www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall +Sean O'Malley/John Kerry, Ted Kennedy

I heard this afternoon (May 9th) that the Archbishop of Boston, +Sean O'Malley, has indicated that he would give the Blessed Eucharist to Senators Kerry and Kennedy if they approached the altar during the celebration of Mass. I do not want to make any judgement about this before I have the correct information. Does anyone know the official statement from the Chancery in Boston? So far, nothing on their web site. Thank you!
Silouan, her monk

Apparently, +O'Malley has said that he wishes pro-abortion politicians wouldn't present themselves for Communion, but that he would not personally deny anyone the Body and Blood.

Too bad for him. I guess he'll have to answer for his decisions and for the well-being of the Boston Archdiocese at his judgment day. I hope he has very good reasons for mingling Our Lord Himself with those persons who support and encourage the annihilation of the unborn.

Logos Teen

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04130/312841.stm

Something thoughtful From Ann Rodgers in the Post-Gazette on Kerry's Catholicism.

Ann Rogers is a good writer. The article provides much food for thought. For me it shows that Kerry is a man who will not bring Christian values to the public arena. He is Catholic only when it suits his agenda and independent when Catholic values are not politically advantageous.

Hospodi Pomiluj!

djs,

Good idea. Let�s pray for Kerry and all Catholic politicians to actually affirm Catholic values once they are elected to office. Their salvation is at stake, not to mention the lives of the millions murdered via abortion each year in this country because they have rejected Catholic Teaching.

Admin

And that all of us can see Christ in each other rather than choosing to see sin foremost - as well as convenient scapegoats.

djs,

Generally I would agree with such a petition but you seem to offer it in sarcasm rather than in prayer.

It is hard to see past the blood of the innocents on Senator Kerry�s hands and on the hands of all those who vote to continue to support the murder that occurs through legal abortion. It taints any good that he might have done. I do pray for him, for President Bush and for all of our representatives each day. I pray that the Lord will lead them to follow His Will, and not what is politically expedient.

Admin

I'm fuzzy about church teaching on denying communion to politicians who support abortion.

I believe it comes under "participating in an abortion" as being a mortal sin (including abortionists, nurses, counselors, technicians and pro-abortion legislators and judges who take part in an abortion).

Is the church obligated to deny communion to known abortionists and participators or is it the responsibility of the church to warn these people that their communion would be sacriligious?

Paul

Administrator,

How did you vote on the where does responsibility lie poll?

Paul,
Under Roman Canon Law, participation of any type in an abortion, causes automatic excommunication, therefore the person who performs, procures, or in any way supports abortion is excluded from the sacraments of the Church.

Dear Glenn,

I understand canon law on "automatic excommunication." in cases involving abortion. My question has do with enforcement of the excommunicaion. Does the priest deny communion to a known abortionist or pro-abortion public official or is the excommunication an "honor" system. The abortionist voluntarily stays away from communion.

Best regards,

Paul

djs,

Thanks for your question. I didn�t vote in that poll. It is my opinion that some of the voices on both the left and the right are wrong. Many on the left seem to believe that President Bush or Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld ordered these torturous actions against the detainees. That is both ludicrous and irresponsible. There are also some on the right who believe that no one had any knowledge of these torturous actions except the soldiers themselves. That is also silly and self-serving.

Responsibility should be placed at several different levels. The soldiers bear direct responsibility for their actions, more so than anyone else. Their superiors in the chain of command also bear responsibility, and it does not matter whether these superiors ordered the torturous actions or turned a blind eye to them.

Unfortunately, the issue has now become politicized. No one in Congress said anything late last year when these misdeeds first came to light. Neither did they raise concern earlier this year when the Pentagon announced that investigations were underway. Last December, the father of one of the soldiers (from here in Virginia) involved contacted the offices of 17 members of Congress (both Republicans and Democrats) to ask for their assistance in addressing this problem, and got virtually no response. The Pentagon announced in the middle of January that there was a problem, that it was beginning a full investigation and that it expected charges to be filed. And now some of these same members of Congress are claiming no knowledge? Yeah, right.

I believe that the appropriate response is for there to be a full investigation and that all those involved � both soldiers, Marines and the higher-ranking officers involved � should be court-martialed.

But this discussion belongs in another thread.

I would like to comment a bit more on Kerry. It seems to me that if he were really �personally opposed to abortion� but did not want to force his values upon others he would have at least acted not to force the pro-abortion position on Catholics. Yet he led the charge to try to deny federal funding to Catholic hospitals because they did not permit abortions in their facilities.

Admin

By saying that he is personally opposed to abortion, but that he does not want to "impose [his] religious convictions" on anyone else, Kerry is actually saying that he personally believes murdering innocent human beings is wrong, but that he doesn't want to impose this view on others who believe they have every right to murder innocents.

Should we have someone so deluded as President of our country? Don't get me wrong, I don't like the alternative (Bush), but at least he doesn't support abortion (or at least puts severe limits on it).

Logos Teen

My comparison of "personally opposed" to abortion is this:

I wouldn't own a slave, but you should be allowed to own your own slave.

Paul