A QUAND ENCORE UN NOUVEAU LYNCHAGE ORGANISE POUR SORTIR DE LEUR BOITE DES GENS QUI AURAIENT BESOIN D UNE BONNE LECON AYANT DÉPLUT A CE GROS CONNARD DE SI PEU PRESIDENT , MEUH ?
http://embruns.net/

i love it! between this, Mark Sanford's call for a more "ideologically pure" GOP, and the love for Sarah Palin, the GOP is on a collision course with becoming a permanent minority in this country.

more stories like this, please!

"Given that a majority of Catholic voters backed Obama on Election Day, one wonders why a church leader would take such an extreme position."

Do you really not know the answer to this question?

Barack Obama is the last living descendant of Mary Magdalen and Jesus; that's the real issue here.

One wonders why? Because all fundamentalists, regardless of faith or creed, are cut from the same cloth: total control. They assume the right to cram their own 'truths' down everyone else's throat, insist on the right to tell others how to live, and threaten exile from the tribe, or worse, for those who don't obey. Like George Bush's binary approach to every issue, loyalty is paramount, and he who is not with me is against me. They're all a sick lot. They deserve each other. Let them all be the great shrinking Rethug party.

i live in Modesto and can tell you that he has started a firestorm here. Many don't agree with him, but, unfortunately, many do. the letters to the editor in the local paper (modbee.com) are starting to flow in on both sides and it isn't pretty.

I don't remember priests cautioning against votes for Reagan who wasn't against the slaughter of nuns in Central America.

Confusion to our enemies. May Sarah divide Republicans and gain power in what will be a declining minority.

These folks see forcing pro-life positions down people's throat because they are personally held liable by God if they don't prevent it. Quite a burden their almighty places on them for others' actions. I hope they aren't right. It's hard enough keeping my OWN sins under wraps.

Just curious as I'[m not Catholic and never will be. If you confess, supposedly because you repent, isn't that a promise to avoid making the same mistake? Are you truly penitent if you voted pro-choice and realistically CAN avoid doing so ever again? Are there priests out there who remind you of this or is recidivist sinning no big deal?

Lastly, may I suggest those 54 percent put nothing in the collection plate when these guys mouth off about politics? I'm confident money talks, even in the chapel. Give that week's contribution to your favorite charity instead.

"Barack Obama is the last living descendant of Mary Magdalen and Jesus; that's the real issue here." Posted by: lampwick

How could he be the last Tsion? I thought he had siblings from both his parents?

The biggest problem the Catholic Church has is its refusal to allow Priests to marry. Because they don't, they get stuck with idiots like Newman and Illo, not to mention the child abusers for the sixties and seventies.

Why they don't let Priests marry, which is a Medieval innovation imposed by a monk Pope, and not a rule from the early church? Because married Priests cause property and inherietence issues and if there is anything the Vatican is, it is very possessive of its wealth.

Religious ideology is the last refuge...

...letters to the editor in the local paper are starting to flow in on both sides and it isn't pretty.

How could it be?
I've known pro-lifers who stated aloud they were willing to kill and die for their cause.

Quick! Get Amy Sullivan in here to concern troll us about how liberals need to accommodate religious extremists!

The official Roman Catholic Church policy is also to oppose capital punishment. Yet you never hear of Catholics being denied communion for voting for death penalty supporters.

If candidates who identify themselves as "pro-life" do nothing to end abortion, or minimize the number of abortions, how can the Church compel voting for these candidates as a moral imperative? Reagan, and both Bushes did nothing; the Republicans have done nothing. If the Church says you have to vote for conservative, pro-life Republicans, then they are endorsing the war in Iraq, in which thousands of innocents died, and continue to die.

Or is the Church telling people not to vote so there's no blood on their hands?

It's bullying, pure and simple, something the Church is good at. But American Catholics are going to do what they're going to do. I doubt many will bring this up at confession. In fact, most Catholics never do confession anymore.

because they are control freaks who want to turn back the clock to the thirteenth century.

