Skip to comments.Scranton bishop threatens to deny sacrament to Casey
Posted on 04/30/2009 5:40:25 AM PDT by NYer
The answer is simple. If the politician doesn't want to follow the teachings of the church, there are many other "denominations" he/she can choose from.
Well, see, the overwhelming number of Orthodox laity, lower clergy and monastics, and, I suspect, hierarchs, want to stay very far away from the Latin Church.
That's your choice.
The Latin Church, however, seems determined to save itself from the consequences of its Vatican II folly by reuniting with us.
They are talking to your leaders about it, but it certainly isn't being forced on you. Nor is it being forced on pro-abort politicians. They can leave the church any time they want.
But it is the duty of the church to exercise biblical discipline toward its congregants. If any church simply shrugs it's collective shoulders at sin, it cannot claim to be following biblical instruction.
“I think the incredibly dumb, schimatic Greek Orthodox Church is even worse... And especially who believe in such non-sense... “
Didn’t you recently post that you went to seminary with one of the bishops whose knowledge is so very lacking in an understanding of proper ecclesiology? Did you learn your ecclesiology at the same seminary you learned your funny book theology, topher and is that where he learned his?
“You’d rather vote for someone who defends and abets the murder of innocent infants?”
I didn’t say that, C.
“The Orthodox Church is very pro-life.”
Indeed it is
“I could easily see my Priest refuse Communion to a politician that in any way supported abortion.”
So could I.
“In fact the Catholic and Orthodox view is nearly identical.”
As presented here? Not even close, JW.
“The Orthodox and Catholic faiths are so close that politically there should be no difference.”
Where did you get this idea? Political action is not what Orthodoxy is about, though some here in America would make it that way.
“Of course politicians should quake at that thought. They only have power because God gave them power. A politician who defies the Prince of the Church is an usurper of power, who should be driven out of office tarred and feathered.”
Alex, an elected official owes the country or community the fulfillment of his oath. If what his Faith teaches him is inconsistent with fulfilling the obligation of that oath, he must resign from his office.
I am reminded of the advice Justice Scalia once gave a lower federal court judge, a friend of his and an aquaintance of mine, on dealing with abortion cases. When the fellow asked him what he, as a pro-life very committed Catholic should do when confronted with upholding Rowe v. Wade, Justice Scalia told him he had a choice, fidelity to his faith or resignation. Its no more difficult than that, Alex.
So Scalia’s advice was that the judge resign or reject Roe vs. Wade??? Sounds good to me, especially the second alternative, but I don’t think that is what you meant.
This is not about the politician. It's about the Bishop and the Church. Casey is not going to become pro-life because of "threats" by a Bishop. Casey can vote how he pleases on abortion, gay marriage, etc. If he feels it is his duty to vote for something the Church is against, then huzzah for his taking such a "principled stand" against the mean old Church. But the Bishop and the Church (who this is really about) have a duty to stand true to their beliefs. If the church feels it should deny communion to Casey, or excommunicate him, then it is the Church's duty to do so.
And if the politician or the judge does neither, and instead betrays his faith, then the best his bishop can do for him and for the country is to excommunicate him. Three chears for Bishop Joseph F. Martino, you and I together.
Didnt you recently post that you went to seminary with one of the bishops whose knowledge is so very lacking in an understanding of proper ecclesiology? Did you learn your ecclesiology at the same seminary you learned your funny book theology, topher and is that where he learned his?
My freshman year in High School would not qualify me as a Theologian... My remarkable achievement that year was placing first in a state academic competition -- for Algebra I -- a mathematics competition...
The point of what the Bishop of Scranton is trying to do has to do with helping to educate people and inform how wrong abortion is...
As far as I am concerned, you only under the Gospel of Hate...
Oooo, that wasnt very well worded.
That is quite correct... That poster who is a member of the Greek Orthodox Church seems to espouse the Gospel of Hate -- at least by his posts...
I was trying to respond in kind.
The point being to show how hate does not work.
And hate really doesn't work......
Maybe I am wrong to fight fire with fire...
The gum flapping of an ignorant schismatic is irrelevant.
You wrote in response (netmilsmom):
I dont know that I would call that very Christian.
Let us turn to the words of Jesus about Judas Iscariot:
Matthew 26:23-25 (proper context)
Matt 26:24 24 The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man! It would be better for him if he had not been born."
What Jesus said about Judas Iscariot -- that it was better for him that he should never have been born -- was not very Christian.
It was meant as a rebuke.
The sinner is to be rebuked -- not rewarded.
An example of this is: John 8:3-11 (The woman caught in the act of Adultery).
