Kerry reaffirms rights to Receive Holy Communion Paterson, NJ Bishop Rodimer Agrees

WASHINGTON - Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry delivered an unabashed defense of abortion rights on Friday, just hours after a top Vatican cardinal said that priests must deny Communion to Catholic politicians who support abortion rights.

Several other Catholic politicians said they, too, had no intention of altering the way they practice their religion or their politics.

With hundreds of Catholic politicians in the United States supporting abortion rights, the trans-Atlantic counterpoint was only the latest sign that the issue promises to be a recurrent one on the U.S. campaign trail this year.

"I believe that in the year 2004, we deserve a president who understands that a stronger America is where women's rights are just that: Rights, not political weapons to be used by politicians of this nation," Kerry declared at a rally with leaders of pro-choice groups mobilizing in Washington for a big march set for Sunday. "We are going to have a change in leadership in this country to protect the right of choice."

Speaking earlier from Vatican City, Cardinal Francis Arinze stopped short of saying whether it was right for Kerry to receive Communion but said a Catholic politician who supports abortion rights "is not fit" to receive the Eucharist. U.S. bishops have discretion in deciding who should receive Communion, but the cardinal's comments could put more pressure on them to sanction Catholic politicians whose positions are at odds with church teachings.

Kerry said he personally opposes abortion but supports a woman's right to choose. He did not directly respond to Arinze's comments, but campaign spokesman David Wade said Kerry believes the separation of church and state "helped make religious affiliation a non-issue in American politics."

Paterson Bishop Frank Rodimer said that he would give Kerry communion. While Rodimer remains adamant that abortion must be publicly condemned, he does not see a benefit in denying communion to a Catholic politician. "I would not make that the occasion for teaching; it is not a teaching moment," Rodimer said.

Rodimer said the proper time to have a conversation with a Catholic candidate about abortion or other spiritual matters is before Mass, not during the distribution of communion.

Bush campaign spokesman Steve Schmidt countered that Kerry's views on abortion were "outside the mainstream" and said the president "supports a culture of life."

Judie Brown, president of the anti-abortion American Life League, said it was perfectly appropriate for voters to consider a candidate's religion and the way he or she practices it in deciding how to vote. She said the group is keeping tabs on 500 Catholic politicians at the state and national level who support abortion rights.

"If you are elected to public office as a Catholic, then your fellow Catholics expect you to be Catholic," she said, calling it "hypocrisy" for Kerry to say he is personally opposed to abortion while supporting wider access to the procedure.

But Frances Kissling, president of Catholics for a Free Choice, USA, said statements such as Arinze's "debase the political campaign" and would only isolate the church from its U.S. members, most of whom she said support abortion rights.

"Every time Catholic church leaders have attacked Catholic politicians for their view on abortion, the Catholic politicians have become more popular and the church has become more marginalized," she said. "It's a very foolish strategy relative to political influence."

She added: "Do they really want to tell Senators (Edward) Kennedy, (Barbara) Mikulski, (Patrick) Leahy and 70 other members of the U.S. Congress that they can't receive Communion? Because they can't just tell this to Senator Kerry."

Sen. Edward Kennedy, the Massachusetts Democrat whose brother was the nation's first Catholic president, stressed that Arinze was speaking for himself, not the pope, and said he did not expect to be denied Communion despite supporting abortion rights.

"I'm a very strong believer in the separation of church and state, as President Kennedy spoke to, and I continue to follow my own beliefs and will continue to serve the people of Massachusetts," he said.

Among American Catholics, 56 percent of non-Hispanic Catholics and 59 percent of Hispanic Catholics oppose making it harder for a woman to get an abortion, according to the Pew Research Center. Support for additional restrictions increases among Catholics who attend church at least once a week, with 50 percent of non-Hispanic Catholics favoring further restrictions and 43 percent of Hispanic Catholics.

Rep. Nick Lampson, D-Texas, was criticized by Republicans recently for keeping track of the votes of Catholic members of Congress and whether they are in keeping with church doctrine. He said the vote tallies grew out of meetings by a group of lawmakers exploring their own beliefs, "knowing many of us want to bring as much of our faith as we can to our action in Congress."

"We are trying to live the teachings of our church and we try to bring that to work," he said. At the same time, he added, Catholic congressional members struggle with adhering to their faith while representing people of many religions.

Last week, Kerry met privately with Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, the Washington archbishop heading a task force examining whether there should be church sanctions for Catholic politicians who vote and support positions at odds with church teachings.

Bishop Raymond Burke, the archbishop of St. Louis, has said he would refuse to give Kerry Communion.

Why Don't Catholic Politicians Practice What the Catholic Church Preaches?

http://www.washingtondispatch.com/article_8797.shtml

Commentary by Judie Brown
April 19, 2004

Whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself.

