Over at Alternet, David Morris wrote an article criticizing some American Catholic bishops politicization of the sacrament of eucharist. I've written on this before. I pointed out that although the Catholic Church's teaching on state-sponsored murder is that cases where the death penalty is necessary are "very rare, if not practically nonexistent" yet no pro-death penalty politician, to my knowledge, has been denied communion for that reason.
Morris wrote: Traditionally, Church leaders have left the decision to participate to the individual. As Cardinal William H. Keeler of Baltimore recently observed, "Catholics have a responsibility to examine their own conscience and see if they are in a state that is appropriate for the reception of the sacrament." Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of Washington, D.C. adds, "As a priest and bishop, I do not favor a confrontation at the altar rail with the Sacred Body of the Lord Jesus in my hand."
Those who favor a more active intervention argue that if the Church does not sanction violators it, in effect, condones their behavior. This undermines the integrity and moral authority of the Church. For them the question is not whether to sanction, but when and for what type of behavior.
He points out that in practice, such decisions seem to have a decidedly partisan aspect.
So far sanctions have been applied in a decidedly partisan manner. While Catholic Democratic Governor [James] McGreevey [of New Jersey] was sanctioned, in part for his support for abortions, Catholic Republican Governor Pataki of New York, who holds similar views on abortion, was not. Sacramento Bishop Wiegand chastised Catholic Democratic Governor Gray Davis for supporting abortion rights and recommended that he refrain from taking Communion. But he has issued no warning to Catholic Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who also supports abortion rights.
Though in fairness, Pataki's case may be related to the fact that the bishop of Albany, Howard Hubbard, is significantly less strident and confrontational than some other bishops. I do not believe he denied communion to Pataki's predecessor, the equally pro-abortion rights Democratic Gov. Mario Cuomo.
Morris notes that US bishops recognized the danger of such partisanship. In a join resolution, the bishops warned "the polarizing tendencies of election-year politics can lead to circumstances in which Catholic teaching and sacramental practice can be misused for political ends."
He points outs that The Pope has clearly and consistently spoken out against abortion. But as Reverend Reese has noted, in a private Mass in 2003, the Pope himself gave Communion to Tony Blair, a pro-abortion Episcopalian. [emphasis mine] U.S. Catholic bishops would be well-served if they were to emulate the example of the head of their Church.
1 comment:
Great posting. This shows how dangerous it is to pick one issue out of the ether and use it as a litmus test. The Church has a lot of positions that do not seem to be popular in Washington, e.g. opposition to the war in Iraq and the death penalty, economic and social justices, etc. but they have never been mentioned as criteria for the sacraments.
Post a Comment