Priests refuse Communion for political leaders..

[Ten Packs]

Not trying to start a volatile thread, but Global News tonight had a piece on the new Pope's "suggestion" (so far that's all it is) that Priests refuse Communion for political leaders who participate in establishing Legislation that is not in the strict teaching of the Church!
In Canada's case, that includes our Prime Minister Martin, a devout Catholic, because he was part of a Government that has passed SSM Legislation, by a Parliamentary vote. Isn't that Democracy?
(The Priest of the church he attends was interviewed, and said he would NOT refuse Communion to him, or anyone else.)

Now to be clear, I am not Catholic, so I don't know how seriously this affects a member of the Congregation - but it sure as Heck sounds pretty serious!


What the Heck is going on? :?

(edit: clarified topic title)

 

[neocon-hunter]

RE: I am confused.... and

I think the roman catholic church is pissed they don't have any control or power over the politicians and laws like they once did. The catholic church has always been run like a dictatorship. However on CTV said most people who are "allegedly" catholics have not been following the "rules" for a long time anyways. Like pre marital sex, abortion etc.

btw-Father John Walsh, the town priest in Martin's working class Montreal riding of LaSalle-Émard, told CTV News he'll continue to give the sacrament no matter what the Vatican decides.

Martin Rover of the pastoral studies program at Saint Paul University in Ottawa believes the church has to account for the differences of opinion within its flock.

"Sometimes I get the impression that the church doesn't worry about alienating people in the pews."

Rover believes a fiercely dogmatic church risks losing the last of its dwindling congregation.

"The fight in the church is really between the right and the centre. The left have all gone and if it keeps fighting to the right -- more conservative and more fundamental -- soon the centre will have to leave too.

Interesting article here at CTV and rest of article.

 

[no1important]

RE: I am confused.... and

They have a pope that is so ignorant, bigoted, tries to hide child abuse and stuck in the dark ages. He has no clue what goes on in the real, modern world anymore. Someone should tell him it is 2005.

 

[missile]

Re: I am confused.... and a bit alarmed.

As an ex Catholic myself,being refused communion isn't that big a deal. The few times I have to go to a Mass,I just sit down and glare at the congregation when they return from receiving communion. It might cause Martin a few votes,but gain him a lot more than you would expect.

 

[GL Schmitt]

I should imagine that the Roman Catholic Church has, for all intents and purposes, already lost the parishioners it feels it must threaten with excommunication, in order to force them into following church doctrine in their secular political lives.

 

[annabattler]

RE: Priests refuse Commun

Many of my friends are Catholic. They take comfort in the 'sameness" of the religion,of the rites,no matter what church they attend.They don't wear their religion on their sleeve,but it satisfies their spiritual side.
On the other hand,all of them practice artificial birth control and don't seem to feel too much guilt.

 

[Nascar_James]

Not trying to start a volatile thread, but Global News tonight had a piece on the new Pope's "suggestion" (so far that's all it is) that Priests refuse Communion for political leaders who participate in establishing Legislation that is not in the strict teaching of the Church!
In Canada's case, that includes our Prime Minister Martin, a devout Catholic, because he was part of a Government that has passed SSM Legislation, by a Parliamentary vote. Isn't that Democracy?
(The Priest of the church he attends was interviewed, and said he would NOT refuse Communion to him, or anyone else.)

Now to be clear, I am not Catholic, so I don't know how seriously this affects a member of the Congregation - but it sure as Heck sounds pretty serious!


What the Heck is going on? :?

(edit: clarified topic title)

As a practicing Catholic, I fully agree with the Vatican's position.

What is the point of those who support SSM and abortion to keep attending a Catholic church? They are against everything the church stands for. What are they accomplishing by attending?There is no such thing as a pretend Catholic.

Those folks who do not follow the teaching of their own religion, are more than free to choose another religion.

By the way, the Catholic Church had suggested the same (withhold communion) for then presidential candidate Kerry since his views on abortion are clearly in conflict with the Catholic Church.

 

[Nascar_James]

Re: RE: I am confused.... and

They have a pope that is so ignorant, bigoted, tries to hide child abuse and stuck in the dark ages. He has no clue what goes on in the real, modern world anymore. Someone should tell him it is 2005.