- 1 Corinthians 11:29

This column is about pro-abortion Catholics - and isn't that just the crème de la crème of the oxymoron world? Yes, there's one pro-abortion Catholic who's getting a lot of attention, and yes, he's running for president. I'll get to him in a minute. But he's not alone. And he himself is not the problem, merely a sign of a much deeper illness.

So what is the big deal about pro-abortion political figures receiving Communion in the Catholic Church? It's a "big deal" because of what Holy Communion is to the Catholic Church. And that's why I led off with St. Paul, who knew a few things about how Christ wanted us mortals to practice our faith. The consecrated bread and wine does not "symbolize" Christ. It is Christ.

Okay, I can almost see the eyes rolling on that one: "There you Catholics go again." And, if we are to believe the polls, a lot of Catholic eyes are rolling in unison with their non-Catholic brethren. But I'm not making any of this up. Holy Communion is Jesus Christ. It's all in the Bible, which all good Christians freely acknowledge is the Word of God.

"But I have to suspend all logic to think that a pressed wafer of wheat and a cup of fermented grape juice is in fact Jesus Christ." Yup. You sure do. It's called "faith." And either you've got it, or you don't. And if you don't, please refer back to the quote from St. Paul at the top of the page.

It is especially puzzling that those who take the Bible as literal fact cannot accept the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Other things in the Bible also require a full-tilt suspension of logic, yet "Bible believing" Christians accept them without flinching.

God created the whole universe in seven days? Of course. It's in the Bible.

Jericho's walls couldn't stand up to a hot tune on the trumpet? Ditto. God said so.

Methuselah lived to the extremely ripe old age of 969? No doubt. It's in there.

Yet we are told that when Christ said, "This is my body," he was just being poetic. Never mind that the quote shows up in the gospels and in Paul's letters. Nope. That Jesus always spoke in riddles, didn't he? And this was just the pinnacle of his storytelling acumen.

Oh yeah? Don't think so.

Check out the "bread of life" discourse in Chapter 6 of John's gospel. Jesus goes on at length about the need to eat his body and drink his blood. People turned away from him because it seemed so … odd. But the disciples knew it was the real deal, and they stayed.

Okay. So much for the detour into basic theology. Today, far too many Catholics seem to have lost touch with that basic teaching. And the lost sheep include far too many Catholics in public office who think they can vote pro-abortion during the week and sashay shamelessly up to the altar on Sunday.

Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts is the current poster boy of this pro-abortion Catholic flock. One week, he rolls into Mass - 10 minutes late - with a noisy entourage, then makes a quick trip to the altar for Holy Communion, then bounces out to hit the ski slopes. The next week, he's photographed receiving communion at a non-Catholic church. That's also a no-no. But Sen. Kerry is not alone.

Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois is getting a fair amount of attention in his home state. Catholics in Springfield picketed his church there. So he sought out a friendlier church in Chicago (read: one where the tenets of the faith are subject to negotiation) where his die-hard pro-abortion stance seems irrelevant. A new group is now organizing to picket that church. Maybe he's not getting the truth inside the building, but he's sure going to get an earful on the way in and out.

Gov. Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas vetoed a bill that would have imposed minimal health and medical standards on abortion clinics in her state. She is Catholic, and pro-abortion. The legislature is again contemplating a bill that would enact such requirements. The governor is promising a repeat veto performance if the representatives of the people of Kansas dare approve what is considered a pro-life measure.

Gov. Jennifer Granholm of Michigan is also a pro-abortion Catholic who has made questionable use of the veto pen. A local group has a web site that follows the ongoing inconsistencies that unavoidably dog someone who proclaims both the Catholic faith and the so-called right to choose abortion. Granholm's case is particularly troublesome, since she has served as a Eucharistic minister. That's right. This woman, who is pro-abortion, has stood before her fellow parishioners, presented the Holy Eucharist to them and announced, "The Body of Christ."

Hello? Does she really believe it? Does Durban? Sebelius? Kerry? Does every Catholic priest and bishop really believe it? Aha! That's the real question. In the pro-life movement, it is often said, "If you really believe abortion is murder, then act like it." A similar sentiment should be expressed to Catholic priests and bishops who are lukewarm about defending the Church's teaching about Holy Communion: "If you really believe the Holy Eucharist is the actual Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, then act like it!"

We are told, for instance, that Archbishop Sean O'Malley of Boston has said pro-abortion Catholics should not receive Communion. Yet Sen. Kerry a, pro-abortion Catholic continues to do so. Granted, Archbishop O'Malley is still the new guy in town, but with high-profile pro-abortion Catholics such as John Kerry and Ted Kennedy in his flock, he surely knows that their behavior merits his extremely vigilant scrutiny.

We are told that Cardinal Francis George of Chicago has met privately with Dick Durbin, hopefully for some remedial catechism instruction on the Church's teachings on the sanctity of human life. That's well and good, but how long will it take before something is said publicly to this man, and the countless others, who very publicly promote legal abortion and very publicly receive Holy Communion?

