WI Bishop Tells Pro-Abortion Catholic Politicians: Change or No Communion

[Khephra]

(Sorry about the title change, mods. There was no other way to make it fit.)

(Press Release)

Wisconsin Bishop Tells Pro-Abortion Catholic Politicians: Change Your Stripes or Stay Away from Holy Communion


To: National Desk


Contact: Erik Whittington of American Life League, 540-226-9004 or [e-mail]


WASHINGTON, Jan. 8 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Calling it "a historic step forward in dealing with the problem of pro-abortion Catholic political figures," American Life League president Judie Brown expressed her gratitude to Bishop Raymond Burke of La Crosse, Wis., for "using the authority of his office to deal with a grave public scandal. By issuing a formal decree barring pro-abortion Catholic politicians from receiving Holy Communion, Bishop Burke is not only enforcing Church law but is courageously stepping forward in defense of innocent human beings." Bishop Burke will be installed later this month as the new archbishop of St. Louis.

For the past year, American Life League has been pointing out that Catholic bishops have the authority under Canon Law to take the precise action Bishop Burke has taken. "We have diligently brought to the attention of America's bishops the pro-abortion public comments of Catholic elected officials in each of their dioceses, and the Church's remedy for this disparity," said Brown. "As Bishop Burke states in his notification, 'A Catholic legislator who supports procured abortion or euthanasia, after knowing the teaching of the Church, commits a manifestly grave sin which is a cause of most serious scandal for others.'

This is why American Life League has published, and will continue to publish, the names of public officials who claim the Catholic faith yet ignore the Church's clear teachings on the sanctity of human life." The Vatican (news - web sites) reinforced those teachings a year ago when it issued a "Doctrinal Note on some questions regarding the participation of Catholics in political life." "Since our effort began last year," said Brown, "American Life League has identified more than 500 state and federal officeholders who claim to be Catholic while making public pronouncements on abortion that are contrary to Church teachings.

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops recently established a task force to take action on this serious problem. We will continue to encourage the task force - and all American bishops - to defend the truth and send a loud, clear message to all Catholic public officials: You cannot be pro-abortion and Catholic." ------


American Life League is the nation's largest pro-life educational organization with more than 375,000 supporting families.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=669&ncid=669&e=2&u=/usnw/20040108/pl_usnw/wisconsin_bishop_tells_pro_abortion_catholic_politicians__change_your_stripes_or_stay_away_from_holy_communion110_xml

[saigon68]

1. I guess these politicians will have to make a choice

Never understood why the church tolerated this behavior in the past???

[damnraddem]

24. Easy choice:

tell the Bishop where he can stick his edict.

I can see why someone would wonder why the Church tolerated separation of church and state, the rights of Americans to make choices rather than having religious edicts forced on them, the independence of politicians from being dictated to by prelates, and so on -- if that someone was from the Spanish Inquisition. Why an American would tolerate such nonsense from any church official: that's what I cannot understand.

I was raised a Catholic, and much of my birth family are Catholics -- and I cannot imagine them accepting the crap put out by this bishop. They wouldn't protest, they'd just ignore the idiot.

[0007]

83. This is pure ca ca!

So this little man in Wisconsin wants to play God?

[formernaderite]

91. churches should do as they please

As far as I'm concerned the churches should do as they please. No one coerces anyone in attending one denomination over another. There is perfect freedom of choice here. What I find intolerable is all these preacher type politicians. I don't want to hear them bless or pray for anyone. It's completely meaningless to me.
Look, if the church succeeds in kicking them all out, they can start a new church for the exhiled politicians. With all their experience dictating to others, they won't even need a priest.

[ithacan]

2. will he do same with capital punishment?

the church also opposes that.

If this bishop is sincere rather than hypocritical, then he'll do the same for those politicians who vote for capital punishment.

And while we're at it, the Pope was VERY much against the Iraq war. And he's very critical of neoliberal capitalism...

[saigon68]

3. Good Point

If you are going to be "PURE" in your doctrine all communicants must hold the beliefs of the heiracrchy.

[Muddleoftheroad]

25. The difference

Is the loss of an innocent life vs. the loss of a guilty one.

[damnraddem]

29. No, the difference is:

the loss of the life of a human person versus the termination of the life of what is not yet a human person.

[Muddleoftheroad]

36. That is your opnion, not theirs

And don't look at me, I'm pro-Choice. But I was trying to explain.

