Vatican gives communion to Pelosi, defying SF bishop who refused

[Hermit For Peace]

My two cents. I was brought up Catholic until I left home at age 18 and denounced that religion. The Catholic Religion told me that not going to church on Sunday was a "Mortal Sin." And if I remember correctly, it said that the other religions were false and that those people were going to hell. Catholics think they are superior to everyone else. Stuff like this is so corny.

Also, the main thing is about all those thousands of priests who sexually abused children....this religion does not have a moral leg to stand on. Why anyone wants to associate with it I don't know. It discriminates against women being in the clergy. It says it's anti abortion, but how many Catholics have had abortions and to how many of them is abortion an acceptable practice?

This church is full of false information and contradictions, and while I like the Pope -- he is a man of peace I believe -- I could never be part of that religion again.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I find it interesting that so many posters are suddenly committed papists when it benefits them to side with Pope Francis. I rather doubt that if the topic were female ordination they would stand with him in opposing it.

Welcome to Catholicism? Strut and grandstand when the Church agrees with you (or you can spin it to imply that), and just totally ignore it when it doesn't like it's no big deal at all.

     While I disagree a lot with trads, they do have an actual epistemology that goes deeper than "I want this to be true". The common lay understanding that "anything the pope says is the truth that Catholics have to accept" is more stereotype than reality. Fhtagn's position is backed by the magisterial tradition of the Roman Catholic Church and isn't just her disagreeing with the pope because she doesn't like what he's saying.

     I find it interesting that so many posters are suddenly committed papists when it benefits them to side with Pope Francis. I rather doubt that if the topic were female ordination they would stand with him in opposing it.

No one here is so-called committed Papists because they appreciate Francis not willing to play two sided hypocritical game of partisan politics unlike some of the Bishops here in America. It's the same concept that none of us particularly want Romney to be president just because he properly stood up to the Trump administration. Do better.

     Tell that to the people calling him the "Vicar of Christ" and saying he "sits on the throne of St. Peter". Those are terms that are far more significant than a mere statement of appreciation.

[jojoju1998]

In the view of some Catholics, the death penalty is seen as a justifiable act if the perpetrator is a threat to the common good. It’s not a intrinsic evil.

Well that’s a dumb view that’s at odds with current Catholic teaching on the death penalty. Also highly doubt any of the locked up Texas prisoners were still a “threat to the common good.” The death penalty is unjustifiable in part (but just one of many, many reasons) because it is no longer necessary to stop a threat once a perpetrator has been incapacitated. It’s pure bloodlust and vengeance at that point. Hardly “Christian” values, indeed Christ himself was a victim of the unjust death penalty!

In any case Abbott has actual blood on his hands as a governor who could have stopped those executions but actively refused. Pelosi does not. That is FAR more “intrinsically evil” by any sane standard as far as I’m concerned.

Yeah sure. In light of Modern American life; the death penalty is increasingly untenable.

Many of these catholics hold to a more Pre Vatican 2 understanding anyway; which has a very strict Thomistic viewpoint on Law and Ethics. Like Hardline Counter Reformation Era Theology. It imagines a more vengeful God, where, where the State and the Church were one and the same. And therefore the death penalty was admissable only because the church directed the state ( if that makes sense ).

My two cents. I was brought up Catholic until I left home at age 18 and denounced that religion. The Catholic Religion told me that not going to church on Sunday was a "Mortal Sin." And if I remember correctly, it said that the other religions were false and that those people were going to hell. Catholics think they are superior to everyone else. Stuff like this is so corny.

Also, the main thing is about all those thousands of priests who sexually abused children....this religion does not have a moral leg to stand on. Why anyone wants to associate with it I don't know. It discriminates against women being in the clergy. It says it's anti abortion, but how many Catholics have had abortions and to how many of them is abortion an acceptable practice?

This church is full of false information and contradictions, and while I like the Pope -- he is a man of peace I believe -- I could never be part of that religion again.

