Cardinal Francis George said Wednesday that he would not deny Communion to Catholic politicians who take positions contrary to church law.
But the archbishop of the Chicago archdiocese said he is still considering the broader issue of how to respond to such politicians, and he awaits a report on the subject from a U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops task force.
Asked whether he would follow at least one other bishop who directed priests to deny Communion to politicians who back abortion rights, George said: “No, not at this point. No.” He made the comments at a downtown luncheon of the City Club of Chicago.
“I don’t have a good answer” to how the church should react to politicians who hold positions contrary to church law, George said. “I’m loath to say we should take too many public positions on that at this point.”
[Full Story]
I can understand why working for the care of individual souls you might decide not to make some of this public. Yet how about a general statement that Catholic politicians who take positions contrary to the faith should themselves abstain from communion until such time as they are actually in communion with the Church. This subject as it becomes more politically charged and is constantly being asked about from the press presents an ideal time to give some catechesis of what communion is and the duties of those who receive communion are. I don’t believe that all Bishops must order a communion ban for Catholic politicians who act contrary to the faith. This is a pastoral action and requires prudence. I do wish that they might realize the scandal caused to the faithful when the response seems to be very weak or non-existent.
6 comments
It’s astonishing to me that the Cardinal must “await a report on the subject from a USCCB task force.” Wait for what? This is “collegiality” run amok – no U.S. prelate wants to make a move or say word (well- almost none) until he has cover from the USCCB.
“The road to hell is paved with the skull of Bshops” – St John Chrysostom
I agree this is a pastoral action, and the form of chastisement should take the form of the dissent.
In Kerry’s case, he publicly takes positions and acts contrary to Catholic teaching. So a public rebuke is called for. Same for Daley and Durbin. If George wants to precede a public rebuke with a private rebuke, that’s fine. But when the private rebuke doesn’t work (assuming it’s even done, when has it ever worked?) then the public rebuke is called for.
Agreed. As a pastor, I would be called upon to do things this same way. Thanks Barrister
I concur with the Barrister and Fr. Tharp. I believe this is what Fr. Tharp calls, “swinging for the fences.”
Their public actions and their brazen, repeated public statements in support of extending and expanding availability of abortion at will, at any time, for any one, for any reason or no reason, all paid for by the taxpayers conclusively prove that John Kerry and his ilk (Nancy Pelosi and the reprobate Kennedy come immediately to mind) are Counterfiet Catholics. These people, by their actions and words, bring shame and disgraceto our Holy Mother Church. They demean the Catholic Church before the world.
The failure of the Church heirarchy to invoke harsh disciplinary measures upon these people for their public defiance of their responsibility as the Catholics they claim to be, further inflames the issue and brings great pain upon true, faithful Catholics.
I, as a faithful Catholic Soldier of Christ and staunch defender of the sanctity oh all human life, born and unborn, am forced to conclude that our Heirarchy appear to be a spineless lot who lack the courage to stand up straight and defend the Faith as they should. A sad state of affairs, indeed, I believe.