On Saturday at the Vigil Mass, Mr. Kerry received Communion again from the Paulist center. Fr. Joe Ciccone (Paulist Center): “We’re following the directive of our archdiocese,” said Father Joe Ciccone, who gave Kerry the Eucharist. “They have said we should give him communion.”
This reply by Fr. Ciccone does not ring very true. In another story today on the Paulist center.
Sen. John Kerry regularly receives Communion attracts Catholics uncomfortable with some of the Vatican’s orthodox teachings or who otherwise feel alienated from the Roman Catholic Church.
The Paulist Center’s congregation includes gay couples, whose adopted children are baptized there, unlike in some other Boston parishes. In November, its leaders refused to read aloud during Mass from a letter opposing gay marriage, as requested by the Massachusetts bishops.
The congregation is not geographical, but ideological, drawing people from as far as away as New Hampshire, said Drew Deskur, the center’s music director and a parishioner for 25 years.
“It’s not St. Around-the-Corner,” Deskur said. “It’s an intentional community that draws people from all over Boston. It tries to make sure that everyone feels welcome and that everyone participates in the liturgy.”
[Full Story]
In an old post I had once said that many of these places should rename themselves to the Saulists since they have reversed St. Paul’s conversion and fallen back onto the horse. There is more than just the scandal of giving Communion to people who stand opposed to basic teaching by the Church on life, but also those pockets of resistance that while being part of a diocese have become heretical in many of the sexual teachings of the Church. It is hard enough for a Bishop to be responsible for teaching the faith to the flock without priests un-teaching the faith.
20 comments
If anyone says that St Paulist center is a Catholic Church with all the fullness of the Catholic Church, ANATHEMA SIT!
Amen, Mr. Miller.
I’d also like a lot of the “Newman Centers” to change their name, since they too often espouse the theological liberalism that the Venerable referred to as ‘this great ‘apostasia’ “.
Peace, all.
Why not just concentrate on hammering away at the pro-life message and not waste energy on who’s receiving Communion and who’s a heretic and who shouldn’t be desecrating Cardinal Newman’s name? The next thing you know, MaChurch Catholics will demand Prots not use the name Christian because they do not have the fullness of faith. (Isn’t it bad enough they call themselves churches?) The only heresy we have any control over is our own.
Todd,
The reason to point out the behavior of the Paulists in regard to Kerry is that it constitutes public scandal. It is a classic example of the social nature of sin.
I’m using scandal in the sense used in the Catechism:
2284 Scandal is an attitude or behavior which leads another to do evil. The person who gives scandal becomes his neighbor’s tempter. He damages virtue and integrity; he may even draw his brother into spiritual death. Scandal is a grave offense if by deed or omission another is deliberately led into a grave offense.
2285 Scandal takes on a particular gravity by reason of the authority of those who cause it or the weakness of those who are scandalized. It prompted our Lord to utter this curse: “Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened round his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.” Scandal is grave when given by those who by nature or office are obliged to teach and educate others. Jesus reproaches the scribes and Pharisees on this account: he likens them to wolves in sheep’s clothing.
2286 Scandal can be provoked by laws or institutions, by fashion or opinion. Therefore, they are guilty of scandal who establish laws or social structures leading to the decline of morals and the corruption of religious practice, or to “social conditions that, intentionally or not, make Christian conduct and obedience to the Commandments difficult and practically impossible.” This is also true of business leaders who make rules encouraging fraud, teachers who provoke their children to anger, or manipulators of public opinion who turn it away from moral values.
2287 Anyone who uses the power at his disposal in such a way that it leads others to do wrong becomes guilty of scandal and responsible for the evil that he has directly or indirectly encouraged. “Temptations to sin are sure to come; but woe to him by whom they come!
Kerry and Communion
While I’m always for being critical, can’t we just deal with the fact that Kerry receives communion on a regular…
Kerry and Communion
Jeff Miller on the Paulist Center While I’m always for being critical, can’t we just deal with the fact that…
The trouble is that, politically speaking, Kerry wins either way. If he receives Communion, he’s a real Catholic. If he’s refused, he’s a victim of a hate-filled bunch of zealots stuck in the Middle Ages. If he sticks to the Paulist Center the political fallout is at any rate minimized: most Catholics are aware that there are loose cannons on deck, and even my mother knows that anything that says “Maryknoll” or “Paulist” is apt to be odd.
What does “MaChurch” mean?
Amen Donna!
If we are going to get picky about who gets communion and who doesn’t, should we deny communion to all catholics who’ve had premarital sex; should we deny communion to everyone who knowingly remained silent while the sex abuse was going on; should we deny communion to all catholics who do not follow every single word on the Catechism? Come on… what’s all this casting of stones at Kerry and the Paulists?
Concentrate your energy in promoting the pro life cause.
I meant, amen Todd!
Clayton explained it all quite clearly above. Giving public scandal is a different case from individual sins. And, yes, if a priest knows that a certain parishioner has been in the habit of a particular sin, doesn’t acknowledge its wrongness, and says he means to continue in it, he would be right to ask that parishioner about it and act according to the answer. I don’t intend to hold my breath until this becomes a common practice, but it does occasionally happen.