1.Women in the clergy is a theological practice and has nothing to do with the status of women in the Church. In fact; more and more women have been serving in key diocesan positions all over the US for the last 20 years or so; and it's been going up. As the number of Clergy goes down; lay People have taken up positions such as Chancellor, Theological Advisor, Professors, It doesn't take a collar, to have positions of responsibility and leadership.


2. Sexual abuse by Clergy is a huge problem. And should be cleaned out. And it has been in the process.

I just volunteered for Vacation Bible School at my church; and they made me do a fingerprint scan, background check, and all kinds of video watching.  Any New Seminarian in addition to the Fingerprint Scans, and Background checks also has psychological testing, interviews, essay writings. It's not like in the 1950s; where one can just become a priest like magic.

Pope Francis released a new set of laws allowing investigations of Bishops who either covered up sex abuse or who were accused themselves. It should be consitionsuly fixed of course.

3. Many Catholics are poorly cathechized and are cultural catholics. Meaning, they don't understand the fullness of what it actually means to be Pro Life; From Abortion, to the death penalty, Euthansia,

And also, Unions. Civil Rights. The Enviroment as well. Catholic Social Teaching 101.

And if I remember correctly, it said that the other religions were false and that those people were going to hell. Catholics think they are superior to everyone else. Stuff like this is so corny.

That is the interpretation of the Sedevancantists who reject the Second Vatican Council's teaching on religious Freedom.

[jojoju1998]

For anyone who's not a Catholic, the dividing Line is the Second Vatican Council and how things are interpretated from that council, because Vatican 2 changed alot of things.

People like Pope Francis, the Jesuit Order overall, tend be more in the " Liberal " camp. They interpret the council as " The spirit of the Council ". Change. Progressivism. Go with Society.

Pope Benedict used to be part of the first group; but grew disenchanted over the years with all the crazy culture wars, so he along with Henri DeLubac, and Balthasar created their own group. The Communio Group. Interpreting Vatican 2 in light of tradition, the scriptures, blah.

The Sedevanctists reject Vatican 2 entirely, because they see it as Anti Catholic, and they want the Hardilne Counter Reformation paradigm of defend the faith. Defend it.

Archbishop Cordelione would be more in between the Communio Group and the Sedevancantists. Because although; he sees Vatican 2 as an extension of tradition, scripture, he has more of the Sedevancatist defend the faith aura to him.

[Badger]

The Vicar of Christ (personally selected by the Holy Spirit for this role) not only says she should have Communion, but gives it to her himself. That's good enough for me.

If Francis truly believed that her public political position on legalized abortion left her outside communion of the church, presumably he wouldn't have granted her communion, would he?

Sorry, I'm going to take Francis's very clear gesture here as the definitive answer as to whether a pro-choice politician can remain in communion with the Church, notwithstanding your wishes to the contrary.

From the very same article in the OP:

While Francis presided over the Mass, he did not distribute Communion himself and Pelosi received the sacrament from one of the many priests who distributed it. From the time he was archbishop in Buenos Aires, Francis has rarely distributed Communion, precisely to prevent the sacrament from becoming politicized.

So he merely didn't stop having communion distributed in his presence. Yeah, totes backs up your claim.

More Catholic than the pope, exhibit B

Tell me you don't understand how a Catholic Mass works, without telling me you don't understand how a Catholic Mass works.

Born and raised catholic, confirmed, practiced till I was in my late teens, married as a catholic, and my mother taught Sunday school.

You've always been one to assume you know a lot more than you actually do, but this might be a good cue for you to drink a well deserved big glass of STFU juice.

[Badger]

The Vicar of Christ (personally selected by the Holy Spirit for this role) not only says she should have Communion, but gives it to her himself. That's good enough for me.

If Francis truly believed that her public political position on legalized abortion left her outside communion of the church, presumably he wouldn't have granted her communion, would he?

Sorry, I'm going to take Francis's very clear gesture here as the definitive answer as to whether a pro-choice politician can remain in communion with the Church, notwithstanding your wishes to the contrary.