The Catholic Religion has been around for ages.No one, I repeat NO ONE has the right to tell the Vatican to change it's religious policies. There is no room for negociation. My religion is off limits for any kind of discussion.

If those pretend Catholics disagree with the Vatican's policies, then I have news for them ... YOU DON'T HAVE TO REMAIN CATHOLIC.

So many proud Catholics all around the globe are in full agreement with the Vatican's position. I cannot for the life of me see why someone would stick with a religion that they are in conflict with. It is pointless.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Priests refuse Commun

If you were honest, Nascar Nero, you would also admit that there have been movements within the church to change the very bigotry and intolerance that you find so endearing.

The Catholic Church is trying to influence politics though. That is illegal in Canada. In fact, if they insist on playing politics, they can lose their charitable status here. Separation of church nad state is important, and we are smart enough to recognise it.

 

[GL Schmitt]

Separation of church and state is as invaluable to the church as it is to the state.

Without that separation, a democracy invariably morphs into a theocracy, which is terminal to the health of the state.

Without that separation, a democracy has the greatest potential to morph into the wrong kind of theocracy to become likewise terminal for all religions other than that one particular creed.

(On a spiritual level, having any religion’s faith imposed by state authority is even more toxic to that succeeding religion’s health.)

Since at one time or another, every religion has been persecuted by at least one other competing religion, or has used unbridled secular power in ways that warped its own beliefs, all but the most lunatic fanatics recognize the value of this separation, for the safety of their own particular religion.

The separation of church and state is a divide which protects the integrity of both sides of that separation.

 

[Nascar_James]

Re: RE: Priests refuse Commun

If you were honest, Nascar Nero, you would also admit that there have been movements within the church to change the very bigotry and intolerance that you find so endearing.

The Catholic Church is trying to influence politics though. That is illegal in Canada. In fact, if they insist on playing politics, they can lose their charitable status here. Separation of church nad state is important, and we are smart enough to recognise it.

How can denying communion to someone who doesn't respect the church's teachings possibly involve mixing church and state Rev? In regards to religious freedom, the Catholic Church has every right to deny communion to anyone who doesn't respect the Catholic faith.

 

[no1important]

RE: Priests refuse Commun

But that Church is more like a business and a political entity than what a church is.

 

[Vanni Fucci]

Re: RE: Priests refuse Commun

How can denying communion to someone who doesn't respect the church's teachings possibly involve mixing church and state Rev? In regards to religious freedom, the Catholic Church has every right to deny communion to anyone who doesn't respect the Catholic faith.

Don't be so damn stupid James...the Vatican is clearly trying to influence politics in Canada, and Canada should send it's own message to the Vatican...eliminate tax exemptions for Roman Catholic Churches and organizations would be a start...burn bible on Parliament hill would be another...maybe throw a handful of pedophile priests in jail for a feckin' change...that would feckin' show 'em... :x

 

[Reverend Blair]

How can denying communion to someone who doesn't respect the church's teachings possibly involve mixing church and state Rev?

They are clearly trying to influence politics through direct religious pressure on politicians, Nascar Nero. They have said so. That's a mix that should not be allowed in this country.

What they are doing is not the same as sponsoring demonstrations or addressing all of government. They are using coercive measures to try to put pressure on individual politicians. That's extortion, Nero.

 

[Nascar_James]

How can denying communion to someone who doesn't respect the church's teachings possibly involve mixing church and state Rev? In regards to religious freedom, the Catholic Church has every right to deny communion to anyone who doesn't respect the Catholic faith.

Don't be so damn stupid James...the Vatican is clearly trying to influence politics in Canada, and Canada should send it's own message to the Vatican...eliminate tax exemptions for Roman Catholic Churches and organizations would be a start...burn bible on Parliament hill would be another...maybe throw a handful of pedophile priests in jail for a feckin' change...that would feckin' show 'em... :x

The Catholic Religion has been around longer than the Liberal government in Canada. NO ONE HAS ANY RIGHT TO ASK THE VATICAN TO CHANGE IT'S POLICIES. Hah ... that would be the day. The government has NO BUSINESS putting it's nose in the policies of the Catholic Church. If politicians don't want to abide by the views of the Catholic Church LET THEM CHOOSE ANOTHER RELIGION.

