Who Are the ‘Real’ Catholics?

MSNBC ^ | 4-13-04 | melinda henneberger

[johnb2004]

April 12 - I was waiting outside Senator Ted Kennedy's office not long ago, listening to one side of a conversation on a subject on which one side is all anyone ever seems to hear. "Yes, Ma'am, he is Catholic,'' the young man answering the senator's phone that day told the caller wearily.

"The senators are not doctors, Ma'am, with the exception of Bill Frist...And I think one of them is a veterinarian...I'm sorry you feel that way, Ma'am...The Pope has met him on several occasions and he considers him Catholic.'' Yes, the aide sighed as he hung up, he gets those calls all the time.

Catholics have also been dialing the Washington archdiocese to weigh in on whether another pro-choice Catholic, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry, could, should or would take communion on Easter. (In the end, he did, in Boston, without incident.) Why would such a private matter even be open to public debate? Because, previously on "How Catholic Is He...'' Archbishop Raymond Burke of St. Louis began the discussion back in February when he announced ahead of the Missouri presidential primary that he, for one, would refuse Kerry the Eucharist since his public stands on abortion and gay unions contradict church teaching. Last week, Kerry brought fresh misery on himself when he fought back by citing a non-existent pope, "Pius XXIII" as a source of his mistaken belief that Vatican II essentially tells Catholics: Whatever. Someone from a group called Priests for Life then accused Kerry of "supporting the dismemberment of babies.'' And for those who just can't get enough on the subject, there are now several new Web sites solely devoted to Kerry's standing in the Church, including ExcommunicateKerry.com.

I can only imagine how smirk-worthy this exercise must seem to non-Catholics, including a few of my acquaintances who are amazed that anyone would want into our not-very-exclusive club after all we’ve learned about how our leaders protected child abusers instead of children over the decades. And the Catholic Church has not survived for more than 2,000 years by excluding, but rather by co-opting everything from Roman holidays to elements of African animism.

So it was a relief to hear Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of Washington respond with a pastoral voice on the Kerry issue. McCarrick is heading a U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops task force on how to handle Catholic politicians who support abortion rights. In an empty meeting room at St. Matthew’s in downtown D.C., where the cardinal led a prayer service last Wednesday, he pulled a couple of dusty folding chairs down from a stack so we’d have someplace to sit while we talked. When I asked about Kerry’s standing, he seemed pained by the idea of turning him, or anyone else, away. “I would find it hard to use the Eucharist as a sanction,” he said gently. “You don’t know what’s in anyone’s heart when they come before you. It’s important that everyone know what our principles are, but you’d have to be very sure someone had a malicious intent [before denying him communion.]” McCarrick is surprisingly humble, and a reluctant judge. “It’s between the person and God,’’ he said. Should Kerry or someone in his campaign seek counsel on Catholic protocol? “What they do,’’ he demurred, “is really their business and not mine.’’ The archdiocese has gotten some calls on the subject from rank-and-file Catholics, but he declined to characterize the faithful as a monolith: “Obviously, we run the spectrum in the Catholic Church, from people who feel very annoyed with their politicians to those who are very supportive.’’

Though this attitude is sure to be criticized as more watered-down Catholicism Lite, I don’t see it that way. At a less orthodox time in my own Catholic life, a nun in my parish in Northern California improved my understanding and appreciation of the sacraments through the underused—and doubtless desperate—strategy of working with me instead of turning me away. I had agreed to teach a parish Sunday school class for second-graders preparing to make their first communion—until it dawned on me that I would also be expected to instruct them on the sacrament formerly known as confession. “I haven’t been in a while myself,” I told her. “That’s fine,’’ she said briskly. “Maybe you’ll go now.’’ Like her, McCarrick seems to feel that we only get better if we stick around and practice.

