[Archbishop Naumann leading a pro-life Rosary.]
Posted on 05/09/2008 7:26:49 PM PDT by Balt
Memo to Arch-Tame Wuerl: Yes, sir, it can be done!
Kansas, May. 9, 2008 (CWNews.com) - Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City has announced that Governor Kathleen Sebelius should not receive Communion because of her support for legal abortion.
In a column appearing on May 9 in the archdiocesan newspaper, The Leaven, the archbishop said that Governor Sebelius has sent a "spiritually lethal message" by implying that she could remain a Catholic in good standing while supporting abortion on demand.
The archbishop's column cited in particular the governor's veto of the Comprehensive Abortion Reform Act, which would have required abortionists to inform women about the effects of the procedure and alternatives to abortion.
The governor's stand in favor of abortion is particularly painful, Archbishop Naumann wrote, because Sebelius is a Catholic. He reported that he had met with her "several times over many months to discuss with her the grave spiritual and moral consequences of her public actions." Because the governor has now rejected his pleas and her public stand constitutes a scandal to the faithful, the archbishop said that he has now directed her to refrain from receiving Communion. Archbishop Naumann reported that he has asked Governor Sebelius to accept this directive, so that she will "not require from me any additional pastoral actions."
The governor will be welcomed back to Communion, the archbishop wrote, if she acknowledges her error, goes to Confession, and makes "a public repudiation of her previous efforts and actions in support of laws and policies sanctioning abortion."
[Archbishop Naumann leading a pro-life Rosary.]
By the way, if you're wondering precisely what "spiritually leathal" means, it means you can go to hell if you don't repent. In light of the comparison between the Archbishop of Kansas City and the Archbishop of Washington, one can surely see the deadly -- leathal, shall we say -- irony in Cardinal Levada's understated comment about his "uneasiness about territorial morality." Now go back and read Mr. Akin's article again, especially the part about material cooperation.
The bottom line is that there should be only one way a Catholic bishop should deal with pro-death public officials, and it isn't the Wuerl way. But the really pressing question is: What are the faithful to think? When two Archbishops of the Catholic Church respond to an acute moral question in two completely opposite ways, one of them has to be wrong, right? Our Lord told Peter three times to "feed my sheep." Which of these two do you think is a "good shepherd?" and which one, having led the "little ones astray," should have the "mill stone tied around his neck" and thrown into the abyss? It's not exactly rocket science, is it?
I've never been there, myself; but I'm told the abyss is pretty dark. That Pepsodent Smile could come in handy.
Another question just occured to me: When two Archbishops of the Catholic Church respond to an acute moral question in two completely opposite ways, there's something that's supposed to happen. It involves the Holy Father, who is successor to St. Peter ... you know, the guy who was told to "feed my sheep." I doubt if it will happen. But if His Tame-ness becomes a Cardinal simply because his diocese is located in the capitol of the republic, then the Holy Father has no right to complain that the herd is thinning.
by Priestly Pugilist
The Church is finally getting back on its game.
The Archbishop is simply doing his job, nothing more. Maybe he shouldn’t have been so public about it, but he has an professional obligation to not sanction something like abortion. It shoudn’t factor against him in his bid to become Cardinal.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
Sounds like Archbishop N. is on the ball. It’s like he actually thinks abortion is baby butchery, which is refreshing compaired to most of the noodle spined mitre crowd.
Freegards
Wuehrl isn’t doing his job. That’s the point. He isn’t doing his job at all.
Defiant public sin requires a public rebuke. He met with her privately, she gave him the finger.
I do think the majority of Bishops in the US are mistaken in not taking the approach of Archbishop Naumann, but as alluded to in his letter, there should be extensive private pastoral care taken by local Bishops for Pro-abortion Catholic pols in their diocese before a formal rebuke such as this one is published.
And make this a second for your nomination of Archbishop Naumann for Cardinal. I think it would send a strong message to US Catholics if a Bishop like Naumann from a small Diocese was elevated to the College of Cardinals over someone like Wuerhl simply because he is head of the Washington D.C. diocese.
One of these days, we'll find a bishop with the guts to do a full-bore ferendae sententiae excommunication.
Meantime, Kudos to Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City. He has taken an important step in the right direction.
May I humbly recommend that folks write him in support of his courageous actions?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.