Statements by Bishops -
on Catholics and Political Responsibility
Updated May 28, 2008
"To claim the right to abortion, infanticide and euthanasia, and to recognize that right in law, means to attribute to human freedom a perverse and evil significance: that of an absolute power over others and against others. This is the death of true freedom..." [Pope John Paul II - Evangelium Vitae 20]
Bishops in the United States have individually expressed concern about Catholics who publicly oppose fundamental Catholic doctrine -- especially politicians. This section includes excerpts from published statements or columns by the bishops, or interviews, with links. (Unless otherwise indicated, click title to go to the complete version on this site, or to access on the site where it originally appeared.)
The items on this page are arranged chronologically, beginning with the earliest -- so that the history of the question can be understood as it developed. This section is updated regularly.
This page are statements between 1990 and 2004, click here for Statements between 2005 and the Present, Click here for Statements between 2008-Present
Index of Bishops' Statements Chronological Order
Alphabetical Order
Archbishop John Myers - June 1990
Bishop William Weigand - January 22, 2003
Archbishop Raymond Burke - November 23, 2003
Archbishop Alfred Hughes - January 14. 2004
Bishop Ronald Gainer- January 18, 2004
Bishop Robert C. Morlino - January 22, 2004
Bishop Thomas Olmsted - March 18, 2004
Archbishop Charles Chaput - April 14, 2004
Cardinal Francis Arinze - April 23, 2004
Bishop Wilton Gregory - April 23, 2004
Bishop Samuel Aquila - April 25, 2004
Bishop Robert Mulvee - April 27, 2004
Bishop Robert McManus - April 27, 2004
Bishop John M. D'Arcy - April 28, 2004
Cardinal Theodore McCarrick - April 29, 2004
Bishop Joseph Galante - April 29, 2004
Bishop John Smith - April 29, 2004
Bishop Michael Sheridan - May 1, 2004
Bishop Carl Mengeling - May 2, 2004
Bishop Joseph V. Adamec - May 3, 2004
Bishop Thomas Wenski - May 3, 2004
Archbishop John Myers - May 5, 2004
Archbishop John Vlazny - May 6, 2004
Archbishop Elden Curtiss - May 7, 2004
Archbishop Daniel Pilarczyk - May 7, 2004
Cardinal Roger Mahony - May 13, 2004
Cardinal Theodore McCarrick - May 13, 2004
Bishop Robert J. McManus - May 21, 2004
Archbishop Michael Sheehan - May 21, 2004
Bishop Thomas Olmsted - May 21 & 24, 2004
Bishop Samuel Aquila - May 23-29, 2004
Bishop Donald Wuerl - May 25, 2004
Archbishop Charles Chaput - May 26, 2004
Cardinal Francis Arinze - May 26, 2004
Bishop John Kinney - May 27, 2004
Bishop Michael Sheridan - May 27 & 29, 2004
Cardinal William H. Keeler - May 28, 2004
Archbishop Nzeki of Kenya - May 30-31, 2004
(USCCB - June Meeting)
Bishop Robert Baker - June 2004
Bishop Robert McManus - June (?) 2004
Bishop Raymundo J. Peña - June 2004
Bishop Michael Sheridan - June 2004
Cardinal Theodore McCarrick - June 1, 2004
Bishop Gerald Kicanas - June 2, 2004
Bishop William Skylstad - June 10, 2004
Bishop Joseph A. Fiorenza - June 11, 2004
Bishop Gregory Aymond - June 11, 2004
Archbishop William Levada - June 13, 2004
Archbishop Raymond Burke - June 21-28, 2004
Bishop Victor Balke - June 24, 2004
Bishop Ronald Gainer - June 24, 2004
Bishop Robert Vasa - June 25, 2004
Cardinal Avery Dulles - June 29, 2004
Bishop Anthony Pilla - July 2004
Bishop Charles Grahmann - July 2, 2004
Bishop William Lori - July 2004
Bishop John Steinbock - July 2004
Bishop Dennis M. Schnurr -July (?) 2004
(Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger - July 4-9, 2004)
Bishop Michael Saltarelli - July 5, 2004