[sybylla]

38. Vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord

More a la carte Christianity from the old white men who run the Catholic Corporation.

[ithacan]

84. no difference in the eyes of the RC Church, both are murder

Protestant fundamentalists do justify their support of the death penalty on these grounds (innocent vs. guilty; although there seem to be a lot of innocent people on death row...).

But the Catholic Church is against capital punishment. So there's no difference.

The Bishop, if he is sincere, will do the same to politicians who support capital punishment.

On edit: Quote from John Paul II

The new evangelization calls for followers of Christ who are unconditionally pro-life: who will proclaim, celebrate and serve the Gospel of life in every situation. A sign of hope is the increasing recognition that the dignity of human life must never be taken away, even in the case of someone who has done great evil. Modern society has the means of protecting itself, without definitively denying criminals the chance to reform. I renew the appeal I made most recently at Christmas for a consensus to end the death penalty, which is both cruel and unnecessary.1

--Pope John Paul II, January 27, 1999, St. Louis, Missouri

And this is from the US Bishops:

For more than 25 years, the Catholic bishops of the United States have called for an end to the death penalty in our land. Sadly, however, death sentences and executions in this country continue at an increasing rate. In some states, there are so many executions they rarely receive much attention anymore. On this Good Friday, a day when we recall our Savior’s own execution, we appeal to all people of goodwill, and especially Catholics, to work to end the death penalty.

As we approach the next millennium, we are challenged by the evolution in Catholic teaching on this subject and encouraged by new and growing efforts to stop executions around the world. Through his powerful encyclical, The Gospel of Life (Evangelium Vitae), Pope John Paul II has asked that governments stop using death as the ultimate penalty. The Holy Father points out that instances where its application is necessary to protect society have become "very rare, if not practically nonexistent."2 In January 1999, our Holy Father brought his prophetic appeal to "end the death penalty to the United States, clearly challenging us to "end the death penalty, which is both cruel and unnecessary."3 Our Holy Father has called us with new urgency to stand against capital punishment.

<more>

http://www.nccbuscc.org/sdwp/national/criminal/appeal.htm

[Muddleoftheroad]

85. There is a difference

How many abortions occur in the U.S. in a given year? How many executions?

Politicians that support or aid abortions would obviously be seen as a bigger threat on numbers alone.

[ithacan]

89. "Our Holy Father has called us with new urgency to stand against capital p

"Our Holy Father has called us with new urgency to stand against capital punishment."

Morally there is no difference. Killing one person is no less wrong than killing many. Both are murder from the Church's perspective, both are just as wrong.

Unfortunately many Catholic clerics are obsessed with sexuality, which may explain this particular hypocrisy.

[kysrsoze]

5. How about adultery?

[CO Liberal]

17. And Pedophilia???

That would keep a lot of priests out of the communion line.

[Rainbowreflect]

7. I'll have more respect if the stood against the war & capital punishment

the way they do against abortion.

[damnraddem]

30. I have no respect for a fanatic who wants to dictate the votes ...

of legislators to fit his church doctrine, whether the issue is abortion, capital punishment, or anything else. If all Catholics must obey the church in how they legislate, then no Catholic should be elected to any legislature. Luckily, most Catholics don't fall for this nonsense.

[LiberalFighter]

55. Correct... Politicians are elected to represent everyone

Not soley the views of an organization especially a religious one.

[DevGrrrl]

82. agreed

I damned well resent the churches attempt to strong arm political issues like this.

[Atlant]

9. Traditionally, the Bishops have been just as much "Cafeteria Catholics"...

Traditionally, the Bishops have been just as much "Cafeteria Catholics"
as the parishoners.

They make a lot of noise about abortion.

They make almost no noise about the death penalty, unjust wars,
issues of social justice, or issues of economic justice.

I can come up with no other explanation than the fact that
talking about these "tougher" issues would drive away most
of their flock whereas the flock just ignores what all these
unmarried men have to say about "matters of the pelvis".

Atlant

[aquart]

33. Abortion controls women. Death penalty doesn't.

Nobody ever electrocutes a man just for killing his wife anyway.

[tritsofme]

21. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong,

but I think the the Church opposes abortion as a matter of doctrine, while it is just the current Pope that strongly opposes captial punishment, and that is not necesarily Church teaching.

[damnraddem]

31. The excuses are irrelevant.

American society cannot be dictated to in its laws by ANY religion.