Bottom line ... the Religious policies of the Catholic Church have been around longer than the Liberal government, so if the Liberal government wants to get involved in this and mix church and state, I have news for the Liberal government ... you will loose.

How can denying communion to someone who doesn't respect the church's teachings possibly involve mixing church and state Rev?

They are clearly trying to influence politics through direct religious pressure on politicians, Nascar Nero. They have said so. That's a mix that should not be allowed in this country.

What they are doing is not the same as sponsoring demonstrations or addressing all of government. They are using coercive measures to try to put pressure on individual politicians. That's extortion, Nero.

Doesn't matter what happens indirectly Rev. Point of the matter is the Vatican has always maintained our traditional definition of marriage in it's teachings. They are doing nothing wrong by preserving the teachings of the Catholic Church. If anyone objects to this, it is not the Church's fault that someone disagrees with their own religion. Hell, that person has every right to pick a new religion that shares his/her views. As I mentioned before ... MY RELIGION IS NOT UP FOR DISCUSSION ... NEVER WAS!!!

 

[Cosmo]

As I mentioned before ... MY RELIGION IS NOT UP FOR DISCUSSION ... NEVER WAS!!!

Tough titty on that one, James. You participate, your views are fair game.

I come from a catholic background, have spent years in study, baptized, first communion and confirmed all in that church. In other words, James, I know a bit about it. I find catholics, as a religious group, reprehensible. I have family that was molested by a priest. Such an honour to be an altar boy (back then it was males only) ain't it? And the church does nothing but protect these people. I was only about 10 years old when I clearly recall sitting in church on Sunday, looking around at the pedophile from next door, the guy I knew who drank and committed violence on his family Saturday night (that was my own father), and the bully from down the street who terrorized us all. I realized then that the church was a scam. You could do whatever you pleased as long as you came in on Sunday, admitted your sins and said a few Hail Marys. It wasn't about substance, but purely about form.

While I agree with Rev and Vanni that the church is trying to use its influence to change political decisions, I regretfully must agree with the righties on this one. The church has the right to give communion to whomever they choose. I firmly believe in separation of church and state and that goes both ways in my books. If they church wants to try to exert influence, so be it. I cannot in good conscience say that they should stay out of politics then try to set rules for them.

If a church does not want to marry same sex couples, so what. If they refuse communion to people they view as transgressing their rules, again, so what. The catholic church is an enormous dinosaur, one of the last bastions of patriarchy, and it is gasping its dying breaths. Let's hope it cannot do too much damage before it finally expires. As much as I find that particular church reprehensible, I must agree with the catholic right to do what it pleases within its own stained glass walls.

It is incredibly unfortunate that many of our leaders follow the dogma of that church. I think the only way to circumvent it is to ensure we vote in people who separate church and religion. It is a slow process.

 

[Reverend Blair]

NO ONE HAS ANY RIGHT TO ASK THE VATICAN TO CHANGE IT'S POLICIES. Hah ... that would be the day. The government has NO BUSINESS putting it's nose in the policies of the Catholic Church.

Nobody is asking the Vatican to change its polices, Nascar Nero. We are asking that they quit trying to extort favours from politicians.

The separation of church and state goes like this: The church is allowed to do as it pleases within the law of the state. In return, the state leaves it alone todo as it pleases. The Catholic church is not required to perform same sex marriages and Catholic women are not forced to use birth control or have abortions. They have a right to their beliefs.

Politicians do not have a right to impose their religious on their constituents though. Paul Martin does not represent the Catholic church, he represents Canadians. As such he has a duty to do what he feels is best for Canada. His personal beliefs do not come into it, nor should the church use those personal beliefs to attempt to alter his representation of Canadians.

It's fine if they want to lobby Parliament. It's fine if they want to make presentations to committee. It is not fine when they try to coerce a politician into representing a religion instead of his constituents. If they persist in doing so, then their charitable status should be revoked.

 

[Martin Le Acadien]

Religion is a hard thing to discuss rationaly. If you don't agree with a particular dogma, then don't patronize it. You are free to practise or not to practise anything. FREE WILL.