Cardinal Theodore McCarrick - July 6, 2004
Bishop Bernard Harrington - July 8, 2004
Bishop Joseph Gossman - July 8, 2004
Bishop Victor Galeone - July/August 2004
Bishop Bernard Schmitt - July 13, 2004
Archbishop Alexander Brunett - July 19, 2004
Archbishop John F. Donoghue - July 22, 2004
Archbishop William Levada - July 31, 2004
Bishop George L. Thomas - August 2004
Bishop David Ricken - August, 2004
Archbishop John F. Donoghue - August 4, 2004
Bishop Robert Baker - August 4, 2004
Bishop Peter Jugis - August 4, 2004
Bishop Robert Carlson - August 2004
Bishop Gerald Barbarito - August 5, 2004
Bishop Rene Gracida - August 10, 2004
Bishop Lawrence E. Brandt - August 10, 2004
Bishop Bernard Schmitt - August 11, 2004
Bishop Peter Jugis - August 14, 2004
Bishop Howard Hubbard - September-October 2004
Bishop Gregory Aymond - September 2004
Bishop Leonard Blair - September 2, 3, 2004
Archbishop Harry J. Flynn - September 9,2004
Archbishop John F. Donoghue - September 16, 2004
Archbishop John Myers - September 17, 2004
Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio - September 18, 2004
Bishop Rene H. Gracida - September 19, 2004
Archbishop Albert Hughes - September 20, 2004
Archbishop Charles Chaput - September 22, 2004
Bishop Thomas Olmsted - September 22, 2004
Archbishop Raymond Burke - September 24, 2004
Bishop Michael Saltarelli - September 30. 2004
Bishop Phillip F. Straling - October 2004
Florida Bishop's Conference - October 1, 2004
Archbishop Raymond Burke - October 1, 2004
Bishop Joseph Gossman - October 3, 2004
Bishop Rene H. Gracida - October 5, 2004
Bishop William Lori - October 2004
Archbishop Raymond Burke - October 5, 2004
Bishops Raymond Boland & Robert Finn - October 7, 2004
Cardinal Francis George - October 10, 2004
Bishop Edward K. Braxton - October 11, 2004
Bishop Bernard W. Schmitt - October 20, 2004
Bishop Thomas Gumbleton - October 20, 2004
Bishop Thomas Wenski - October 21, 2004
Archbishop Charles Chaput - October 22, 2004
Bishop Kenneth A. Angell - October 23, 2004
Bishop Paul S. Loverde - October 31, 2004
Bishop David Ricken - October 2004
Massachusetts Bishops - October 29, 2004
Cardinal Justin Rigali - October 28, 2004
Bishop George L. Thomas - October 2004
Bishop George Coleman - October 29, 2004
Bishop Timothy McDonnell - October 29, 2004
Bishop Robert McManus - October 29, 2004
Archbishop Sean O'Malley - October 29, 2004
Bishop David Zubik - October 29, 2004
Bishop Samuel Aquila - November 30, 2004Bishop Edward U. Kmiec - January 28, 2005
Cardinal Oscar Andres Rodriguez Maradiaga - February 15, 2006
Cardinal Theodore McCarrick - June 15, 2006
Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann - August 15, 2006
Bishop Ronald M. Gilmore - August 15, 2006
Bishop Paul S. Coakley - August 15, 2006
Bishop Michael O. Jackels - August 15, 2006
Arizona Catholic Conference - September 2006
Arizona Catholic Conference - October 2006
Illinois Catholic Conference - October 2006
Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted - October 2006
Bishop Joseph A. Galante - October 27, 2006
Bishop Paul S. Coakley - January 31, 2007
Bishop Robert Vasa - March 1, 2007
Bishop Thomas Tobin - May 31, 2007
Cardinal George Pell - June 12, 2007
Virginia Catholic Conference - October 2007
(USCCB - November Meeting 2007)
Statements between 2008-Present
Archbishop Charles Chaput - January 16, 2008
Catholic Conference of Kentucky- (January 22, 2008)
Cardinal Edward Egan - April 28, 2008
Archbishop Donald Wuerl - April 30, 2008
Archbishop Joseph Naumann - May 9, 2008
Archbishop Charles Chaput - May 19, 2008