JFK had to overcome the voters' fear of Catholics, which I never understood. Now I do. When a church, be it Catholice, Mormon, or Evangelical, commandeers the democratic process it's time to be afraid.

The priest's own bishop (not A bishop, but THE bishop, by the way) says Illo is in error, that Catholics can vote for candidates who have pro-choice positions as long as they are not voting for the pro-choice position. That is the position of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, which recently agreed to work with Obama on the pro-life positions he supports. And that nuance seems to conform with the position of the Pope.

A priest who contradicts his bishop is not likely to do himself any good, long-term, in the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Mind you, the Bishops' credibility in anything is nealy nil for at least a generation--until the memory of the last raped child is forgotten. The heirarchy that shielded their rapists, and then their enablers, is regarded with whole-hearted contempt in the pews.
Individual churchmen are respected, even revered, but the leadership has a taint that will never be forgotten or forgiven. You need only look at the shortfall of individual diocesan donations. See also how little is being donated to the Vatican.
As for Fr. Illo, he might want to start on counseling one-or two- child parents to start obeying the church's teaching on birth control---another grave sin--if he really want to see how Catholic his flock really is. He might also want to ask himself when was the last time a parent left him alone with a child.

I'd like to think this radical cleric would have to first acknowledge whether he considers pederasty to be a "mortal sin".

Matthew 7:3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

Why does the Catholic church still have non-profit status?

The heirarchy that shielded their rapists,...., is regarded with whole-hearted contempt in the pews.
Individual churchmen are respected, even revered, but the leadership has a taint that will never be forgotten or forgiven.

Substitute Congress and that statement is also true.

The priest's letter inartfully expressed the issue. If a parishioner voted for Obama solely or predominantly because of his pro-woman position, then confession is warranted. The bishop tried to make that point more clearly. Neither took an extremist position and Opus Dei didn't try to kill the Marovingian. That was Neo.

Catholics are more diverse than some here seem to believe. So, too, are their leaders.

Can't Catholics make their own Communion hosts? It's just flour and water.

One wonders why? Because all fundamentalists, regardless of faith or creed, are cut from the same cloth: total control.

To use the term "fundamentalist" to refer to Catholics obfuscates more than it explains. Fundamentalism is an ideology having to do with adherence to the literal word of the Bible. This is not a major feature of Catholic teaching, which has its own unique set of terrible beliefs quite different from fundamentalism.

Beyond that, I'll just say that I don't really understand the generalized Catholic bashing here - two priests go off the reservation to make this claim. They've clearly been repudiated by the hierarchy, and these seem to be pretty individualized instances. Blame these particular priests, sure, but I don't see how the Catholic Church as a whole deserves blame for this particular issue.

That the RCC has one iota of credibility left with critical thinking people is amazing. To condemn someone for how they vote has to be some sort of "sin." Anyone with a smattering of [new testament]biblical knowledge knows that the words of Jesus denounce those who judge and those who fail to honor their neighbors as themselves. Confession, in and of itself, has merit in that to confess with integrity is to ask for understanding and compassion, not condemnation and expulsion. There are many good points made above: ask parents of fewer than one or two children how they are avoiding more pregnancies; ask how the "Church" has dealt with the pedophile priests and the "victims" of said priests; ask about the condemnation of the death penalty, killing of civilians, including pregnant women and children, in time of war; ask what the definition of "just war" is and how this fits the current conflicts around the world; and so on.

Fundamentalism, in all of its forms, whether political, religious or secular, is so rigid as to prevent expansive thinking and the allowance of people to have their own opinions and grow in wisdom as they examine the consequences of their behaviors. None of us gets it right every time or the first time, but we have the power of self-examination and free will to change what doesn't work and replace it with what does. And, even that changes. Liberalism is a quality of flexibility that is ever in evolution. Even the Creation of the Universe by Whomever was incremental...over "7 days". According to the traditional stories in most religions and spiritual revelations, creation was and continues to be, a process. Humanity is the final step (I believe that we are still in creation mode), so far.