From the very same article in the OP:

While Francis presided over the Mass, he did not distribute Communion himself and Pelosi received the sacrament from one of the many priests who distributed it. From the time he was archbishop in Buenos Aires, Francis has rarely distributed Communion, precisely to prevent the sacrament from becoming politicized.

Come on, you're reaching hard here. Obviously if God's personal representative on Earth didn't want her to have it, he would have made sure she didn't. Or at the very least would have issued a stern correction in the aftermath now that it's known she got it.

A Pope doesn’t control very single detail in a papal mass though.

There’s usually priests to do that for him. Like I said, it’s probably a random Italian priest who just happened to give Pelosi communion, I bet my 5 cents that the Italian priest has no idea who Pelosi is.

The Pope has bigger things to worry about than the speaker of the US House.

We like to think America matters. But we don’t. Especially in the eyes of Rome.

I highly doubt that that's the case.

It is the case, believe me. I have friends in the Seminary, at the American Roman College, and they will tell you, the one thing The Vatican loves more than anything is Administrative bull crap.

If the Pope plans a Mass, there’s usually the Papal Master of Ceremonies who orchestrates it all, and usually the Pope gives him free reign, because no one especially the pope wants to get bogged down in administrative and detailing. Any foreign dignitary has to get processed through the Vatican Secretary of State, and typically the Pope remains hands off.

Sure, they will say to the Pope that this person is coming, but that applies to… any high level official from any country, and the popes usually approve.



As for knowing who Pelosi is; we like to think everyone follows US news; but we're in a bubble; I don't think a Diocese of Rome Priest would be like " Oh. Pelosi, I should deny communion. ". I mean yeah sure, they might recognize her; but that's only it.

To add onto that, even if one from outside the US is familiar with who Pelosi is, that doesn't necessarily mean they'd immediately recognize her if they saw her in person.

Wow. Now you're stretching to claim that the pope was unaware that the speaker of the US House was at the mass. You are going to pull some serious muscles stretching like this.

[7,052,770]

My two cents. I was brought up Catholic until I left home at age 18 and denounced that religion. The Catholic Religion told me that not going to church on Sunday was a "Mortal Sin." And if I remember correctly, it said that the other religions were false and that those people were going to hell. Catholics think they are superior to everyone else. Stuff like this is so corny.

This is not correct. Catholics have a doctrine of "baptism by desire" which essentially states that non-Christians who are good people subconsciously want to be baptized and know Jesus, so they get to go to Heaven too. Pope Francis has even explicitly said that an atheist can go to Heaven in this manner.

[fhtagn]

The Vicar of Christ (personally selected by the Holy Spirit for this role) not only says she should have Communion, but gives it to her himself. That's good enough for me.

If Francis truly believed that her public political position on legalized abortion left her outside communion of the church, presumably he wouldn't have granted her communion, would he?

Sorry, I'm going to take Francis's very clear gesture here as the definitive answer as to whether a pro-choice politician can remain in communion with the Church, notwithstanding your wishes to the contrary.

From the very same article in the OP:

While Francis presided over the Mass, he did not distribute Communion himself and Pelosi received the sacrament from one of the many priests who distributed it. From the time he was archbishop in Buenos Aires, Francis has rarely distributed Communion, precisely to prevent the sacrament from becoming politicized.

So he merely didn't stop having communion distributed in his presence. Yeah, totes backs up your claim.

More Catholic than the pope, exhibit B

Tell me you don't understand how a Catholic Mass works, without telling me you don't understand how a Catholic Mass works.

Born and raised catholic, confirmed, practiced till I was in my late teens, married as a catholic, and my mother taught Sunday school.

You've always been one to assume you know a lot more than you actually do, but this might be a good cue for you to drink a well deserved big glass of STFU juice.

