Closing Ranks on Canon 915 (Governor Sebelius got some bad news last week)

Inside Catholic ^ | March 30, 2009 | Deal W. Hudson

[NYer]

Gov. Kathleen Sebelius received some good news last week when abortionist Dr. George Tiller was found not guilty of breaking state laws regulating late-term abortion. The relationship between Tiller and Sebelius would surely have played a role in her upcoming confirmation hearings had he been found guilty.

 

But Governor Sebelius got some bad news as well -- something not noticed much in Catholic media or the secular press. The bishops of Washington, D.C., and Arlington, Virginia, confirmed publicly they would uphold the declaration of her ordinary, Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City, stating that Governor Sebelius should not present herself for communion.

 

A spokeswoman for the Washington Archdiocese, Susan Gibbs, said Archbishop Donald Wuerl would expect Sebelius to follow Bishop Naumann's request while in Washington. Joelle Santolla, spokeswoman for the Arlington Diocese, announced that Bishop Paul Loverde would expect the same while she was in Northern Virginia.

 

That Archbishop Wuerl and Bishop Loverde would back up Bishop Naumann in regard to the future Secretary of Health and Human Services is a significant development in the effort of some bishops to enforce Canon 915: "Those upon whom the penalty of excommunication or interdict has been imposed or declared, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin, are not to be admitted to holy communion."

 

This will send the message to other bishops that if they choose to pronounce members of Congress from their dioceses unfit for communion, their authority will be respected in D.C. and across the Potomac in Virginia. The ramifications are enormous: For example, if Sean Cardinal O'Malley of Boston stated publicly that Sen. John Kerry was in violation of Canon 915, he would not have been able to receive communion at Pope Benedict XVI's Mass in Washington, D.C., a year ago. Rep. Nancy Pelosi would not have been able to celebrate her elevation to speaker of the House with a special Mass at Trinity College,

if Archbishop Neiderhauer had found her wanting according to the standard of Canon 915.

 

Some will argue that neither Archbishop Wuerl nor Bishop Loverde will attempt, through their priests, to deny Governor Sebelius communion. But this misses the point, and the significance, of how the combined statements of Bishops Naumann, Wuerl, and Loverde have created a new and more vulnerable situation for the pro-abortion Catholic members of Congress. As Archbishop Raymond Burke has explained, Bishop Naumann did not impose a "sanction" on Governor Sebelius; Bishop Naumann asked Sebelius, not the clergy, to apply Canon 915 to herself.

 

But if Sebelius were to receive communion in D.C. or Northern Virginia, it would likely generate a news story that would mushroom quickly, involving the priest who administered communion and his bishop. This is not news coverage that Sebelius, or the Obama administration, would want to deal with.

 

No doubt there are priests in both dioceses who would have little compunction about giving communion to pro-abortion Catholic politicians, but whether they want to get into a media-generated spat with their bishop over a high-profile politician is another matter.

 

A final point: Archbishop Wuerl and Bishop Loverde's collegial response to Bishop Naumann destabilizes the relationship between pro-abortion Catholic politicians and their bishops back home. The question will arise as to why Governor Sebelius should be the only politician in Washington who has been called to account under Canon 915. What about the dozens of others in Congress who have a 100 percent pro-abortion voting record? What about Vice-President Joe Biden himself?

 

Will other bishops seize this opportunity to apply Canon 915 to politicians in their dioceses, knowing that Archbishop Wuerl and Bishop Loverde will back them up? Given the determination of the Obama administration and the Congress to roll back all restrictions on abortion, I wouldn't be surprised.

[NYer]

A Primer on Canon 915

Catholic Ping
Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list

[verga]

Bout time
Who has the Bishops Crozier with the spine?

[meandog]

A lower case “c”atholic, I have some mixed feelings about this...I fully understand the RC’s position on abortion and I am pro-life; BUT, to cut a Christian off from Christ who is perhaps personally pro-life but publicly pro-choice seems, IMHO, to be a bit too extreme. Excommunication should be reserved for incorrigible sinners who refuse to reform a personal sinful lifestyle (even members of the Nazi and Fascist and Communist parties have been granted Holy Eucharist at one time or another).

[meandog]

A lower case “c”atholic, I have some mixed feelings about this...I fully understand the RC’s position on abortion and I am pro-life; BUT, to cut a Christian off from Christ who is perhaps personally pro-life but publicly pro-choice seems, IMHO, to be a bit too extreme. Excommunication should be reserved for incorrigible sinners who refuse to reform a personal sinful lifestyle (even members of the Nazi and Fascist and Communist parties have been granted Holy Eucharist at one time or another).

[NTHockey]

Don’t expect Biden to be denied any time soon. Bishop Malooly has stated publicly that he “will not use The Eucharist as a political tool”. He will however, continue to “dialog”.

So, where does this leave the Catholic in the pew. In the same state that he’s been in for forty years - believe what you want.

[Bainbridge]

Good for them !

[kenmcg]

AMEN!!!

[RobbyS]

I wonder of Bishop Martino will act on Biden, now? But the real biggie would be if the archbishop of San Francisco would act against Pelosi.

[rom]

Umm, this woman supports the most horrific forms of abortion imaginable — AND the giving of OUR tax monies to help fund abortions thanks to continued support of Planned Parenthood.

Maybe I can try that line out if I ever run for office.

“You know, personally I support getting out of Iraq, but publicly I am for the war in Iraq”

If you are not pro-life publicly, you really are not pro-life personally.

