Christian Discussion Thread XI: Anicetus’ Revenge

[Luminesa]

I was wrong about the church's teaching on abortion. I thought that it was morally permissible in some instances but I was gravely mistaken. It is never acceptable to will the death of an innocent person even to save the life of an innocent person. I apologize to you all for that mistake.

Not sure why you’re apologizing, you re-read the Church’s position and saw you were mistaken. Don’t worry about it.

[Immortan Khan]

Shame really. Abortion is a sticky situation for a Catholic politician, and I agree with Bishop McElroy, they're trying to weaponize the eucharist for political motives which is just despicable

Expecting the church to be consistent with it's own dogma is hardly weaponization of the eucharist. Despite what some idealists would like to believe, the church is, always has been, and will never not be involved in politics. Though we are above secular politics, we are not removed from it, and if we wish to the further mission set down to us then we must engage with the temporal forces that rule the world. If reaffirming our stance against something that's been deemed so objectively evil that it merits excommunication is considered too controversial a move then we've obviously failed in our duties.

Agreed. It's perfectly within the Church's right to deny communion to politicians that support, and indeed wish to expand, abortion. In fact, isn't it grounds for full blown excommunication? Politicians should especially be held to a higher standard than regular lay persons.

[Lady Victory]

I would like to apologize for the inappropriate joke I made earlier. I admit I didn't actually think about how serious the situation was. I have a rather dark sense of humor and I tend to laugh at and joke about inappropriate things at inappropriate times. I'm usually better at restraining it, but I saw a chance at a "history repeats itself" joke and jumped at it without thinking in an effort to lighten the mood after Arch dug up that old argument and the news of the massacre of Tigray priests. Humor is one of my coping mechanisms, but I should know better than to assume that's not true for everyone.

I failed to analyze the situation and that was entirely my fault. I was in the wrong, and when Tars pointed that out I instinctively reacted defensively as I tend to do when confronted with my own faults and errors. None of this excuses my behavior, of course, but I feel it's important to clarify that my intentions were never to mock anyone.

So again, I am sorry.

But that being said, I also want to take this time to call out the fermented bullshit of two CDT regulars, because this needs to be said and I'm tired of watching them get away with their crap.

Tars & Salus,

You are both raging hypocrites. I've blocked you both twice before because of your aggressive, confrontational attitudes and generally arrogant behavior, but because I've been trying to be a better Christian I've both times removed you from my Foes List in order to give you guys another chance. "Forgive and forget", and all. Yet both times I never really bothered to actually confront you about said behavior under the assertion that you would, hopefully, figure your own shit out and better yourselves on your own. But clearly that was naive of me, and I feel like an idiot now for believing that it would work.

I know my sins and flaws. I don't need to be called out on them, thank you. It's hard to break from habitual behaviors. I am working on it, and I don't really give a shit if you believe that or not. I have nothing to prove to either of you. Neither of you have any right to talk about my "behavior" or "toxicity" until you look in the damn mirror.

You're both on my Foes List for the third and final time. Neither of you will be coming off of it in the foreseeable future. Normally I try to avoid this level of confrontation, but Arch putting his own foot down has inspired me to do the same. Sort your own fucking shit out. I'm done with the both of you.

And now I, too, will be taking a hiatus from this thread for a while.

You can huff, scoff, fold your arms, and assert I'm full of shit all you like. I really don't care what either of you have to say anymore. Do whatever you want.

[Tarsonis]

I would like to apologize for the inappropriate joke I made earlier. I admit I didn't actually think about how serious the situation was. I have a rather dark sense of humor and I tend to laugh at and joke about inappropriate things at inappropriate times. I'm usually better at restraining it, but I saw a chance at a "history repeats itself" joke and jumped at it without thinking in an effort to lighten the mood after Arch dug up that old argument and the news of the massacre of Tigray priests. Humor is one of my coping mechanisms, but I should know better than to assume that's not true for everyone.

I failed to analyze the situation and that was entirely my fault. I was in the wrong, and when Tars pointed that out I instinctively reacted defensively as I tend to do when confronted with my own faults and errors. None of this excuses my behavior, of course, but I feel it's important to clarify that my intentions were never to mock anyone.

So again, I am sorry.

But that being said, I also want to take this time to call out the fermented bullshit of two CDT regulars, because this needs to be said and I'm tired of watching them get away with their crap.

Tars & Salus,

You are both raging hypocrites. I've blocked you both twice before because of your aggressive, confrontational attitudes and generally arrogant behavior, but because I've been trying to be a better Christian I've both times removed you from my Foes List in order to give you guys another chance. "Forgive and forget", and all. Yet both times I never really bothered to actually confront you about said behavior under the assertion that you would, hopefully, figure your own shit out and better yourselves on your own. But clearly that was naive of me, and I feel like an idiot now for believing that it would work.