For some, this willingness to meet people where they are amounts to an acknowledgment that the clerical sex scandals have undermined the bishops’ ability to lead. But McCarrick disagrees. “You have conversations that are compassionate but clear. You’re not doing anyone a favor if you’re not clear.’’ He seems confident that the church as a whole is ready to move beyond the scandals now. But, he said, “You can only move forward if the people believe that we appreciate the harm that’s been done, and understand the sadness and the betrayal.’’

“We’ve had this trauma, but we can’t stay in darkness; that’s the whole Easter message. We’re an Easter people and Alleluia is our song,’’ he said, quoting Augustine. Throughout the trial that the scandal has been to all American Catholics, that song sometimes seemed impossible to sing. The wounds will not heal quickly, and they are sure to be ripped open occasionally, too. Only last week, a 72-year-old priest in Orange County, California was removed from the ministry after pleading guilty to molesting a 15-year-old girl as he sat with her in the back seat of a car—while her parents rode up front.

[TYVets]

"While America's military strength is important, let me add here that I have always maintained that the struggle now going on for the world will never be decided by bombs or rockets, by armies or military might. The real crisis we face today is a spiritual one; at root, it is a test of moral will and faith." --Ronald Reagan

[TYVets]

"While America's military strength is important, let me add here that I have always maintained that the struggle now going on for the world will never be decided by bombs or rockets, by armies or military might. The real crisis we face today is a spiritual one; at root, it is a test of moral will and faith." --Ronald Reagan

[nickcarraway]

Narses, I think you should say the Catholic Church has always held that the death penalty can be used legitimately by a government. Saying the Church always supported the death penalty isn't quite the way to put it. Sorry to nitpick.

[thegreatbeast]

“I would find it hard to use the Eucharist as a sanction,” he said gently. “You don’t know what’s in anyone’s heart when they come before you. It’s important that everyone know what our principles are, but you’d have to be very sure someone had a malicious intent [before denying him communion.]” McCarrick is surprisingly humble, and a reluctant judge. “It’s between the person and God,’’ he said. Should Kerry or someone in his campaign seek counsel on Catholic protocol? “What they do,’’ he demurred, “is really their business and not mine.’’....." “You have conversations that are compassionate but clear. You’re not doing anyone a favor if you’re not clear.’’

Stuff & nonsense! What kind of shephard would leave his flock to wander where they may and then attribute their devourng by wolves an Act of God?...Where is the clarity in allowing some follow the Luciferian Commandment: Do What Thou Wilt?

[Aquinasfan]

The official Catholic church position is to be against abortion and the death penalty.

The Church regards abortion as it regards murder. The Church sees no moral difference.

The Church's position regarding the death penalty is different. The Church has always maintained that the State, in principle, has the right to impose the death penalty for serious crimes like murder. Whether the death penalty should be imposed in particular cases, however, is a matter of prudential judgement.

The current pope has said that since it is now possible in some societies to incarcerate criminals for life without risk to society, there is no need for the death penalty. This is a prudential recommendation, not a repudiation of the death penalty in principle.

Why this furor over a "pro-choice" politician receiving communion and not the same furor over a "pro-death penalty" politician receiving communion?

Because abortion, like murder, is always wrong (except when the mother's life is at risk). It's intrinsically evil. The imposition of the death penalty isn't always wrong. It isn't intrinsically evil.

Kerry after all never committed an abortion and said he is personally against abortion.

Just substitute the word "murder" for "abortion," and the Church's reasoning becomes clear: "Kerry after all never committed a murder and said he is personally against murder, [but he thinks women should have the right to choose murder].

But being a man and not a doctor he will never commit an abortion personally. So what is his sin? Allowing others to be able to commit the sin of abortion? When did allowing someone the free will to commit a sin become a sin?

Failing to work to criminalize murder (abortion), as a legislator, is a grave sin of ommission.

[OpusatFR]

"Kerry after all never committed an abortion and said he is personally against abortion. But being a man and not a doctor he will never commit an abortion personally. So what is his sin?"

