China to Pope Francis: You’re not running things here, pal

posted at 9:21 am on March 15, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

George Weigel notes in his book Evangelical Catholicism that the popes of this era have more control over the episcopate than ever before.  Whereas entanglements with monarchies in the past limited the power of the Holy See to appoint bishops as it wished, the pontiff now selects bishops freely in every nation but two: China and Vietnam.  Yesterday, Beijing wasted no time in explaining to the newly-elected Pope Francis just who’s boss, either:

China congratulated Pope Francis on Thursday on his ascension to the papacy, but also warned the Vatican not to interfere in what China deems to be its internal affairs.

The reaction underscored the tensions between the Vatican and China’s government, which has been accused of suppressing Catholicism under Communist rule.

Hua Chunying, a Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, said that Beijing hoped the pope, who was elected on Wednesday, would work with Chinese officials on improving relations. But, she said, the Vatican “must stop interfering in China’s internal affairs, including in the name of religion.”

No sooner did China tell the Vatican not to interfere with its internal governance than it began dictating the Vatican’s relationships:

She also said the Vatican must sever diplomatic relations with Taiwan before ties with Beijing improve. China considers Taiwan a renegade province that is part of its territory.

The Vatican, however, has resisted cutting ties to Taiwan and wants China to give assurances on granting religious freedom to China’s Catholics.

I’d presume that the new Pope will take that advice with as much seriousness as his predecessors.  “Improving” ties with Beijing means, in this case, that they’ll be friendlier when they dictate episcopal choices to the Holy See.  Simply put, no matter how the Vatican treats Taiwan, China is not about to let the Catholic Church challenge the state religion of Communism above all things temporal and spiritual.

If the Vatican withdrew recognition from Taiwan, China would still insist on interference on episcopal appointments in order to ensure that bishops don’t challenge the political and economic status quo, especially in regard to their one-child policy.  The last thing Beijing would allow is a unified Catholic population of 12 million to start agitating about forced abortions and interference with God’s plan for marriage and family.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Please don’t bow to the Chinese, Francis.

bluegill on March 15, 2013 at 9:23 AM

Underground.

If protestant churches and groups in the West are aware of and involved in – to some degree – underground churches in China, then surely the Catholic church should be as well.

Keep the pressure on the Chinese government in various, small ways.

God’s laws are above man’s, and all Christians must be prepared for persecution. History has also shown that we thrive and grow under persecution.

Logus on March 15, 2013 at 9:28 AM

But, she Obama said, the Vatican “must stop interfering in China’s internal America’s health care affairs, including in the name of religion.”

The State über alles

rbj on March 15, 2013 at 9:28 AM

The only thing I find interesting about this story is the fact that a nation so oppressive that the RCC elevates its priests sub rosa would even bother congratulating the new Pope.

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2013 at 9:29 AM

Rome’s emperors tried to suppress it for a while. So did the Soviet Union….. yet something surely outlasted them.

viking01 on March 15, 2013 at 9:31 AM

Dear Pope Francis,

Congratulations on your new position.

You will provide abortifacients, contraceptives, and sterilization to your employees at no cost to them regardless of any moral or theological questions you may have.

Regards,

Kathleen Sabellius

Akzed on March 15, 2013 at 9:32 AM

Regards,

Kathleen Sabellius

Akzed on March 15, 2013 at 9:32 AM

Let’s remember that this whore still is eligible to recieve communion in the churches run by Pope Francis. Hopefully that will soon change but I doubt it.

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2013 at 9:37 AM

Logus on March 15, 2013 at 9:28 AM

Not all Cardinals were able to attend the Conclave. There are two “Catholic Churches” in China — one the Chinese National Catholic Church, and the other — well, let’s just say it had the name first.

Henry VIII’s method of dealing with the Church lives on.

unclesmrgol on March 15, 2013 at 9:41 AM

Let’s remember that this whore still is eligible to recieve communion in the churches run by Pope Francis. Hopefully that will soon change but I doubt it.

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2013 at 9:37 AM

That act is up to the Bishop of her Diocese, who appears to be incapable acting to confront her with her sins.

unclesmrgol on March 15, 2013 at 9:46 AM

Pope Francis to China: You’re not running things here, pal!

unclesmrgol on March 15, 2013 at 9:47 AM

The most import thing to remember about China is their best general is chicken, and damn does General Tso taste good.

Flange on March 15, 2013 at 9:55 AM

That act is up to the Bishop of her Diocese, who appears to be incapable acting to confront her with her sins.

unclesmrgol on March 15, 2013 at 9:46 AM

While I understand the need to delegate, I find this excuse a cop out designed to shelter “good Catholics” like Sebelius, Pelosi, and Biden (to name just three prominent members of the flock).

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2013 at 9:59 AM

The most import thing to remember about China is their best general is chicken, and damn does General Tso taste good.

Flange on March 15, 2013 at 9:55 AM

So what do they call Chinese food in China? Food?

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2013 at 10:00 AM

I heard once there were 100 million or so Chinese Christians.

Bishop on March 15, 2013 at 10:02 AM

Regards,

Kathleen Sabellius

Akzed on March 15, 2013 at 9:32 AM

Let’s remember that this whore still is eligible to recieve communion in the churches run by Pope Francis. Hopefully that will soon change but I doubt it.

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2013 at 9:37 AM

A whore might be the wrong semantics. A vile and corrupt, constitution arse wiping, soulless, power crazed, narcisistic,
lesbian might apply but she’s not a whore.

acyl72 on March 15, 2013 at 10:03 AM

So what do they call Chinese food in China? Food?

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2013 at 10:00 AM

Dogs and cats.

Bishop on March 15, 2013 at 10:07 AM

From the wayback machine, re: the homosexual priest scandal:

Us Catholics don’t defend it that way. The Church is even more in favor of separation of Church and State, especially given the tendency for tolitarian regimes like China to “embrace and extend” our religion.