That priests and bishops are within bounds in withholding Communion from such persons is beyond question. It's in the rules: Canon Law, in this case. Canon 915 says those "who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to communion." Abortion, the Church says, is gravely evil, adding that "formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense."

Pro-abortion Catholic politicians are fond of saying they "personally oppose" abortion, but are unwilling to stand in the way of others who seek them. Is that formal cooperation? Well, voting to expend tax dollars on abortion and abortion-related matters certainly seems to qualify.

Abortion is, after all, a matter of life and death. Yet the Gallup organization tells us it "consistently ranks among the least important issues to the electorate in choosing a president." Americans have become indifferent. American Catholics, too, have become indifferent. Is it because too many priests and bishops, through their silence, have allowed this indifference to fester?

"I am the bread of life," said Christ. The apostles knew it was the real deal, and they stayed. Do the apostles' modern day successors share that conviction? Or have they, as did many of Jesus' fair-weather followers, simply drifted away?

It's certainly a question to ponder at this time of year, when Christians commemorate the Lord's Passion and Resurrection.

Judie Brown is the president of American Life League

Frances Kissling, president of Catholics for a Free Choice, USA, said statements such as Arinze's "debase the political campaign" and would only isolate the church from its U.S. members, most of whom she said support abortion rights.

Kissling Spins Canon Law
(from Catalyst, May 2003)

Catholics For a Free Choice (CFFC) recently released a new pamphlet, titled, “Catholics and Abortion: Notes on Canon Law.” Its aim is to counter “finger-pointing” and “misinformation.” No one who is familiar with Frances Kissling’s group should be surprised that the only techniques used in the pamphlet are just that—finger-pointing and misinformation.

The introduction whines, “Everyone is an expert, claiming that prochoice Catholics are ‘heretics’ or have been ‘excommunicated’ because they have had an abortion or have supported legal abortion.” And here’s some misinformation: CFFC claims, “We respect the church’s law.”

The pamphlet focuses on two relevant passages in the 1983 Code of Canon Law—the one prescribing automatic excommunication for those who have a completed abortion (canon 1398), and the passage that stipulates automatic excommunication for “accomplices” without whose help the grave sin could not have been committed (canon 1329 §2).

In the next ten or so pages, the pamphlet’s author, Sara Morello, wrangles word-by-word with the passages from Canon Law, attempting to show that mitigating factors can lessen the likelihood that someone who has had an abortion actually incurs excommunication. But any Catholic already knows that there are conditions to be met (grave matter, full knowledge, and deliberate consent) before any sin incurs its full penalty. (Incidentally, the word “sin” appears nowhere in the leaflet.)

In a huge leap of logic, the brochure tells us, “In cases where it is difficult to argue that the primary actor incurs a penalty, it would also be very difficult to justify punishing accomplices.” In other words, since we cannot say for sure whether the woman undergoing an abortion meets the requirements under Canon Law for responsibility for her actions, then we cannot even begin to judge the actions of accomplices, such as Kissling. Thus “the routine activity of hospital administrators, directors of abortion clinics and prochoice politicians does not make them eligible for punishment under this canon.”

One doesn’t have to have a degree in Canon Law to see this is nonsense. Canon 1329 states that anyone who aided in the commission of an offense such that it would not have been committed without their help suffers the penalty attached to that offense. For example: an accomplice to a murder is subject to the same penalty that the actual murderer is, regardless of any mitigating factors operating on the murderer. If the murderer is in a blind rage and acts in the heat of the moment, he may be less culpable; but a man who calmly gives him a knife and leads him to his victim enjoys no such advantages. Each individual is subject to penalties based on his own mental state and actions.

Frances Kissling and other facilitators of abortion are probably not under the emotional pressure of those with unplanned pregnancies. And CFFC is fully aware of the Church’s actual teaching; they produced this tract on Canon Law, didn’t they? And it even grudgingly acknowledges, “getting an abortion is against the church’s law.”

In other words, Frances Kissling and her ilk have no excuse. And whether or not you believe that she has acted directly as an “accomplice” through her work with CFFC and the pro-abortion lobby, there remains the fact that she operated one of the first legal abortion clinics in New York, and ran illegal ones in Mexico and Rome; all of which she still defends. If that’s not direct complicity, then the law is meaningless.

It’s not our place to declare people excommunicated, but we will point out their disingenuous reasoning. Kissling’s motive in producing the tract is transparent: she hopes to silence her opposition, who place her and her organization outside the Church. But Canon Law is clear on one matter, and the American bishops agree: Catholics For a Free Choice is anything but Catholic. And no glossy pamphlet that butchers Canon Law will convince us otherwise.

Catholic Ping - let me know if you want on/off this list

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.

Grow a pair!