Todd,
“Why not just concentrate on hammering away at the pro-life message and not waste energy on who’s receiving Communion and who’s a heretic…”
Why because this is what Jesus told us to do. In Matthew he told us to rebuke our brother and if they refused to listen to the Church to treat them as a tax collector. He did not mince words when it came to hypocrites and those who falsely taught children.
Paul in his letters told Churches to remove people who were not following the faith and in 1 Cor he talked about those who committed sacrilege by receiving the lord improperly.
How can we hammer away at the pro-life message when we allow those who proclaim themselves Catholics and then allow the murder of children?
Part of the Spiritual works of mercy is to rebuke sinners. It is not charity to allow someone to continue in sin. In the case of those who hold public positions then you also have the element of scandal mixed into to their actions.
It is not either/or it is preach the pro-life message and rebuke those who thumb their nose at the Churches teachings. Is it charity to ignore a child when they do something wrong? No it is charity to remind them that what they are doing is wrong and if they persist to take stronger actions to stop it.
Is it charity to allow someone to receive Communion when they are in objectively grave sin?
Peace, Jeff.
You know I’m no fan or Kerry, but Elinor’s point that this is a lose-lose situation is well taken. My main problem with the line of thinking begun on this thread is that somehow the Paulist Center and most campus ministries are outside of the faith. Jesus most certainly did not say, “If you don’t like someone’s expression of faith in me, just declare them anathema.”
It would be one thing if a “corrector’s” parish did something improper. I find it hard to sympathize with people complaining about what goes on in another parish, especially a different diocese. Personally, I fail to see how Mr Kerry reconciles his political position with his faith. But I’m not scandalized by him. I’m angry at him. There’s a difference.
Mauge-
In response to your (rhetorical?) questions about who should be denied communion: yes until they confess their mortal sin(s), as clearly defined in the Cathechism (COnfession: another Sacrament, but it’s funny how it is rarely demanded as much as Eucharist …).
The examples you gave (should we deny communion to all catholics who’ve had premarital sex; should we deny communion to everyone who knowingly remained silent while the sex abuse was going on) are good examples for that matter …
sorry, forgot to put my name to the previous post ..
Todd,
“Expression of faith?” How in the world is support of homosexual sex and abortion an expression of faith? These actions are a denial of the Catholic faith. I don’t care what parishes engage in what devotions, but I care when something other then the Catholic faith is taught as if it was valid. I am all for parishes involved in true social justice, but that does not give them a pass to be disobedient to the faith and their Bishops on other parts of the faith. Remember the word heretic comes from pick and choose.
As for the lose-lose. I don’t buy it. If he is denied Communion and thus does not commit a sacrilege against “the body and blood of the Lord” then what is lost? We are not suppose to do spiritual works of mercy like rebuking the sinner if it not politically expedient? What matters is that the truth is taught. That people know the truth about the Eucharist and what true Communion is.
My first concern is for Mr. Kerry’s soul and then for the scandal caused to others. Many people in Church history have had actions taken against them by the Church and they later repented.
Mauge,
The only people who can be denied Communion are public sinners. Those whose sins are known to all. It is the sin of detraction to withold Communion to someone whose sin is knowm only to a few.
If someone has had premarital sex and has not repented of it and not gone to confession, they themselves should refrain from Communion until they have repented of it.
If someone knowingly remained silent about abuse, then they too should repent and go to confession before presenting themselves for Communion.
St. Paul talked precisely about examining yourself before partaking in Communion. To say amen when receiving Communion is to say amen to all the Church teaches, not just the parts that appeal to you. If you don’t agree with everything the Church teaches then you should not lie by receiving Communion.
Jeff, can I quote your last paragraph in the letter to the editor I am trying to write? Or better yet, you can write a letter to the editor. I am getting fed up with the media coverage that just doesn’t get what it means to be Catholic!
The media I think knows quite well what it means to be Catholic, they just don’t want any of the millions of poorly catechized Catholics to find out what it is and then potentially oppose their agenda.
I’ll admit, I have a bit of an agenda when it comes to defending the Venerable’s honor, inasmuch as I believe that the association of his name with those who indulge in theological flakiness is a serious detriment to his Cause. People aren’t going to ask for his intercession if they think he is a “patron’ of dissent.
And the termites in secular campus ministry are a very serious problem, since many people make major decisions during their college years, such as what their careers are going to be and whom they will marry. (True, not everyone decides these things then, but enough do to make a big difference.) A good campus ministry can have a huge positive impact. A poor one can cause terrible damage. I was immensely blessed by mine-so much so that I am now contributing to its ministry as a Secular member of the religious community which staffs it. But I’ve come across many people who were disedified or downright scandalized by theirs. Prayer is urgently needed- absolutely ! But so is calling things by their right names-heresy, disobedience and scandal.
Hi,
I don’t usually do this but I just had to say something. Denying the Eucharist to a confirmed Catholic just seems contrary to my very being. What did the Pope do when Bill Clinton came to receive communion from him? What would Jesus do? I think Jesus has already shown us what he would do at the last supper where he gave communion to both Judas and Peter. Judas of course had already betrayed Jesus (I think) and Jesus knew that Peter would betray him in the future.
Now of course denying someone the Eucharist is a different subject than telling someone that they shouldn’t receive until they have reconciled themselves to the Lord.
-Nathan