[Ctuser]

74. you are corrected

capital punishment is against church teaching and the fifth commandment says it

[damnraddem]

27. Separation of church and state, individual conscience, being adults.

There are many reasons to reject this bishop's idiocy. The Church, any religion, can hold whatever moral positions they want. They do not have the right to push those opinions on others, especially onto those who do not belong to their churches. The corrolary is that they do not have a right to dictate to ANY politician about what choices will be allowed by the state. Sure, they can say that the politician must accept that abortion is immmoral if he/she is to be a Catholic (whether or not they can enforce such a rule); but they have no right to dictate what the legislator will legislate for all of society.

The further point is that any politician who would buckle under to such an edict is incompetent to hold elective office.

[el_gato]

4. religion

mental slavery

that's why faith and obedience are stressed so much

[kysrsoze]

6. Ummm....wasn't your avatar a devout muslim?

There's a difference between religion and those who twist it for their own purposes.

[Gin]

10. Man I'm glad I am no longer Catholic.....they are losing people in droves

because they are self serving neanderthals....priests having sex with children is ok though.

This religion is nothing more than a business. The faithfull better not question the doctrine...or disagree with it..hell is waiting for all who do.

[eyesroll]

8. "You cannot be pro-abortion and Catholic." Fair enough. But.

Do you have to actively lobby to make abortion against CIVIL law, that applies to non-Catholics as well, in order to be Catholic?

Can a Catholic say, "I personally believe abortion is morally wrong, but I represent people of all faiths and no faiths so I have no business imposing my religious conviction on others" and still be Catholic?

I am not Catholic, or particularly observant in my family's faith (Judiasm, which believes life-protecting and to some extent health-protecting abortions are actually a moral duty), so perhaps someone with more knowledge can enlighten me -- does Catholic teaching say civil law in a diverse society needs to conform to religious law? Or am I missing something?

[Hoosier Democrat]

12. As a Catholic...

I have to say that I'm not surprised, just disappointed. It seems to me that these bishops are no better than single-issue candidates.

While I was raised as a devout Catholic, I've found myself attending Mass less and less often as I grow older. I see the Church as doing everything in its power to preserve orthodoxy, no matter how many people leave in the process. I'm not calling for the Church to embrace pro-choice, just to give up this attitude of unquestioning obedience or ELSE!!

Now I don't actually have a problem with the bishops enforcing the Church's teachings on abortion. However, I feel that they must be consistent and enact a ban on Catholic politicians who support the death penalty, those who supported this war (despite the Pope's vehement opposition), and those divorced Catholics who violated Church teaching by remarrying. If you're going to play the moral card, play it consistently.

[Whitacre D_WI]

73. Actually...

The statement "you cannot be pro-abortion and Catholic" is completely fallacious.

You cannot deny the divinity of Christ and be Catholic. You cannot deny the sacraments and be Catholic. That is to say, you cannot go against the dogmatic, fundamental issues of FAITH upon which the Catholic Church is based and remain a Catholic.

Abortion, however, is a specific moral question. It is permissable for a Catholic to differ from Church teaching; just not from the core tenets of the faith. In other words: a Catholic can be pro-choice (or even pro-abortion), pro-death penalty, pro-war, and still be a Catholic; but a Catholic cannot be a Jew and still be a Catholic.

[yellowcanine]

11. How is the esteemed bishop going to enforce that?

Is he going to direct his priests to yank the cup back when certain parishioners present themselves for communion? Sounds like a winner to me. I always thought the responsibility for determining whether one was "worthy" of communion was on the individual - the priest isn't supposed to be monitoring behavior - isn't that why confession is anonymous and confidential? I am not Catholic - am I missing something here?

[sybylla]

13. Well the church has a long and sordid history of excommunicating "strays"

The sick part of this for me is that in the collective brain of the church there appears now to be no such thing as free will. None of these politicians were forcing abortion on anyone. They weren't providing abortions themselves. So the church wants to make the sins of freethinking women into the sins of the politicians.

Politicians who currently believe that reproductive rights are the business of a woman and her doctor are now being told that they must force the position of the church on other people or be kicked out. (And I'm not going to debate the symantics of "no communion." It is integral to celebration of the faith and salvation so it is essentially the same thing.)

Sounds to me like extortion: your job or your soul. Just one more idiocy to add to the pile of reasons to stay away from the Catholic church. Thank goddess Wisconsin's Pro-Choice Catholic representatives have no interest in catering to the borg.

