Biden and the Catholic Sacraments

[Pastorbps]

I recently heard Senator Joe Biden is being forbidden the sacraments by one of the Catholic churches he attends while the other says they will not forbid the sacraments to him. The refusal is based upon his acceptance of abortion. What do you think? I know there are many differences between us and the Catholics but if you were in the priest's position, Would you refuse the sacraments to Biden based on his stand on abortion?

[free]

CoGoP used to refuse it to people who were divorced and remarried! Would that be a similar comparison?

[Paully_44]

I recently heard Senator Joe Biden is being forbidden the sacraments by one of the Catholic churches he attends while the other says they will not forbid the sacraments to him. The refusal is based upon his acceptance of abortion. What do you think? I know there are many differences between us and the Catholics but if you were in the priest's position, Would you refuse the sacraments to Biden based on his stand on abortion?

If it was me, and I was the priest, I'd be thankful he was in church and let him participate.

CoGoP used to refuse it to people who were divorced and remarried! Would that be a similar comparison?

thankfully, that was never done in the church I am at. I dont think the church/pastor should refuse a person from taking communion. After the Last Supper, where did Jesus put restrictions on who could and could not partake?

[crispfin]

I would not refuse the Eucharist to someone unless it was the official teaching of the church and I had to honor my vows of obedience. Otherwise, I am placing one sin as higher than the others, and I'm personally not competent to do so. It's kinda above my pay grade, so to speak.

[beckrl]

Sound like to me the Catholic churches has a Schism.

[oletimer]

free wrote:
CoGoP used to refuse it to people who were divorced and remarried! Would that be a similar comparison?


thankfully, that was never done in the church I am at. I dont think the church/pastor should refuse a person from taking communion. After the Last Supper, where did Jesus put restrictions on who could and could not partake?

_________________

Try this and read it close:

1Co 11:26
For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.
1Co 11:27
Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
1Co 11:28
But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
1Co 11:29
For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
1Co 11:30
For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.
1Co 11:31
For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.
1Co 11:32
But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.
1Co 11:33
Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another.
1Co 11:34
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.

True we don't know all sins and can never know all the sins that a person may have been guilty of, but God help us when we alloud someone we know to be in sin that take the Lord Supper unworthy knowing.

I believe that not only do we add to their condemnation, but bring our own self there also. My two cents.

[darylscook]

1Co 11:28
But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

True we don't know all sins and can never know all the sins that a person may have been guilty of, but God help us when we alloud someone we know to be in sin that take the Lord Supper unworthy knowing.

I believe that not only do we add to their condemnation, but bring our own self there also. My two cents.

Oletime

It seems Paul was telling the Corinthians and to us, to let a man examine himself and let him eat...

The bible tells us to let the partaker examine himself and let him eat. Not to forbid him to eat.

God Bless You
Daryl

[Pastor Gary]

1Co 11:28
But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

True we don't know all sins and can never know all the sins that a person may have been guilty of, but God help us when we alloud someone we know to be in sin that take the Lord Supper unworthy knowing.

I believe that not only do we add to their condemnation, but bring our own self there also. My two cents.

Oletime

It seems Paul was telling the Corinthians and to us, to let a man examine himself and let him eat...

The bible tells us to let the partaker examine himself and let him eat. Not to forbid him to eat.

God Bless You
Daryl

Yes -- I agree. It is not the church that has the responsibility to police eligibility. That passage seems to suggest that the burden is one of SELF-examination.

[RamboPreacher]

agreed on the introspective point. (so the protestant comparative would not be a good one, though analogically would remain similar)

on the sacraments, one would have to put on the mind of the RC to understand their justification or not of allowing or not the sacraments.

When a protestant uses the word, it is probably not the same definition in depth of theological understanding than when a RC priest says it.

I think that the priest should not allow him Eucharist (assuming that is the sacrament being discussed), unless he has had confession first (in that context), and appropriate penance.

[beckrl]

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

Who shall determine who is worthy or unworthily? the Church or the person

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

[Full Quiver]

Yes -- I agree. It is not the church that has the responsibility to police eligibility. That passage seems to suggest that the burden is one of SELF-examination.

Absolutely and AMEN!

Paul said they that eat unworthily bring damnation on THEMSELVES.

[Dr. Ron]

There are many denominations that have "closed communion". It is as scriptural as non- closed in my opinion.

This is something that is as sacred as we are allowed to do. It should be up to the concience of the minister as to whether he will administer it or not. We are responsible for the souls of man. Again, Holy Communion in the Catholic Church is far more important to them than to the majority of the protestants. Far more value is placed upon it. Right or wrong is not the issue....the right of the church to place those limitations is important.

I agree with the Catholic Church on this and applaud them for their stand. They have drawn the line in the sand......maybe we all need to take an example from that.

[paul]

posted my response in the doctrine section

[Tim Elston]

With that in mind, what does it mean "not discerning the Lord's body ?"

I came to think it meant the church itself, that the people involved were members of Christ together.

[Dr. Ron]

We still need to understand that Biden is catholic by choice and he understands what it's position is. He must realize that his "rebellion" against it is not going to be tolerated.

I have the right to refuse baptism, communion, marriage, or anything else I am not comfortable with. I would not baptize someone who was drunk...and I have had that situation come up before.

I would not perform a marriage in certain circumstances.....I have refused that before.

I would not give communion to someone who was drunk......

And so it goes......