In this passage, many forget that at the end Jesus rebukes the woman with:
11 ... "Go now and leave your life of sin." (NIV)
11 ... "Go now and leave your life of sin."
Jesus does not say to the woman: "Your sins are forgiven." In some passages, Jesus blesses the person.
Not in this passage. It is a rebuke for Jesus to say "sinner stop sinning"...
The member of Greek Orthodox Church who posts here is a disruptor, and, in my opinion, an agent of Satan (even if he does not consider himself to be an agent of Satan)...
15 "If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over.
16 But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that 'every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.'
17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.
18 "I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.
19 "Again, I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything you ask for, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven.
20 For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them."
This is one of the problems with being Politically Correct... Being Politically Correct does not tend to inform the sinner of his sin.
That is something we must do! That what is the Good Shepherd of Scranton is trying to do: scold Casey into obeying the teachings of the Church...
It is because the Good Shepherd of Scranton is looking after one of his flock that he does this.
Saint Padre Pio did similar things in the confessional -- to scold sinners that were not truly repentant...
>>Maybe I am wrong to fight fire with fire... <<
That’s kinda what I was thinking. It’s the honey and vinegar thing. *smile*
Maybe it’s me, but I like to see the Catholics take the high road and not be goaded into being nasty.
And you see that is what happened right? You were goaded into a reaction...
“...an agent of Satan (even if he does not consider himself to be an agent of Satan)...”
You are right. I don’t.
“Agent of Satan”? That’s a bit dramatic, t. Is it the same sort of nonsensical hyperbole which leads some of your bishops to proclaim a hierarchy of dogma, placing one interpretation of the Church’s anti-abortion above all other dogma?
Orthodox theologians are laughing at the American bishops, t, at the same time as they are promising the rest of us that they will remember this little American circus if there is ever another meeting of The Joint International Commission for the Theological Dialogue between the Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church...which is looking increasingly unlikely. You will be pleased to hear that that unlikelihood is attributable in great measure to the situation in the Roman Church here in America.
You may be trying to balance all sin as equal, but it has always been obvious that some things are worse than others. Most of our bishops and priests recognize abortion as one of the most grevious of sins. Our view matches that of the Catholic Church.
Please do not paint our Church as being weak on this issue, or the RCC as being single issue. Of all the issues that arise this is the one where we agree most.
If you wish to have disagreement with the “Latins” that is your business, but do so honestly. I have disagreements with them, but they are handled respectfully as I expect them to treat our faith. There have been unworthy comments made against our faith, but they were in response to you. I don’t believe the writers of those comments actually intended them to insult in general, only to teach you a lesson.
There have been many problems over the centuries, but they shouldn’t affect us now. We have real problems with the Islamists, secularists and those that would water down the faith into something unrecognizable. We face these issues together. In dealing with our Catholic brethren, we want to move them back towards a more traditional view (as we see it).
"Most of our bishops and priests recognize abortion as one of the most grevious of sins."
Indeed it is and indeed they do. Perhaps you are confused by the position that the Roman Church takes that "anti-abortionism" is a dogma. We do not do that. As you know, dogma in the Orthodox Church is proclaimed only as it was in the pre-schism Church, by an Ecumenical Council. To go further, as some Latin lay people and hierarchs go and insist that "anti-abortionism" is the most important of all dogmas is, in my opinion, heresy.
"Our view matches that of the Catholic Church."
I'm sorry, my brother, but you are incorrect.
"Please do not paint our Church as being weak on this issue, or the RCC as being single issue."
Orthodoxy is not weak on this question at all, though some of the less well catechised Latons seem to think so. The problem, my brother, is that some Latins and some of their undereducated hierarchs, assume that there is only one way to put faith into action and that's their way, even if their way violates the canons, which, you will remember, has been a bone of contention between the many Patriarchates of the Church in the East and the Church of Rome for over 1000 years.
"I dont believe the writers of those comments actually intended them to insult in general, only to teach you a lesson."
Please! It is a very rare Latin, +BXVI springs to mind, who has any business teaching the Orthodox anything about The Faith.
"We have real problems with the Islamists, secularists and those that would water down the faith into something unrecognizable."
We do? What are the Mohammedans doing today to our people that they haven't been doing for 1300 years? The danger to Orthodoxy lies in the Protestantized/secularized West which has embarked on a campaign of destruction against Eastern Christian communities.
"We face these issues together."
Oh? From what I have read here on FR, Latin support for the actions of the West against Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox has been substantial, though of course both +JPII and +BXVI have spoken out against it.
And you see that is what happened right? You were goaded into a reaction...
You are quite correct... I was goaded into a very bad reaction...