Archbishop Joseph Naumann - May 23, 2008Bishop Joseph V. Adamec - May 3, 2004
Bishop Kenneth A. Angell - October 23, 2004
Bishop Samuel Aquila - April 25, 2004
Bishop Samuel Aquila - May 23-29, 2004
Bishop Samuel Aquila - November 30, 2004
Cardinal Francis Arinze - April 23, 2004
Cardinal Francis Arinze - May 26, 2004
Arizona Catholic Conference - September 2006
Arizona Catholic Conference - October 2006
Bishop Gregory Aymond - June 11, 2004
Bishop Gregory Aymond - September 2004
Bishop Robert Baker - June 2004
Bishop Robert Baker - August 4, 2004
Bishop Victor Balke - June 24, 2004
Bishop Gerald Barbarito - August 5, 2004
Bishop Leonard Blair - September 2, 3, 2004
Bishop Raymond Boland - October 7, 2004
Bishop Lawrence E. Brandt- August 10, 2004
Bishop Edward K. Braxton - October 11, 2004
Archbishop Alexander Brunett - July 19, 2004
Archbishop Raymond Burke - November 23, 2003
Archbishop Raymond Burke - June 21-28, 2004
Archbishop Raymond Burke - September 24, 2004
Archbishop Raymond Burke - October 1, 2004
Archbishop Raymond Burke - October 5, 2004
Bishop Robert Carlson - August 2004
Archbishop Charles Chaput - April 14, 2004
Archbishop Charles Chaput - May 26, 2004
Archbishop Charles Chaput - September 22, 2004
Archbishop Charles Chaput - October 22, 2004
Archbishop Charles Chaput - January 16, 2008
Archbishop Charles Chaput - May 19, 2008
Bishop Paul S. Coakley - August 15, 2006
Bishop Paul S. Coakley - January 31, 2007
Bishop George Coleman - October 29, 2004
Archbishop Elden Curtiss - May 7, 2004
Bishop John M. D'Arcy - April 28, 2004
Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio - September 18, 2004
Archbishop John F. Donoghue - July 22, 2004
Archbishop John F. Donoghue - August 4, 2004
Archbishop John F. Donoghue - September 16, 2004
Cardinal Avery Dulles - June 29, 2004
Cardinal Edward Egan - April 28, 2008
Bishop Robert Finn - October 7, 2004
Bishop Joseph A. Fiorenza - June 11, 2004
Florida Bishop's Conference - October 1, 2004
Archbishop Harry J. Flynn - September 9,2004
Bishop Ronald Gainer- January 18, 2004
Bishop Ronald Gainer - June 24, 2004
Bishop Joseph Galante - April 29, 2004; May 5, 2004
Bishop Joseph A. Galante - October 27, 2006
Bishop Victor Galeone - July/August 2004
Cardinal Francis George - October 10, 2004
Bishop Ronald M. Gilmore - August 15, 2006
Bishop Joseph Gossman - July 8, 2004
Bishop Joseph Gossman - October 3, 2004
Bishop Rene H. Gracida - August 10, 2004
Bishop Rene H. Gracida - September 19, 2004
Bishop Rene H. Gracida - October 5, 2004
Bishop Charles Grahmann - July 2, 2004
Bishop Wilton Gregory - April 23, 2004
Bishop Thomas Gumbleton - October 20, 2004
Bishop Bernard Harrington - July 8, 2004
Bishop Howard Hubbard - September-October 2004
Archbishop Alfred Hughes - January 14. 2004
Archbishop Albert Hughes - September 20, 2004
Illinois Catholic Conference - October 2006
Bishop Michael O. Jackels - August 15, 2006
Bishop Peter Jugis - August 4, 2004
Bishop Peter Jugis - August 14, 2004
Cardinal William H. Keeler - May 28, 2004
Bishop Gerald Kicanas - June 2, 2004
Bishop John Kinney - May 27, 2004
Bishop Edward U. Kmiec - January 28, 2005
Archbishop William Levada - June 13, 2004
Archbishop William Levada - July 31, 2004
Bishop William Lori - July 2004
Bishop William Lori - October 2004
Bishop Paul S. Loverde - October 31, 2004
Cardinal Roger Mahony - May 13, 2004
Cardinal Oscar Andres Rodriguez Maradiaga - February 15, 2006
Catholic Conference of Kentucky- (January 22, 2008)
Massachusetts Bishops - October 29, 2004
Cardinal Theodore McCarrick - April 29, 2004
Cardinal Theodore McCarrick - May 13, 2004