As I’ve stated previously, it is an amazing thing for this Pope to subjugate his clergy to the state. While the US can be expected not to abuse that position, I worry about China…

unclesmrgol on April 14, 2010 at 10:25 PM

And I take it back about the US not abusing the situation. With the HHS Mandate, it certainly has.

unclesmrgol on March 15, 2013 at 10:08 AM

China to Pope Francis: You’re not running things here, pal

Marxism, which, let’s be honest, is the underlying foundation of
Chinese Communism, is an atheist political ideology. (No, this does not mean that all atheists are Marxists) As such, it seeks to place Marxism in the place of God in the minds and hearts of all whom it subjugates. Marxist will tolerate no divided loyalties in the hearts and minds of those it subjugates.

What we have seen with Obamacare is that exact same ideological mentality towards Catholicism/Christianity that the Chinese are displaying right here. A bellicose and threatening attitude whose purpose serves only to extend the promise of persecution and domination to those of faith. Obama and his cadre of Marxist have demonstrated a admiration for/of Maoist Communism, evidenced by their placing a Chairman Mao Christmas Ornament on the Whitehouse Christmas tree.

What could possibly be more antithetical and disrespectful of the spirit behind Christmas than a Chairman Mao Christmas Ornament? Marxism/Socialism/Communism have brought about the slaughter of nearly half a BILLION innocent human lives in the last 100 years. To call Marxism/Socialism/Communism the most demonically inspired political ideology in human history might seem hyperbolic, but the death toll it has rendered makes that accusation one of reality rather than hyperbole.

Since the inception of Marxism America has stood as a bulwark against this heinous political ideology for perhaps no other reason that America’s historic and infinitely profound Christian Heritage. Those who are Marxists are far more acutely aware of this than the vast majority of American Citizens. Those sick, twisted and perverse individuals have done everything they possibly could for nearly the last 100 years to obliterate that Christian foundation that is America’s historic tradition.

So yes, look carefully towards China and their response to the new Pope, their disdain is not feigned. It is the same disdain that Obama hold towards any and all of faith. What China does to it’s Catholic/Christian population is how Obama and company wish to see America treat it’s Catholic/Christian population. It is how the American Educational system is teaching your children to view Catholics/Christians. It is the future if we do not do something about it.

There is a way forward, if we dare to take it, if we have the nerve the strength and the perseverance. There is A Path Forward if we are courageous enough to take it. It will not be easy, nor will it happen overnight, it took the Marxists nearly 100 years to get where they are today, it will take time to undo all of the evil they have accomplished.

Many people have been indoctrinated to the extent that they do not see Marxism/Socialism/Communism as evil, or even particularly bad. They have been lied to, America’s Fifth Column Treasonous Media has been infiltrated by Marxists for 60 or 70 years with their propaganda and selective reporting of truth. How else could otherwise descent people of good conscience look at a political ideology that has murdered almost 500 million people in the last 100 years and not see it for the brutal and heinous evil that it really is?

SWalker on March 15, 2013 at 10:15 AM

I heard once there were 100 million or so Chinese Christians.

Bishop on March 15, 2013 at 10:02 AM

Their decades long persecution of same notwithstanding.

“How’s that working out, guys?”

CurtZHP on March 15, 2013 at 10:17 AM

A whore might be the wrong semantics. A vile and corrupt, constitution arse wiping, soulless, power crazed, narcisistic,
lesbian might apply but she’s not a whore.
acyl72 on March 15, 2013 at 10:03 AM

I disagree. For clarity, I don’t suggest the woman is out on some street corner selling her body. But she surely is a partisan whore.

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2013 at 10:18 AM

So what do they call Chinese food in China? Food?

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2013 at 10:00 AM

A tool for compliance.

Flange on March 15, 2013 at 10:24 AM

While I understand the need to delegate, I find this excuse a cop out designed to shelter “good Catholics” like Sebelius, Pelosi, and Biden (to name just three prominent members of the flock).

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2013 at 9:59 AM

It’s not delegation, nor is it an excuse. The Bishops themselves have traditional powers relative to their Diocese. “A Bishop is Pope in his own diocese.”

The Pope may excommunicate a Bishop, or even an Archbishop or Cardinal. It’s been done — in recent times. But within a Diocese, the Pope’s powers are somewhat limited.

I’m in favor of excommunicating Pelosi, Biden, etc. so that they may truly understand the harm they are doing to the Church and to their own souls, but, again, not my decision. If I were a Eucharistic Minister facing any of the signers of that letter, I’d be hard pressed to offer them the Host….

unclesmrgol on March 15, 2013 at 10:25 AM

SWalker on March 15, 2013 at 10:15 AM

+1000!

Cleombrotus on March 15, 2013 at 10:26 AM

Bishop on March 15, 2013 at 10:07 AM

Kinda gives the Kennel Club a whole new meaning doesn’t it?

viking01 on March 15, 2013 at 10:27 AM

SWalker on March 15, 2013 at 10:15 AM

Souls are such useless, clogging things — I’m betting the Chicoms are very happy they no longer have them.

Heh.

unclesmrgol on March 15, 2013 at 10:27 AM

A Jesuit Pope named Francis…

No wonder the Chinese Government is…ummmm…nervous.

Franciscans brought Christianity to China.

Jesuits were missionaries in China for 300 years and Tibetan revolts due to successful conversions to Christianity by Jesuits…

Catholic scholar John Witek, SJ appraises the situation of Western missionization in the development of Catholicism in China and its impact on Chinese Christians in later eras:

“Today there are villages in China that are very Christian. How and why is it that these people have rooted themselves despite the Cultural Revolution?” says Witek. Such endurance is evidence that Chinese Christians identified strongly with the teachings of Jesuit and other missionaries, and as such were not just passive subjects of Westernization.”

