Banned From Catholic Web Sites?

[InHisLove726]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' date='23 October 2009 - 11:41 PM' timestamp='1256355678' post='1990514']
oh you joker.
[/quote]

Yeah, if the mod on the other forum is also a mod here, I would be REALLY surprised. I've never ever had a problem with any of the mods here.

[mommas_boy]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='23 October 2009 - 03:11 PM' timestamp='1256325114' post='1990343']
Well I disagree. The politicians haven't brought scandal to the Catholic Laity, because when it comes to religious beliefs, no one really cares what they believe.

However, the petition was scandalous by making Catholics look like something akin to the 17th Century Puritans in Salem Ma.


Only the local Bishops of these fellow Catholics, has the authority to excommunicate a person from the Sacrament.

Jim
[/quote]


Peace be with you Jim.

I disagree. Canonically (that is, according to the law of the Church) these people have already excommunicated themselves. The official term is "excommunication [i]latae sententiae[/i]" -- it is excommunication without need of the Church's declaration. Politicians like Biden, Pelosi, Durbin (who, coincidentally, was a "parishoner" at the parish I grew up in), and many others are truly already excommunicated. They are excommunicated by virtue of their actions. The Church needs do nothing in order to excommunicate them; they are excommunicated already. All that the lay people are doing is asking that the bishops make public note of this.

[Maximilianus]

...

Edited October 24, 2009 by Maximilianus

[InHisLove726]

[quote name='Maximilianus' date='24 October 2009 - 01:25 AM' timestamp='1256361928' post='1990564']
...
[/quote]

Wha?

[OraProMe]

I think Jim has a chip on his shoulder.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Anomaly' date='23 October 2009 - 09:40 PM' timestamp='1256355621' post='1990512']
but it happens. Depends upon who you annoy.
[/quote]
I did say "rarely."

[JimR-OCDS]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='23 October 2009 - 05:38 PM' timestamp='1256330321' post='1990376']
You appear to be confusing your judgments about the motivations and intentions of these individuals with their actions or comments. Now, I do not doubt that a man's actions (or statements) may reveal something about his inner character, but only God can judge the secrets of the heart.


You have no special insights into the psychological qualities of the person who says things like this, so why pretend to know their intentions.


You do not know the secrets of any person's heart.
[/quote]


Of course I don't know the secrets of any person's heart, nor am I try to.

I repsonding to what they expressed publically.

Jim

[JimR-OCDS]

[quote name='Sternhauser' date='23 October 2009 - 08:44 PM' timestamp='1256341488' post='1990406']
Bishops who continue to distribute the Body and Blood of Christ to politicians who publicly, obstinately and knowingly oppose Catholic doctrine in word and deed are giving grave scandal to real Catholics. There is nothing uncharitable about saying, "If you want to participate in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass as a Catholic, you have to believe and hold as true the teachings of the Catholic Church on faith and morals." There is something uncharitable about saying, "Come, commit sacrilege and give grave scandal at Mass."

St. Teresa of Avila went to a bishop or two to give them a piece of her mind.

~Sternhauser
[/quote]

Whether you like it or not, the Bishop is the only one who has the authority to prohibit a Catholic Politician, from receiving Holy Communion.

I wouldn't have had a problem with the petition, if it was a general request, i.e. we want the Bishops to stand firm, by not allowing Catholic
Politicians who support abortion, to be prohibited from receiving Holy Communion.

However, the petition went over the top, by demanding Catholic politicians specifically, to be prohibited from receiving Holy Communion. We as lay
Catholics have no right to drag a person before the USCCB's and demand that they be excommunicated.

Again, the spirit of this petition was the equivalent of the Pharisees dragging the woman caught in adultery, before Jesus, demanding that he follow the law by
agreeing that she be stoned to death.

In both cases, it was self-righteous arrogance. Jesus response to the Pharisees would be the same to the framers and signers of the petition.
Let he who is among you who is without sin, sign the petition.

Jim

[JimR-OCDS]

[quote name='little_miss_late' date='23 October 2009 - 09:49 PM' timestamp='1256345389' post='1990425']
Jim, I am a younger person who is in the process of becoming Catholic. I want you to know that I have really appreciated your POV in a few of the threads that I have read here on Phatmass. I think you come across as charitable and measured in your approach.

I do understand what you mean about defending something with your ego. I don't read or post on any other religious websites so I have no idea about any of the folks you are talking about. But, I have been in conversations with people where at some point it just becomes about defending a position that you [i]identify with [/i]rather than defending something that you [i]believe.[/i] I have been guilty of that myself.