Love that Yahoo linked to a horrendously biased news source.

[damnraddem]

32. It also has a long and sordid history of inquisitions.

Although the Spanish Inquisition was terminated politically by Spain nearly two centuries ago, the Roman Inquisition still exists -- it just doesn't have the power to force its views on civil society anymore, in most countries. This bishop appears to want to create an American Inquisition.

[lovedems]

14. Shit, as a pro-choice catholic this really sucks

That has been my one defense of the catholic church for sometime. I have never gone to a mass in my life and heard "hate speech". Never, never, never. I never thought of the catholic church as one to force their moral opinion on the public like the christian coalition is doing. This sucks. My kids go to catholic school. I might have to rethink that decision if they keep going on this path.

[heidiho]

15. As a Wisconsinite and a Catholic, I am outraged

Would this bishop like Governor Doyle to make decisions governing the clergy?

Politicians are required to represent their constituency - NOT the Catholic Church or any other religion. This is outrageous especially for an organization that condoned and covered up the abuse of children for so many decades.

The hypocricy never ends.

[Muddleoftheroad]

28. Religious groups

Have every right to expect their followers to obey the teachings of the church. Membership is voluntary after all.

[damnraddem]

34. They do not have the right to dictate the votes of legislators.

Any legislator who would accept such dictation is incompetent to retain his/her position.

We don't need an American Inquisition.

[Muddleoftheroad]

37. They have every right

To say that their members must follow the beliefs and to publicly fail in that will result in loss of rights.

[Sandpiper]

41. What this Bishop is doing

Is trying to coerce elected officials into toeing the church's political line by threatening to withhold the church's "blessings" from them.

An elected official represents all people from his/her district or state, not just catholics. Consequently, their duty is to uphold and support the law of the land, not use their position as a means of codifying catholic dogma.

If this Bishop and more like him try to use their position to try to beat legislators into subsmission, then the legislators ought to use the weapon they have at their disposal as legislators:

Strip the Catholic Church of its Tax exempt status.

The only way to get a response out of churches is to hit them where it really hurts: in the wallet.

The only thing that spurred the church into action regarding pedophile priests was the prospect of lawsuits, and parishioners threatening to withhold their funds from the collection box until corrupt priests were removed.

[Muddleoftheroad]

53. Nope

What the bishop is doing is mandating that the Catholic faithful not publicly defy the church on one its primary teachings.

The question is not what the church wants, but how the politicians react. If they choose to obey, then you can have a gripe with them. If they choose not to, then they may worship elsewhere.

There is no reason to strip the church of anything since it is merely expecting that which all religious expect, obedience to the beliefs of that religion.

[Sandpiper]

54. Yep

What the Bishop is doing is demanding that these elected officials place Catholic dogma over their duty to uphold the law of the United States.

There is a good deal of reason to strip the church of its tax exempt status. For a church or religious organization to maintain its tax exempt status, they cannot engage in promoting political candidates or attempt to influence legislation. Why do you think the Christian Coaliton got stripped of theirs?

This so called man of God is trying to use his religious influence to force elected officials into submission to church dogma on political matters.

When you are elected to an office, you duty is to uphold the law of the land, everything else takes a back seat. The Constitution governs this country, not the Pope.

Your support of this Bishop and his methods are the very reason that the founding fathers of this nation supported a separation of church and state.

[Muddleoftheroad]

58. Catholics

Not at all. The bishop is merely expecting the faithful to be, well, faithful. Especially in public. They don't have to stay Catholics. That is their choice.

There is NO good reason to strip one of the largest churches in the U.S. of its tax exempt status, but talking like that will certainly alienate yet another Democratic constituency.

It seems that your complaint is not with the church but anybody who chooses to obey. That is your choice. If I remind a politician that he said he was opposed to something in the past and he switches to his previous position, how is that undue influence?

I too support separation of church and state. There is no problem between the two positions.

[Sandpiper]

60. Re: Catholics

I too support separation of church and state. There is no problem between the two positions.

There is an obvious problem when a church official attempts to use their position to threaten elected officials into compliance with the church. And that's exactly what this Bishop is doing. He's attempting to use his religious influence in order force these legislators into compliance with a position that obviously dear to his heart.

The Catholic church also opposes capital punishment. Funny that I don't hear him threatening to withhold communion from judges who sign death warrants.