I would love to see the RCC respond directly to the priests who call for the denial of communion to their members for voting decisions. I cannot see them giving credence to those who condemn their members for the private and conscience-driven choices.

I am committed to Oneness through Justice and Transformation
peace,
st john

Jindal, GOP presidential nominee in 2012?

Clear it with Bill Kristol first.

Simple: they believe that the issues that are most important to the priestly caste are the most important issues for the nation. In other words, they are terrible advisers on political issues of any real import.

To be fair, the letter was probably not written by the Rev. Joseph Illo. It was probably written by his secretary, and he didn't have time to proofread it, because he was busy molesting children.

What about all the other moral issues that a candidate might be wrong on, like just war, torture, etc?

"Fundamentalism is an ideology having to do with adherence to the literal word of the Bible."

This idea always baffles me. So much of the Bible is allegorical and plainly metaphorical (not to mentioned translated and retranslated who knows how many times) that basing life decisions on a supposed "literal" interpretation is just ridiculous. It's like Hal Lindsey reading in Revelation about the Beast with 10 heads each one bearing a crown and saying "Of course! Obviously, this is referring to the first 10 members of the European Union!"

When people talk about biblical inerrantcy, what they really mean is that their own interpretation of the Bible is inerrant. In other words, it's not that the Bible is without error, it's that the reader is. Now that's blasphemy for you.

Thanks for the link to the Modesto Bee, Galen. Fascinating. They seem to love moral issues in Modesto, judging from the other headlines.

Village priests. They've always been a burden on Catholics. There are no real villages or village parishes to speak of, yet there are still village priests.

I would prefer to see Catholicism stripped of its riches. What is appalling as a large bureaucracy would be charming as a poor storefront operation.

Funny thing tho.... the Catholic Church seems to have no problem with candidates that preach violating various ten commandments such as, oh, I don't know, "thou shalt not kill" (bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran) for one? Rather selective preaching I would say. I wonder what the churches financial interest could be in the outcome of our elections?

hmmm, a Priest advancing the notion of guilt, shame, and rightous punishment in the Catholic Church...why does that not surprise me?

The catholic church has always been against divorce, yet I don't remember any priest saying it was a sin to vote for a divorced and remarried man (Reagan).

Lance,

not to mention the child abusers for the sixties and seventies

So, mass rape of little boys by Roman priests was limited to the 60s and 70s? Evidence for this astonishing claim, please.

I think John said it well in his response above. Two priests (of thousands) have gone off the reservation. They have been rebuked by their superiors. Why are they taken as representative of the Catholic Church as a whole? I'm disappointed both with the Catholic bashing and with the lack of clear thought. (And I note that I'm a Catholic who voted for, and donated to, Obama).

Why would these two do what they did? I don't know. People are funny and driven to their actions for a host of different reasons. Part could be that they aren't very bright. Priests vary in intelligence. Could be that they are tuned to a group that feeds them misinformation, a danger all of us should beware of. Could be that they see the fertilized egg as a human and are appalled at what they perceive as murder by the millions, and that has affected their ability to reason or to be objective. Why ask the question about why they did what they did? The key here is that they are two priests. And they've been rebuked. And they do not speak in ways consistent with the teaching of the Church. Please don't elevate "them" to mean the Church as a whole. Thanks.

How stupid. There are two videos out one by Senator McCain and one by his wife where they claimed they were not opposed to R v W but felt it should be left up to the states to decide not the federal government. Does that mean receiving communion if voting for them depends on what state you live in. This "priest" obviously hasn't studied the facts or he would know that the number of abortions decrease under dem presidents and increase under republican administrations, so he advocates for an administration where increased abortions will result.

Time to look to who is 'giving' communion to wash his hands rather than who is receiving it. If only there were someone to point out his ignorance to him rather than trying to cover his ass. Does he do the same with voting for war presidents? Such "priests" should not be allowed a pulpit without wearing their white hooded sheets.