I am sure that out of any group of young adults who are making an extreme life choice, there will be a percentage who are going to be overly interested in the reactions they get from others. Another thought I had while reading your post, was that maybe the young converts who are "in your face" about their new Catholicism are that way *because* they are not getting support from friends and family and they feel a need to defend themselves a lot of the time. I am defensive about my age and my parenting skills because I did not get support from friends and family when I had a child in my teens.
[/quote]


The people I'm referring to are not in my face so much as they're in the face of their non-Catholic family and friends. As I said, they come in with vigor and excitement in becoming Catholic, which is fed by the enjoyment they get, seeing the reactions of their non-Catholic parents and friends. Most have stated that their families were anti-Catholic, so its seems as though their motivation is rebellious adolescence. They express nothing about becoming a Christian, or that they're drawn to the Church to become closer to Jesus.

Don't misunderstand what I'm saying here. There are many young people who do have a deep faith in Jesus Christ, and He is the motivation for their conversion to Catholicism. Praise God for them, for they are the future of the Church and they are the one's who Christ uses to make the Church pure and holy.

God Bless
Jim

[JimR-OCDS]

[quote name='mommas_boy' date='24 October 2009 - 01:33 AM' timestamp='1256358790' post='1990551']
Peace be with you Jim.

I disagree. Canonically (that is, according to the law of the Church) these people have already excommunicated themselves. The official term is "excommunication [i]latae sententiae[/i]" -- it is excommunication without need of the Church's declaration. Politicians like Biden, Pelosi, Durbin (who, coincidentally, was a "parishoner" at the parish I grew up in), and many others are truly already excommunicated. They are excommunicated by virtue of their actions. The Church needs do nothing in order to excommunicate them; they are excommunicated already. All that the lay people are doing is asking that the bishops make public note of this.
[/quote]


Not for you to judge, for the actions they have taken, within the legislature, are more complex than what most people understand.

Catholics can not [b][i]actively promote[/i][/b] abortion. The definition here is promote abortion. When it comes to various bills being debated and voted
on in Congress, most are not promoting abortion per se, and I believe that the Bishops of these politicians, who they in fact have had private meetings with,
them, understand this and hence, have not excommunicated them.

The bottom line is, its between them and their Bishop. If their Bishop has not excommunicated them publicly, then we as laity have to accept that they
are in good standing with the Church and can still receive Holy Communion.

There are some in Catholic Forums who are Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, who stated that they will not give Communion to anyone who they know voted
for Barrack Obama. This is nuts. We don't have that authority.

Jim

[Sternhauser]

[font="Arial"][quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='24 October 2009 - 09:11 AM' timestamp='1256389885' post='1990641']
Whether you like it or not, the Bishop is the only one who has the authority to prohibit a Catholic Politician, from receiving Holy Communion.

I wouldn't have had a problem with the petition, if it was a general request, i.e. we want the Bishops to stand firm, by not allowing Catholic Politicians who support abortion, to be prohibited from receiving Holy Communion.

However, the petition went over the top, by demanding Catholic politicians specifically, to be prohibited from receiving Holy Communion. We as lay Catholics have no right to drag a person before the USCCB's and demand that they be excommunicated.[/quote]

I'm not talking about excommunication, (which the politicians already are, [i]latae sententiae) [/i]I'm talking about upholding the already extant canon law. Canon 915 says that those who are [/font][font="Arial"][size="2"]"obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin [i]are not to be admitted to holy Communion.[/i]"[/size][/font][font="Arial"] [Emphasis added.]

Not only does the Bishop have the [i]authority[/i] to prohibit pro-abortion "Catholic" politicians from receiving the Body of Christ, he has the [i]duty [/i]to do so. If asking a Bishop to do his God-given [i]job[/i] is "over the top," I don't have any issue with it. Those who urge the Bishops to do their job are not the problem, here.

[quote]Again, the spirit of this petition was the equivalent of the Pharisees dragging the woman caught in adultery, before Jesus, demanding that he follow the law by agreeing that she be stoned to death.

In both cases, it was self-righteous arrogance. Jesus response to the Pharisees would be the same to the framers and signers of the petition.

Let he who is among you who is without sin, sign the petition.
Jim
[/quote]

[/font][font="Arial"]These are not mere sinners caught in a private act of adultery. These are famous, public apostates.

"Canon 1364 §1: “an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.”