It seems that your complaint is not with the church but anybody who chooses to obey. That is your choice.

It seems that your complaint is that these elected officials are letting their duty to all of their constituents outweigh their catholocism.

If I remind a politician that he said he was opposed to something in the past and he switches to his previous position, how is that undue influence?

If that's all you're doing, that isn't undue influence. But that's hardly the case at hand. What's going on here is that a church leader is trying to use his position to coerce compliance with his wishes, and threatening to withhold communion if his demands are not met.

If this were over a matter of money, what he is doing would be called extortion.

[Muddleoftheroad]

61. Catholics Ongoing

What is the "obvious problem" with a church official expecting followers to follow and believers to believe?

How the Catholic Church handles its INTERNAL dogma issues is up to them.

I have no problem if elected officials ignore this religious dictate. Both they and the church officials are making choices. If the politicians ignore what the church leaders say, there will be religious results.

The religious leader here has EVERY RIGHT to "withhold communion if his demands are not met." He is, after all, a religious LEADER.

But it's not a matter of money. It's a matter of religion.

[Sandpiper]

63. Catholics Cont.

What is the "obvious problem" with a church official expecting followers to follow and believers to believe?

The obvious problem is, this Bishop is trying to use his position to coerce legislators, who represent people of all faiths and people of no faith at all, to impose Catholic beliefs on them regarding abortion. This Bishop is flatly stating, either you do what I say or else.

If you find nothing wrong with this, then the concept of separation of church and state is lost on you.

Let's turn this around and say that these legislators threaten the Catholic church to accept Roe v. Wade and to stop fighting against legalized abortions, or else they will lose their tax exempt status.

Would that be ok? If not, why then is it ok for the church to do it?

[Muddleoftheroad]

64. NOT coercion

Part of the freedom of religion issue is tolerating the religion of others. Catholics believe in a centralized church that mandates a certain belief structure. Departure from that belief system -- especially doing so in public -- can result in a variety of sanctions including loss of sacraments or excommunications.

That is their RIGHT to do so.

The legislators in this case have voluntarily chosen to associate with the Catholic church and its beliefs. As such, your analogy is totally bogus. The legislators here may opt out of their association at any time. The church could not do the same with the law.

[Sandpiper]

65. "Coerce"

Coerce - 1 : to restrain or dominate by force <religion in the past has tried to coerce the irreligious -- W. R. Inge>
2 : to compel to an act or choice
3 : to bring about by force or threat

(Merriam Webster's Dictionary)

Call me crazy, but that definition sounds an awful lot like what the Bishop is doing.

This Bishop is out promoting his own personal agenda, and is threatening to use his office in the church to advance it. If that isn't the case, why is only singling out those legislators who are pro choice? Why is he not threatening to withhold communion from those who support capital punishment. Could it be because OBispo is a rightie and is out to promote a rightie's agenda?

Continue to play the role of apologist if you like, but I don't understand it. This Bishop is just another corrupt priest trying to throw his weight around. People of his ilk have done more to impede the progress of the human race than just about any other group in history.

Anyhow, no one is going to change anyone's mind here, so I respectfully agree to disagree with you.

[Muddleoftheroad]

68. None of those

Coerce - 1 : to restrain or dominate by force <religion in the past has tried to coerce the irreligious -- W. R. Inge>
2 : to compel to an act or choice
3 : to bring about by force or threat

1. Just because Catholicism used force a couple hundred years ago, that threat is meaningless now.

2. The legislators are not compelled to do anything. They have the choice of free association.

3. See 1.

The bishop is not promoting a personal agenda, he's promoting Catholic belief that you don't like.

And, I'm not an apologist, a term the mods frown on btw. I simply see things differently than you.

[Sandpiper]

69. Hmmmm....

And, I'm not an apologist, a term the mods frown on btw.

A veiled threat of censorship?

[Muddleoftheroad]

70. I don't run things here

It was a polite suggestion that you refrain from using terms that can lead to post deletions.

[atreides1]

75. Faithful

I have no problem with the bishop expecting the faithful to obey the
teachings of the church, in my opinion the legislators have a choice to make.

In order to obey the church, they cannot represent the people. Not all of their constituents are Catholic, therefore if they are unable to represent all of the people that voted for them they should resign.

If they wish to represent the people, then perhaps they should find another church to attend. Faith is not faith in the church, for the church is man made, faith is one's faith in God and his son Jesus Christ. You can have faith in God without attending church.

