California Catholic Daily
Rome, Aug 19, 2008 / (CNA) -- Archbishop Raymond Burke, prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura, the highest judicial authority of the Holy See, said this week that Catholics who publicly support abortion -- especially politicians -- should not receive Communion, and that ministers of Communion should be responsibly charitable in denying it to them if they ask for it until they have reformed their lives.
[[Burke082108.jpg]]In an interview with the magazine Radici Christiane, Archbishop Burke pointed out that there is often a lack of reverence at Mass when receiving Communion. Receiving the Body and Blood of Christ unworthily is a sacrilege, he warned. If it is done deliberately in mortal sin it is a sacrilege.
To illustrate his point, he referred to public officials who, with knowledge and consent, uphold actions that are against the Divine and Eternal moral law. For example, if they support abortion, which entails the taking of innocent and defenseless human lives. A person who commits sin in this way should be publicly admonished in such a way as to not receive Communion until he or she has reformed his life, the archbishop said. If a person who has been admonished persists in public mortal sin and attempts to receive Communion, the minister of the Eucharist has the obligation to deny it to him. Why? Above all, for the salvation of that person, preventing him from committing a sacrilege, he added.
We must avoid giving people the impression that one can be in a state of mortal sin and receive the Eucharist, the archbishop continued. Secondly, there could be another form of scandal, consisting of leading people to think that the public act that this person is doing, which until now everyone believed was a serious sin, is really not that serious -- if the Church allows him or her to receive Communion.
If we have a public figure who is openly and deliberately upholding abortion rights and receiving the Eucharist, what will the average person think? He or she could come to believe that it up to a certain point it is okay to do away with an innocent life in the mothers womb, he warned.
Archbishop Burke also noted that when a bishop or a Church leader prevents an abortion supporter from receiving Communion, it is not with the intention of interfering in public life but rather in the spiritual state of the politician or public official who, if Catholic, should follow the divine law in the public sphere as well.
Therefore, it is simply ridiculous and wrong to try to silence a pastor, accusing him of interferi ng in politics so that he cannot do good to the soul of a member of his flock, he stated.
When does human life begin? Nancy believes it’s sometime after partial birth abortion. I really don’t understand catholics and their dem party affiliation.
Now to add support of "Gay Marriage" as a reason to Excommunicate.
This could be BIG!
A wolf, meeting with a Lamb astray from the fold, resolved not to lay violent hands on him, but to find some plea to justify to the Lamb the Wolf’s right to eat him. He thus addressed him: “Sirrah, last year you grossly insulted me.” “Indeed,” bleated the Lamb in a mournful tone of voice, “I was not then born.” Then said the Wolf, “You feed in my pasture.” “No, good sir,” replied the Lamb, “I have not yet tasted grass.” Again said the Wolf, “You drink of my well.” “No,” exclaimed the Lamb, “I never yet drank water, for as yet my mother’s milk is both food and drink to me.” Upon which the Wolf seized him and ate him up, saying, “Well! I won’t remain supperless, even though you refute every one of my imputations.”
I hope this goes on for a while.
The Dumocrats are pissing people off.
Thanks very much for posting. Insight into the criminal mind.
I believe this was the example I was seeking.
In other words, human life begins at conception. That is not a religious posture, but a scientific fact that the lowest paid laborer on the planet can assert without qualm. What we do with that understanding is another matter, but no one in the 21st century should pretend not to know when human life begins. On this matter at least, the church and science are in agreement.
I love this last paragraph, should I send it to Obama, perhaps he needs consultation with the scientific and religious experts!
How could one not believe in God, Creator of all, realizing what happens in that moment and then during the next 40 weeks.
"Hey - Madam Speaker or whatever you call yourself! Don't make me come down there!"
In the history of the abortion debate, there have been few statements more grossly offensive than this one. I disagree with those who genuinely believe that a "fetus" becomes human at birth or (in Obama's case if he's sincere) a few hours or days after birth, but it's at least possible that they don't understand the facts or haven't thought it through. When someone says that whether or not the embryo/fetus/baby has or should have human rights is irrelevant to whether the mother should be permitted to kill it at will, that is shocking - even by the standards of last year's Democrat party.
And for those Catholics who were embarrassed by Pelosi, don't worry. She is the only person in the country stupid enough to believe that her words have any relationship with the Church's position except as polar opposites. Every other Catholic knows better, whether or not they follow the Church's teachings, and every non-Catholic knows the clear and unambiguous position that the Church has taken. She's not causing any confusion at all. Just shock.