I'm aware how you were raised, but it's pretty clear you understood nothing and unfortunately probably found yourself as yet another example of what poor catechesis does to someone, as you should have been well aware that a priest can't just stop Mass to make an example of someone doing something wrong. It would be even more improper if he wasn't even the one distributing Communion. The Pope is no exception.

[jojoju1998]

The Vicar of Christ (personally selected by the Holy Spirit for this role) not only says she should have Communion, but gives it to her himself. That's good enough for me.

If Francis truly believed that her public political position on legalized abortion left her outside communion of the church, presumably he wouldn't have granted her communion, would he?

Sorry, I'm going to take Francis's very clear gesture here as the definitive answer as to whether a pro-choice politician can remain in communion with the Church, notwithstanding your wishes to the contrary.

From the very same article in the OP:

While Francis presided over the Mass, he did not distribute Communion himself and Pelosi received the sacrament from one of the many priests who distributed it. From the time he was archbishop in Buenos Aires, Francis has rarely distributed Communion, precisely to prevent the sacrament from becoming politicized.

Come on, you're reaching hard here. Obviously if God's personal representative on Earth didn't want her to have it, he would have made sure she didn't. Or at the very least would have issued a stern correction in the aftermath now that it's known she got it.

A Pope doesn’t control very single detail in a papal mass though.

There’s usually priests to do that for him. Like I said, it’s probably a random Italian priest who just happened to give Pelosi communion, I bet my 5 cents that the Italian priest has no idea who Pelosi is.

The Pope has bigger things to worry about than the speaker of the US House.

We like to think America matters. But we don’t. Especially in the eyes of Rome.

I highly doubt that that's the case.

It is the case, believe me. I have friends in the Seminary, at the American Roman College, and they will tell you, the one thing The Vatican loves more than anything is Administrative bull crap.

If the Pope plans a Mass, there’s usually the Papal Master of Ceremonies who orchestrates it all, and usually the Pope gives him free reign, because no one especially the pope wants to get bogged down in administrative and detailing. Any foreign dignitary has to get processed through the Vatican Secretary of State, and typically the Pope remains hands off.

Sure, they will say to the Pope that this person is coming, but that applies to… any high level official from any country, and the popes usually approve.



As for knowing who Pelosi is; we like to think everyone follows US news; but we're in a bubble; I don't think a Diocese of Rome Priest would be like " Oh. Pelosi, I should deny communion. ". I mean yeah sure, they might recognize her; but that's only it.

To add onto that, even if one from outside the US is familiar with who Pelosi is, that doesn't necessarily mean they'd immediately recognize her if they saw her in person.

Wow. Now you're stretching to claim that the pope was unaware that the speaker of the US House was at the mass. You are going to pull some serious muscles stretching like this.

Has anyone read my previous posts on this ?

[fhtagn]

The Vicar of Christ (personally selected by the Holy Spirit for this role) not only says she should have Communion, but gives it to her himself. That's good enough for me.

If Francis truly believed that her public political position on legalized abortion left her outside communion of the church, presumably he wouldn't have granted her communion, would he?

Sorry, I'm going to take Francis's very clear gesture here as the definitive answer as to whether a pro-choice politician can remain in communion with the Church, notwithstanding your wishes to the contrary.

From the very same article in the OP:

While Francis presided over the Mass, he did not distribute Communion himself and Pelosi received the sacrament from one of the many priests who distributed it. From the time he was archbishop in Buenos Aires, Francis has rarely distributed Communion, precisely to prevent the sacrament from becoming politicized.

Come on, you're reaching hard here. Obviously if God's personal representative on Earth didn't want her to have it, he would have made sure she didn't. Or at the very least would have issued a stern correction in the aftermath now that it's known she got it.

A Pope doesn’t control very single detail in a papal mass though.

There’s usually priests to do that for him. Like I said, it’s probably a random Italian priest who just happened to give Pelosi communion, I bet my 5 cents that the Italian priest has no idea who Pelosi is.

The Pope has bigger things to worry about than the speaker of the US House.

