| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Priests Should Refuse Communion to Kerry, Leading Catholic Says |
| 2004-04-01 |
| EFL Sen. John Kerry’s defiance of his Church’s condemnation of abortion and approval of gay marriage is not only a problem for him and Catholic bishops, but for individual Catholics as well, according to a leading Catholic layman and editor. He says Catholic priests should refuse to give Holy Communion to Kerry even if their bishops have not specifically warned the senator that he is not to receive Communion. That demand of excommunication for Kerry is made by Deal Hudson, editor of Crisis magazine, the nation’s leading intellectual Catholic journal. In an exclusive interview with NewsMax.com, Hudson said that the matter of individual bishops ordering Kerry to refrain from receiving the Eucharist when in their dioceses - in other words, excommunicating him - was between Kerry and America’s individual bishops, including his own. "It’s in the hands of his ordinary [bishop] - and when his ordinary has spoken and said that politicians should refrain from communion, he’s alluding to the fact that someone like Sen. Kerry should not consider themselves part of the Catholic community." The issue will arise as Kerry campaigns around the nation and continues to insist on publicly receiving communion under the watchful eyes of the media. As a result, Hudson said, some bishops will have to face the issue head-on. Hudson left no doubt that in the absence of action by their bishops, individual Catholic priests should still turn Kerry away from Communion. "Absolutely, they should," he said. St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke has specifically warned Kerry to avoid receiving communion when visiting his archdiocese. In Kerry’s home archdiocese, without mentioning him by name, Boston Archbishop Sean O’Malley has said that Catholic politicians who do not vote in line with Church teachings "shouldn’t dare come to Communion." Guess he wont be attending mass in those places... Commenting on Archbishop Burke’s instruction to Kerry, Hudson noted that Kerry avoided the confrontation by visiting a black Baptist Church when he was there recently. And we thought he was visiting his homies.... I’m so disappointed :^( "My view that this is a huge decisive moment for Catholics in the United States. I hope they will rise to the challenge and refuse to endorse another Catholic politician who is pretending to be a Catholic while rejecting the Church’s central moral and social teachings. As NewsMax.com has reported in Vatican Worries About Kerry, the Rev. Thomas Reese, editor of the Jesuit magazine America, is quoted in Time magazine as saying, "All you need is a picture of Kerry going up to the Communion rail and being denied, and you’ve got a story that’ll last for weeks." But Hudson told NewsMax.com he doubted that will happen. "They [Kerry’s staff] are checking it very carefully, everywhere he goes to Mass. Time on Monday quoted a Vatican official, who is American, as saying: "People in Rome are becoming more and more aware that there’s a problem with John Kerry, and a potential scandal with his apparent profession of his Catholic faith and some of his stances, particularly abortion." But of course they won’t actually do anything about it. Kerry, who likes to think of himself as JFK, has said: "We have a separation of church and state in this country. As John Kennedy said very clearly, I will be a president who happens to be You misspelled ’Pretending’ again John..... He insists he will continue to attend Mass and take Communion. Unless he would be refused then he’ll pretend he is part of a black church..... Only last week, Kerry, in a rare episode of showing up for work, was among the minority of senators voting against the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, which, when President Bush signs it, will finally make it a crime to harm or kill an unborn child, abortions excluded. Proof that John Kerry is a liar.... |
| Posted by:CrazyFool |
| #5 One more valuable excerpt from Catholic Doctrine that specifically hurts Kerry's claims to be a "practicing Catholic in good standing": When political activity comes up against moral principles that do not admit of exception, compromise or derogation, the Catholic commitment becomes more evident and laden with responsibility. ... This is the case with laws concerning abortion and euthanasia (not to be confused with the decision to forgo extraordinary treatments, which is morally legitimate). Such laws must defend the basic right to life from conception to natural death. In the same way, it is necessary to recall the duty to respect and protect the rights of the human embryo. Analogously, the family needs to be safeguarded and promoted, based on monogamous marriage between a man and a woman, and protected in its unity and stability in the face of modern laws Makes you wonder which "Catholic" Church he claims to be a part of. Certainly not the one with the Pope in Rome. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2004-04-01 7:54:25 PM |
