Ad Assails D.C. Cardinal For Stance on Communion

Ad Assails D.C. Cardinal For Stance on Communion

By Alan Cooperman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, May 7, 2004; Page A03


A Roman Catholic antiabortion group launched an advertising campaign against Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick of Washington yesterday, attacking him for saying he is not comfortable denying Communion to Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.) and other Catholic members of Congress who support abortion rights.



The Virginia-based American Life League said the advertisements are the beginning of a $500,000 print ad campaign targeting bishops who are reluctant to punish Catholic politicians for taking policy positions that defy the church. The first ad shows Jesus in agony on the cross and asks: "Cardinal McCarrick: Are you comfortable now?"

Under pressure from such groups and from the Vatican, a small but growing number of U.S. bishops have said they would deny the Eucharist, which Catholics believe is the body and blood of Christ, to elected officials such as Democratic presidential candidate Kerry and the governor of New Jersey.

But the increasingly aggressive, personal criticism of bishops and politicians is running into opposition from Catholics across the political spectrum. Some conservatives fear the tactics may backfire and raise sympathy for Kerry. Some liberals say the church is opening itself to charges of partisanship and could revive the charge that haunted John F. Kennedy, that Catholic politicians take orders from Rome.

~snip~
more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A6871-2004May6.html

And that whole ugly mess.

You know I used to love being a Catholic. I thought we held some kind of moral high ground. Now I just hang my head in shame.

Pedophile priests, arch-conservative archbishops, and spun spin doctors.

I guess I shouldn't be too angry though-they're still giving communion to the Gropinator in California and the Adulterator in New York.

Damn, still hanging my head in shame.

I just don't get why they want to do this. (Withhold the Eucharist) Don't they realize that ALL the people vote for the Senators, Reps etc?

It looks like they're trying to control all the Catholics in the US. In San Diego (hardly a hotbed of liberal Catholic thought) a few years back they pulled the withholding Eucharist ploy on a democratic state politician. There was a huge outpouring of support for her. From where? The local Protestant congregations.

I feel I'm kind of in some strange limbo. I can't really support abortion because (of my Catholic education) I can't reconcile the "when does life begin" question, but on the otherhand I just can't support the death penalty either.

The conservatives have a kind of reverse philosophy on abortion. I call it catch and release. We don't want to kill them until they get a little bigger-like maybe 12 or so.

I've seen that too. Make the young adult age 17 carry the child to term and then cut off any benefits for her or the child, or aid to assist her in raising the child.

Then they argue for adoption--- force her to give up the baby. I just don't know-- when I was young they still had orphanages. There seemed to be no lack of children there.

At almost age 60 I have come to the realization that history is written by the Victor.

I had all the answers back then. I must have forgotten them all

When I was a boy of 14, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be 21, I was astonished at how much the old man had learned in seven years.
--Mark Twain Bringing Up Father

Didn't want to register, so I don't know all the details. Are these conservative Catholics, or others? If "others," where do they get the idea that they can tell Catholic leaders what they should do? And, if they're Catholics, where did they get the idea that they can influence the church leaders? The Catholic Church has been emphasizing that the rules come from the top down for a long time -- something that doesn't sit well with some American Catholics. And a question: is denying the Eucharist to a Catholic de facto excommunication?

Since communion is an integral part of Catholic beliefs, being one of the seven sacraments, denial is a serious thing to a practicing Catholic.

I'm not really up on Canon Law right now but excommunication is a much more involved process. I can research it though and give you an answer in a few hours.

it seems to be de facto excommunication -- isn't "excommunication" denial of the sacraments? Does a Catholic have the right to receive sacraments until he or she is formally excommunicated? I'm wondering if these pronouncements by bishops amount to excommunication or not.

I'd also like to know who's stirring this up. If it's non-Catholic conservatives, it's clearly political meddling in a religion that isn't their own, aimed at hurting Kerry and other pro-choice politicians.

Hi,
I checked their web site and it looks like it is probably a legitimate Catholic antiabortion site. So their a bunch of my fellow Catholics who put aside their conscience on all the other Reichsfuhrer's programs and focused on this one issue to make sure he can continue his reign of terror on the unsuspecting people of the world.