“On Their Own Terms: Father John Witek, S.J. Studies Jesuit Initiatives in China.” Georgetown University: Georgetown College Research News. October 27, 2008. Kara Burritt.

A Franciscan Blessed Gabriele Allegra, O.F.M translated the bible into Chinese completing a 40 year effort in 1968.

Catholics in China have grown from WWII 4 million to currently 12 Million Catholics, most of whom are not affiliated with the (CPA) and recognize Roman Authority…These underground Catholics love Christ and they love their Faith and their Priests,monks,nuns,Bishops & Cardinals…

workingclass artist on March 15, 2013 at 10:32 AM

So what do they call Chinese food in China? Food?

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2013 at 10:00 AM

A tool for compliance.

Flange on March 15, 2013 at 10:24 AM

Best response of the week!

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2013 at 10:34 AM

I’m in favor of excommunicating Pelosi, Biden, etc. so that they may truly understand the harm they are doing to the Church and to their own souls, but, again, not my decision. If I were a Eucharistic Minister facing any of the signers of that letter, I’d be hard pressed to offer them the Host….

unclesmrgol on March 15, 2013 at 10:25 AM

I understand what you are saying but I still consider it a failing of the church that these people are in communion with the Catholic faith.

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2013 at 10:36 AM

Cardinal Kung & Father Beda Chang SJ were incredible examples of inspiration for Catholics…Here’s their wiki entries.

” Cardinal Kung was the Roman Catholic bishop of Shanghai in China from 1950 until his death, spending 30 years in Chinese prisons for defying attempts by China’s Communist government to control Roman Catholics in the country through the state-established Catholic association.

On September 8, 1955, Bishop Kung, along with several hundred priests and church leaders, was arrested and imprisoned. He was sentenced five years later to life imprisonment.

Kung was secretly named a Cardinal (in pectore) in the consistory of 1979 by Pope John Paul II, while serving a life sentence for counter-revolutionary activities. After he was released in 1986, he was kept under house arrest until 1988. Until 1991, his membership in the College of Cardinals was kept secret, or in pectore; this is a formula that has been used when the pope wants to name a cardinal in a country where the Church is oppressed, to protect the safety of the cardinal and his congregation. Cardinal Kung himself did not know until he had a private meeting with the Pope in Vatican City in 1988; by then, he had passed the age limit for participating in a conclave.

He died in 2000, aged 98, from stomach cancer in Stamford, Connecticut. His funeral was held at St. John the Evangelist Church in Stamford with Cardinal James Francis Stafford, President of the Pontifical Council for the Laity, presiding. Cardinal Kung’s body was then transported to Star of the Sea Church in San Francisco, California, for a Low Mass and rosary service, with Cardinal Paul Shan Kuo-hsi of Taiwan presiding. A burial Pontifical High Mass using the Tridentine Liturgy in Latin was said the following day at Five Wounds Parish in San Jose, California, with Cardinal Shan again presiding. Cardinal Kung is interred next to Dominic Tang, S.J. (Archbishop of Canton, China) at Santa Clara Mission Cemetery in Santa Clara, California.”

Beda Chang, S.J. (Society of Jesus) was a Chinese Roman Catholic Jesuit priest and martyr. He was tortured to death during a wave of persecution by the communist government.

Because he refused to renounce his faith and to cooperate with the government in their persecution of the Church, Fr. Chang was arrested, imprisoned, tortured and then died. Rev. William Aedan McGrath, in the cell opposite Chang, reported that he saw the priest languishing and vomiting in the cell for two months before he died. Chinese Roman Catholics reacted with mass protests and turned out in great numbers for Father Chang’s requiem Mass.

After Father Chang’s death, the communist government issued a statement denouncing the prayers and Masses for Chang as a “new type of bacteria warfare by the imperialists – a counterrevolutionary mental bacteria.”

After the burial the faithful began to visit Fr. Chang’s grave, the police guarded the grave to prevent veneration, but reports of miracles accomplished through the intercession of Fr. Chang began to be reported.

The Chinese authorities later admonished Shanghai’s Roman Catholic Bishop Ignatius Kung Pin-Mei (himself later imprisoned for 30 years). Fr. Chang’s body was returned to the Church on November 12, 1951 and Shanghai’s Catholics began to venerate him as a martyr.

workingclass artist on March 15, 2013 at 10:45 AM

Let’s remember that this whore still is eligible to recieve communion in the churches run by Pope Francis. Hopefully that will soon change but I doubt it.

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2013 at 9:37 AM

As I posted yesterday in response to you on a thread, her bishop in Kansas asked her to refrain from presenting herself for communion. Additionally,
Archbishop Donald Wuerl of Washington maintained the pastoral request Kathleen Sebelius’ bishop made in 2007 asking her not to receive Communion.

She is not eligible to receive communion in the church. Stop saying she is.

Lily on March 15, 2013 at 10:47 AM

Evil soviet dictator Stalin once said: “How many tank divisions does the Pope have?”… He was totally dismissing the influence of the Chruch on the world… The evil soviet union does not exist anymore but the Chruch is still very much alive…

mnjg on March 15, 2013 at 10:51 AM

As Cardinal Bergoglio wrote that Holy Communion should be denied unrepentant Catholics who publicly speak,write and act in opposition to Church Teaching in particular facilitating abortion and euthanasia. This should apply especially to Catholic Politicians who legislate policies that contradict their faith and mislead/confuse other Catholics by mis-representing their faith in their political role as Catholics.

So…I guess we’ll see if Pope Francis will enact through the Bishops as Pontiff.

workingclass artist on March 15, 2013 at 10:55 AM

She is not eligible to receive communion in the church. Stop saying she is.

Lily on March 15, 2013 at 10:47 AM

Has she been excommunicated? Because if not, her being denied the Eucharist is pretty meaningless.

