Bishop's ban ignites church-state debate

Cleveland Plain Dealer / AP ^ | 01/11/04 | Juliet Williams

[Valin]

Milwaukee- A Roman Catholic bishop who waded into politics with a decree that lawmakers who support abortion rights can no longer receive Holy Communion has ignited a debate over the separation of church and state.

Bishop Raymond Burke of La Crosse cited Vatican doctrine, canon law and teachings by the U.S. bishops in an announcement telling diocesan priests to withhold Communion from such lawmakers until they "publicly renounce" their support of abortion rights.

"This is about as stark a decree to come down against Catholic politicians as we've seen in recent history," said Barry Lynn, executive director of the Washington, D.C.-based Americans United for the Separation of Church and State.

"The problem with it is that elected officials have to represent people of all faiths and none and not adhere to one religious demand like the bishop's," he said.

The Vatican and U.S. bishops have for years urged Catholic legislators to consider their faith when they vote, and a task force of bishops is weighing whether to recommend sanctions for Catholic politicians who support policies contrary to church teachings.

In November, Burke wrote to at least three Catholic lawmakers, saying they risked being forbidden from taking the sacrament by continuing to vote for measures he termed anti-life, including abortion and euthanasia.

Democratic U.S. Rep. David Obey, who received a letter from Burke, said Friday that he respects the oath he took to uphold the U.S. Constitution.

Obey said Burke can instruct him on faith and morals in his private life but should use "persuasion, not dictation" to affect his political votes. He said Burke had "crossed the line into unacceptable territory."

State Senate Minority Leader Jon Erpenbach, a Democrat who was raised Catholic but is no longer practicing, expressed a similar view.

"Dictating public policy for people of all faiths by holding sacraments hostage from those who believe does not sound right," Erpenbach said.

Burke has also been criticized by some Catholic scholars.

Dan Maguire, a professor of theology at the Jesuit Marquette University in Milwaukee, called Burke a "fanatic" who has embarrassed the Catholic Church by using bullying tactics.

© 2004 The Plain Dealer

[Zack Nguyen]

Indeed. Please check out my post #20.

[the invisib1e hand]

"The problem with it is that elected officials have to represent people of all faiths and none and not adhere to one religious demand like the bishop's," he said.

the problem really is an elected official who will not inform his conscience nor conduct himself according to it.

[BikerNYC]

The control the church has is to cut the person off from rituals the person finds important and significant. It is not easy to leave a religion one has belonged to for a lifetime, and the church knows this. The risk is that a politician will vote because of the kind of blackmail seen in this case.

The church's blackmail weakens its moral authority. I appears as though the church itself does not believe any punishment in the afterlife will be sufficient; rather, punishment in this life is necessary.

[Enterprise]

If a priest supports leftist causes, the left crows about it and makes the priest a "hero."

[the invisib1e hand]

Democratic U.S. Rep. David Obey, who received a letter from Burke, said Friday that he respects the oath he took to uphold the U.S. Constitution.

Does the Bill of Rights fit in here, anywhere?

This is great. Sometimes there has to be a separation of state and Church. In other words, a time comes to obey God rather than man.... even the man that elected you.

[Zack Nguyen]

I appears as though the church itself does not believe any punishment in the afterlife will be sufficient; rather, punishment in this life is necessary.

I'm not a Catholic, but in my opinion it has nothing at all to do with that. Christ laid down specific procedures to go through with a wayward brother. If all else fails the person is to be treated "like a tax collector." God wants members of his church to behave in a certain way while on earth. I have no idea if Congressman Obey truly belives or not - and that may be his biggest problem.

[sinkspur]

The church's blackmail weakens its moral authority. I appears as though the church itself does not believe any punishment in the afterlife will be sufficient; rather, punishment in this life is necessary.

It's not blackmail; no one is forced to belong to the Catholic Church.

Catholic politicians who openly support and vote for abortion give other Catholics the impression that abortion is just dandy.

Abortion is a violation of the moral law and is condemned by the Catholic Church. So the Church, in order to prevent the scandal of a Catholic politician contravening a Church law, publicly, is beginning to say that Catholic politicians are free to vote for abortion, but are no longer free to call themselves Catholics.

Life's full of all kinds of choices, some easy some painful. This is a painful one, but politicians must make it.

[Tench_Coxe]

" The church's blackmail weakens its moral authority. I appears as though the church itself does not believe any punishment in the afterlife will be sufficient; rather, punishment in this life is necessary."

It is not blackmail. The Catholic church has a responsibility. To turn and look away from one who claims to be a member then have that same person proceed to go against the church's moral teachings is akin to being an accessory to a crime.

