfort, collegiality, and ease are more important than the nasty little subject of abortion. So, open the VIP section wide, and let the counterfeit brotherly love flow!
And did anyone notice that I wrote the murderous name of ROBERT MUGABE in my post, and did anyone not vomit? Mugabe is unwelcome for his crimes in the whole of the EU, yet the Vatican sent him a personal priest-escort to manage his bypass of the EU ban at the airport. This priest announced to him: "On behalf of Pope Francis, welcome to the Vatican, welcome to the Holy See." He was escorted to the VIP section (and yes, the Pope knows everyone in it). For this bloody tyrant and racist, a place of honor was prepared. This is a man famous for chopping off hands and feet of enemies, stealing the land of whites, and admiring the ingenuity of Hitler. A manifestly evil and unrepentant man. Plus, he was treated to a homily that showcased the environment! How comfortable we all are, liberals and conservatives alike, with that tame little topic. So soothing. Who would be disturbed by a homily about the poor? The environment? Taking care of each other? As long as we don't verge on dangerous specifics that require us to do anything real. As long as the homily we hear is but an empty glass that we fill with our own desires, with progressives and orthodox alike coming away unruffled. Does it satisfy? No, not really. It's not real food, but candy floss, melting from the memory in the space of an hour. Soap bubbles.
So, ladies and gentlemen, habemus papam! The time of our timid speculation is over. The time of acceptance has begun. Whether we do it by squarely facing what we see, or by spinning a fairy tale is, I suppose, up to us.
I just can't live in a world that's not real, no matter what pain it brings.
@Sophia's Favorite: I'm sorry I got your handle wrong. As for your criticism that Pelosi and Biden were not "well known" what planet are you on? Maybe the average Italian wouldn't know who they were, but the people handling the guest lists would have to have some knowledge of them. And do you honestly believe that the rest of the people in the Vatican would be so ignorant of these pro-aborts? Sorry, but you're just making excuses for PF1 failure to protect the Holy Sacrament from profanation.
@Blackrep: Bravo for your brave words in the face of willful ignorance!
You know the Pope knows who's in the VIP section...how? This seems an odd venue to reveal your telepathic powers to the world.
Where is your evidence that Biden is so prominently pro-abortion...to an Argentinian? Where is your evidence that even were that the case, Pope Francis would know him on sight?
Your case essentially hinges on your unsupported assumptions about what other people can be expected to know. This is, among other things, a classic symptom of paranoid schizophrenia—they all assume everyone knows their random little habits.
That being the case, it's funny that you say you can't live in a world that's not real.
I might ask of all those who are condemning Pope Francis I for this event and painting hm as a liberal: What would you have done? Publicly humiliated people at your own installation Mass? Create a 'Cannot Receive Section' at the Mass...giving their neighbors glaring rights? Should he perhaps have gathered a large pile of stones so that he could have anyone who received unworthily stoned on the spot? What does he have to do to prove his credentials to you that he is worthy of being pontiff? Perhaps you should send him a list of your criteria! Who knew you had exclusive access to the ear of the Holy Spirit?! Better yet, perhaps your name should be on the list of the papabile next time! Me? I do not presume the ability to read souls nor do I presume the freedom to stand in judgement on the Holy Father. I find judging my own activities and lack of charity a full time job on its own.
At the very least, a specific statement of the Church teaching in regards to receiving Holy Communion worthily could have been made very clear at the Mass, just prior to communion.
Moreover, repeating the words of St. Paul would be an act of Fraternal Correction that could also have been done.
The fact that this abuse has been allowed to continue provides more than enough basis for making the teaching very public at the Mass.
Lastly, better to be humiliated in public than lose your soul.
DB
Fr.Peckman and Sophia's Wisdom, when I was a Lutheran, my synod dared to 'humiliate' people who dared to take the sacrament unworthily. If they were living in open sin, a heretic, not in communion with the synod, or an infidel, and they dared to come forward to take the sacrament, they would be turned away.
As for the hyperemotional argument that we can't read peoples minds and hearts, we're not concerned about the contents of the soul here, it's the declared public statements of belief and action that we care about. PF1 by his public actions showed disrespect for the sacrament. I hope and pray he never does this again.
! Your HTML cannot be accepted: Tag is not allowed: BLOCKQUOTE
<blockquote>[H]ow do we know that they have had Reconcilation and in fact can receive it?
--Carolyn</blockquote>
They are public figures with public positions against the teachings of Jesus made public by His Church. Until these public figures renounce in public, they cause scandal by receiving the Eucharist in public.
