socalscout Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 (edited) Ok let me preface this by saying that I was all for denying Communion for politicians but I gave it some thought and here is a take on it. I would like to be wrong but you will have to prove it. If voting for pro choice is a mortal sin and it is, which I assume incurs latae sententiae excommunication then the only reinstatement is Confession from a confessor who was giving authority by the local ordinary, right? Tell me then how does a priest or extraordinary minister know that he(the politician) did not confess and thus be reinstateed without breaking the anonymity of the penitant? See what I mean? If that politician confesses to the proper confessor and the excommunication is lifted then no one would know that except for the confessor and the penitant so how can one deny him Communion without breaking the secrecy of Confession? Like I said I would like to be wrong on this. Edited August 9, 2004 by socalscout Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 He would also have to publicly renounce his stance on abortion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socalscout Posted August 9, 2004 Author Share Posted August 9, 2004 [quote name='qfnol31' date='Aug 9 2004, 05:53 PM'] He would also have to publicly renounce his stance on abortion. [/quote] That makes sense but like I said you have to prove that to me. Where does it say that? I want to be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 Well, I will have to look, but I know that if he doesn't say that he was wrong, no one will know, and this is the same as supporting something through silence. It could cause scandal. Part of Reconciliation is you must make peace with all those you have injured. How else do you reconcile with those babies without saying you were wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socalscout Posted August 10, 2004 Author Share Posted August 10, 2004 [quote name='qfnol31' date='Aug 9 2004, 05:57 PM'] Well, I will have to look, but I know that if he doesn't say that he was wrong, no one will know, and this is the same as supporting something through silence. It could cause scandal. Part of Reconciliation is you must make peace with all those you have injured. How else do you reconcile with those babies without saying you were wrong? [/quote] No confessor would require anyone to make a public reconciliation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash Wednesday Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 I'm with Q. To have confessed and made reparation for being pro-choice would mean publicly altering their stance to pro-life before taking communion. At least any orthodox and faithful priest to the Vatican would have them do this. We don't go to confession just to be able to take communion, but to eradicate sin and change our lives altogether. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash Wednesday Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 [quote name='socalscout' date='Aug 9 2004, 07:06 PM'] No confessor would require anyone to make a public reconciliation. [/quote] Are you sure? They might, given if it was a public scandal.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socalscout Posted August 10, 2004 Author Share Posted August 10, 2004 (edited) [quote name='Ash Wednesday' date='Aug 9 2004, 06:06 PM'] I'm with Q. To have confessed and made reparation for being pro-choice would mean publicly altering their stance to pro-life before taking communion. At least any orthodox and faithful priest to the Vatican would have them do this. We don't go to confession just to be able to take communion, but to eradicate sin and change our lives altogether. [/quote] But like I said no confessor gives us public penance or requires that for absolution. You are required to be contrite which means you are sorry and promise not to do it again. Edited August 10, 2004 by socalscout Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash Wednesday Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 If they are truly sorry for causing public scandal with pro-choice stances and legislation, and have repented of this, I don't see how they would carry on with that stance and legislating abortion. Unless they really weren't sorry and didn't have a true spirit of reparation, making it a sacreligious confession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socalscout Posted August 10, 2004 Author Share Posted August 10, 2004 (edited) [quote name='Ash Wednesday' date='Aug 9 2004, 06:10 PM'] If they are truly sorry for causing public scandal with pro-choice stances and legislation, I don't see how they would carry on with that stance and legislating abortion. Unless they really weren't sorry and didn't have a true spirit of reparation, making it a sacreligious confession. [/quote] They cannot do it again but are not required to make public reparations. No confessor has ever required that. If so where is it written in Canon or in the Catechism that public reparations are part of pennace and requirement for absolution? Edited August 10, 2004 by socalscout Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash Wednesday Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 (edited) I guess this depends on what one would define as public reparation. If say, Kerry confessed and abandoned his pro-choice stances, it would basically be a public thing, whether he and the priest intended it or not, because he lives and serves in the public eye. I mean a pro-choice politician could abandon their office altogether to lead a private, pro-life existence in that respect. But it would probably still make news... So what I'm getting at is I do not know whether or not one would HAVE to make it explicitly public, but given the public position a politician is in, it's GOING to become a public matter as it is. Edited August 10, 2004 by Ash Wednesday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socalscout Posted August 10, 2004 Author Share Posted August 10, 2004 [quote name='Ash Wednesday' date='Aug 9 2004, 06:08 PM'] Are you sure? They might, given if it was a public scandal.... [/quote] For one thing that was brought up to or priest and he was very specific on it. He cannot require the penitant to devulge any of the confession which a public renonuncement would do just that. The politician would have to stop voting that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash Wednesday Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 [quote name='socalscout' date='Aug 9 2004, 07:16 PM'] The politician would have to stop voting that way. [/quote] Right. It wouldn't be, by definition, public renouncement in the strict sense but it boils down to what it is -- a public matter, the same way it was a public scandal in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socalscout Posted August 10, 2004 Author Share Posted August 10, 2004 (edited) [quote name='Ash Wednesday' date='Aug 9 2004, 06:15 PM'] I guess this depends on what one would define as public reparation. If say, Kerry confessed and abandoned his pro-choice stances, it would basically be a public thing, whether he and the priest intended it or not, because he lives and serves in the public eye. I mean a pro-choice politician could abandon their office altogether to lead a private, pro-life existence in that respect. But it would probably still make news... So what I'm getting at is I do not know whether or not one would HAVE to make it explicitly public, but given the public position a politician is in, it's GOING to become a public matter as it is. [/quote] The logic is that Kerry confesses to a proper confessor and then just does not vote that way anymore. It would get out but he would not be required to hold a press conference. The fact that the public knows is a side effect of changing his stance not a requirement. See what I mean? But what if there were no more issues to vote the other way? Let's say that he already voted but then saw the error in his ways and confesses to the proper confessor. How can someone deny him Communion unless they knew his Confession? Edited August 10, 2004 by socalscout Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 You are required to make reparations to all you have injured. This is a requirement of the Sacrament. How you do it is up to you, but in the case of abortion, public renouncement would be much easier than approaching all of those whom you have offended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now