I know my sins and flaws. I don't need to be called out on them, thank you. It's hard to break from habitual behaviors. I am working on it, and I don't really give a shit if you believe that or not. I have nothing to prove to either of you. Neither of you have any right to talk about my "behavior" or "toxicity" until you look in the damn mirror.

You're both on my Foes List for the third and final time. Neither of you will be coming off of it in the foreseeable future. Normally I try to avoid this level of confrontation, but Arch putting his own foot down has inspired me to do the same. Sort your own fucking shit out. I'm done with the both of you.

And now I, too, will be taking a hiatus from this thread for a while.

You can huff, scoff, fold your arms, and assert I'm full of shit all you like. I really don't care what either of you have to say anymore. Do whatever you want.

Ah the classic" sorry I was wrong but you're wronger for calling me out on it" non-apology.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

[Herzpunkt]

“Observes quietly”

[North Washington Republic]

The Vatican warning about denying communion to supporters of abortion rights is going to push more trads into the sede position.

I don’t see how that logic tracks.

How would affirming opposition to abortion make trads schismatic?

I’m sorry. I’m the king of typos.
What I meant to say is that the Vatican warning clergy about denying communion to supporters of abortion rights would result in trads becoming sedes. I’ve noticed one thing that unites trads and Novus Ordo conservatives, and that’s their strong disapproval of giving communion to politicians that support and even want to expand abortion rights.

[Immortan Khan]

I don’t see how that logic tracks.

How would affirming opposition to abortion make trads schismatic?

I’m sorry. I’m the king of typos.
What I meant to say is that the Vatican warning clergy about denying communion to supporters of abortion rights would result in trads becoming sedes. I’ve noticed one thing that unites trads and Novus Ordo conservatives, and that’s their strong disapproval of giving communion to politicians that support and even want to expand abortion rights.

Nothing really wrong with that to be honest.

[North Washington Republic]

I’m sorry. I’m the king of typos.
What I meant to say is that the Vatican warning clergy about denying communion to supporters of abortion rights would result in trads becoming sedes. I’ve noticed one thing that unites trads and Novus Ordo conservatives, and that’s their strong disapproval of giving communion to politicians that support and even want to expand abortion rights.

Nothing really wrong with that to be honest.

Well, as an apostate, I can’t answer if it’s a good thing or a bad thing. I almost became a sede before I became an apostate. Even went to a sede chapel for Mass, where the Priest either was very ill, or he was drunk, or both. He was coughing and speech was slurred. He was elderly.

[Salus Maior]

I don’t see how that logic tracks.

How would affirming opposition to abortion make trads schismatic?

I’m sorry. I’m the king of typos.
What I meant to say is that the Vatican warning clergy about denying communion to supporters of abortion rights would result in trads becoming sedes. I’ve noticed one thing that unites trads and Novus Ordo conservatives, and that’s their strong disapproval of giving communion to politicians that support and even want to expand abortion rights.

....That still doesn’t track for the same reason. Why would trads become sedes?

[Madrinpoor]

“Observes quietly”

I've seen you on a couple of different religious threads, haven't I?

[Herzpunkt]

“Observes quietly”

I've seen you on a couple of different religious threads, haven't I?

Yes

[Madrinpoor]

I've seen you on a couple of different religious threads, haven't I?

Yes

Kudos for learning about different religions. I've decided to start trying that.

[Tarsonis]

I’m sorry. I’m the king of typos.
What I meant to say is that the Vatican warning clergy about denying communion to supporters of abortion rights would result in trads becoming sedes. I’ve noticed one thing that unites trads and Novus Ordo conservatives, and that’s their strong disapproval of giving communion to politicians that support and even want to expand abortion rights.

Nothing really wrong with that to be honest.

I think the fundamental problem for Catholic public servant, in America at least, is that religious doctrine has no standing when it comes to the basis of Law. The Constitution and judicial precedent have established that elective abortion is protected. Even Justice Barrett has more or less confirmed that there's no really basis to overturn Casey or Roe. Abortion is legal under US Law, and that really isn't going to change, barring an amendment to the Constitution



So a Catholic Politician has to walk a very fine line, of upholding their oath as politicians, and upholding their moral conscience. Traditionally, this has been the "safe and rare" line. If we're gonna have it, we're gonna make sure it's safe, so as not to compound harm on top or harm.


This is why I support the warning letter and the Bishop I quoted earlier. While there may be some "catholics" who have fully embraced abortion and have crossed the line until excommunication , the conservative wing of the USCCB is attempting to use the Eucharist as a hostage, blackmailing politicians into adopting their political agenda, instead of working with them.

