Replies

A Clear Example

An American bishop causes a stir when he announces that a pro-abortion politician should not receive the Eucharist.

Brian O'Neel

Apr. 05, 2003 (CWR) - It was expected to be a commemoration of Roe v. Wade like every other, indistinguishable except that this one would mark the 30th anniversary of the tragic Supreme Court decision. The pro-life marchers would march on the state capitol building, they would hear speeches, and they would attend Mass at the nearby cathedral. There the bishop would utter pious generalities about the sanctity of life, but would say nothing different or daring.

And all would have proceeded as planned, except for one thing: the bishop didn't follow the script.

True, Bishop William Weigand of the Diocese of Sacramento did say something about the sanctity of life, but he also did something no one these days expects bishops to do: He took to task pro-abortion politicians who call themselves 'Catholic. And he named names--or at least one very prominent name.

The effect was immediate. The bishop received several standing ovations. His homily was disseminated around the world, and nearly every Catholic and pro-life news service carried a brief on the matter. His remarks even made the front page of the liberal Sacramento Bee, which has published anti-Catholic political cartoons and commentaries in the past.

THE DECEMBER INCIDENT

To understand the bishop's actions fully, one first has to know what happened just a few weeks earlier, in December 2002. It is tradition at the Christmas season for California's governors to visit the wards of St. Patrick's Home for Children, founded and run by a local legend, Msgr. Eugene Kavanagh. This Christmas, Msgr. Kavanagh told the governor's staff in no uncertain terms that Gov. Grey Davis, who is Catholic, was unwelcome. 'We cannot allow a person who doesn't promote the sanctity of human life to appear that he was all for helping children when he's killing the unborn--the most defenseless of all,'' Msgr. Kavanagh said.

Gov. Davis' only response was to say, "I'm unapologetically pro-choice and I'm not changing my position." One might say Gov. Davis' claim that he is "unapologetically pro-choice" is the understatement of the century. He has signed more pro-abortion laws than any other governor in California's history. Just last year, Davis signed three pro-abortion laws. Nevertheless, Msgr. Kavanagh's decision to declare the governor persona non grata caused quite a stir. Some Californians, anxious to preserve a pleasant annual tradition, saw the priest as the Grinch who stole Christmas. "I don't give a damn," the doughty cleric responded. "I'm standing up for life."

FAST FORWARD TO JANUARY 22

According to a Sacramento diocesan spokesman, Father Sylvester McDermott, Bishop Weigand had by this point become quite concerned about Governor Davis' stance, which suggested that one could be a Catholic in good standing and remain "pro-choice" on abortion. The bishop was also troubled by assertions that the governor's position was as valid as Msgr. Kavanagh's.

So on January 22, with 2,000 people packed into the Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament, Bishop Weigand addressed the controversy in his homily. After some preliminary comments about the evils of abortion and how the Roe decision cannot stand, Weigand reached the heart of his message:

People need to understand that you cannot call yourself a Catholic in good standing and at the same time publicly hold views that are contradictory to the Catholic faith. Thank you, Msgr. Kavanagh, for standing up for the unborn...

In stating publicly that many Catholics believe as he does, and insisting that women should retain the right to decide to kill their own children by aborting them, under the guise of making their own decisions about their bodies, Governor Davis needs to recall that we do not own our bodies. We are not proprietors. We are stewards--stewards of a sacred trust. We all must decide how to care for our bodies. But abortion entails another body, that of the infant. The prohibition of God and of the law of nature is abundantly clear: "Thou shalt not kill."

As your bishop, I have to say clearly that anyone--politician or otherwise--who thinks it is acceptable for a Catholic to be pro-abortion is in very great error, puts his or her soul at risk, and is not in good standing with the Church. Such a person should have the integrity to acknowledge this and choose of his own volition to abstain from receiving Holy Communion until he has a change of heart.

HEATED REACTIONS

The reaction was immediate, far-reaching, and vociferous. Denver's Archbishop Charles Chaput wrote Bishop Weigand congratulating him for his faithful stance. Bob Dunning, host of "The Bishop's Radio Hour" on the local Catholic station reported, "I've had volumes of calls, of emails, and the sentiment is 100 percent behind the bishop. Thank God someone is standing up and taking on the governor."

On the other hand the governor's spokesman, Russ Lopez, who is also a Catholic, said that Gov. Davis "will not back down." Lopez also delivered an odd complaint against the bishop, criticizing Weigand for "telling the faithful how to practice their faith."

Governor Davis' own pastor said he was not bothered by his parishioner's pro-abortion stance. Father Colm O'Ryan of Good Shepherd Church in Beverly Hills told the lay Catholic publication San Francisco Faith, "He's a very faithful Catholic. He and his wife come to Mass very faithfully when they are in town." Father O'Ryan said his own stance on the matter was "judge not and you shall not be judged." (Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles has not, to date, made any comment on the matter.)

FURTHER STEPS?

The controversy took on a new life when the National Catholic Register claimed that Bishop Weigand had said in an interview that if Gov. Davis approached him for Communion during the annual "Red Mass" that is traditionally celebrated for lawyers at the opening of the judicial term, the bishop would simply give him a blessing and offer to discuss the matter with him later.

However, immediately after the Register article appeared, the Sacramento diocese took issue with the paper's characterization of Bishop Weigand's comments. According to Father Sylvester McDermott, "When the bishop was interviewed by the Register, he was asked a number of hypotheticals, and the bishop answered hypothetically."

Father McDermott took pains to point out that Bishop Weigand's remarks during the Register interview did not point to any decision to deny the Eucharist to Gov. Davis, much less to excommunicate him. Rather, he said, the bishop had made:

& a pastoral clarification to every Catholic that if you hold these positions, then you need to examine yourself in relation to teaching of the Church and draw the necessary conclusions and take the necessary action. It goes back to 1 Cor. 11:27-29. What the bishop is saying is what St. Paul is saying: If you are in disharmony with the Church in whatever way, then you should recognize that you may be eating and drinking judgment upon yourself, and take the necessary steps.

As for refusing the governor Communion at the Red Mass, Father McDermott observed that it was a moot point, since Gov. Davis was not expected to attend the ceremony. "No governor has ever come," he said. "Certainly Gov. Davis has never come."

The governor seems unfazed by the whole imbroglio. "The governor is a faithful, practicing Catholic who attends Mass in West Hollywood," maintained his spokesman Lopez. "We don't like abortion, but we do like choice on the issue." As if to underline his stance, Gov. Davis soon appointed an abortionist to a statewide panel that makes health-care financing decisions.

[AUTHOR ID] Brian O'Neel writes from Sacramento. California.

Editor's Note: Bishop Weigand's support for Msgr. Kavanaugh, and his clear statement of Church teaching, are laudable. However, his stance now raises two questions:

1) Since the teachings of the universal Church do not differ from one diocese to another, why do other bishops not make similar public statements regarding prominent Catholic politicians who are equally aggressive in their support for legal abortion, such as Senators Biden, Dodd, Kennedy, Kerry, Leahy, and Mikulski? Why is Cardinal Mahony silent on the case of Gov. Davis? 2) The bishop has warned Gov. Davis that he endangers his soul by receiving the Eucharist while he persists in assaults on the dignity of human life. Does it not follow logically that if Davis ignores the bishop's invitation to abstain voluntarily from the Eucharist, he should be denied the Sacrament--for the good of his soul and the welfare of the Church?