SWalker on March 15, 2013 at 10:55 AM

workingclass artist on March 15, 2013 at 10:32 AM

Thank you. Your post was very informative. Learn something new everyday!

marybel on March 15, 2013 at 11:01 AM

She is not eligible to receive communion in the church. Stop saying she is.

Lily on March 15, 2013 at 10:47 AM

Has she been excommunicated? Because if not, her being denied the Eucharist is pretty meaningless.

SWalker on March 15, 2013 at 10:55 AM

SWalker…You’re kidding right?

For a Catholic to be denied the Eucharist is a very big deal. It is a form of personal Interdict.

workingclass artist on March 15, 2013 at 11:04 AM

Has she been excommunicated? Because if not, her being denied the Eucharist is pretty meaningless.

SWalker on March 15, 2013 at 10:55 AM

Excommunicated means, denied the sacraments. It’s the ex in excommunicated. Kathleen Sebelius is not to present herself for communion by order of her bishop. The only way that can be lifted is by a different order of her bishop saying that she had repented, received absolution, and was now in communion with the church and able to receive the sacraments. She can still go to Mass. Anyone can, we don’t shun people. But she should not approach for the Eucharist, and because this is public knowledge, a Eucharistic Minister would be obliged to refuse to give her the sacrament.

It is a very big deal and not something that a bishop will do lightly. There were years of meetings, letters, etc. that were exchanged between her and her bishop before this step was taken. There are other politicians that may be eligible for this. I can certainly think of a few, but I am not a bishop and it is not my call. They may still be in “negotiations” with their bishop for all we know. Maybe their bishops still have hope they will repent and so do not cut them off. I don’t know.

Lily on March 15, 2013 at 11:08 AM

An interdict today has the effect of forbidding the person concerned to celebrate or receive any of the sacraments, including the Eucharist, or to celebrate the sacramentals. One who is under interdict is also forbidden to take any ministerial part (e.g., as a reader if a layperson or as a deacon or priest if a clergyman) in the celebration of the Eucharist or of any other ceremony of public worship.

Bishop René Henry Gracida of Corpus Christi, Texas interdicted a Roman Catholic politician in the late 20th century for supporting legal abortion; the unnamed individual died while under interdict.

workingclass artist on March 15, 2013 at 11:09 AM

It would depend on Canon Law whether Sebelius is under Personal Interdict by her Bishop…That another Bishop confirms the denial of the Eucharist suggests she could be under Personal Interdict.

This is a serious form of censure for a Catholic and although different than formal ex-communication has similar effect. Interdicts can be rehabilitative censure designed to reel the wayward Catholic toward reconciliation or they can be punitive.

Any Catholic might seek reconciliation of their error to get the Bishop to lift the Interdict, but they would have to follow the Bishops instructions as to formal penance or reparation.

If a Catholic died while under Interdict this would be grave indeed since in some cases other Catholics are forbidden to pray privately or publicly (All Souls Day Mass) for the soul of those under Interdict until the Interdict is lifted.

More on Interdicts at this link…
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08073a.htm

workingclass artist on March 15, 2013 at 11:25 AM

As I posted yesterday in response to you on a thread, her bishop in Kansas asked her to refrain from presenting herself for communion. Additionally,
Archbishop Donald Wuerl of Washington maintained the pastoral request Kathleen Sebelius’ bishop made in 2007 asking her not to receive Communion.

She is not eligible to receive communion in the church. Stop saying she is.

Lily on March 15, 2013 at 10:47 AM

I missed your response of yesterday but you contradict yourself. Essentially she can’t take communion in Kansas or DC. She could perfectly well take communion at a church in an area with a more accomodating bishop, right? This is utterly different than the RCC excommunicating the whore for her crimes against humanity.

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2013 at 11:28 AM

For a Catholic to be denied the Eucharist is a very big deal. It is a form of personal Interdict.

workingclass artist on March 15, 2013 at 11:04 AM

Yeah, I’m sure the whore is up at night in turmoil about the way the Catholic church is treating her.

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2013 at 11:31 AM

workingclass artist on March 15, 2013 at 11:04 AM
Lily on March 15, 2013 at 11:08 AM

With all due respect, while I am not a Catholic, that does not mean that I am ignorant of Catholic Dogma.

Denial of Communion

Archbishop Raymond L. Burke
In a recent article in America, a Jesuit magazine, Burke argued that the church law he cites to explain his intended denial of Communion to politicians who support abortion rights (Canon 915) is not part of the law code that treats “ecclesiastical sanctions,” or punishments, and therefore, could not possibly be called excommunication.

He points out that Canon 915 “requires that those who ‘obstinately’ persevere ‘in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion.’” Burke concedes in the article that the law code’s “ecclesiastical sanctions may involve exclusion from the reception of holy Communion.” But he notes that Canon 915 also “refers to an exclusion that is inherent in the nature itself of the sacrament of the holy Eucharist.” In other words, while the denial of Communion may appear to be driven by Burke’s reading of the law code, he maintains it is simply a natural extension of the rules associated with accepting the Eucharist in the first place.

Denial of Communion is “quite a distance from excommunication,” Burke said in an interview. “That’s why I make that distinction that (denial of Communion to a politician) is not part of the penal code of the church. Canon 915 deals with the state of someone who persists in an open, serious moral violation and so has gravely sinned. This means you can’t receive communion, but it is not saying you are excommunicated. It’s just saying you have broken, in a very serious way, your communion with God and with the church and therefore are not able to receive holy Communion.”

Excommunication is far more serious than being denied communion, it is a highly public rebuke of behavior considered under Church Canon to be utterly unacceptable and is considered by the Church to be a “medicinal penalty” intended to invite the person to change behavior or attitude, repent, and return to full communion.