Cardinal Theodore McCarrick - June 1, 2004
Cardinal Theodore McCarrick - July 6, 2004
Cardinal Theodore McCarrick - June 15, 2006
Bishop Timothy McDonnell - October 29, 2004
Bishop Robert McManus - April 27, 2004
Bishop Robert McManus - May 21, 2004
Bishop Robert McManus - June (?) 2004
Bishop Robert McManus - October 29, 2004
Bishop Carl Mengeling - May 2, 2004
Bishop Robert C. Morlino - January 22, 2004
Bishop Robert Mulvee - April 27, 2004
Archbishop John Myers - June 1990
Archbishop John Myers - May 5, 2004
Archbishop John Myers - September 17, 2004
Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann - August 15, 2006
Archbishop Joseph Naumann - May 9, 2008
Archbishop Joseph Naumann - May 23, 2008
Archbishop Nzeki of Kenya - May 30-31, 2004
Bishop Thomas Olmsted - March 18, 2004
Bishop Thomas Olmsted - May 21 & 24, 2004
Bishop Thomas Olmsted - September 22, 2004
Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted - October 2006
Archbishop Sean O'Malley - October 29, 2004
Cardinal George Pell - June 12, 2007
Bishop Raymundo J. Peña - June 2004
Archbishop Daniel Pilarczyk - May 7, 2004
Bishop Anthony Pilla - July 2004
(Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger - July 4-9, 2004)
Bishop David Ricken - August, 2004
Bishop David Ricken - October 2004
Cardinal Justin Rigali - October 28, 2004
Bishop Michael Saltarelli - July 5, 2004
Bishop Michael Saltarelli - September 30. 2004
Bishop Bernard Schmitt - July 13, 2004
Bishop Bernard Schmitt - August 11, 2004
Bishop Bernard W. Schmitt - October 20, 2004
Bishop Dennis M. Schnurr - July (?) 2004
Archbishop Michael Sheehan - May 21, 2004
Bishop Michael Sheridan - May 1, 2004
Bishop Michael Sheridan - May 27 & 29, 2004
Bishop Michael Sheridan - June 2004
Bishop William Skylstad - June 10, 2004
Bishop John Smith - April 29, 2004
Bishop John Steinbock - July 2004
Bishop Phillip F. Straling - October 2004
Bishop George L. Thomas - August 2004
Bishop George L. Thomas - October 2004
Bishop Thomas Tobin - May 31, 2007
(USCCB - June Meeting 2004)
(USCCB - November Meeting 2007)
Bishop Robert Vasa - June 25, 2004
Bishop Robert Vasa - March 1, 2007
Virginia Catholic Conference - October 2007
Archbishop John Vlazny - May 6, 2004
Bishop William Weigand - January 22, 2003
Bishop Thomas Wenski - May 3, 2004
Bishop Thomas Wenski - October 21 2004
Bishop Donald Wuerl - May 25, 2004
Bishop Donald Wuerl - August 18, 2005
Archbishop Donald Wuerl - April 30, 2008
Bishop David Zubik - October 29, 2004
June 1990 Archbishop John Myers - The Obligations of Catholics and the Rights of Unborn Children
This June 1990 Pastoral Statement by Archbishop John Myers, then bishop of Peoria, contains, a clear and very useful description of the meaning of "cooperation" in abortion, including "formal" and "material" cooperation., and the very limited circumstances where "remote material cooperation" can be morally permissible -- such as a "legislator who votes for legislation permitting some abortions in order to prevent the enactment of legislation permitting even more".This explanation is helpful in understanding the meaning of Cardinal Ratzinger's June 2004 letter to Cardinal McCarrick which refers to "formal cooperation" and "remote material cooperation".
(Click title to go to complete Statement on this site.)
January 22, 2003 Bishop William Weigand - Homily on 30th Anniversary of Roe v Wade
On January 22, 2003, Sacramento Bishop William K. Weigand, leader of 500,000 Catholics in Northern California, called on then-Governor Gray Davis to renounce his support of abortion rights or stop taking Holy Communion .