[Madrinpoor]

..and have crossed the line until excommunication...

Sorry for my ignorance, but what's the point of excommunications? It doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

[Tarsonis]

..and have crossed the line until excommunication...

Sorry for my ignorance, but what's the point of excommunications? It doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

it's essentially exile. A formal barring from being able to partake in the life of the church until they've corrected their error. It's supposed to be corrective more than it is supposed to be punitive or vindictive. Though historically it has been used politically at times, unfortunately.

[Lord Dominator]

As an aside, I mentioned the Pew polling on the general population from my belief that focusing on just Biden (and Catholic Democrats in Congress in general) rather obscures the more general problem of what is possibly a majority of Catholics in America supporting abortion in contravention of Catholic doctrine. I don’t really bring this up because I believe there to be a good solution to that for the Catholic Church at large (simply because the proportions are so large).

Of course, I’m also not a Catholic, so I probably lack the same urgency of it being more than interesting rather than whatever degree it actually is (though I still hope it can be resolved as best as is possible).

[Madrinpoor]

Sorry for my ignorance, but what's the point of excommunications? It doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

it's essentially exile. A formal barring from being able to partake in the life of the church until they've corrected their error. It's supposed to be corrective more than it is supposed to be punitive or vindictive. Though historically it has been used politically at times, unfortunately.

But like, why would you exile someone from the Church? If human judgement is flawed, and only God's judgement can decide whether or not someone belongs in the Church, then why give the Church that power? Aren't we all sinners? Children of God? Then shouldn't we, all of us, all Children of God, stay in the Church so that God can save us from our sins?

[Salus Maior]

it's essentially exile. A formal barring from being able to partake in the life of the church until they've corrected their error. It's supposed to be corrective more than it is supposed to be punitive or vindictive. Though historically it has been used politically at times, unfortunately.

But like, why would you exile someone from the Church? If human judgement is flawed, and only God's judgement can decide whether or not someone belongs in the Church, then why give the Church that power? Aren't we all sinners? Children of God? Then shouldn't we, all of us, all Children of God, stay in the Church so that God can save us from our sins?

The point of excommunication is to help people realize their need to repent.

Same as, say, a parent cutting off funds to their drug addict kid. It’s harsh, but it’s meant to help them realize what they’re doing as wrong and their urgent need to change.

[Tarsonis]

it's essentially exile. A formal barring from being able to partake in the life of the church until they've corrected their error. It's supposed to be corrective more than it is supposed to be punitive or vindictive. Though historically it has been used politically at times, unfortunately.

But like, why would you exile someone from the Church? If human judgement is flawed, and only God's judgement can decide whether or not someone belongs in the Church, then why give the Church that power? Aren't we all sinners? Children of God? Then shouldn't we, all of us, all Children of God, stay in the Church so that God can save us from our sins?

So it's not like a complete removal. A person who is ecocommunicated is still a Christian, and salvation isn't necessarily denied to them. They don't have to be rebaptized or anything. It's meant to be corrective. There's numerous biblical passages to support the concept of removing people from the fellowship who don't conform. As for why does the Church have this power, well Christ entrusted the pastoral role to the Church. Caring for the souls of the faithful is the Church's responsibility, and excommunication is a tool to that end.

[Kowani]

As an aside, I mentioned the Pew polling on the general population from my belief that focusing on just Biden (and Catholic Democrats in Congress in general) rather obscures the more general problem of what is possibly a majority of Catholics in America supporting abortion in contravention of Catholic doctrine. I don’t really bring this up because I believe there to be a good solution to that for the Catholic Church at large (simply because the proportions are so large).

Of course, I’m also not a Catholic, so I probably lack the same urgency of it being more than interesting rather than whatever degree it actually is (though I still hope it can be resolved as best as is possible).

An interesting point of demographics here-while not abortion, it's close enough to where I think it works as a proxy attitude.
Catholic Latinos don't see birth control through a religious lens.

The vast majority of Latina/o voters (82%) does not see birth control through a religious lens, including 76% of Catholic respondents. Rather, most Latina/o voters (86%) consider birth control part of preventive health care for women.

I would bet-fairly well-that a similar process is happening with abortion.

[Luminesa]

Nothing really wrong with that to be honest.

I think the fundamental problem for Catholic public servant, in America at least, is that religious doctrine has no standing when it comes to the basis of Law. The Constitution and judicial precedent have established that elective abortion is protected. Even Justice Barrett has more or less confirmed that there's no really basis to overturn Casey or Roe. Abortion is legal under US Law, and that really isn't going to change, barring an amendment to the Constitution



So a Catholic Politician has to walk a very fine line, of upholding their oath as politicians, and upholding their moral conscience. Traditionally, this has been the "safe and rare" line. If we're gonna have it, we're gonna make sure it's safe, so as not to compound harm on top or harm.