| #4 Well, I've been approached to see if I am interested in starting as another "volunteer" in service - 5 years training, then life long service. Pay sucks but the fringe benefits are great. The permanent Diaconate. I'm leaning toward yes. To the best of my knowledge, to stay in good standing and be eligible for communion, you have to have penance at least once a year during lent, and take communion at least once a year during Lent/Easter, and attend mass regularly. In addition to your duties as a confirmed practicing Catholic to obey the dogmatic authority of the church and not deny or oppose the magisterum of the Church. In simpler terms, you can disagree with the Church, but not publicly from a position of authority, and certainly not against declared beliefs. As for confession: the confession must be genuine, and reparations must be made. Also, remember the "go forth and sin no more" part of the absolution. Promoting sin as an enabler is a sin in itself. And to continue to repeat the same sin indicates dishonesty toward the Church and toward God as well as a lack of contriteness. Both of those basically nullify any saving grace that a confession should confer - meaning the person, in their heart, know they are not in good standing and should not recieve communion until they have given a genuine confession and recieved genuine absolution. Kerry confirms my low opinion of him with his grandstanding about religion and his continued works counter the the Chruch and what should be core beliefs in his life (sanctity of life, opposition to euthanasia and abortion). This isnt "new" at all - the doctrine of Humanae Vitae has been around since Paul VI. Check out this vatican position on political life Here is the relevant quote - in the Pope's words, speaking with the full authority of the Church. it must be noted also that a well-formed Christian conscience does not permit one to vote for a political program or an individual law which contradicts the fundamental contents of faith and morals. The Christian faith is an integral unity, and thus it is incoherent to isolate some particular element to the detriment of the whole of Catholic doctrine. I suggest Senator Kerry try rereading the Catechism of the Catholic Church and be honest with himself and the public. And he should be aware of the Nicean Creed he recites at every mass before the Communion. That is a sworn oath beteen him and God, in presence of the Church. He has damned himself unless and until he comes clean and does a true confession and penance to reconcile himself to God, and the Magisterum of the God's Holy and Apostoloic Church. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2004-04-01 7:50:30 PM |
| #3 I'd hate to think that I'm the default Catholic theologian and parish priest of greater Rantburg, but here's my understanding of the relevant doctrines:* One is not supposed to receive communion when in a state of grave sin, but one can be in a state of sin without leaving the Church. (If sin was an automatic excommunication, we'd all be in trouble!) If the bishop directs that someone is not to receive communion due to "grave scandal" in their public conduct, that person is still a member of the Church. He would still be eligible to receive the sacrament of Pennance (and would be encouraged to do so!) or the Last Rites.** "Excommunication" means that you are separated from God's Church--"out of the communion." There is a formal procedure by which the Pope or a bishop can excommunicate you for certain major acts of sin. The Catechism and Canon Law further provide that certain acts of sin are so bad that they literally destroy your relationship with God--that is, you literally excommunicate yourself. (Participation in an abortion is one such act, but there's a pretty long list in the CCC.) In those instances, the formal proceeding merely acts as an official confirmation of what has already happened. Please also remember that even one who has been excommunicated can always come back into God's grace--all you have to do is make a sincere confession, make restitution to those you have harmed, and abide by any penance imposed by your confessor. *-Anyone with better knowledge than me, feel free to weigh in. **-I know, I know, the modern terminology is "Reconciliation" and "Sacrament of the Sick," respectively. So, I'm old-fashioned. |
| Posted by: Mike 2004-04-01 5:39:24 PM |
| #2 Isn't there supposed to be some kind of official procedure to excommunicate someone - as opposed to veiled hints from the ordinary bishop and leaving it up the the individual priests to make the call. Sounds a bit fatwa-ish to me. |
| Posted by: VAMark 2004-04-01 5:11:37 PM |
| #1 Wow. I've been telling you guys this...! Tom Daschle's right behind Lurch as should be Uncle Ted Oldsmobile. Oh, and Sen. Ketchup supports euthanisia, which the Vatican also condemns. I imagine his Lib Dim colleagues in the Sen. do, too. |
| Posted by: Jen 2004-04-01 2:52:21 PM |