Review your Gospels. Pay attention to the example of Zacchaeus. He too was a public figure with a public reputation that gave scandal until he demonstrated before the public that he had reformed. (Luke 19:1-10)
We're not concerned about the contents of the soul?! Are you kidding?! Is it not the contents of the soul which make one fit or not fit for reception of the Blessed Sacrament?! I guess that God Himself did not strike these people dead on the spot makes Him complicit? I tire of those who believe their goal in life is to be a religious version of Mrs Kravitz, constantly presuming to have the right to condemn souls and make such pronouncements. Never mind that the Scriptures remind us time and again that such judgement of souls is the prevue God alone and that there are levels to fraternal correction. I will presume, of course, that such types have already contacted the offices of the VP and Pelosi and begged them to refrain in concern for their eternal souls before they jumped on here to condemn! I will assume that when that didn't work, then they got a few more fellow Catholics to beg them to relent. Then I am sure when that didn't work they contacted the ordinary of these individuals and begged them to intercede? I would suppose all of this was done prior to jumping on line and throwing out condemnations like beads from a Mardi Gras float? I will assume that those who presume to attack the Holy See have gone through similar steps before jumping up and down on him as if he were an ecclesiastical trampoline? If not...how about we go through scriptural prescription before we make wild statements like 'Pope Francis I showed disrespect for the sacrament.'
Fr. Peckman, you're running on emotion, not logic. I said I was not concerned about the contents of PF1's soul, not because I didn't care, it's because I can't read minds or hearts. I can only go by his actions. His actions show he seems to be indifferent about administering the sacrament.
Fine insights, Steve. Of course, it is also for the benefit of their souls that communion is to be denied to those who are outside Church teaching and appropriate practice in approaching and receiving Holy Communion.
Now, even if members of the Vatican did not know about this public person or that public person, the need to protect the Eucharist is so great that it should be a matter of course to conduct prompt research to discover any public statements/sentiments, etc. made by those who indicated their intentions to attend the installation Mass.
If such people sincerely indicate a change of heart to coincide with Church teaching and practice, this should be made public to serve as a counter to the other public statements in support of abortion, etc. Moreover, if these people have expressed such a welcome change of heart, they should want this to be made public to "correct the record" and also help others appreciate the Eucharist as it should be appreciated, and to help convert others to the proper point of view.
A simple press release, etc., could be done to accomplish this instead of leaving it to people to imagine that perhaps the offending individuals have expressed a change of heart while their offensive positions remain in the public eye.
A few questions to those who express the concern about public humiliation:
Should our concerns for the serenity of those who have scorned the Church and the Lord Himself in their public actions and statements outweigh our protection of and defense of the Lord in the Holy Eucharist?
Do human concerns trump Divine reality?
DB
Fr. Peckman, I am certain that Biden and Pelosi didn't just arrive without any protocol. As the formal representatives of America, they would certainly have been greeted by someone from the Vatican, or their protocol officer would have been. That was the point of opportunity for a private education in what they should do, and in the moral consequences should they disobey.
Thank you, DB.
! Your HTML cannot be accepted: Tag is not allowed: BLOCKQUOTE
<blockquote>I might ask of all those who are condemning Pope Francis I for this event and painting him as a liberal: What would you have done? Publicly humiliated people at your own installation Mass?
--Fr Bill Peckman</blockquote>
Alas, the 'looking away' and being 'nice' by past popes and other bishops comes at a price and eventually every penny must be paid. Were not the scandals of another 'looking away' by bishops a warning?
To claim that publicly humiliating people at the installation Mass is the only alternative is to assert a falsehood. Think hard. There are other alternatives available. I'm not asking for be-on-the-lookout posters to be placed at the entrances to the installation Mass, but would that really be a bad thing if they were?
(Posters at parish entrances back home seems like a good idea, though. US bishops, wake up!)
Our new Holy Father is Pope Francis, not Pope Francis I. Also, he is Christ's Vicar on earth. Please stop judging him. God's ways are not our ways. We don't know how our Heavenly Father is working to convert Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi and others who break His Commandments. I only know this: God loves them just as much as He loves me and He wants no one to be lost eternally. Let's pray for their conversion and for our Father's Will to be revealed through our Beloved Pope Francis.
Don't forget that Judas was present at the Last Supper, our First Holy Mass. Our Lord did not humiliate him or draw attention to him. He just loved him and prayed for his conversion.
How do you know the other alternatives were not done and simply ignored? I am finding it hard to believe that people have the hubris to attack the Pope for things they know little about.
Greetings, Anonymous:
I'm not judging Pope Francis per se, but I am disappointed in that he and others in the Church hierarchy continue to allow abuses of the Holy Eucharist to take place in public. Please see my 2 other posts above.
Our Lord most certainly drew attention to Judas at the Last Supper, and Judas ran off. Was he humiliated? Who knows? Nevertheless, the other Apostles knew something wasn't right; otherwise, Judas would have stayed at the Supper because he wasn't sent out to pick up some milk, etc.
In any case, the position of Judas at the Last Supper is not equivalent to pro-abortion politicians in open defiance of Church Teaching. If the Church believed the same thing as you do about Judas and how he was treated, and would make the same application as you suggest, then why have the Law against unworthy reception in the first place?
Always keep in mind that the prohibition is an act of Fraternal correction and love due in large part to the Pauline admonition regarding the danger to one's soul in eating and drinking unworthily.
Tolerance of evil is not an act of love, but fraternal correction is.