SWalker on March 15, 2013 at 11:31 AM

The evil soviet union does not exist anymore but the Chruch is still very much alive…

mnjg on March 15, 2013 at 10:51 AM

But is it still growing? That’s a debatable point in many parts of the world. Have the numbers of practicing Catholics in Europe and the US gone up or not over the past few decades? I have a feeling the new Pope will reinvigorate the RCC in these areas but I would also suggest that the church has been coasting for a while when it comes to evangelizing (in the proper sense of that word) established territory.

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2013 at 11:35 AM

Excommunication is far more serious than being denied communion, it is a highly public rebuke of behavior considered under Church Canon to be utterly unacceptable and is considered by the Church to be a “medicinal penalty” intended to invite the person to change behavior or attitude, repent, and return to full communion.

SWalker on March 15, 2013 at 11:31 AM

And this isn’t appropriate when it comes to these politicans why?

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2013 at 11:36 AM

If a Catholic died while under Interdict this would be grave indeed since in some cases other Catholics are forbidden to pray privately or publicly (All Souls Day Mass) for the soul of those under Interdict until the Interdict is lifted.

More on Interdicts at this link…
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08073a.htm

workingclass artist on March 15, 2013 at 11:25 AM

Yes, as you say, this is a very big deal. And for her to be denied publicly is a bigger deal yet. The one instance of a regular person I know of being denied Eucharist, the bishop did not make it public. But told the person they should not present themselves for Eucharist. That person to this day does not. However, if he chose to disregard him and go anyway, the Eucharistic Minister might not know that. Perhaps if he had continued to go up, the bishop might have been forced to publicly humiliate her by publishing his excommunication status in the diocese, but they are not inclined to do that unless forced.

Lily on March 15, 2013 at 11:38 AM

DarkCurrent will be by, to defend the tyrants of China.

Seattle will be proud of him.

Schadenfreude on March 15, 2013 at 11:46 AM

SWalker on March 15, 2013 at 11:31 AM

And this isn’t appropriate when it comes to these politicans why?

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2013 at 11:36 AM

Precisely my point. My best guess, is “Money”. Or a lack of genuine moral courage on the part of their Bishops. There is absolutely no question that a public excommunication of a politician or highly connected bureaucrat could result in said politician or bureaucrat making the financial considerations of any Diocese or Bishop involved in said excommunication difficult.

What is important to understand regarding the difference between merely being denied communion and being excommunicated is, that excommunication functions as a “medicinal penalty” not just to the individual excommunicated, but to everyone who associates with that individual as well.

SWalker on March 15, 2013 at 11:47 AM

Denial of the Eucharist? Excommunication? Hey – why not go back to the good old days when the church was dominant and burn them at the stake….

callingallcomets on March 15, 2013 at 11:57 AM

Happy Nomad: I completely agree with you in that this is shameful to the Church, and creates a double whammy public affairs disaster for the Church. Those who should be among our strongest supporters in many ways (other Christians) basically see us as impotent as best, and hypocrites at worst, on this issue.

And yes, the ‘leave it up to the Bishop’ dodge is just that: a dodge. Since the bishops serve by the leave of the Magisterium.

I’m not sure if the Pope can directly publish the fact that these people are excommunicated. (That is a quibble. These people are heretics, and really, the excommunication is much more for the protection of others from them–basically a doctrinal Hazmat warning–than any real damage to the person excommunicated.)

Having said that, the Pope can certainly remove and replace Bishops until one that is willing to publish said excommunication is in place.

Considering that Pope Francis should have the entire Jesuit order behind him, I imagine he has a lot more manpower for this than, perhaps, Benedict did.

On another note, I would love for Pope Francis to address a joint session of Congress for the _express purpose_ of publishing the scroll of those people sitting in the room who have, by their own substantial efforts to legalize abortion, excommunicated themselves from the Church.

Scott H on March 15, 2013 at 12:02 PM

calling: Hopefully, these people can be redeemed. Death for them would be… very drastic.

Scott H on March 15, 2013 at 12:03 PM

DarkCurrent will be by, to defend the tyrants of China.

Seattle will be proud of him.

Schadenfreude on March 15, 2013 at 11:46 AM

LOL! No doubt!

AsianGirlInTights on March 15, 2013 at 12:07 PM

On another note, I would love for Pope Francis to address a joint session of Congress for the _express purpose_ of publishing the scroll of those people sitting in the room who have, by their own substantial efforts to legalize abortion, excommunicated themselves from the Church.

Scott H on March 15, 2013 at 12:02 PM

Indeed, likewise note those who support SSM and Pope Francis would go an amazing ways to proving that he has no intention of tolerating either heretical behavior within the Church or anything that might be perceived as hypocritical behavior on the part of the Church, which I might add would go a very long way towards addressing the “Sexual” scandals that are distressing the Catholic Church at present.

SWalker on March 15, 2013 at 12:08 PM

Every so often the Church gets oppressed, whether here, in China, in Eastern Europe, or even ancient Rome. It survived. It will survive this too.

Iblis on March 15, 2013 at 12:10 PM

SWalker: I am very Rand Paulish on the ideas of the federal govt interfering with marriage and how to handle it.

I certainly agree that any Catholic who actually supports federal recognition of SSM ‘has some ‘splainin’ to do’. ;p

To be honest, it is my personal belief that the Magisterium is so afraid of an American Catholic schism if they ‘play hardball’ that they are basically running away from the issue. Personally, I think this is a believable yet inadequate response, and shows a lack of faith.

Scott H on March 15, 2013 at 12:16 PM

Iblis: I would argue, particularly with the slightly OT thread we have going here, that the Church is not ‘oppressed’, per se, in the US these days. It is being coopted. This is a far more insidious and dangerous development.

Scott H on March 15, 2013 at 12:17 PM

Denial of the Eucharist? Excommunication? Hey – why not go back to the good old days when the church was dominant and burn them at the stake….

callingallcomets on March 15, 2013 at 11:57 AM

I get the feeling that certain commenters here would not be happy unless that happened.

