Bishop Bans Rep. Kennedy from Communion

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

jamesrage

New Member
Apr 30, 2007
188
0
0
47
If only more churches did this. People should not be allowed to claim something they are not. If you are catholic then that means you are not supposed to support abortion. The I separate my beliefs from my professional life is cop out. If you claim to be a particular faith then your professional life should reflect that as well you do not put God aside when it become inconvenient. I think the Bishop is a brave man and hopefully he is not the only doing this. Politicians shouldn't be allowed to pretend to be of a particular faith without consequences. http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1942082,00.html(PROVIDENCE, R.I.) — Roman Catholic Bishop Thomas Tobin has banned Rep. Patrick Kennedy from receiving Communion, the central sacrament of the church, in Rhode Island because of the congressman's support for abortion rights, Kennedy said in a newspaper interview published Sunday.The decision by the outspoken prelate, reported on The Providence Journal's Web site, significantly escalates a bitter dispute between Tobin, an ultra orthodox bishop, and Kennedy, a son of the nation's most famous Roman Catholic family. "The bishop instructed me not to take Communion and said that he has instructed the diocesan priests not to give me Communion," Kennedy told the paper in an interview conducted Friday.
 

Moses

New Member
Oct 7, 2009
61
0
0
It's about time! I'm tired of any clergy that will not take a stand for or against what is right or wrong. The church has been silent for too long!Moses
 
K

kiwimac

Guest
And therein is the problem. You see Rep Kennedy was not elected to solely carry the voices of Catholics to the House. He was elected by all people in his electorate, Christian AND OTHERS. He is not there simply to represent a portion of his constituency but all of it that means the portion that disagrees with the RC church's take on matters of abortion as well as those who agree.The Church's actions make it clear that they do not believe that the good representative should, in fact, represent anyone who is not Catholic. This is a problem.
 

jamesrage

New Member
Apr 30, 2007
188
0
0
47
kiwimac;75294]And therein is the problem. You see Rep Kennedy was not elected to solely carry the voices of Catholics to the House. He was elected by all people in his electorate said:
The Church's actions make it clear that they do not believe that the good representative should, in fact, represent anyone who is not Catholic. This is a problem.
I think the catholic church's position is if you are going to claim to be a catholic then you should act like one instead of just claiming to be one. Christian churches should follow suit.
 

Moses

New Member
Oct 7, 2009
61
0
0
jamesrage;75295]Irrelevant said:
Boy there it is. The church needs to stand up. Our first responsibility is to God, not man. Kennedy answers to God not man. He needs to remember that. As we all do.Moses
 

Jimmy Engle

New Member
Jun 17, 2009
203
14
0
34
New York
This reminds me of what Paul Washer was saying about how they should kick most pastors out of there professions because out of cowardice or self preservation they will not preach the real Gospel.
 

Miss Hepburn

Well-Known Member
Oct 28, 2009
1,674
1,333
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
kiwimac;75294]And therein is the problem. You see Rep Kennedy was not elected to solely carry the voices of Catholics to the House. He was elected by all people in his electorate said:
I agree. Church and state issues. He must represent his constituency.Though I understand the Bishop's decision - I have never believed anyone should ever be denied the Sacrament of Holy Communion. Example - if one has not gone to Confession in how many days I can't remember they are not to receive Communion. What? They need Communion more than anyone!Another reason I do not follow doctrines made up in men's minds.Would Jesus Himself not break bread and drink wine representing His body and blood, if a sinner were at the table? I think not.Doctrines made up in the mind's of men -though good intentioned are still "made up"...and then change!Ooo, I might get flak for this. Oh well.
 

jamesrage

New Member
Apr 30, 2007
188
0
0
47
Miss Hepburn said:
I agree. Church and state issues. He must represent his constituency..[/COLOR]

Church and state issues are irrelevant. When you prescribe to a faith your faith always comes first then your job. His constituents knew that they were voting for a catholic and if Kennedy acted like a proper catholic and voted against pro-abortion bills then his constituents would have no one to blame but themselves. You to do not tell God to go screw himself just because you want the the votes of individuals who support somethings that your faith adamantly opposes.