Instead of talk about stripping the church of its tax exempt status, perhaps the Wisconsin Attorney General should investigate as to whether this meets the standards of extortion under Wisconsin law, if it does then perhaps a criminal charge against the bishop would be
a better way to approach this. After all at this point it's only one man who is technically trying to blackmail the Catholic legislators
of Wisconsin, to follow the dictates of the Catholic church or be denied communion.

[Muddleoftheroad]

81. That's not really true

How the legislators vote is up to them. Whichever way they vote will undoubtedly antagonize some voters. But either way, they still represent their whole constituency.

Why is it extortion to expect public members of a church to do what the church mandates?

Sure, go ahead and try prosecuting them. You will see African-Americans leaving this party faster than ANY other group. Most of us are both strongly religious AND strongly church going. Our churches are highly active politically and were a major factor in the civil rights marches.

[LiberalFighter]

57. Not as elected officials!!

If they were elected by the church members to attend a convention as a delegate where voting is taken then they could be required to follow the dictates.

But not when elected officials are to represent every constituent in their district.

What should happen is that legislation pertaining to religious views never be allowed to be introduced or passed.

[Muddleoftheroad]

59. Every elected official

They all base their opinions, their beliefs on their own personal history -- religion, upbringing, morality, etc. The politicians in question here have, in the past, expressed their opinions by staying members of the church.

They are not obligated to vote the way EVERY member of the district would vote. That is impossible. They vote the way THEY vote and the district chooses to elect them. Or not.

And, pretty much all legislation pertains to somebody's religious views.

[Gman]

62. You're missing the point of how politically motivated this is

because if the Church really was consistent, this bishop would make the very same decree for those that support the death penalty which the Church also opposes.

Absent any consistency on not only abortion versus the death penalty but other issues, the abortion issue is reduced to a pure political ploy by a man, not a representative of the Church.

From a Catholic.

[readmylips]

67. All Politics..Bishop must be like my priest...

who praises boosh and the success of the war. How a priest can praise the killing of innocent people, including our soldiers, is not God-like. But my priest is 300% republican. The Bishop in the story sounds like a boosh republican.

[PassingFair]

86. Then, we, the voters, have every right to expect...

a declaration of said faith, and whether said polititian wants to revive stoning and the burning of witches, as prescribed by their religious texts. Fair enough?

[sybylla]

39. Yea, they do

And I haven't seen any of these politicians having abortions.

If this bishop's decree applied to everyone in the church, it would be the same as saying that everyone who did not actively work to stop abortion should not receive communion. Why is Burke picking on legislators? Cause he's a big ole hypocrite trying to rally the faithful with a carrot.

[Muddleoftheroad]

40. Public displays

He is picking on people who are both obvious about their disagreements with the church and serve as potential role models for other church members.

[Sandpiper]

43. What you said...

And I haven't seen any of these politicians having abortions.

Reminds me of the saying:

"If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament."

As always, it seems that the most strident anti abortionists are those who have a penis.

[aquart]

35. Ask the dear bishop

If he's trying to insure a steady supply of altar boys to sodomize?

WHY does he want so many children under the control of Catholic priests?

Just for fun.

[LiberalFighter]

56. Could we get the Governor to make some decisions with the church.

The hours that their services could be held.
How many services they can conduct.
Video cams in the confessionals.
Require their buildings to be shared by other religious organizations like the Muslims or used for governmental purposes.
Open the church to any organization that whiches to use their facilities like Planned Parenthood.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

16. Progressive1 tells WI Bishop to stop protecting pediophiles or....

sink LIKE THE TITANIC!

:puke:

[CO Liberal]

18. Stories Like This......

...make me glad I left the church over 25 years ago.

[Mushroom]

19. a question

Does anyone know if Brown and Burke did anything to stop certain priests from terrorizing their catholic children/families and their religion? I guess I'm just trying to figure out what they DO care about.

[R Hickey]

20. This Biship also placed a twelve ton marble bingo-card in the Court House

You get alot of quirky stuff out of Northern Wisconsin this time of year. We go ice fishing alot, and sometimes get kind of...shack-wacky.

[damnraddem]

22. Pro-choice Catholics should tell the stupid Bishop:

"No more collection on Sunday until you stop trying to push the Church into the American state.

[Junkdrawer]

23. Reverse recruiting again I see...

More "recovering Catholics" for the fold. Well, no one can say Catholics are evangelical!