The Church can’t please everyone. That’s why they don’t try. The lefties are convinced that the bishops are one step away from burning people as witches who don’t agree with them. The other religionists, like some on this post, think that only Ex-communication or even, perhaps a good old fashioned bonfire will show the world the Church is serious where politicians are concerned.

The fact that there are measures that are taken, doesn’t matter in the least to these people. The Church doesn’t take the measures they personally think are right, so it’s evil.

Whatever.

Lily on March 15, 2013 at 12:19 PM

With all due respect, while I am not a Catholic, that does not mean that I am ignorant of Catholic Dogma

Excommunication is far more serious than being denied communion, it is a highly public rebuke of behavior considered under Church Canon to be utterly unacceptable and is considered by the Church to be a “medicinal penalty” intended to invite the person to change behavior or attitude, repent, and return to full communion.

SWalker on March 15, 2013 at 11:31 AM

Interpreting the actions of a Bishop exercising his ecclesiastical authority is interesting but often the process of those actions unfolds over time.

There is a difference in Canon Law between Excommunication and Interdict. Excommunication is considered medicinal while Interdict (Local or Personal) can be either medicinal or punitive.

Denial of the Eucharist is serious for Catholics and is a humiliating public censure for a Catholic by the Bishop.

To belittle this is nonsensical.

If this censure is confirmed by another Bishop in another Dioceses it could be interpreted as proceeding toward a formal Personal Interdict which is grave indeed unless the offense by the Catholic undergoes formal reparation under the authority of the Bishop.

The form of penance is between censured Catholic and her Bishop.

workingclass artist on March 15, 2013 at 12:27 PM

Lily: Everyone is entitled to their own judgement of good and evil, no matter how incorrect that judgement is. :p

I will say, though, that it’s very hard to explain the exact requirements for excommunication, heresy, renunciation of Communion, etc., when there isn’t some VERY public explanation of it.

I am on your side about the whole Communion thing, because it is the only repetitive act of public sacrament in the Church. (Everything else is either one-off or private.)

The problem is _enforcement_. I have a great deal of sympathy for people who don’t believe the arguments that ‘there’s very little to do about it’. Again, go after the enablers who you have far more control over than the heretics–and incidentally, I use that term precisely.

Sure, you can’t prevent Sebelius, Biden, or Pelosi from going up to Communion. However, you can certainly institute harsh penalties for any clergy or laity who contravenes e.g., Sebelius’s public rebuke regarding the Eucharist.

As I believe you said, we don’t exclude people. But we do (or at least we should) make someone’s state of disagreement with the Church as clear as humanly possible, for both their edification and others’.

Scott H on March 15, 2013 at 12:29 PM

workingclass: I think the very fact that American Catholics do not see denial of the Eucharist as very serious is a far more alarming issue than the one under discussion. ;)

While the form of penance is more or less private, there are Magisterial requirements for penance and contrition. One is to stop doing what caused the problem in the first place, and as such it would be very hard for Sebelius to act as HHS Director and satisfy that requirement.

The issue is one of lack of seen enforcement of this denial. Whether the Magisterium cleans house in the USCCB until something is done about it or something else, this is an ongoing doctrinal scandal in the American Catholic Church that needs to be addressed, and very very soon.

Scott H on March 15, 2013 at 12:34 PM

For a Catholic to be denied the Eucharist is a very big deal. It is a form of personal Interdict.

workingclass artist on March 15, 2013 at 11:04 AM

Yeah, I’m sure the whore is up at night in turmoil about the way the Catholic church is treating her.

Happy Nomad on March 15, 2013 at 11:31 AM

This isn’t about how the church treats her…It’s about Hell.

Her Immortal Soul is in Jeopardy and she has been warned not to cause scandal in the Church at the Altar by expecting Holy Communion.
She compounds her sin sacrilegiously by doing so.

She has been publicly censured by her Bishop.

She continues to act against the teaching of her Church.

She is putting Pride before the Love of God and makes herself an enemy of The Church.

Other Catholics are aware of her censure by her Bishop.

There is a formal process to Censure actions in Ecclesiastical Authority and we don’t know where this case is except that the Bishop answered in an interview as to excommunication.

Hell is Real…And it’s forever.

workingclass artist on March 15, 2013 at 12:41 PM

Lily: Everyone is entitled to their own judgement of good and evil, no matter how incorrect that judgement is. :p

As I believe you said, we don’t exclude people. But we do (or at least we should) make someone’s state of disagreement with the Church as clear as humanly possible, for both their edification and others’.

Scott H on March 15, 2013 at 12:29 PM

Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinion of good and evil. But certain commenters, here today and yesterday are just here to bash the Church. Certainly their right, they don’t like it fine. To them, nothing the Church is going to say or do in this will matter. Whatever.

However, just because we do not know what the state of the negotiations are between a bishop and a particular politician is, doesn’t necessarily mean that the bishops are not taking this seriously. As a pastoral matter the bishop may think that it is better if the matter is attended to privately. In the case of Sebelius, two different bishops very publicly did not think it should be private. We should not rejoice to see this happen to anyone. It is a matter of sorrow that it came to this.

Will we see more of this with Pope Francis, who knows? But if we do, there will be some who will be happy the Church is “finally” taking a stand against politicians who flout Church teachings, and others who will be shrieking that it is the second coming of the Spanish Inquisition.

I don’t blame the leaders of the Church for not wanting to spook the more skittish sheep in their flock by making sudden moves.

Lily on March 15, 2013 at 12:46 PM

Sure, you can’t prevent Sebelius, Biden, or Pelosi from going up to Communion. However, you can certainly institute harsh penalties for any clergy or laity who contravenes e.g., Sebelius’s public rebuke regarding the Eucharist.

As I believe you said, we don’t exclude people. But we do (or at least we should) make someone’s state of disagreement with the Church as clear as humanly possible, for both their edification and others’.