Would Jesus Himself not break bread and drink wine representing His body and blood, if a sinner were at the table? I think not.
Doctrines made up in the mind's of men -though good intentioned are still "made up"...and then change!

I think there is a difference between a sinner and what Kennedy is doing. One is sinning and repenting those sins.Kennedy is trying literally legalize a particular sin and perhaps even getting people to pay for that sin to happen.
 

Miss Hepburn

Well-Known Member
Oct 28, 2009
1,674
1,333
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
jamesrage said:
Miss Hepburn said:
I agree. Church and state issues. He must represent his constituency..
Church and state issues are irrelevant. When you prescribe to a faith your faith always comes first then your job. His constituents knew that they were voting for a catholic and if Kennedy acted like a proper catholic and voted against pro-abortion bills then his constituents would have no one to blame but themselves. You to do not tell God to go screw himself just because you want the the votes of individuals who support somethings that your faith adamantly opposes.
Would Jesus Himself not break bread and drink wine representing His body and blood, if a sinner were at the table? I think not.
Doctrines made up in the mind's of men -though good intentioned are still "made up"...and then change!
I think there is a difference between a sinner and what Kennedy is doing. One is sinning and repenting those sins.Kennedy is trying literally legalize a particular sin and perhaps even getting people to pay for that sin to happen.
We'll have to agree to disagree on this one, jamesrage, sorry.

No matter who he is or what subject it is - death penalty, early release, abortion -if the elected official is gay or atheist or Catholic or Jew- it makes no difference as to their beliefs (for me) while in the job. I mean, of course, their beliefs will effect every aspect of their life... but, if he was elected to represent his people in his district, county or state - he is there to represent them. Period or he will never be elected again.

NOW, if he would like to influence his constituency and sway them to think as he does - well, that is another matter. Many politicians have announced that they must vote "their heart". I respect that, of course, who wouldn't. But, if your going to vote vegetarian in Texas - you will simply not get elected again. Your job is to represent the people that elected you. That is the job.


I'm fine with us looking at it differently - I hope you are, too.

And again, no one on earth has a right to withhold the the body of Christ. Holy Communion, imo. And why I do not practice Catholicism. Wanted to get that in again. Esp., since the "banning of Communion" is the topic.

Thanks,
Miss Hepburn
 

Nomad

Post Tenebras Lux
Aug 9, 2009
995
143
43
58
Philadelphia, PA.
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Miss Hepburn said:
And again, no one on earth has a right to withhold the the body of Christ. Holy Communion, imo.


Hello Miss Hepburn,

I'm afraid there are those who have that right. They're called "elders" or "presbyters." Their qualifications are found in 1 Tim. 3. Their task is to discipline those who are living in willful open sin. The highest form of discipline they can mete out is excommunication which effectively cuts the offender off from fellowship and sacraments until the time they repent.

Heb 13:17 Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you.

1Co 5:5 ...you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.

1Co 5:13 God judges those outside. "Purge the evil person from among you."

2Co 2:5 Now if anyone has caused pain, he has caused it not to me, but in some measure--not to put it too severely--to all of you.
2Co 2:6 For such a one, this punishment by the majority is enough...

1Ti 1:20 ...among whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme.

2Th 3:14 If anyone does not obey what we say in this letter, take note of that person, and have nothing to do with him, that he may be ashamed.

 

Miss Hepburn

Well-Known Member
Oct 28, 2009
1,674
1,333
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Hi Nomad. :)

Yes, I see what you mean - I am new and did not know about these verses. My point stands as to why I no longer subscribe to religiousity.
I don't believe Jesus would withhold His Sacred Body and Blood, as the Catholics see Holy Communion - for performing a job he was elected to do - not to represent God - but his constituents - sort of like giving to Caesar what is Caesar's (a stretch, I know). I know I may be wrong. And I know you all could show many many scriptures that might dispute what I think.