We like to think America matters. But we don’t. Especially in the eyes of Rome.

I highly doubt that that's the case.

It is the case, believe me. I have friends in the Seminary, at the American Roman College, and they will tell you, the one thing The Vatican loves more than anything is Administrative bull crap.

If the Pope plans a Mass, there’s usually the Papal Master of Ceremonies who orchestrates it all, and usually the Pope gives him free reign, because no one especially the pope wants to get bogged down in administrative and detailing. Any foreign dignitary has to get processed through the Vatican Secretary of State, and typically the Pope remains hands off.

Sure, they will say to the Pope that this person is coming, but that applies to… any high level official from any country, and the popes usually approve.



As for knowing who Pelosi is; we like to think everyone follows US news; but we're in a bubble; I don't think a Diocese of Rome Priest would be like " Oh. Pelosi, I should deny communion. ". I mean yeah sure, they might recognize her; but that's only it.

To add onto that, even if one from outside the US is familiar with who Pelosi is, that doesn't necessarily mean they'd immediately recognize her if they saw her in person.

Wow. Now you're stretching to claim that the pope was unaware that the speaker of the US House was at the mass. You are going to pull some serious muscles stretching like this.

Do you just not read, or are you intentionally ignoring an important part of this story? I'll highlight what I already addressed for you

From the very same article in the OP:

While Francis presided over the Mass, he did not distribute Communion himself and Pelosi received the sacrament from one of the many priests who distributed it. From the time he was archbishop in Buenos Aires, Francis has rarely distributed Communion, precisely to prevent the sacrament from becoming politicized.

[Blue3]

The Vicar of Christ (personally selected by the Holy Spirit for this role) not only says she should have Communion, but gives it to her himself. That's good enough for me.

If Francis truly believed that her public political position on legalized abortion left her outside communion of the church, presumably he wouldn't have granted her communion, would he?

Sorry, I'm going to take Francis's very clear gesture here as the definitive answer as to whether a pro-choice politician can remain in communion with the Church, notwithstanding your wishes to the contrary.

From the very same article in the OP:

While Francis presided over the Mass, he did not distribute Communion himself and Pelosi received the sacrament from one of the many priests who distributed it. From the time he was archbishop in Buenos Aires, Francis has rarely distributed Communion, precisely to prevent the sacrament from becoming politicized.

Come on, you're reaching hard here. Obviously if God's personal representative on Earth didn't want her to have it, he would have made sure she didn't. Or at the very least would have issued a stern correction in the aftermath now that it's known she got it.

A Pope doesn’t control very single detail in a papal mass though.

There’s usually priests to do that for him. Like I said, it’s probably a random Italian priest who just happened to give Pelosi communion, I bet my 5 cents that the Italian priest has no idea who Pelosi is.

The Pope has bigger things to worry about than the speaker of the US House.

We like to think America matters. But we don’t. Especially in the eyes of Rome.

I highly doubt that that's the case.

It is the case, believe me. I have friends in the Seminary, at the American Roman College, and they will tell you, the one thing The Vatican loves more than anything is Administrative bull crap.

If the Pope plans a Mass, there’s usually the Papal Master of Ceremonies who orchestrates it all, and usually the Pope gives him free reign, because no one especially the pope wants to get bogged down in administrative and detailing. Any foreign dignitary has to get processed through the Vatican Secretary of State, and typically the Pope remains hands off.

Sure, they will say to the Pope that this person is coming, but that applies to… any high level official from any country, and the popes usually approve.



As for knowing who Pelosi is; we like to think everyone follows US news; but we're in a bubble; I don't think a Diocese of Rome Priest would be like " Oh. Pelosi, I should deny communion. ". I mean yeah sure, they might recognize her; but that's only it.

To add onto that, even if one from outside the US is familiar with who Pelosi is, that doesn't necessarily mean they'd immediately recognize her if they saw her in person.

Wow. Now you're stretching to claim that the pope was unaware that the speaker of the US House was at the mass. You are going to pull some serious muscles stretching like this.