I am no theologian. But I know my faith. The sins of omission and commission are probably not thought of by many people, but they are sins.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11251b.htm

"Omission" is here taken to be the failure to do something one can and ought to do. If this happens advertently and freely a sin is committed. Moralists took pains formerly to show that the inaction implied in an omission was quite compatible with a breach of the moral law, for it is not merely because a person here and now does nothing that he offends, but because he neglects to act under circumstances in which he can and ought to act. The degree of guilt incurred by an omission is measured like that attaching to sins of commission, by the dignity of the virtue and the magnitude of the precept to which the omission is opposed as well as the amount of deliberation."

To me, the ability to CAST THE VOTE in issues that are moral truths is omission.

Of course, as I said. I am no theologian, nor am I judging the man. I merely measure my own thoughts and attitudes against Kerry who brings his Catholicism into the presidential race.

[johnb2004]

"Because abortion, like murder, is always wrong (except when the mother's life is at risk). It's intrinsically evil. The imposition of the death penalty isn't always wrong. It isn't intrinsically evil."

Just to clarify, you do not mean to say that abortion is ever morally justified do you? In those rare circumstances that a mother's life may hang in the balance, then delivering the baby early may be required and the baby may die in the process, but intention is everything. To intentionally abort is a grave sin.

[Aquinasfan]

Just to clarify, you do not mean to say that abortion is ever morally justified do you?

It can be if the life of the mother is in grave danger. It would be an application of the principle of double-effect. Consider the case of a woman with an ectopic pregnancy. In order to save the mother's life, the baby must be removed from the fallopian tube. Removing the baby will kill the baby. But the primary intention of the action isn't to kill the baby, but to save the mother's life. One action has two effects, one good and one bad. The secondary effect isn't worse than the good effected by the primary act, so the primary act is permissible.

[johnb2004]

Yes, so the intention is not to abort. The intention is to save the mother's life, but the child dies in the process.

[Aquinasfan]

I was wrestling with how to word that, because of the objection you mentioned. Is it appropriate to say that abortion is never permissible? Yes, if this qualification is added.

[johnb2004]

I have no training in moral theology or logic. I understand and accept the principle of double effect, but it seems to me that if something is intrinsically evil, then it may never be done. Never.

In the case of an ectopic pregnancy or cancerous uterus my understanding is that the baby may be removed with the intention of saving the mother's life. The intention is not direct abortion. I do not know if the medical procedure would be classified as a surgical abortion by the profession, but certainly it would not be thought of as an abortion by the Church. Correct?

[Aquinasfan]

...it would not be thought of as an abortion by the Church. Correct?

As far as I know. The action would be categorized primarily as a life saving operation.

[Destro]

Just asking - I am not a Catholic. Thanks for the info. Thsi sin of omission only applies to legislatures then? And it is enough to deny holy communion?

[BlackElk]

Ummmmmm, whatever the drawbacks of Theodore Cardinal McCarrick (and they are very possibly many) including his apparent reluctance to crack down on the pro-abort public officials, he DOES allow the Tridentine Latin Mass at Old St. Mary's in DC which is attended by Pat Buchanan and his wife. To suggest that he would punish the saying of Latin Masses is neither fair nor true.

[MarkBSenior]

There is a difference between allowing and supporting.

[OpusatFR]

How would I know. I'm not a Bishop. I do know that not doing something when you should and when it is a moral imperative is a serious failing for everyone.

How many times have people stood around and done nothing when action is called for in a given situation?

[ninenot]

Yes, there IS a difference between 'allowing' and 'supporting.'

In the case at hand, it's irrelevant. The Old Rite is said at a prominent location, accessible, decent time of the day, reverently, etc., etc.

Although I am loathe to quote Sinkspur approvingly, now and then he's right--(in general terms) 'you can't FORCE people to go to the Old Rite Mass.'

[Destro]

So if I am a Catholic and I don't block the door to an abortion clinic for a woman about to get an abortion I am sinning?

[Tuco Ramirez]

Definitely true; the "seamless garment" was invented by America's "lavender mafia"...

[Tuco Ramirez]

Mister McCarrick even got slammed by the NRA; not an easy task for a "reverend".