The phrase “latae sententiae” means a judgment or sentence which has already been brought, in other words, a sentence or judgment which does not need a future additional judgment from someone in authority; it refers to a type of excommunication which is automatic. Such a sentence of excommunication is incurred “by the very commission of the offense,”(CCC 2272) and does not require the future particular judgment of a case by competent authority." [url="http://www.catholicplanet.com/articles/article78.htm"]http://www.catholicp...s/article78.htm[/url]

Those well-known public figures must be reproved, who persist in manifest grave sin, claim to be Catholic and then commit sacrilege and give scandal at Masses across the country. The Bishops who fail to do their duty (not merely what we fellow sinners [i]want[/i] them to do, but their [i]duty[/i]) must be reproved first.
[/font]
[font="Arial"]~Sternhauser[/font]

Edited October 24, 2009 by Sternhauser

[JimR-OCDS]

[font="Arial"]deleted by Jim[/font]

Edited October 24, 2009 by JimR-OCDS

[JimR-OCDS]

[quote name='Sternhauser' date='24 October 2009 - 10:33 AM' timestamp='1256391231' post='1990648']
[font="Arial"]

I'm not talking about excommunication, (which the politicians already are, [i]latae sententiae) [/i]I'm talking about upholding the already extant canon law. Canon 915 says that those who are [/font][font="Arial"][size="2"]"obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin [i]are not to be admitted to holy Communion.[/i]"[/size][/font][font="Arial"] [Emphasis added.]

Not only does the Bishop have the [i]authority[/i] to prohibit pro-abortion "Catholic" politicians from receiving the Body of Christ, he has the [i]duty [/i]to do so. If asking a Bishop to do his God-given [i]job[/i] is "over the top," I don't have any issue with it. Those who urge the Bishops to do their job are not the problem, here.



[/font][font="Arial"]These are not mere sinners caught in a private act of adultery. These are famous, public apostates.

"Canon 1364 §1: “an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.”

The phrase “latae sententiae” means a judgment or sentence which has already been brought, in other words, a sentence or judgment which does not need a future additional judgment from someone in authority; it refers to a type of excommunication which is automatic. Such a sentence of excommunication is incurred “by the very commission of the offense,”(CCC 2272) and does not require the future particular judgment of a case by competent authority." [url="http://www.catholicplanet.com/articles/article78.htm"]http://www.catholicp...s/article78.htm[/url]

Those well-known public figures must be reproved, who persist in manifest grave sin, claim to be Catholic and then commit sacrilege and give scandal at Masses across the country. The Bishops who fail to do their duty (not merely what we fellow sinners [i]want[/i] them to do, but their [i]duty[/i]) must be reproved first.
[/font]
[font="Arial"]~Sternhauser[/font]
[/quote]

In all you've said, there is nothing that gives us laity the authority to decide who is to be prohibited from receiving Holy Communion.

Whether you think the Bishops are doing their duty or not, is irrelevant, because we don't have the authority, they do.


Jim

[mommas_boy]

[quote name='Sternhauser' date='24 October 2009 - 09:33 AM' timestamp='1256391231' post='1990648']
[font="Arial"]

I'm not talking about excommunication, (which the politicians already are, [i]latae sententiae) [/i]I'm talking about upholding the already extant canon law. Canon 915 says that those who are [/font][font="Arial"][size="2"]"obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin [i]are not to be admitted to holy Communion.[/i]"[/size][/font][font="Arial"] [Emphasis added.]

Not only does the Bishop have the [i]authority[/i] to prohibit pro-abortion "Catholic" politicians from receiving the Body of Christ, he has the [i]duty [/i]to do so. If asking a Bishop to do his God-given [i]job[/i] is "over the top," I don't have any issue with it. Those who urge the Bishops to do their job are not the problem, here.



[/font][font="Arial"]These are not mere sinners caught in a private act of adultery. These are famous, public apostates.

"Canon 1364 §1: “an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.”

The phrase “latae sententiae” means a judgment or sentence which has already been brought, in other words, a sentence or judgment which does not need a future additional judgment from someone in authority; it refers to a type of excommunication which is automatic. Such a sentence of excommunication is incurred “by the very commission of the offense,”(CCC 2272) and does not require the future particular judgment of a case by competent authority." [url="http://www.catholicplanet.com/articles/article78.htm"]http://www.catholicp...s/article78.htm[/url]

Those well-known public figures must be reproved, who persist in manifest grave sin, claim to be Catholic and then commit sacrilege and give scandal at Masses across the country. The Bishops who fail to do their duty (not merely what we fellow sinners [i]want[/i] them to do, but their [i]duty[/i]) must be reproved first.
[/font]
[font="Arial"]~Sternhauser[/font]
[/quote]

Please forgive my presumption, but when is Sternhauser going to be made CM?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='24 October 2009 - 07:05 AM' timestamp='1256389515' post='1990639']
Of course I don't know the secrets of any person's heart, nor am I try to.

I repsonding to what they expressed publically.[/quote]
Perhaps it was simply your poor ability to express your opinion, but from your posts you appeared to be judging the individual personally, rather than simply his comments.