This is why I support the warning letter and the Bishop I quoted earlier. While there may be some "catholics" who have fully embraced abortion and have crossed the line until excommunication , the conservative wing of the USCCB is attempting to use the Eucharist as a hostage, blackmailing politicians into adopting their political agenda, instead of working with them.

I don’t think gatekeeping on who can receive communion is “holding Communion as hostage.” They are bishops, bishops are meant to be shepherds. They are meant to guide public Catholic figures to represent the Church properly. Even if Roe isn’t going to be overturned at the moment, a Catholic politician should aim to uphold Catholic Social Teaching as much as possible in their duties and in their prayer lives.

[Tarsonis]

I think the fundamental problem for Catholic public servant, in America at least, is that religious doctrine has no standing when it comes to the basis of Law. The Constitution and judicial precedent have established that elective abortion is protected. Even Justice Barrett has more or less confirmed that there's no really basis to overturn Casey or Roe. Abortion is legal under US Law, and that really isn't going to change, barring an amendment to the Constitution



So a Catholic Politician has to walk a very fine line, of upholding their oath as politicians, and upholding their moral conscience. Traditionally, this has been the "safe and rare" line. If we're gonna have it, we're gonna make sure it's safe, so as not to compound harm on top or harm.


This is why I support the warning letter and the Bishop I quoted earlier. While there may be some "catholics" who have fully embraced abortion and have crossed the line until excommunication , the conservative wing of the USCCB is attempting to use the Eucharist as a hostage, blackmailing politicians into adopting their political agenda, instead of working with them.

I don’t think gatekeeping on who can receive communion is “holding Communion as hostage.” They are bishops, bishops are meant to be shepherds. They are meant to guide public Catholic figures to represent the Church properly. Even if Roe isn’t going to be overturned at the moment, a Catholic politician should aim to uphold Catholic Social Teaching as much as possible in their duties and in their prayer lives.

Sure, but that's not what they're doing. They're weaponizing the Eucharist to blackmail politicians into conforming to their political agenda. That is wrong. A politician can't do their job if bishops are watching bills in congress and denying the eucharist to any catholic who doesn't vote their way. Hell, I've even heard some Catholics try to argue that if you voted for Biden you're excommunicated. The weaponizing of the faith for political gain is getting ridiculous.

[Madrinpoor]

But like, why would you exile someone from the Church? If human judgement is flawed, and only God's judgement can decide whether or not someone belongs in the Church, then why give the Church that power? Aren't we all sinners? Children of God? Then shouldn't we, all of us, all Children of God, stay in the Church so that God can save us from our sins?

So it's not like a complete removal. A person who is ecocommunicated is still a Christian, and salvation isn't necessarily denied to them. They don't have to be rebaptized or anything. It's meant to be corrective. There's numerous biblical passages to support the concept of removing people from the fellowship who don't conform. As for why does the Church have this power, well Christ entrusted the pastoral role to the Church. Caring for the souls of the faithful is the Church's responsibility, and excommunication is a tool to that end.

How is it corrective though? If you were excommunicated, why would you want to try and become a part of that Church again. It would likely harm your faith, wouldn't it?

[Tarsonis]

So it's not like a complete removal. A person who is ecocommunicated is still a Christian, and salvation isn't necessarily denied to them. They don't have to be rebaptized or anything. It's meant to be corrective. There's numerous biblical passages to support the concept of removing people from the fellowship who don't conform. As for why does the Church have this power, well Christ entrusted the pastoral role to the Church. Caring for the souls of the faithful is the Church's responsibility, and excommunication is a tool to that end.

How is it corrective though? If you were excommunicated, why would you want to try and become a part of that Church again. It would likely harm your faith, wouldn't it?

You're looking at it through a Protestant lens I think, where Church hopping is a more common occurrence. If you're Catholic that's not really an option. There's just the Church.

[North Washington Republic]

How is it corrective though? If you were excommunicated, why would you want to try and become a part of that Church again. It would likely harm your faith, wouldn't it?

You're looking at it through a Protestant lens I think, where Church hopping is a more common occurrence. If you're Catholic that's not really an option. There's just the Church.

Indeed. Excommunication in the Catholic Church is actually very common. I think that those unfamiliar of the concept think that excommunicated Catholics are treaded like excommunicated scientologists.

By the way, isn’t there a class of Excommunication that is so severe that if a Mass is being said, it must be halted immediately if they go inside the church or chapel it is taking place in?