In his homily at Mass at the Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament on the 30th anniversary of the landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion, Bishop Weigand quoted the USCCB's Living the Gospel of Life, and said that Davis should refrain from receiving Communion while he continues to support abortion rights.
"No public official, especially one claiming to be a faithful and serious Catholic, can responsibly advocate for or actively support direct attacks on innocent human life. No appeal to policy, procedure, majority will or pluralism ever excuses a public official from defending life to the greatest extent possible. Those who justify their inaction on the grounds that abortion is the law of the land need to recognize that there is a higher law, the law of God....
"As your bishop, I have to say clearly that anyone -- politician or otherwise -- who thinks it is acceptable for a Catholic to be pro-abortion is in very great error, puts his or her soul at risk, and is not in good standing with the Church,. Such a person should have the integrity to acknowledge this and choose of his own volition to abstain from receiving Holy Communion until he has a change of heart."
Bishop Weigand said afterward that "in general, we do not refuse Communion to anyone; we try to instruct people as to when it would not be appropriate", according to a news story in The Sacramento Bee, January 23, 2003.
Click title or highlighted text above to access the bishop's homily on the Sacramento diocesan web site.
November 2003 Archbishop Raymond Burke - Pastoral Letter On the Dignity of Human Life and Political Responsibility (click title for complete version on this site)
A pastoral letter, dated November 23, 2003, was written when Archbishop Burke was bishop of La Crosse, Wisconsin. He had been forced by recalcitrant pro-abortion Catholic politicians to inhibit them from receiving Communion. His action was widely publicized after the likelihood of a pro-abortion Catholic as presidential candidate seemed almost certain.
The letter amply cites recent papal teaching,and the US Bishops "Living the Gospel of Life" (quoted above). Following are two quotes:"Sadly, many Catholics misunderstand the meaning of the so-called "separation of Church and state" in our nation and believe that the Word of God, handed on to us in the Church, has no application to political life. Certainly, our government does not endorse or fund a particular Christian denomination or religion. But, at the same time, we, as Roman Catholics, have the right and, indeed, the obligation to inform our consciences and political judgments from the teachings of our faith, especially in what pertains to the natural moral law, that is the order established by God in creation." ...
"Our faith and our political judgments cannot be separate compartments of our lives; they must relate to each other in a life which is lived with integrity. This is especially true with respect to safeguarding the right to life, the foundation of all other rights. "
January 2004 Archbishop Alfred Hughes - Co-responsibility for Public Policy
In his column in the diocesan paper January 14, 2004, "Co-responsibility for Public Policy", New Orleans Archbishop Alfred Hughes spoke specifically about Catholic officials who support policies inimical to Catholic teaching receiving Holy Communion:
"A recent Vatican document, A Doctrinal Note on Some Questions Regarding the Participation of Catholics in Political Life, [see above] offers valuable guidance in the above issues for public figures. This document does not propose a Catholic agenda, but clarifies for Catholics those truths that are rooted in nature. The Louisiana bishops are sending a copy of this document to each of our elected Catholic public officials in Baton Rouge and Washington. When Catholic officials openly support the taking of human life in abortion, euthanasia or the destruction of human embryos, they are no longer faithful members in the Church and should not partake of Holy Communion. Moreover, citizens who promote this unjust taking of human life by their vote or support of such candidates share in responsibility for this grave evil.
(For complete version, click title above to link to Archbishop Hughes's statement on the New Orleans archdiocesan web site.)
Bishop Ronald Gainer Warns Catholic Politicians of "False Dichotomy"- January 18, 2004
In a "Bishop's Forum" statement published January 18, 2004 in the Lexington diocesan newspaper, Crossroads, Bishop Ronald Gainer announced the day of penance to be observed on January 22, the anniversary of Roe v. Wade. The bishop stressed the obligation of all Catholics politicians and voters to uphold the right to life. He wrote, in part:
"A cause of particular sadness and concern are those in public service who claim to be serious Catholics and advocate for or actively support direct attacks on innocent human life. These individuals have fallen victim to thinking that there can be a dichotomy between personal conscience and public practice. That is false. I am certainly grateful for those Catholics in public life (and all politicians) who work diligently to promote the Gospel of Life.