[Malva Zebrina]

26. How holy can that communion be?

It seems to me that the "body and blood of Jesus Christ" is being used as a club to beat and punish those who do not politically tow the line according to what the good Bishop thinks is the line.

This is the danger in all religion, imo. This guy was not elected by anyone. The church is NOT a democratic institution and he has the nerve to think he can bribe or threaten people into voting a certain way, against the law of the land, simply because he was an "appointed" person by the hierarchy of a church--which has a history of repression and brutal repression at that.

Women have always been feared by this church--and women's sexuality is particularly feared for some reason. It is not right and it is not moral or ethical for the church to interfere and threaten with punishment those who would , without an moment's hesitation, force the people of land to comply with it's own particular tenets.

[Solly Mack]

42. Solly Mack to Bishop: Get a Hobby!

Garden,knit, collect stamps...do something worthwhile...learn to skydive!...Just stop being some damned autocratic.

[Rockholm]

45. Sadly, they DO have a hobby...

It's called pedophilia. Amazing, these bishops can kick and scream about no communion for lawmakers who do "anti-catholic" legislative acts. But when it comes to the systematic raping and molesting of children for generations, they are SILENT.

[twilight]

44. oh bull ....

The Archdiocese where I used to live offers "post-abortion workshops". Why? Because many Catholic women have had them.

I don't fear this type of hyperbole!

As a Catholic, this does not keep me away from my Church.

As a baptized Catholic, you are forgiven for all of the sins in your lifetime. That includes abortion btw.

I really don't think its the Church's business what one does with their body - accidental and not wanted pregnancies DO happen and in some cases, the woman is sick and unable to have children.

So, I take this with a grain of salt and yes, I'll keep going to my Church!

:dem: :kick:

[Malva Zebrina]

46. I respect your faith in your church in spite of what it's hierophants tell

you.

As an atheist, I view this whole thing as another fascist attempt to contol by PUNISHIMENT.

We elect people in this country to represent us. We are varied in our beliefs, we do NOT or are NOT required to respect an unelected member of a church, such as a Bishop, simply because he, in his hubris, tells us or anyone, that HE must be OBEYED or else some dire PUNISHMENT is in store for those who would defy him!!

Egads--this is so transparent--how anyone can follow the lemmings over this cliff is beyond me.

I do not follow any lemming especially those who are appointed by a person who has himself been "appointed" by a hierarchy of supercilious, males who are so preposterous as to think they can control this country,this multi-cultural country that is for the people, you know the PEOPLE, not the CATHOLICS, and for their right to pursue their "happiness" as they live and work in this country.

Ugh--please someone, tell these hierophants that they do not OWN this country. Who does this bishop think he is anyhow? He is out of control.

[twilight]

47. he is consumed with arrogance!

If anyone needs to go to confession it is this idiot.

Enough said. :D

:dem: :kick:

[Sandpiper]

49. I'm not an atheist

But have been going to church long enough to realize that for most churches, their greatest motivating tool is fear. Oft times, it is their only motivating tool.

The church knows that they have no real power over the congregation, so, in order to get what they want, they usually have to resort to either:

"If you don't do ____________ God will be angry with you."

OR

"If you don't do what we say __________ will be withheld from you."

Any successful religion understands that the most dangerous person to them, is the one who realizes that the church has no real power over them. That's why most churches are so controlling.

[cap]

48. Ted Kennedy needs to receive Communion in WI

and let the bishop deny him.

[twilight]

51. Ted Kennedy and the rest of the lot ...

They are for the most part I'd say your TYPICAL Irish Catholics (only with lots of $$$)! Haven't known of any myself that were a whole lot different. I happen to be one myself and I am even married to one. Do we practice the "faith"?

Only to a point ... :D

and yes, you can always go to the Catholic Church no matter what being you were forgiven of all sins upon baptism. Convenient as hell IMO! :D

LOL!

:dem: :kick:

[mrsteve]

50. I am sick to death of the phrase "Pro Abortion"

No one in their right mind is "Pro Abortion", unless they have some elective surgery fetish.

Instead, the majority of people in this country (although a slim majority, according to non-biased polling) are "Pro-choice". To a greater or lesser degree, this means that they believe that an abortion, if personally considered necessary, should be medically available to women based on their choice.

Calling people "Pro Abortion" instead of "Pro Choice" is a cheap trick designed to emotionally polarize the argument. I'm damned sick of it.