Like I said before I have problems with abortion myself but I would probably not have complained if Barbara Bush would have had one-no make that two.

According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, excommunication carries the following penalty: loss of the sacraments, public services and prayers of the Church, ecclesiastical burial, jurisdiction, benefices, canonical rights, and social intercourse with the Church body.

Also they state who can excommunicate:
".....they may come from the pope alone or a general council for the entire Church; from the provincial council; from the bishop for his diocese; from the prelate nullius; and from regular prelates for religious orders. But a parish priest cannot inflict this penalty nor even declare that it is incurred, i. e. he cannot do so in an official and judicial manner."

So it is within the Church's power to withhold communion from Kerry but denial of his right to the other sacraments would of necessity require a formal order of excommunication.

Denial of communion or Eucharistic celebration is a serious forfeiture for a Catholic but in no way does it constitute excommunication.

Hope this helps.

I was educated in Catholic schools, I even went to a Jesuit college.

We started attending a Presbyterian church 2 years ago. I couldn't go to Mass any longer and have priests sermonize to me about what a sinner I am.

See what a Catholic education does to you!:toast:

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2004/05/06/shanley_defrocked_in_wake_of_abuse_scandal/

Thankfully, the RC church still has a few cardinals who are level-headed but I find it uncomfortable (for lack of a better word) to listen to these men who allowed the child abuse to go on unpunished talking to me about my choices and denying communion. This non-practicing Catholic (who once sat through a sermon in which the priest said women who DON'T have children are wrong) is terribly conflicted about the church she grew up with.

my comment was mean to illustrate the hypocrisy of the whole thing.

I find it all very disturbing. I had 2 uncles who were priests and I wish they were still around so I could get their thoughts on all this. (One was a Jesuit from Boston so that could have been very interesting.)

seems awfully close to being in jeopardy if they haven't already crossed the line on this issue.

There must be a Republican group within the Catholic Church that is pushing this.

The only politician that has received a definite "yes" that they will be denied communion is Democratic Gov. McGreevey of New Jersey. I wouldn't be suprised if they started going after Pelosi and other pro-choice Dems now.

for moral outrage.

The Catholic church heirarchy--both here and in the Vatican--is dominated by jaded, dryed-up, presumably celibate old men who are above all else profoundly rigid ultra-conservatives.

These men have a definite political agenda--both in the church and in US politics. They are playing many faithful Catholics like fiddles. They are nothing more than despicable right-wing zealots, and need to be treated that way--I don't care what their rank in the church is.

Is Opus Dei operating in The Vatican?

http://www.mond.at/opus.dei/opus.dei.uo.faq.html

<snip>
6. Q: What are the negative things in Opus Dei?

A: In short:

The Fascist ideology in Escriva's teachings. The fundamentalism. The
Intolerance towards other religions.
The dishonesty.
The danger inherent in the undemocratic structure of blindly following orders.
The danger inherent in the psychological control they have of their members due to the ``weekly chat'' where they have to tell the innermost details of their souls to their spiritual leaders.
The aggressive and manipulative way in which they try to catch new members.
The evil character of the founder.
The fact that they do not reveal their true goals and keep a lot of material secret from the public.
The smug thinking of belonging to an elite.

is Opus Dei. Cardinal Ratzinger, very powerful and makes many of the decisions for the pope, is Opus Dei.

I was wondering when this might happen. I am a practicing Catholic and I love my church. I believe that abortion in cases other than rape or incest is wrong. You can flame me if you want--I can take it. But I also believe that war except in cases of national defense -- such as invasion of our country (which has happened in almost 200 years), capitol punishment, not paying a living wage to employees, poor health benefits, etc. is also wrong and that's why I am a Democrat who is going to vote for John Kerry in November.
PS - I have taught CCD for over 20 years and I have training in Canon Law and I was taught that you can't deny the sacraments their delivery can only be stalled.

of choice on abortion?

In other words, war by its very nature must be conducted through the legal processes of a nation (declaring war, conscription, funding the military, etc.) So laws are necessary when it comes to war.