"I take this opportunity to warn Catholic politicians within this diocese who in their public careers choose to depart from Church teaching regarding the inviolability of all human life. They need to consider the consequences of their position for their own spiritual well being, as well as the scandal they cause by leading others into serious moral danger. I urge all Catholics who hold public office to examine your consciences in light of the Gospel duty to protect all human life. Hear this as the Lord Himself calling you to do your part."
Bishop Gainer's complete message in Crossroads is reprinted on this site, with permission.
(Click title above to go to complete statement )
Bishop Robert C. Morlino - "Mind of Christ: Must not be set aside in public office"
In a statement issued January 22, 2004, Bishop Robert Morlino expressed his and other Wisconsin bishops' support of Archbishop Raymond Burke's action. It was published in the diocesan paper, the Catholic Herald and on the Madison diocesan web site. The statement said, in part,
"Archbishop Burke is on target as he spells out the principles of the Church's teaching, and his brother bishops stand with him in episcopal communion and collegiality. All are aware that Archbishop Burke has come under fire lately from certain public office holders, and reports of this difficult situation have enjoyed more than ample attention in the mass media", Bishop Morlino wrote.
"It is indeed the case that Catholics who are public office holders enjoy the blessing of only one conscience - they do not have one conscience for their private lives and one for their public responsibility, one for Church matters and another for State matters. ... it is clearly not possible for a Catholic public office holder to leave the mind of Christ aside as he or she enters a Senate or House chamber".
(Click title above to go to complete statement on Madison Catholic Herald web site.)
March 2004 Bishop Olmsted: Rebutting the "Catholic but..."
Phoenix Bishop Thomas Olmsted, in his column March 18 in his diocesan paper, the Catholic Sun, warned against the compromising "Catholic, but..." stance -- not only for politicians:
"The 'Catholic but' syndrome stands in direct contradiction to Jesus' clear and unequivocal demand (Mk 8:34-36), 'Whoever wishes to come after me must deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me. For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake and that of the Gospel will save it. What profit is there for one to gain the whole world and forfeit his life?'"
"Now is the time to say 'yes' when we mean yes, and to say 'no' when we mean no", he said in his Lenten column.
(He did not comment explicitly on administering Communion to pro-abortion politicians or voters.)
(Click title above to go to complete version on the Catholic Sun web site.)
See BELOW for Bishop Olmsted's May 24 correction of a news story that reported he would not deny Communion to pro-abortion Catholic politicians.
April 2004 Archbishop Charles Chaput: How to tell a duck from a fox - Thinking with the Church as We Look Toward November
Denver Archbishop Charles Chaput wrote about Catholics and political responsibility in his column posted the week of April 14, 2004. .
Archbishop Chaput spoke strongly on the lack of integrity of some Catholic politicians, and emphasiszed the requirement that one's actions be consistent with one's beliefs. He concluded,
"We've come a long way from John F. Kennedy, who merely locked his faith in the closet. Now we have Catholic senators who take pride in arguing for legislation that threatens and destroys life -- and who then also take Communion.
"The kindest explanation for this sort of behavior is that a lot of Catholic candidates don't know their own faith."
The very next week, April 21, Archbishop Chaput's column, "What Vatican II did -- and didn't -- teach about conscience", explained Vatican II's teaching on conscience -- and stressed that "elections and voting booths are not 'faith-free' zones". He wrote, in part:
Vatican II can never be invoked as an alibi for Catholics ignoring grave public evil or failing to act on their faith in the political sphere. That's a distortion of the council's message. It also misreads the U.S. Constitution. America's Founding Fathers did not say, and never intended, that religious faith should be excluded from civic debate. They intended one thing only: to prevent the establishment of an official state church. A purely secular interpretation of the "separation of church and state" would actually result in the "separation of state and morality." And that would be a catastrophe for real pluralism and the democratic process.
If we're sincere about our faith, "conscience" can never be used as an excuse for dismissing what the Church teaches by pointing to her theological critics, voter surveys or public opinion polls, and then doing what we find more convenient. That's dishonest. And God made us for something better than that.