Scott H on March 15, 2013 at 12:29 PM

Actually if she is placed under Formal Personal Interdict by her Bishop, the other Bishops would likely comply.

It would mean that she would have to go to a foreign country to receive the Eucharist because any Priest that gave it to her publicly or privately without the permission of the Bishop who exercised the Interdict risks excommunication.

If it were a formal Papal Interdict…This would be Universal.

The censured Catholic would have to seek remedy for reconciliation directly to the Bishop or the Pope if it’s a Papal Interdict.

workingclass artist on March 15, 2013 at 12:49 PM

workingclass artist on March 15, 2013 at 12:27 PM

Like I said, I am not ignorant of Catholic Dogma, Canon or Theology, having spent 5 years studying with a Jesuit kind of has that effect. What does seem evident here is that some of our Catholic friends are reading more into what I say, than is really there. I am under no illusions what excommunication entails, nor am I calling for anything remotely approaching burning people at the stake.

SWalker on March 15, 2013 at 12:49 PM

workingclass: You give an excellent summation of the true nature of this.

Lily: I don’t rejoice for Sebelius that she has been publicly rebuked for her heretical position by multiple Bishops. However, I do rejoice that the Bishops did so, as it helps other people see what the problem is.

And unfortunately, I must disagree you. I do blame the leaders of the Church if they are too worried (that is, afraid) of the consequences of standing up for the Faith that they don’t. We are required to be without fear in our defense of the Faith. That requirement is more stringent on the representatives of the Faith than on others.

This has gone far beyond a ‘private pastoral matter’. These people are heretics, in the precise sense of the term: they have stood up and used their public platform to say that they are right on a doctrinal issue (the sin of abortion) and that the Church is wrong. The Church _must_ respond to this, and they must do so publicly, because the attack on the Church was public.

The Church has a process for responding to this, and that process is excommunication. And yeah, they might be in the process of doing so. However, I would argue, as someone who studies and optimizes processes, that if it takes the Roman Catholic Church 5+ years to go through this process, that is a failing in Church administration that must be addressed and soon.

Enough is enough. I don’t want them burned at the stake, but we cannot tolerate heresy and maintain that we have the Truth.

Scott H on March 15, 2013 at 12:55 PM

Hell is Real…And it’s forever.

workingclass artist on March 15, 2013 at 12:41 PM

You miss a little but significant issue that I have raised here. It isn’t just her soul that is paced at risk. Remember, A little leaven leavens the whole loaf? The actions of high level bureaucrats and politicians have profound impacts on their communities, not just themselves.

SWalker on March 15, 2013 at 12:57 PM

workingclass: I think the very fact that American Catholics do not see denial of the Eucharist as very serious is a far more alarming issue than the one under discussion. ;)

While the form of penance is more or less private, there are Magisterial requirements for penance and contrition. One is to stop doing what caused the problem in the first place, and as such it would be very hard for Sebelius to act as HHS Director and satisfy that requirement.

The issue is one of lack of seen enforcement of this denial. Whether the Magisterium cleans house in the USCCB until something is done about it or something else, this is an ongoing doctrinal scandal in the American Catholic Church that needs to be addressed, and very very soon.

Scott H on March 15, 2013 at 12:34 PM

Pope Benedict XVI increased Ecclesiastical Authority for Bishops in Canon Law so they could exercise disciplinary actions in their dioceses to withstand public pressure. This is interpreted by many as ongoing preparation for what the church perceives as the threat of coercion and oppression by secular governments.

Pope Francis is likely to uphold the corrections in Canon Law and maybe even go further.

This will protect the Church (USCCB) in legal proceedings when Bishops exercise their authority with regards to correcting Institutions like charities,hospitals,schools that do not comply with Catholic Teaching…and would apply to individuals as well.

So American Catholics may be surprised…especially Catholic Politicians.

workingclass artist on March 15, 2013 at 12:59 PM

Enough is enough. I don’t want them burned at the stake, but we cannot tolerate heresy and maintain that we have the Truth.

Scott H on March 15, 2013 at 12:55 PM

Exactly… With excommunication comes the hope and prayers of repentance and reconciliation, not eternal damnation. But it’s purpose is not simply to admonish the individual being excommunicated, but to ensure that the entire congregation understands the serious nature of the offense committed.

SWalker on March 15, 2013 at 1:01 PM

SWalker: While I don’t dispute your knowledge of Catholic belief, and with all due respect to Pope Francis, citing a Jesuit as your source of information is not quite the evidentiary level you’re looking for, IMO. ;)

Now, if you said you had studied with a Dominican, I might take you a bit more seriously… ;)

workingclass: It doesn’t remove the scandal. I hear you, but it’s a huge issue. Too many priests, not to mention the laity, will ignore it. Yeah, they reach excommunication, but there is a public affairs issue, and people like Happy Nomad exemplify the issue.

People are using their reason on this issue and coming to the conclusion, rightly or wrongly, that the Church does not have the Truth, as it professes. Yes, Sebelius and any clerical enablers of hers get the external fault for it, but if that hardens someone into antagonism of the Faith, that does not serve God’s will, does it?

At what point is the concern of causing a backlash, or the fact that ‘they’ll get what’s coming to them eventually’ overwhelmed by the very real fact that they are leading people astray? I’m not saying that these aren’t both important aspects of the case. But many people, myself included, believe that that tipping point has been crossed.

Scott H on March 15, 2013 at 1:03 PM

The Church has a process for responding to this, and that process is excommunication. And yeah, they might be in the process of doing so. However, I would argue, as someone who studies and optimizes processes, that if it takes the Roman Catholic Church 5+ years to go through this process, that is a failing in Church administration that must be addressed and soon.

Enough is enough. I don’t want them burned at the stake, but we cannot tolerate heresy and maintain that we have the Truth.

Scott H on March 15, 2013 at 12:55 PM

You may very well be correct. It may be an administrative failing. If this is true and it is not a pastoral decision by the bishop, then things are very grave indeed.