[PoorMuttly]

"I'm a good Christian. The ROMANS pay me to do this."

[TheGeezer]

If the Church does not discipline its members, it betrays Christ and its members. The members of His body do not have teaching authority, that is reserved for the shepherds of the flock who possess the teaching authority bestowed upon them by prior successors of Christ. The bishops have too long ignored their duty, themselves risking Christ's condemnation. It IS about time that they slap secularists publicly for the outrages perpetrated against the innocent.

Regards.

[Cicero]

Actually, a politician who votes for abortion and then goes to church to receive communion is, in the phrase I remember from the Book of Common Prayer in the days when I was an Epicopalian, "eating and drinking damnation to himself." Catholics believe that Holy Communion is the Body and Blood of Christ, and if a person receives communion in a state of mortal sin he is only making things much worse for himself.

Catholics also believe that anyone who "procures and abortion," which presumably applies to politicians whose votes make abortion and abortion funding possible, is automatically excommunicated. It is a false kindness for a bishop not to warn someone that they are risking damnation.

If you don't believe that, fine, but then you have no business being a Catholic.

[NewMac]

Ole Dan from Marquette University was married to a forme nun, now divorced from her, and still teaches Theology at Marquette U. His Highness Weakland never did anything about this "Former Jesuit." And now it appears Archbishop Dolan doesn't have the gonads to do anything about this - or even to defend Bishop Burke, who will soon take over Dolan's home diocese of St. Louis. Bishop Burke stands with Archbishop Bruskewitz of Lincoln, NE as men of stalwart faith in our church - and the balls to defend our faith against these duplicitous public servants.

[reed_inthe_wind]

"Does this sound ominous to anyone else? Almost as if the Congressman is warning the Bishop. The opening line of the article sounds as if the Bishop had entered territory he had no right to enter."

Exactly.

[sinkspur]

Catholics also believe that anyone who "procures and abortion," which presumably applies to politicians whose votes make abortion and abortion funding possible, is automatically excommunicated.

Technically, procuring an abortion applies to abortionists, clinic assistants, and the woman procuring the abortion.

But, legislating to make abortion possible is surely only a half-step of separation from procurement.

If a Catholic politician is concerned that his faith prohibits him from representing all of his constituents, he should renounce Catholicism. Or, he should realize that unborn fetuses are also his constituents, and he is not representing them by enabling their extermination.

[Aliska]

I have only one problem with this. It will not be enforced across the board in every diocese and, thus, will still send a confusing message.

[cornelis]

he should renounce Catholicism

renounce his pretense to Catholicism : )

[rhinohunter]

Ping!

[NewMac]

The most confusing of messages is to say nothing. If Bishop Burke remains silent he's a traitor to his calling.
Because so many Bishops past were weak-kneed and cowed by public opinion they did nothing and the seminaries were invaded and ruined.
Bishop Burke is probably heeding the advice of Edmund Burke:
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
The process of doing something has begun with Archbishops like Bruskewitz of Lincoln, Archbishop Meyer and many others who have been fighting an uphill battle against the forces of evil which have invaded our church through our (parishioners) love of secularism, and some Bishops' wanton dereliction of duty.

[Southern Federalist]

"Dictating public policy for people of all faiths by holding sacraments hostage from those who believe does not sound right," Erpenbach said.

At least the Bishop has not called on a cabal of Catholics to impose Catholic policies on the people of the United States against their will as recorded in their laws, which is how we got the abortion regime in the first place, from a "Supreme" cabal of secularists.

Mr. Erpenbach is no doubt happy to have public policy dictated by unelected judges, but it's wrong for a Bishop to ask Catholic politicians to stand by the teaching of their Church and let the voters decide. The implication is that a Catholic politician who does oppose abortion is somehow a tool of sinister control-hungry interests -- unlike Mr. Erpenbach, none of whose views whatsoever are influenced by anything like social pressure or the desire to fit in with the right sort of people or the influence of pro-abortion groups in his party.

It's no doubt tough to be denied the sacraments. It's also tough to defy the Church of Abortion and be described in the media as a "fanatic" and bully by a third rate academic drone like Dan Maguire. It's tough all over, Jon old boy, so don't expect my heart to break if some of your buds are now getting in a far less brutal way some of what they dish out.

[Aliska]

and some Bishops' wanton dereliction of duty.

The same goes for Rome for not reining in the bishops. You are right on about the rest.

They were talking about this on the Michael Reagan Show, and Michael thought the bishops were wrong. I couldn't see where he was coming from on that. He didn't seem to get it.

A lady who called into the show and identified herself as a catholic, likened the way matters are handled in the US as a "checkerboard church". I did understand where she was coming from.