SC priest: No communion for Obama supporters

Ass Press via Breitbart ^ | Nov 13, 2008 | MEG KINNARD

[upchuck]

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) - A South Carolina Roman Catholic priest has told his parishioners that they should refrain from receiving Holy Communion if they voted for Barack Obama because the Democratic president-elect supports abortion, and supporting him "constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil."

The Rev. Jay Scott Newman said in a letter distributed to parishioners at St. Mary's Catholic Church in Greenville that they are putting their souls at risk if they take Holy Communion before doing penance for their vote.

"Our nation has chosen for its chief executive the most radical pro-abortion politician ever to serve in the United States Senate or to run for president," Newman wrote, referring to Obama by his full name, including his middle name of Hussein.

"Voting for a pro-abortion politician when a plausible pro-life alternative exits constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil, and those Catholics who do so place themselves outside of the full communion of Christ's Church and under the judgment of divine law. Persons in this condition should not receive Holy Communion until and unless they are reconciled to God in the Sacrament of Penance, lest they eat and drink their own condemnation."

During the 2008 campaign, many bishops spoke out on abortion more boldly than four years earlier, telling Catholic politicians and voters that the issue should be the most important consideration in setting policy and deciding which candidate to back. A few church leaders said parishioners risked their immortal soul by voting for candidates who support abortion rights.

But bishops differ on whether Catholic lawmakers—and voters—should refrain from receiving Communion if they diverge from church teaching on abortion. Each bishop sets policy in his own diocese. In their annual fall meeting, the nation's Catholic bishops vowed Tuesday to forcefully confront the Obama administration over its support for abortion rights.

[Jvette]

As for the loss of donations from wealthy pro-abortion donors, Jesus said one cannot serve two masters, God or mammom.

If losing money or lukewarm parishioners is the worst consequence this fine priest faces then he is way ahead.

[Jvette]

Yes, I believe we are in for a time of suffering for the sins of our countrymen. It has taken thirty years for the anti-abortion movement to achieve some of the victories we have enjoyed. A win may have made us more complacent. This loss is a call to greater action, stronger defense of the unborn. It is important to keep fighting and reject the notion that the Republicans lost because of the “social issues”.

[Jvette]

Silly, silly. He was saying that we must take personal responsibility for our actions. There is not a communion police. He was saying that those who voted for Obama know what they have done, and if they wish to be in a state of grace, they must repent, confess and do penance.

That those who do not condemn themselves is straight from St. Paul, for whosoever receives the body and blood of Christ unworthily brings condemnation upon themselves.

In the old days, many people did not receive, they knew that they were not in a state of grace. Nowadays, too many people reject the doctrine of sin and think they are righteous simply for their belief in Jesus.

[lastchance]

I agree with you.

[Recovering_Democrat]

A South Carolina Roman Catholic priest has told his parishioners that they should refrain from receiving Holy Communion if they voted for Barack Obama because the Democratic president-elect supports abortion, and supporting him "constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil."

Thank God for Catholic priests who stand up for LIFE.
Maybe they can give some evangelicals a lesson in living biblically, even in the face of a 21st Century Messiah.

[PalmettoMason]

Actually, the last time I was there, he celebtated the Mass at my wife's cousin's funeral. He is quite a guy. My wife's cousin was famous for being late to everything she ever attended. On the day of her funeral, the Mass was scheduled to begin at 12:00 noon. Father Newman had her casket wait out in the hearse until 12:10... just so she would be late to her own funeral, just like he said he always told her she would be. LOL

That made it very special for the family, and it lightened things up a bit (she died very young). I gained an enormous amount of respect for Fr. Newman that day, for what he did for that family.

I'm an Episcopalian, but with the turmoil my Church is in, sometimes I feel like I need the "rock" that is the RC Church.

Thanks for the info.

[E. Cartman]

Come on, the maximum discipline possible to a Catholic layperson is to deny them the sacraments. That's just what this pastor did.

Well, I guess the same sort of person who'd fear a Shaman's curse or a voodoo priest's hoodoo might tremble in terror at the thought of a clergyman's interdict, but it all remains, nonetheless, so medieval.

[Natural Law]

"Well, I guess the same sort of person who'd fear a Shaman's curse or a voodoo priest's hoodoo...."