[goodwithagun]

Religion is not a buffet. We don’t get to pick and choose what we want to obey and what we do not. This sub-human has cut herself off from Christ. It is the church’s job to administer communion to those who are Catholic. I am not Catholic, but my husband and son are. I do not see myself converting yet, but the church makes a wonderful pro-life stance. It follows God’s teaching. If one is pro-abortion, one does not follow God.

[annalex]

Excommunication is not “cutting a Christian off from Christ” in any permanent sense.

The excommunicated sinner is welcome to publicly recant her views and receive absolution for the sin, at which point she or he can again present herslef for the Holy Communion.

The difference between public excommunication and any other serious sin is that the excommunication is explicit and public if the sin was likewise committed publicly and defiantly.

[A.A. Cunningham]

IMHO, to be a bit too extreme.

Your opinion, however humble it may be, is irrelevant with regard to Canon law and the Catholic Church.

One can't be "personally pro-life but publicly prochoice" and be a Catholic.

[anoldafvet]

As Catholics we believe that you cannot receive the eucharist unless you are in a state of grace. Mortal sin destroys this state. Normally, no one knows but you whether you are in a state of grace or not (received absolution in the confessional). In this case the mortal sin is public and therefore she should be denied the sacraments.

[chimera]

There is another aspect of this that must be borne in mind. I am a convert to RC so I don't speak with any authority, but we were taught that the church leadership feels an obligation to take a strict view on a fundamental teaching (the value of human life as a gift from God) for several reasons. One is to remain faithful to the teachings of Christ and the Scriptures and the Apostles. The other is to provide firm guidance to those Catholics who are faithful in their adherence to church doctrine. While special dispensations are granted from time to time on matters not related to fundamental doctrine, they are not for things that contradict basic principles of the faith, and this is one. If someone who claims to be a practicing Catholic leads another member of the Church astray on a fundamental teaching of the Church, they are in as grave a state of sin as those who commit the sinful act. That is why the pedophilia scandals have been so serious and scandalous. The Church holds its leadership to account by these means. It also recognizes that those in positions of political authority who claim allegiance to the Church have a special obligation to remain faithful to the teachings of the Church and not lead others astray by bad example or offering erroneous interpretations of Church doctrine.

Keep in mind that it is the sinful choice of the sinner that is the fundamental cause of excommunication. The officers of the Church are obliged by their vows to effect the things and acts that signify such a state, such as denial of the sacraments,and other things.

[mathurine]

Guess that’s why you are a pawn, rather than a bishop.

[NYer]

[MockTurtle]

Darn good for a convert who claims to not "speak with any authority." Keep speaking out!

I would also add that refusing Communion also protects the integrity of the Sacrament. This is the Body and Blood of Christ and it is important to stop people from abusing Him.

A bishop's responsibility is also to save souls. By continuing to give the Eucharist to public figures not in Communion with the Church, the bishops are hurting them more than helping them.

[meandog]

If you are not pro-life publicly, you really are not pro-life personally....SNIP...Religion is not a buffet...SNIP...The difference between public excommunication and any other serious sin is that the excommunication is explicit and public if the sin was likewise committed publicly and defiantly...SNIP...IMHO, to be a bit too extreme. Your opinion, however humble it may be, is irrelevant with regard to Canon law and the Catholic Church....SNIP...As Catholics we believe that you cannot receive the eucharist unless you are in a state of grace. Mortal sin destroys this state. Normally, no one knows but you whether you are in a state of grace or not (received absolution in the confessional). In this case the mortal sin is public and therefore she should be denied the sacraments...SNIP...One can't be "personally pro-life but publicly pro-choice" and be a Catholic...SNIP... The officers of the Church are obliged by their vows to effect the things and acts that signify such a state, such as denial of the sacraments,and other things...Guess that’s why you are a pawn, rather than a bishop.

Anyone here ever hear of Father Bob Drinan? Liberal, former liberal Democratic congressman from Mass, friend of Kennedy and Kerry; extremely and vociferously PRO-CHOICE often stating that abortion was "a woman's Constitutional right;" did give up his U.S. seat but remained steadfast to the pro-choice and homosexual movements. Despite political leanings and backing of abortion and gay rights NEVER REALLY THREATENED WITH EX-COMMUNICATI0N, in fact, allowed by Vatican to keep officiating in official priestly role.

[chimera]

If your point is that they have been inconsistent, that is true. And by not taking a stand early on in this abortion business against the pols who claim to be pro-abort and Catholic, they have allowed this poison to fester and the scandal to grow. The Church was very reluctant to publicly admonish their pro-abort political leaders, much less do anything. And that has come back to haunt them. They are johnny come latelys when it comes to taking a stand.

And that may be because may lay people are also succumbing to the siren song of picking and choosing those things they will from church doctrine. It may be the leadership fears a mass exodus from the rank and file if they push the issue to strongly. If so, they are also treading a fine line between grievous sin and salvation.

But the Lord Himself makes it clear that at some point we have to choose which Master we will serve. The pro-aborts choose to serve Moloch and they will reap the bloody fruits of that choice. Those who refuse to call out the error of others in positions of leadership risk being spit out like lukewarm water. The Master will know His Own.

IMNSHO Drinan should have been defrocked and excommunicated, publicly and loudly. Pelosi, Sebelius, Kennedy, and all the others should be called out publicly and denied the sacraments.