Showing posts with label Joe Biden. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Joe Biden. Show all posts

Monday, October 28, 2019

Canon 915: Priest in South Carolina Refuses Joe Biden Communion

Edit: how dare this priest politicizes the Eucharistic Meal! Obviously, we need a conservative canon lawyer to explain why this priest is out of line.

.- A South Carolina Catholic priest denied Holy Communion to  presidential candidate Joe Biden on Sunday, because of the candidate’s support for legal abortion.
Fr. Robert Morey, pastor of St. Anthony Catholic Church in the Diocese of Charleston, South Carolina, denied Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden Holy Communion at Sunday Mass for his support of legal abortion, the Florence Morning News reported Monday.
"Sadly, this past Sunday, I had to refuse Holy Communion to former Vice President Joe Biden,” Morey said in a statement he sent CNA Oct 28.
AMDG

Wednesday, March 20, 2013

Pro-Abort US Democrats Receive Sacrilegious Communion at Papal Innauguration


"Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. 28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. 30 For this reason many are weak and sick among you, and many have fallen asleep." --1 Cor. 11:27-30
Edit: Father Pavone promised an uproar if this happened. Let’s see the uproar now, please. Washington times reports:

Vice President Joseph R. Biden and House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi both received Communion during the Mass to celebrate the installation of Pope Francis in spite of their pro-choice position on abortion. 
The vice president’s office confirmed Tuesday night that both he and Mrs. Pelosi took Communion during the Mass at St. Peter’s Square in Rome. 
Some [All] Catholics argue that politicians whose positions on abortion and contraception conflict with church teachings should not receive communion.  

This occurred despite the fact that when he was Archbishop of Buenos Aires, he was against pro-abort politicians there receiving Holy Communion.  Neither one of these heretical politicians have commented on their crime so far.

According to the Puffington Post, Nancy Pelosi was specifically addressed by Pope Benedict:

When Pelosi met Benedict in 2009, the Vatican released a statement saying the pope spoke to her about the "requirement of the natural moral law and the Church’s consistent teaching on the dignity of human life from conception to natural death which enjoin all Catholics." Biden also met Benedict in 2011, but the details of their conversation were not released.

Read more: Follow: @washtimes on Twitter Even EWTN knows this is problem:

 Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion: General Principles Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger Prefect, Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith [Note: The following memorandum was sent by Cardinal Ratzinger to Cardinal McCarrick and was made public in the first week of July 2004.]

 1. Presenting oneself to receive Holy Communion should be a conscious decision, based on a reasoned judgment 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. The Church teaches that abortion or euthanasia is a grave sin. The Encyclical Letter Evangelium vitae, with reference to judicial decisions or civil laws that authorize or promote abortion or euthanasia, states that there is a "grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection. [...] In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to 'take part in a propaganda campaign in favour of such a law or vote for it'" (no. 73). 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).

 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" [2002], nos. 3-4). This decision, properly speaking, is not a sanction or a penalty. Nor is the minister of Holy Communion passing judgment 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. [N.B. A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favor of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.]

Friday, October 12, 2012

Vatican Radio Statement on Joe Biden's False Assertion

Edit: here's a statement from Vatican Radio on the USCCB's statement regarding claims made by Joe Biden in last night's presidential debate. Will they also excommunicate him?
The Bishops of the United States have reacted forcefully to claims made by Vice President Joe Biden in last night’s vice presidential debate.
During the debate, Biden, a Catholic, said that a health insurance mandate issued by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) would not force religious institutions to pay for or provide contraception: “With regard to the assault on the Catholic Church, let me make it absolutely clear. No religious institution—Catholic or otherwise, including Catholic social services, Georgetown hospital, Mercy hospital, any hospital—none has to either refer contraception, none has to pay for contraception, none has to be a vehicle to get contraception in any insurance policy they provide. That is a fact. That is a fact.”
In their statement, the Bishops respond bluntly: “This is not a fact.” The Bishops go on to explain that, even after proposed exemptions, religious organisations would serve as vehicles for contraception “because they will still be forced to provide their employees with health coverage, and that coverage will still have to include sterilization, contraception, and abortifacients.” They will have to pay for these things, the Bishops continue “because the premiums that the organizations (and their employees) are required to pay will still be applied, along with other funds, to cover the cost of these drugs and surgeries.”
The US Bishops have vigorously opposed the Obama administrations’ mandate since it was announced last year, denouncing it as a violation of religious liberty. In their statement, the Bishops urged the Department of Health and human services “in the strongest possible terms, actually to eliminate the various infringements on religious freedom imposed by the mandate.”
Below, please find the complete statement of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops:
Last night, the following statement was made during the Vice Presidential debate regarding the decision of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to force virtually all employers to include sterilization and contraception, including drugs that may cause abortion, in the health insurance coverage they provide their employees:
“With regard to the assault on the Catholic Church, let me make it absolutely clear. No religious institution—Catholic or otherwise, including Catholic social services, Georgetown hospital, Mercy hospital, any hospital—none has to either refer contraception, none has to pay for contraception, none has to be a vehicle to get contraception in any insurance policy they provide. That is a fact. That is a fact.”
This is not a fact. The HHS mandate contains a narrow, four-part exemption for certain “religious employers.” That exemption was made final in February and does not extend to “Catholic social services, Georgetown hospital, Mercy hospital, any hospital,” or any other religious charity that offers its services to all, regardless of the faith of those served.
HHS has proposed an additional “accommodation” for religious organizations like these, which HHS itself describes as “non-exempt.” That proposal does not even potentially relieve these organizations from the obligation “to pay for contraception” and “to be a vehicle to get contraception.” They will have to serve as a vehicle, because they will still be forced to provide their employees with health coverage, and that coverage will still have to include sterilization, contraception, and abortifacients. They will have to pay for these things, because the premiums that the organizations (and their employees) are required to pay will still be applied, along with other funds, to cover the cost of these drugs and surgeries.
USCCB continues to urge HHS, in the strongest possible terms, actually to eliminate the various infringements on religious freedom imposed by the mandate.
Link to Vatican News...