This is the second such dumbass comment you made in this thread. It clearly places you outside the communion of Catholics, a group of like minded people who accept and believe in the teachings of the Church. So, as they would say in a legal context, what you think doesn't really matter because you "lack standing'.

[Natural Law]

"As for the loss of donations from wealthy pro-abortion donors, Jesus said one cannot serve two masters, God or mammom."

Church attendance is way down and contributions are off because the Church strayed from its principles. Amazing how the fate preceded and paralleled the fate of the GOP, I'll bet there is a moral in there somewhere.

[jwalsh07]

Amen sister!

[visualops]

Thanks for posting that link. I hadn’t read that before.

[Campion]

If they put the sacraments on the same level as a “voodoo curse,” they aren’t Catholics and don’t belong in a Catholic Church in the first place ... so your comment is completely irrelevant.

[Fred]

May the Holy Spirit descend on Father forever.

[Tribune7]

I think it’s appropriate to demand those support ‘choice’ be made to choose — either be a Democrat or be a Catholic.

[plain talk]

I think many sheep have jumped on the bandwagon since they like the end result without giving this much thought. What is the criteria by which a person should not receive communion?

Abortion is murder. Obama isn’t personally committing murder. He is facilitating it. Christ said if you have anger in your heart against someone you have committed murder. So every person in that congregation has actually committed murder, not just facilitated it. So by that logic no one should receive communion.

Then look at another aspect. Many of those members have been voting democrat all their lives and not necessarily because of abortion. Long before Obama they were voting for local, state and federal democrats that supported abortion policies. So why did he wait til now to make this proclamation? It should apply to anyone who ever voted for a dem based on that logic not just to those who supported Obama.

Then why single out abortion? There are plenty of other sins to consider. So while I love the end result of tarring Obama and poking a stick in the eye of the abortion lovers I find this Priests reasoning bizarre and untenable.

[Diva]

Call me stunned. Finally.

I suspect it is happening all over. I say this because I have heard several priests in this diocese (Detroit) say basically the same thing.

[Diva]

Well, an important thing to consider about all of this, is that if the priests and bishops do not do this, and they knowingly give these unrepentant people communion, they are also guilty of allowing them to partake in communion, and taking damnation upon themselves.

Except for two things.

1 How does a priest know if someone voted for Obama unless the person tells him and

2 Even if he knows they did he may not know if they have been to Confession or what they Confessed.

All a priest can do about this is teach, preach and warn. If a Catholic wants to take Communion with grave sin on his soul the priest cannot stop them.

High profile politicians who support abortion are a different matter. The priest is reasonably assured that this individual is using religion and has not stopped supporting a grave evil.

[castowell]

Father Newman has clarified his statement. He wasn’t as hard line as he was described in the AP article:

http://catholicexchange.com/2008/11/15/114467/print/

[E. Cartman]

It clearly places you outside the communion of Catholics, a group of like minded people who accept and believe in the teachings of the Church.

But it puts me among those Christians still rational enough to know bread is still bread and wine is still wine no matter what encantation you say over it, nor to be hoodwinked into believing bells and whistles can add to or detract from The Gospel.

So, as they would say in a legal context, what you think doesn't really matter because you "lack standing'.

I also lack standing among wiccans, moon-worshipers and the other pagans.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Subjectively, there are several reasons why a Catholic might have voted for Obama, and not all of them involve choosing intrinsic evil.

If a voter thought that, although Candidate A supports one intrinsic evil (abortion), the other supports a equivalent intrinsic evil (say, a nuclear target=city strategy that would kill millions), then there would be a proportionate reason to vote for "A" to limit the evil of "B."

(This is not factually true --- McCain was not threatening to nuke a bunch of cities together with their population --- but if you thought it was so, it would be a proportionate reason.)

If a voter thought that, although Candidate B has the verbally "right answers" about abortion ("It's wrong because life begins at conception"), Candidate A has a greater likelihood of actually, substantially reducing the number of abortion by some other, moral means (say, by promising every pregnant American woman $20,000 upon live birth), then there would be some justification in voting for "A".

(This also is not factually true, but it would provide justification for someone who thought it were true.)

Either of these two voters would be factually wrong, but subjectively not guilty of sin.

In any case, I think the priest is right in saying they should go to Confession. They should examine their consciences and discuss their vote and their motives with the priest: they need help sorting it all out before Judgment.