Cardinal McCarrick’s interim report to the US bishops’ conference on what to do about anti-life Catholic politicians is a model of double-speak and avoiding the issues.
For one thing, he summarizes Cardinal Ratzinger’s letter that was in the news. He says that Ratzinger told him that consistently voting for or campaigning for abortion and euthanasia meet canon 915’s criteria for manifest grave sin and obstinate persistence. He also said that the politician should be warned and instructed, and if he does not amend his ways, told not to present himself for Communion, just as they do for a person in an invalid marriage.
“There is no temporal consequence for disobeying the Church, a lesson being taught to every Catholic in America now. “
This, precisely, is the tragedy which is occurring. Do what you will, embrace any form of evil you want, and we’ll not do ANYTHING about it. I shudder at what my kids are being taught.
Are you accusing Cardinal McCarrick or Cardinal Ratzinger of waffling, or both? The judgment that it is up to each bishop appears to come straight from the head of the CDF, if Cardinal M’s summary of Cardinal R’s observations is accurate, as we must presume to be the case. So what you’re saying is that the Vatican is “not serious about the Church’s teachings”? Does that even make sense?
Might as well unrepentantly promote murder and rape in society, and then come in and get Communion…
Can anybody tell me why Jesus offered Judas His Body and Blood? I’m not a scripture scholar, nor a theologian, is the reason why I’m asking.
Kelly, I don’t pretend to know the mind of God, but…..it did give Judas the opportunity to exercise his free will and do what he had already chosen to do.
Some of that is going on here in this issue also, I think.
The fact that the bishops have made it clear, finally, that some things are not acceptable is good. It is teaching of the right sort—probably the best thing I’ve ever seen the bishops do in 20 years of being catholic.
It is a fact that the bishops are not juridically bound by the USCCB. I find it odd that this is in question. Perhaps people here have come to think the USCCB is more important than it is? According to canon law, bishops’ conferences are not juridical entities and cannot tell individual bishops how to govern their dioceses.
Bishops truly do have the right and responsibility to govern in their dioceses, on this matter and on others. This is not new.
Thanks.
“Can anybody tell me why Jesus offered Judas His Body and Blood? Ithily. But the church doesn’t cross-examine every private person who shows up, and rightly so. The church should do a much better job of warning people how much danger they are subjecting their souls to when they show up unworthily, though. We have a big problem here.
BTW, homosexuals showing up in a group wtih a banner are in group #1. There may be (probably are) some showing up privately in group #2. They’re risking their souls and need to know it, but they’re not in #1, public sinners, unless they’re just being totally flaming.
These two cases are quite different and we have to make sure not to confuse them.
Well, Judas had not made his final decision to betray Christ until after the Last Suppernational law was break off diplomatic ties and deport the diplomats (and my memory tells me we didn’t even do the former)