Perfect point:
1Co 5:13 God judges those outside. "Purge the evil person from among you."


That very same "evil person" - Mr. Kennedy is wanting Holy Communion. How "evil" could someone be, afterall.
He can do his own "ceremony" and eat bread and drink wine in remembrance of Him, if he wishes...according to Protestants. There is no ordaination or priesthood necessary, right? I've been told that many times.

I'm not sure -but, shouldn't he still be able to call himself Catholic doing his job?

Is my hole getting bigger and bigger? LOL!

:) Miss Hepburn

.
 

Nomad

Post Tenebras Lux
Aug 9, 2009
995
143
43
58
Philadelphia, PA.
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Miss Hepburn said:
[ He can do his own "ceremony" and eat bread and drink wine in remembrance of Him, if he wishes...according to Protestants. There is no ordaination or priesthood necessary, right? I've been told that many times.

Hello again Miss Hepburn,

If there are Protestants who believe that private self-administration is legitimate I would beg to differ. The Lord's Supper is to be eaten in the fellowship of other believers as instituted by Jesus. First century believers shared communion along with a fellowship meal as seen in 1 Cor. 11. There are no examples of private self-administration anywhere in the New Testament. It's always portrayed as a collective activity.

Beside this, if Sen. Kennedy were to do such a thing while under discipline he would in effect be breaking the command to submit to and obey those who have spiritual authority over him. It doesn't seem to me that God would honor Mr. Kennedy's sinful actions.

I understand what you're saying with regard to the Senator's constituents, but Christ made it clear that if one wants to follow him, love for him must far out-weigh love for anyone or anything else. I would dare say this includes any political office.

...and no, you're not digging yourself a hole. A discussion like this is a good thing. :)
 

Miss Hepburn

Well-Known Member
Oct 28, 2009
1,674
1,333
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Thank you Nomad, I always appreciate an unemotional, clear post.
:)

Maybe I should ask you to expound on "spiritual authority over" you.
How does someone, anyone have spiritual authority over me?
I'm a rebel, I guess, at least as far as religiosity is concerned!
I really just do not get it.
It's me and my Father as far as I'm concerned.
Sure, I have fellowship with others - but "authority"?
That's a mighty big word.

Seems that the Holy Spirit is the only authority. Or God the Creator of all.

How can somene, anyone have authority over my spirit, soul, mind, body. Not even a boss - I have the authority to quit the job ultimately.
See what I'm getting at?

Does someone have "spiritual authority over" you? And could you explain that?
Thanks alot.
 

Nomad

Post Tenebras Lux
Aug 9, 2009
995
143
43
58
Philadelphia, PA.
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Miss Hepburn said:
Maybe I should ask you to expound on "spiritual authority over" you.
How does someone, anyone have spiritual authority over me?

Well, this brings us back to the importance of being a part of a local congregation. God has gifted his Church with leaders who are responsible for your spiritual well-being. Those who meet the Biblical qualifications found in 1 Tim. 3, feel called to this work , and are ordained by the congregation they serve will give an account to God for their service.

Heb 13:17 Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.

1Ti 5:17 Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.



Miss Hepburn said:
Does someone have "spiritual authority over" you? And could you explain that?
Thanks alot.

In a local congregation leaders are accountable to each other. This is why the single pastor or "one man rule" model of Church government is not good nor is it Biblical. There's no accountability. Congregations that follow the Biblical model of Church government will have a plurality of elders and each one accountable to the others. So yes, as an elder I am under the spiritual oversight of my fellow elders.
 

jamesrage

New Member
Apr 30, 2007
188
0
0
47
Miss Hepburn said:
We'll have to agree to disagree on this one, jamesrage, sorry.

No matter who he is or what subject it is - death penalty, early release, abortion -if the elected official is gay or atheist or Catholic or Jew- it makes no difference as to their beliefs (for me) while in the job. I mean, of course, their beliefs will effect every aspect of their life... but, if he was elected to represent his people in his district, county or state - he is there to represent them. Period or he will never be elected again.