DB
Once again, if people have publicly presented viewpoints and also acted in opposition to Church teaching, and these viewpoints and practices are known to the public, then any change of heart by these people should also be made public for the benefit of the faithful who only have the prior statements and actions to consider.
I hope that Pelosi and Biden and others did have a change of heart, and if so, it should have been made public without delay to help avoid ongoing scandal, and to also help others who may still follow the wrong-headed public positions and actions of Pelosi and Biden prior to any hoped-for conversion.
And if the conversion was/is sincere, then there is an obligation in charity to renounce in public (as quickly as possible) the publicly witnessed wrong actions and opinions of the past that remain on the record until publicly revoked.
Have we heard from Pelosi or Biden or the Church in this regard? Unless we hear of a public renunciation of wrongful statements and actions, we only have the actions and statements on the record to go on, and if these continue to contribute to others holding such wrong positions and acting incorrectly, what possible good reason can there be for not making a public renunciation if such a sincere renunciation has been made?
The love of Christ and the Eucharist should bypass any possible human concerns that would keep such an important renunciation (if done) from being reported to the public.
DB
Well said.
I think it is Pelosi and Biden that are to be condemned not Pope Francis. Unless they have been living under a rock they know they are not supposed to receive Communion. If they are so filled with hubris that they choose to ignore that directive then they must deal with the consequences. I understand how many of you feel as I feel the same way. I would give just about anything to see them refused the sacrament as they are so haughty in their disregard for the Church and the Eucharist. Just who do they think they are?? One would love to see them slapped down. Actions have consequences and, one way or another, they will receive theirs.
I think it is the hypocrisy of the hierarchical church in general, that needs to be condemned. As a Catholic you are told live your life by strict guidelines, and to abstain from Communion when you are in a state of mortal sin. The approach is the same for the rapist or the mass murderer as it is for the person who masterbated once this year, no communion until you go to confession and truthfully confess. I used to get strapped by Christian Brothers for pathetic things, but nothing for people that promote the death of thousands and even millions all over the world. Really, if the Pope and other Vatican officials don't people like Pelosi, then they are in the wrong business and have lived with their heads in the ground. This is another example of why I am starting reconsider my believe in any divine truth to the Church. What's next, it seems the Pope would approve homosexual unions as a "compromise" to so called gay marriage. Seriously, what next?
This exemplifies what I mentioned earlier - that allowing foreseeable, avoidable egregious sacrilege of the Blessed Sacrament to take place at the inauguration Mass of the Pope is so scandalous that it endangers many souls, brings Bishops and priests into disrepute, even worse brings the authenticity of Church teachings (and therefore, the Church itself) into question. Lord, have mercy!
I think we need to spend more time in prayer, and evangelizing with words and without, the people God sends across our paths each day. We are all adults and like Kathy said, Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi know they are not supposed to be receiving Holy Communion. They will receive their just recompense for the choices they have made in their lives. So will you and I. There is such a lack of love in our world today. I also find this lack of love in people who profess to be Catholic. If we had been faithful in showing this love to each other, the whole world would be Catholic today.
I think points 5-6 show that Pope Benedict would refuse Biden if he recognized him based on his persistent public support including the v-presidential debate.
Cardinal Ratzinger wrote the following:
Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion. General Principles
by Joseph Ratzinger
1. Presenting oneself to receive Holy Communion should be a conscious decision, based on a reasoned judgement regarding one¿s worthiness to do so, according to the Church¿s objective criteria, asking such questions as: "Am I in full communion with the Catholic Church? Am I guilty of grave sin? Have I incurred a penalty (e.g. excommunication, interdict) that forbids me to receive Holy Communion? Have I prepared myself by fasting for at least an hour?" The practice of indiscriminately presenting oneself to receive Holy Communion, merely as a consequence of being present at Mass, is an abuse that must be corrected (cf. Instruction "Redemptionis Sacramentum," nos. 81, 83).
2. point 2 is omitted allowing this to be accepted based upon the limit of characters.
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 individuals¿s judgement 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).
5. Regarding the grave sin of abortion or euthanasia, when a person¿s formal cooperation becomes manifest (understood, in the case of a Catholic politician, as his consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws), his Pastor should meet with him, instructing him about the Church¿s teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Eucharist.
6. When "these precautionary measures have not had their effect or in which they were not possible," and the person in question, with obstinate persistence, still presents himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, "the minister of Holy Communion must refuse to distribute it" (cf. Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts Declaration "Holy Communion and Divorced, Civilly Remarried Catholics" [2000], nos. 3-4). This decision, properly speaking, is not a sanction or a penalty. Nor is the minister of Holy Communion passing judgement on the person¿s subjective guilt, but rather is reacting to the person¿s public unworthiness to receive Holy Communion due to an objective situation of sin.
I figured they would. The priests do not know the politicians and would've probably caused ciaos if they refused with so many people. Perhaps in hindsight, the Pope can send a letter to these persons. They probably should not have gone in the first place, but since the majority of US representatives are pro-abortion anyway, I don't see how we could have a US representative there and avoid the issue.
Post a Comment