In that case, Pope Francis has his work cut out for him, for sure. Because we are not the only country that is dealing with this. To some extent they all are and he will be swimming against a heavy tide. And, him with only part of one lung, too. :)

Lily on March 15, 2013 at 1:05 PM

workingclass: While I hear you on the ‘legal issue’, I’m not sure how it applies.

What standing does Canon law have in US politics? There are a couple of issues here, and it gets quite thorny. Some will mistakenly point out if we can’t have Sharia law, we also can’t have Canon law. (I believe the mistake is that Sharia law reaches far more into the secular field than Canon law, but hey, it’s a mess.)

I am supposing that you mean that if, for example, a Bishop denounces, say, Pelosi, and Pelosi loses her next election, and she decides to sue the Bishop for libel or whatever, the Bishop can cite Canon law as a way of giving a religious exemption to the charge?

That’s a bit dangerous ground, for one thing. For another, we’ve already seen with the HHS mandate that the government ignores religious beliefs (and this one is more blatant) when it suits their purposes.

I’m not sure that the strengthening of Canon Law will be quite the solution you think it is.

Scott H on March 15, 2013 at 1:09 PM

Lily: Pope Francis’s history shows promise on these points, and this is why I discuss it. While I don’t think he’s hearing anything he hasn’t already heard, I would like him to see that a significant part of the supposedly apathetic and ‘go along to get along’ American Catholic congregation is incensed over this, and expects action.

He will do what is best for the Church. What is frustrating is that we don’t see what’s going on, and so the appearance of inactivity is large.

On the other hand, perhaps this is an opportunity to grow in faith. It’s a failing of mine. :p

Scott H on March 15, 2013 at 1:13 PM

Hell is Real…And it’s forever.

workingclass artist on March 15, 2013 at 12:41 PM

You miss a little but significant issue that I have raised here. It isn’t just her soul that is paced at risk. Remember, A little leaven leavens the whole loaf? The actions of high level bureaucrats and politicians have profound impacts on their communities, not just themselves.

SWalker on March 15, 2013 at 12:57 PM

No I don’t miss what you’re saying…

She causes scandal (To Catholics & Her Church) and Grave harm to citizens (Undermining the Constitution) through her actions. I don’t discount this at all.

Nevertheless….No job is worth a persons immortal soul.

Christ said two very important things to the Church:

1. If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you. Remember the words I spoke to you: ‘No servant is greater than his master.’If they persecuted me, they will persecute you also. If they obeyed my teaching, they will obey yours also. They will treat you this way because of my name, for they do not know the One who sent me. (John 15:18-21)

2. Woe to you when all men speak well of you, for that is how their fathers treated the false prophets.(Luke 6:26)

St. Paul admonished Timothy to preach the Gospel, whether in season or out of season (2 Tim 4:2). Increasingly now it is out of season and the world hates us for what we say. But we can do no other, for if we are faithful, we must speak.

Pope Paul VI said it so well in the very in the “out of season” encyclical Humane Vitae:

It is to be anticipated that perhaps not everyone will easily accept this particular teaching. There is too much clamorous outcry against the voice of the Church, and this is intensified by modern means of communication. But it comes as no surprise to the Church that she, no less than her divine Founder, is destined to be a “sign of contradiction.” She does not, because of this, evade the duty imposed on her of proclaiming humbly but firmly the entire moral law, both natural and evangelical. Since the Church did not make either of these laws, she cannot be their arbiter—only their guardian and interpreter. It could never be right for her to declare lawful what is in fact unlawful, since that, by its very nature, is always opposed to the true good of man. (H.V. # 18)

http://blog.adw.org/2013/03/it-is-not-the-job-of-the-church-to-conform-to-modern-notions-for-jesus-was-called-a-sign-of-contradiction/

workingclass artist on March 15, 2013 at 1:18 PM

I’m not sure that the strengthening of Canon Law will be quite the solution you think it is.

Scott H on March 15, 2013 at 1:09 PM

I’m just following discussions of this in conservative catholic blogs…

It’s interesting to follow.

Sharia Law isn’t a fair comparison to Canon Law as there is no singular authority within Islam as Sharia Law is interpreted differently by sect and within countries.

Canon Law has a singular Papal Authority and is interpreted/administered by Bishops who are autonomous to a degree but still under the Authority of the Pope. This would apply especially to Institutions affiliated with Catholic Churches or Orders and Diocesan Institutions under the authority of the Bishops.

Canon Law would not ordinarily be in conflict with the US Constitution…unless the principles of that constitution were compromised, such as Religious Liberty.

Might be an indication that the USCCB will clarify the mess that has been going on in this country for 40+ years and be united doing that.

I guess we’ll see.

workingclass artist on March 15, 2013 at 1:34 PM

workingclass: I’m just saying that Canon has very little standing as a defense in the US ‘Justice’ system.

Unless you were referring to ecclesiastical law, and therefore ecclesiastical courts?

Scott H on March 15, 2013 at 1:50 PM

He will do what is best for the Church. What is frustrating is that we don’t see what’s going on, and so the appearance of inactivity is large.

On the other hand, perhaps this is an opportunity to grow in faith. It’s a failing of mine. :p

Scott H on March 15, 2013 at 1:13 PM

Mine too. I wish that God would grant me patience. Right NOW!

Lily on March 15, 2013 at 2:06 PM

Lily: I wish that God would just listen to me on certain issues, as I’m fairly sure I know what I’m talking about. ;)

Scott H on March 15, 2013 at 2:07 PM

“China is truly as liberal/great as the USA, if not better, on all things, including freedom of religion, not to speak culturally” — DarkCurrent

Schadenfreude on March 15, 2013 at 2:35 PM

Schadenfreude on March 15, 2013 at 2:35 PM

Have another doughnut

DarkCurrent on March 15, 2013 at 3:08 PM