But laws are NOT necessary when it comes to abortion. There is no reason to pass laws that forbid someone who disagrees with your view from having an abortion. To do so makes your view of what is right or wrong unnecessarily restrict the freedom of others to their own view.

raised and confirmed in the Church, who decided long ago to go my own way on the spritual path. The Episcopal Church follows with some pride the practices of the Roman Catholic Church. I had a belly full after seeing so much hypocrisy exhibited in the church and was a participant in that hypocrisy. I divorced my 1st husband. When we decided to give it another try the desire was to be remarried in the church. No problem, my minister said the original marriage would be null and void (in spite of the fact we were married in church, had a child and 10 years of living in sin (I guess). I have known too many divorced people who have been allowed a new marriage in the Church (some the bride wearing white) inspite of the tenets of the church. This sort of manipulation of the bywords and laws of the church is hypocrisy at it's worst. I still value my spiritual upbringing, mainly because it put me on other paths to finding my spiritual self.

that a priest had to conduct communion. Communion is a ceremonial function designed by the Catholic church and followed by offspring churches. Anyone can commume with Jesus while 'breaking bread' in remembrance of Him. If you are a good Christian just remember Jesus while enjoying that salmon sandwich with your glass of wine.

Jesus never specified anything, for that matter. The "Last Supper" and the "Eucharist" and the "Body and Blood of Christ" are all inventions of St. Paul who never even met Jesus, except in a dream.

Some substantial time after Paul wrote, the formal Catholic Church declared the Eucharist was the literal body and blood of Christ, a transformation accomplished through a mystical process called transubstantiation which can only be invoked by an ordained Catholic priest.

I have no problem with the beliefs of others or of their churches, considering they don't advocate death and destruction. I just believe that politics and religion don't mix. The results of that meld can be seen in countries in the Mideast. And I think of the struggle between Ireland and England, so much religiosity for so many years has contributed to that struggle.

even-handed here.
Refuse the communion to all the pro death penalty pol's...whats that? you cant do that?
Why??, because the RETHUGS are going to give you tax money...for the poor.
Like those bastards care about the poor.
Jerk their tax exemption NOW!!.

supporting the D.C. Cardinal and criticizing the Vatican for insisting that Catholic politicians follow Papal law instead of the U.S. Constitution?

How can we get the ball rolling here? We need to show the world that Catholics aren't all anti-choice, and that all Catholics aren't anti-Democrat.

That latter should be obvious as the majority of Catholics are registered Democrats.

david

There's a group of catholics who picket outside of the church that Jennifer Granholm attends. The neighbors have been complaining because they hold up signs with pictures that no one wants their kids to see, on either side of the issue.

In my opinion, the catholic church has lost all moral leadership in this country by allowing priests to molest children and not keeping those priests they knew about from abusing more children. But, then again, I'm not a catholic and the ones I know are for the most part liberals who disagree with the church about abortion and birth control.

They really don't have any right, by Catholic doctrine, to question the judgement of His Eminence the Cardinal Archbishop, a prince of the Church, in this matter. The Church's heirarchy is structured so that the decisions of a cardinal are more or less final in his archdiocese, and the only way this is going to change is if the pope decides to replace the cardinal with someone else.

Look at what's up next, according to Catholic Citizens of Illinois: sodomy and gay marriage. If such groups have their way (and I'll wager they won't), the Catholic Church is going to look EXACTLY like Fred Phelps and his band of followers -- obsessed, mean-spirited, and completely insane.

That said, however, I'm very angry about the inconsistency and cherry-picking regarding moral issues in the church. We're all sinful human beings, and the scandals in the church have more than brought that home, and now someone's proposing shunning based on one or two issues? What about the individual conscience? What about the obligation of the church to serve? What about facing up to its own sins, current and historical?

I must confess that I have repeatedly thought of leaving the Catholic Church recently. I don't like the way my diocese has cozied up to the Bush administration and sought additional funds for Catholic schools. It's not the taxpayers' obligation to finance parochial schools. I'm tempted to withhold donations to the diocese -- and let them know why.

How very "Christian" of them!