Do you just not read, or are you intentionally ignoring an important part of this story? I'll highlight what I already addressed for you

From the very same article in the OP:

While Francis presided over the Mass, he did not distribute Communion himself and Pelosi received the sacrament from one of the many priests who distributed it. From the time he was archbishop in Buenos Aires, Francis has rarely distributed Communion, precisely to prevent the sacrament from becoming politicized.

What exactly are you arguing?

[Hermit For Peace]

For anyone who's not a Catholic, the dividing Line is the Second Vatican Council and how things are interpretated from that council, because Vatican 2 changed alot of things.

People like Pope Francis, the Jesuit Order overall, tend be more in the " Liberal " camp. They interpret the council as " The spirit of the Council ". Change. Progressivism. Go with Society.

Pope Benedict used to be part of the first group; but grew disenchanted over the years with all the crazy culture wars, so he along with Henri DeLubac, and Balthasar created their own group. The Communio Group. Interpreting Vatican 2 in light of tradition, the scriptures, blah.

The Sedevanctists reject Vatican 2 entirely, because they see it as Anti Catholic, and they want the Hardilne Counter Reformation paradigm of defend the faith. Defend it.

Archbishop Cordelione would be more in between the Communio Group and the Sedevancantists. Because although; he sees Vatican 2 as an extension of tradition, scripture, he has more of the Sedevancatist defend the faith aura to him.

Pardon me but this just sounds like a bunch of words, coming from an elite group who think they walk on water. Nobody really cares but them. And my intention is to call it as I see it and experience it, and not try to be flippant about it.

The Catholic Church has so many problems that I don't know what. They need to work on their integrity.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

My two cents. I was brought up Catholic until I left home at age 18 and denounced that religion. The Catholic Religion told me that not going to church on Sunday was a "Mortal Sin." And if I remember correctly, it said that the other religions were false and that those people were going to hell. Catholics think they are superior to everyone else. Stuff like this is so corny.

Also, the main thing is about all those thousands of priests who sexually abused children....this religion does not have a moral leg to stand on. Why anyone wants to associate with it I don't know. It discriminates against women being in the clergy. It says it's anti abortion, but how many Catholics have had abortions and to how many of them is abortion an acceptable practice?

This church is full of false information and contradictions, and while I like the Pope -- he is a man of peace I believe -- I could never be part of that religion again.

I certainly don't agree with Hermit on much of her Worldview, but she's up front about it.  She acknowledges the Catholic Church for what it is and chooses to not be a part of it.  I respect that.
Nancy Pelosi disagrees with a number of its core doctrines, yet she remains a Catholic and insists that she's a "Good Catholic" while disagreeing (vocally and defiantly, to be sure) with a doctrine of the Catholic Church that is more fundamental than its doctrines on immigration, social welfare, and even the Death Penalty.  It's more fundamental, from a Catholic point of view, because it deals with the shedding of INNOCENT blood; the taking of INNOCENT life.  I could care less if she takes Communion or not; that's between her and God, but there are caveats to what Mommy Nancy is doing:

28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.

31 For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.

32 But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.

33 Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another.

34 And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come.

I would ask the reader this:  If I were running for office and I were running on a platform of being a Pro-Life opponent of the Death Penalty, advocating for M4A (or some other public healthcare option), repeal of Taft-Hartley, opposition to all COVID-19 vaccine mandates, support for school choice, and opposition to Trans Women (biological males) in women's sports, and supportive of sentencing reforms that would dial back minimum mandatories and excessive "enhancements" while denouncing BLM, would you consider me a "Good Democrat"?  Would you vote for me in the Democratic Primary?  Or am I not a "Good Democrat"?  If I were the Democratic nominee, would you vote for me against the Republican if you believed I'd be a long-term incumbent?  In other words, would you vote for me if I were as good a Democrat as Nancy Pelosi is a Catholic?  This is a political forum, so I don't know how better to put it.