NOW, if he would like to influence his constituency and sway them to think as he does - well, that is another matter. Many politicians have announced that they must vote "their heart". I respect that, of course, who wouldn't. But, if your going to vote vegetarian in Texas - you will simply not get elected again. Your job is to represent the people that elected you. That is the job.

I'm fine with us looking at it differently - I hope you are, too.

You do not tell God to go screw himself for votes. If you are religious then that is supposed to have an effect on everything you do regardless if it is your private life or professional life. Being of a particular faith does not stop at the church or synagogue doors, you do not stop being a christian, catholic or jew just because you walk outside that church or synagogue. God does not matter only on the inside of a religious building he matters in all aspects of your life. Kennedy has no business being a catholic if he can not uphold his religious beliefs or he has no business being in politics if he will do something that blatantly contradicts his religious beliefs, he should not be a bad catholic for cheap votes. As for the vegetarian running for office in Texas no one would vote for him and if he did get elected he would not be expected to vote for laws that contradict his beliefs.


You are basically arguing that it is Okay for church member to work in porn because as long as he or she wants to keep his job then he or she has to engage in sexual acts for money, be a hitman because he or she has to kill people in order to his job or to work as a pimp because if he wants to keep his job then he has to basically keep women in sexual slavery. You will probably argue that none of those things are legal but religious wise neither is abortion.


And again, no one on earth has a right to withhold the the body of Christ. Holy Communion, imo. And why I do not practice Catholicism. Wanted to get that in again. Esp., since the "banning of Communion" is the topic.

Apparently the catholic religion says someone can ban people from communion so you are wrong and I am sure there are some Christians churches who also can ban certain individuals from communion as well.
 

Miss Hepburn

Well-Known Member
Oct 28, 2009
1,674
1,333
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
jamesrage,
You're funny -you don't know me - I'm not arguing at all about anything. Certainly anything about porn!!
I have an opinion - opinions are just that - whether right or wrong, for some or for all.
I am allowed to feel how I do. It is not right for you to feel my way - it's not right for me to feel your way.

There is the letter of the law and then there is the spirit of the law. People in power have imposed so many rules, doctrines, dogmas and regulations on mankind - I simply say - give me a break - enough - now who am I? No one. A rebel - an independent thinker or just someone that looks at things differently than you - so?
The Church and the Pope have the power in their religion. But they have no power over me.

Am I right? Are you right? I don't know.
I'm not arguing with anyone. I don't debate or argue - waste of time. I don't know if you are right and I don't know if I'm right.

Perhaps I shouldn't have posted an opinion. Next time I may re think it.

That's what I mean about agreeing to disagree.

Take care,
Miss Hepburn
 

forgivenWretch

New Member
Feb 10, 2008
324
10
0
65
Tennessee
The entire issue here as I see it is, it's not about religion folks, it's about God and the relationship that we have with him. Who cares if one is Catholic, Baptist, CoC, or what? Being so is not what saves us and makes us a Christian.
 

Miss Hepburn

Well-Known Member
Oct 28, 2009
1,674
1,333
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
forgivenWretch said:
The entire issue here as I see it is, it's not about religion folks, it's about God and the relationship that we have with him. Who cares if one is Catholic, Baptist, CoC, or what? Being so is not what saves us and makes us a Christian.
Ah. . . I like that. Yes..
 

Samuel Pickens

New Member
Feb 10, 2010
87
6
0
USA
It's about time! I'm tired of any clergy that will not take a stand for or against what is right or wrong. The church has been silent for too long! Moses

The Eucharist is wrong: they say they pray over the bread and wine and it becomes the actual body and blood of Christ and it is taken for the forgiveness of sins.

The infant baptism is wrong. Regenerative baptism is wrong. Abusing little boys is wrong.

Killing Christians is wrong. They should take a stand and come out and serve a living God if they are born again. And they would and will if they are born again.