Colorado Springs, CO (LifeNews.com) -- A Catholic bishop in Colorado says that any person who votes for politicians who back abortion, assisted suicide, euthanasia, or embryonic stem cell research should not receive communion until they have a change of heart and confess their voting.

The story is here.

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45-nospam@hotmail.com), May 14, 2004

Answers

bump

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45-nospam@hotmail.com), May 14, 2004.

Does this mean we can't vote for Bush, since he supported stem cell research?

-- (sincerely@wondering.?), May 14, 2004.

there is a significant difference between embriotic stem cell research and general stem cell research.

stem cell research for the creation of medical organ replacement (not human beings) involving sources such as donated stem cells from spinal columns, etc, is NOT against church instruction. general stem cell research can gain samples from a great number of sources.

embrionic stem cell research uses the vastly available source of stem cells by taking them from the spinal columns of aborted fetuses, making it murder in the name of science (a sick perversion of science, if you ask me). this is wholly UNacceptable.

-- paul h (dontsendmemail@notanaddress.com), May 14, 2004.

Why not just ban everyone from communion? I am sure almost every Catholic in the US does not agree with Church teaching on some level. So why not ban everyone?

Basically the Bishops are going to far. I don't believe that this is how the Bishops should be handeling this. I thought a bishop's job was to guide his sheep. This sounds like he is trying to beat the sheep with a stick to get them out the door.

I think that it is one thing for the Bishops to say that Catholics should not receive communion if they support these positions, however, I don't think the Bishops should deny communion.

Also, why haven't the Bishops come down hard on Bush for supporting the death penalty? Playing favorites it sounds like.

-- Scott (papasquat10@hotmail.com), May 14, 2004.

Scott,
Read this thread for an answer.

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45-nospam@hotmail.com), May 14, 2004.

Parishes should begin now to organize volunteers who would be responsible for scrutinizing the voter registration cards of all would-be communicants as they exit the pews for the communion line. Anyone whose card is not clearly marked "Republican" would then be forbidden from entering the line. Independents would be allowed to remain in their seats for the remainder of the Mass, and Democrats would be escorted from the premises immediately. This could be implemented in a tasteful way that would not directly involve the priest or EMs. If parishes started planning this now, it could be up and running smoothly prior to the coming election.

-- Bob Palmer (BobPalmer@brightideas.com), May 14, 2004.

Bob, This has nothing to do with being Republican, it has everything to do with the advocating of murdering of millions of innocent children.

In Christ, Bill

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45-nospam@hotmail.com), May 14, 2004.

I find it interesting that in virtually all Catholic churches across America there are people attending Mass who are divorced and remarried who do not receive communion. People accept this and would be rather horrified to one day see THESE folks get up en masse' and proceed to the front of the church and have the priest allow them to receive the Eucharist. Yet when one reads statistics which state that a significant number of practicing Catholics in America utilize artificial contraception, and that there are a large number of practicing Catholics in America who support "pro-choice" one HAS to wonder how many OTHER folks OUGHT to be staying in their seats during communion, and isn't it the responsibility of the Bishops to wake them up to that fact for the good of their souls, not to mention the good of the Church? When the Bishops say nothing, what are these folks supposed to think? That it's OK to support pro- choice? That it's OK to use artificial contraception? That it's ALL Ok as long as you can sleep at night? No, it's not "all good". It is the responsibility of the Bishops to act as shepherds of the flock. Good shepherds do not allow the sheep to wander hither and yon making up their own minds which is the safest way home. It's been way overdue, IMHO, since folks have had some solid no-nonsense leadership in this part of the world. It's time for the term "cafeteria catholics" to become obsolete.

-- lesley (martchas@hotmail.com), May 14, 2004.

Does this mean we can't vote for Bush, since he supported stem cell research?

Yes, in Colorado the only non-sinful vote possible is for Joe Schriner. (Or you can abstain.) If all the bishops in the U.S. had the guts of Bishop Sheridan, then Joe Schriner would be the next president!

-- Mark (aujus_1066@yahoo.com), May 14, 2004.

Mark, here comes another. Give it your best.

I live in Pennsylvania. Watchout for the curve. I really have no answers.

God Bless!

-- Vincent (love@noemail.net), May 15, 2004.

Basically Catholics can't vote. It is our civic responsibility, even according to the Church, to vote but the Church is telling us that we can't. What is a Catholic to do?

-- Scott (papasquat10@hotmail.com), May 15, 2004.

Bill,

Your thread wasn't much of a help. I don't think Kerry is right and that he should be let off for his beliefs. However, I think that the Bishops are handleing this all wrong. They are getting too much into the political side of things instead of emphasizing the pastoral.

Also this also might look different if the U.S. Bishops emphasized these things all the time, but they don't. They only emphasize these things around election time.

One last things is, why do the Bishops think that they have the ability to talk about this stuff now when they are not being fully compliant with their policy to cooperate with the Lay Council of Review? Seems very hypocritical to me.

Remember: PASTORAL, NOT ELECTORAL.

-- Scott (papasquat10@hotmail.com), May 15, 2004.

Basically Catholics can't vote. It is our civic responsibility, even according to the Church, to vote but the Church is telling us that we can't. What is a Catholic to do? Joe Schriner is the best candidate for president, in addition to being the only acceptable candidate that I am aware of. The Church is telling you that he is the kind of person who should be president, and that faithful Catholics should cast their vote for good instead of engaging in debates as to whether Bush or Kerry is the lesser of two evils. Seriously, if all Catholic voters listened to Bishop Sheridan, then Joe Schriner would actually win.

http://www.voteforjoe.com

-- Mark (aujus_1066@yahoo.com), May 15, 2004.

A vote for Joe is a vote for John Kerry.

-bill

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45-nospam@hotmail.com), May 15, 2004.

But of course for Bill a vote for anyone besides Bush is a vote for Kerry.

-- Scott (papasquat10@hotmail.com), May 15, 2004.

A vote for Kerry is a sin. A vote for Bush is a sin. Abstaining is throwing your vote away.

Thus all Catholics should vote for Joe Schnider. With the magisterium finally getting on board, Joe might just get enough of the vote so that faithful Catholics would have a real influence in U.S. politics.

-- Mark (aujus_1066@yahoo.com), May 15, 2004.

Mark,
You are incorrect that a vote for Bush is a sin. However voting for someone who is as solidly pro the 5 non-negotiables as Kerry might be (I don't know). A vote for Joe is a vote for Kerry.

As I mentioned before a Catholic must work hard to defeat someone like Kerry because of his positions on the 5 non-negotiables.

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45-nospam@hotmail.com), May 15, 2004.

You are incorrect that a vote for Bush is a sin. In the diocese of Colorado Springs, it most definitely is. And to the extent that Bishop Sheridan's statement reflects the true teachings of the universal Church, it is a sin everywhere.

However voting for someone who is as solidly pro the 5 non- negotiables as Kerry might be (I don't know). I'm going to place my faith in our bishops, and believe Bishop Sheridan on this matter. I certainly don't claim to know of my own accord.

A vote for Joe is a vote for Kerry. Assuming Florida gets this butterfly ballot thing fixed, a vote for Joe is actually a vote for Joe. A vote for either Kerry or Bush is a vote against the magisterium, and places your mortal soul in jeopardy (certainly in Colorado, probably elsewhere as well). Can any vendetta against Kerry possibly be worth that price?

-- Mark (aujus_1066@yahoo.com), May 15, 2004.