On Judgement day, we might be surprized by what the real truth is! What we think is important might not be that important.

 

[Nascar_James]

As I mentioned before ... MY RELIGION IS NOT UP FOR DISCUSSION ... NEVER WAS!!!

Tough titty on that one, James. You participate, your views are fair game.

I come from a catholic background, have spent years in study, baptized, first communion and confirmed all in that church. In other words, James, I know a bit about it. I find catholics, as a religious group, reprehensible. I have family that was molested by a priest. Such an honour to be an altar boy (back then it was males only) ain't it? And the church does nothing but protect these people. I was only about 10 years old when I clearly recall sitting in church on Sunday, looking around at the pedophile from next door, the guy I knew who drank and committed violence on his family Saturday night (that was my own father), and the bully from down the street who terrorized us all. I realized then that the church was a scam. You could do whatever you pleased as long as you came in on Sunday, admitted your sins and said a few Hail Marys. It wasn't about substance, but purely about form.

While I agree with Rev and Vanni that the church is trying to use its influence to change political decisions, I regretfully must agree with the righties on this one. The church has the right to give communion to whomever they choose. I firmly believe in separation of church and state and that goes both ways in my books. If they church wants to try to exert influence, so be it. I cannot in good conscience say that they should stay out of politics then try to set rules for them.

If a church does not want to marry same sex couples, so what. If they refuse communion to people they view as transgressing their rules, again, so what. The catholic church is an enormous dinosaur, one of the last bastions of patriarchy, and it is gasping its dying breaths. Let's hope it cannot do too much damage before it finally expires. As much as I find that particular church reprehensible, I must agree with the catholic right to do what it pleases within its own stained glass walls.

It is incredibly unfortunate that many of our leaders follow the dogma of that church. I think the only way to circumvent it is to ensure we vote in people who separate church and religion. It is a slow process.

Really good points, Cosmo.

I am deeply sorry that someone in your family was molested by a priest. if a child was involved, then I support the harshest of punishment for that priest.

In addition, it is unaccepatable for anyone committing crimes to hide behind the church. It should not be an immunity from justice, no exceptions. No one is above the law.

For the most part, we still only have alter boys. Alter girls (which are rare) are permitted only with the permission of the bishop responsible for that church.

The Catholic church will not expire anytime soon. Here in the southern US we have a new generation of young church goers who are fully committed ot their faith. The church I attend is always full and many of the young are very enthusiastic. I also noticed unlike Canada, here most of the folks do take communion every Sunday.

 

[Nascar_James]

NO ONE HAS ANY RIGHT TO ASK THE VATICAN TO CHANGE IT'S POLICIES. Hah ... that would be the day. The government has NO BUSINESS putting it's nose in the policies of the Catholic Church.

Nobody is asking the Vatican to change its polices, Nascar Nero. We are asking that they quit trying to extort favours from politicians.

The separation of church and state goes like this: The church is allowed to do as it pleases within the law of the state. In return, the state leaves it alone todo as it pleases. The Catholic church is not required to perform same sex marriages and Catholic women are not forced to use birth control or have abortions. They have a right to their beliefs.

Politicians do not have a right to impose their religious on their constituents though. Paul Martin does not represent the Catholic church, he represents Canadians. As such he has a duty to do what he feels is best for Canada. His personal beliefs do not come into it, nor should the church use those personal beliefs to attempt to alter his representation of Canadians.

It's fine if they want to lobby Parliament. It's fine if they want to make presentations to committee. It is not fine when they try to coerce a politician into representing a religion instead of his constituents. If they persist in doing so, then their charitable status should be revoked.

All good points Rev.

However, I still cannot for the life of me understand why someone (like Martin) would choose to stay with a Religion that goes against his personal beliefs? I mean why doesn't he pick a religion that shares his values? What is the point of his presence in a church that he is in disagreement with? What does it serve to him? I don't get it?

As to the government revoking the church's chatitable donation, folks in Canada have a right to give money to anyone they like. Their money has already been taxed, so it cannot be once again taxed, particularly since they are not getting any goods in return, and are simply giving a donation or "gift" to the church. If I give my neighbor a $100 gift, that is a gift and as such it is not taxable.