[twilight]

52. this fool in Wisconsin ...

He seriously needs to GET A LIFE! Good gawd!

:dem: :kick:

[LiberalFighter]

76. He probably buys his sex up in that northern city in Wisconsin

[Mackay]

66. Why? I'm pro-abortion...

Especially when foetal tests show that the baby might be born to be 'freeper'. Think what a peaceful planet this would be without them.

They know that given the CHOICE no self-respecting mother would want a freeper baby... so they have to be anti-abortion to protect their own.

I wish I had a happy upbeat PRO-ABORTION song to sing in these people's faces because there is no talking to them anyway. After all the grand canyon was dug by prairie dogs just 1,000 years ago...

[ngGale]

72. "Pro Choice" cheap trick...

Agreed, cheap trick. Ditto!

[IndianaGreen]

71. Senator John F. Kennedy was asked what he would do if the Pope...

told him to impose Catholic theology on the country.

Kennedy said:

I am not the Catholic candidate for President. I am the Democratic Party's candidate for President, who happens also to be a Catholic.

Address of Senator John F. Kennedy to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association
September 12, 1960

But because I am a Catholic, and no Catholic has ever been elected President, the real issues in this campaign have been obscured -- perhaps deliberately, in some quarters less responsible than this. So it is apparently necessary for me to state once again -- not what kind of church I believe in, for that should be important only to me -- but what kind of America I believe in.

I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute -- where no Catholic prelate would tell the President (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishoners for whom to vote -- where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference -- and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the President who might appoint him or the people who might elect him.

I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish -- where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source -- where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials -- and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all.

For while this year it may be a Catholic against whom the finger of suspicion is pointed, in other years it has been, and may someday be again, a Jew -- or a Quaker -- or a Unitarian -- or a Baptist. It was Virginia's harassment of Baptist preachers, for example, that helped lead to Jefferson's statute of religious freedom. Today I may be the victim -- but tomorrow it may be you -- until the whole fabric of our harmonious society is ripped at a time of great national peril.

PBS: American Experience

[ElsewheresDaughter]

77. this is NOT legal...they cannot do this..it is between me and my God

and even though i choose for myself to not have an abortion...i can NOT choose for anyone else....and how can they tell me who, and what to vote for??? what i vote for is not theirs to choose for me!!! they are way out of line on this one!!!

...yet they can choose not to report a molesting priest? WTF???

[Muddleoftheroad]

80. It is entirely legal

They have every right to tell their followers what to believe and do. Since their followers are VOLUNTARY, there is no problem here.

As for molesting priests, so few people here seem to understand the concepts of confession or forgiveness that it isn't worth trying.

[tom_paine]

78. Sounds like religious zealotry is being mainstreamed in the Empire

Who would have guessed THAT would happen?

[Merlin]

79. Brings to mind the wisdom of Tom Lehrer: 2-4-6-8; time to excommunicate!

ARTIST: Tom Lehrer
TITLE: The Vatican Rag
Lyrics

First you get down on your knees
Fiddle with your rosaries
Bow your head with great respect
And genuflect, genuflect, genuflect

Do whatever steps you want if
You have cleared them with the Pontiff
Everybody say his own kyrie eleison
Doin' the Vatican Rag

Get in line in that processional
Step into that small confessional
There, the guy who's got religion'll
Tell you if your sin's original

If it is, try playin' it safer
Drink the wine and chew the wafer
Two, four, six, eight
Time to transubstantiate

So get down upon your knees
Fiddle with your rosaries
Bow your head with great respect
And genuflect, genuflect, genuflect

Make a cross on your abdomen
When in Rome do like a Roman
Ave Maria, gee it's good to see ya
Gettin' ecstatic an' sorta dramatic an'
Doin' the Vatican Rag

[MikeG]

87. I always thought Jesus would be pro-choice.

I guess he can't have communion either.

[apsuman]

88. As I put on my asbestos suit here...

I am sure that Jesus would want young women who found themselves pregnant completely unexpectedly to...

I can't do it. I can't finish it. No matter how much I tried I just could not finish the above line.

[san antonio]

90. Based on what?

"I always thought Jesus would be pro-choice."

What exactly are you basing that on? According to Bible stories about Jesus himself, children are humans before they are actually born.

I can understand your decision to be pro-choice but claiming that Jesus was would be pro-choice is a bit of a stretch.