Amazing how many comments have Catholic Church teachings and stances wrong.
The prior pope came out against the Iraq war, so J G is behind the times.

Bob, the settlement of abuse cases has stripped several parishes of their "riches" and a sizeable chunk of the Vatican's riches ended up hanging from a bridge in London.

the number of abortions decrease under dem presidents and increase under republican administrations,

Lastly, catholics are actually discouraged from reading the bible on their own because it is difficult to undertand. Biblical interpretation is a role of the priest. Jut one more thing the heretics get wrong.

This just in from the Modesto Bee, the priest recants:

Later, Illo sat down with The Bee to expand on his views.

"I affirm and support President-elect Obama and every good thing he will do for this country," he said. "He has the charisma of leadership, the gift of speech. We have hope that he will end this war and that he'll bring stability to our economy. He's a tremendously gifted man.

"We, as Catholics, pray (for) and support all of our elected leaders. And we believe that our elected officials will someday recognize the rights of all Americans, including those who are not yet born.

"I never condemned Barack Obama. But we must condemn a policy that eliminates the rights of a whole class of people. We are behind him in everything good, but we can't support him in this thing that is bad."

The Bee sent an e-mail to Obama's headquarters in Chicago requesting a response to Illo's letter, but the office was closed Sunday.

The offspring of Irish, Polish, Czech and Spanish immigrants, there was never a question of whether or not I would be raised a Catholic. I was born in the Vatican II era (the one that Mel Gibson's father found so offensive), one of the few moments in history when the church attempted to begin to understand the world in which it's parishoners existed ( a world much different than the one to be found within the confines of Vatican City). There were efforts at making the church-going experience of Catholics more meaningful, such as conducting sevices in a language they understood rather tahan one, like Latin, they didn't(as if Christ preferred to speak to his followers, who were, aside from the occasional scholar, scion of a wealthy family, tax collector and prostitute, mostly fishermen, farmers, shepherds, and servants, in the language of their Roman conquerer rather than their native Hebrew). There were folk masses, hippie priests, and at least one singing nun (who eventually married a hippie priest and opened a record store). There were dialogues with people of other faiths, including "field trips" to other churches and synagogues in the community. There were efforts to get parishoners, each in their own way, involved in the battle against the forces that threatened to push humanity to the brink, such as the ruthless exploitation of the world's resources, the impoverishment of much of it's population, and, most importantly, the fear, hatred, and disregard for life (exemplified by the cold and not so cold wars of the day)to be found in every corner of the world.

There were occasional attempts to instill in Catholics the church position on abortion, usually in the form a film or lecture on the development of the typical fetus. In my recollection, the churches' opposition to abortion did not begin to exhibit the features of a holy war until the early 1980's. No one I knew then or know now had or has a problem with speaking out against abortion. Like Obama said, I don't know anyone who is for abortion. I have a problem with the church's obsession with abortion, and candidate's positions on this issue, at the expense of all the other issues that imperil this planet and it's people. The devastation of the earth, the depletion of it's resources, the impoverishment of it's people, the unprecedented destructiveness of war, and the relentless quest for power and riches should also be issues that preoccupy the church. Shouldn't it matter that a candidate like George W. Bush executed more death-row inmates than any other elected offical in recent memory (on one occasion, showing complete contempt for their cries for mercy) or slaughtering a million (by some estimates) Iraqis on a whim? What about John McCain's willingness to continue the carnage indefinately? How would Jesus answer this question? If my priest asked me to apologize and don my sackcloth and ashes for voting for Obama, I would walk out of the church and, like the apostles of old, shake the dust from my sandels behind me. The danger the church faces in sowing the same seeds as the republican party is that it may, as the exhortation goes, reap the same whirlwind. That is, in the eyes of the people it is attempting to appeal to, seeming completely incapable of either recognizing or addressing the issues that they face.

Peace