(Click highlighted titles to read columns on the Denver archdiocesan web site)
See below for Archbishop Chaput's May 26 column on this topic, or click It's a Matter of Honesty and check index above for other statements, columns of Archbishop Chaput on this topic.
Question to Cardinal Arinze Sparks Flurry
Cardinal Francis Arinze, prefect of the Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments, was interviewed on April 23, after he presented a disciplinary Instruction on the Eucharist, Redemptionis sacramentum [link on Adoremus site]. The Instruction's 185 paragraphs on correcting liturgical abuses included a brief paragraph (82) simply citing the Church's existing norms on "objective conditions under which Communion may not be given".
At a press conference following the presentation of the Instruction, a reporter asked the cardinal whether Senator John Kerry should be denied Communion because his position on abortion and other issues that conflict with Church doctrine. Cardinal Arinze replied that "the norm of the Church is clear", and that American bishop should determine its application. When asked if a priest should refuse Communion to a Catholic politician who supports abortion, Cardinal Arinze said, "Yes. If he should not receive, he should not be given."
Cardinal Arinze's comments were widely reported in the US media, and later the same day, Bishop Wilton Gregory, president of the US Conference of Catholic bishops, issued a statement (published on the USCCB web site April 23) which said that "as Cardinal Arinze stated, it is the responsibility of the bishops of the United States to deal pastorally with such situations as they exist here. Each diocesan bishop has the right and duty to address such issues of serious pastoral concern", and he mentioned the USCCB "task force" that is studying the matter.
On April 27, the two Providence bishops, Bishop Robert Mulvee and Bishop Robert McManus also issued a clarification of Cardinal Arinze's comment, in a statement posted on the Providence diocesan web site. "The document, The Sacrament of Redemption, as approved by the Holy Father, does not specifically address any criteria for excluding Catholic politicians from the reception of the Eucharist based upon their position on life issues", the bishops stated. Bishops Mulvee and McManus also stressed that "The American Bishops have set up a committee to study this very question. Their conclusions have as yet not been presented to the Bishops of our country for consideration". (Note: Bishop McManus became bishop of the Diocese of Worcester on May 15.)
Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, of Washington, heads this "task force". His spokeswoman, Susan Gibbs, told reporters that his committee would be unlikely to reach any decision on the issue before the November presidential election. Cardinal McCarrick, according to numerous reports, said that he does not "feel comfortable" denying Communion to anyone, nor with "using" the Eucharist as a "sanction" against pro-abortion Catholic politicians.
Cardinal McCarrick spoke further on Cardinal Arinze's responses in an April 29 interview by National Catholic Reporter's Rome correspondent, John Allen. When asked if Cardinal Arinze was right in saying that a politician who is unambiguously pro-abortion should be denied Communion, Cardinal McCarrick responded,
"I don't think it was his eminence's official opinion. I did speak to the cardinal while I was here in Rome, and I think the cardinal would say that what he wanted to say is what was in the document. In it, it's clear as the church has always taught that to receive communion you have to have the proper disposition, you have to be in communion with the church, and not conscious of serious sin. All those things that are part of our teaching. That's in the document. Then, his official statement that was part of what he read is that all these documents present general norms that the bishops of a country have to put into practice. When he reported to me what had happened, this was not something that he reported as an official or even a personal statement, whatever he might personally believe, and whatever I may even personally believe. The cardinal's position was that this is the teaching of the church, and the bishops of the United States should figure out what they ought to do." [sic, NCR]
(Compiled from various news sources. Click highlighted links to go to statements and interviews.)
Bishop Samuel Aquila, Fargo, North Dakota in his homily presented at his cathedral on April 25, 2004. said that denying Communion to pro-abortion politicians is part of Catholic teaching. His homily is posted on the Fargo diocesan web site (Adobe Acrobat Reader required) http://www.fargodiocese.org/Bishop/Homilies/homily4-25-04.pdf
Bishop Aquila said:
"In the light of the last few days and all of the media coverage regarding John Kerry's unambiguous support of abortion rights, his personal opposition to abortion, and his insistence on the separation of his Catholic faith from his professional life, I, as a successor of the apostles, cannot remain silent. I, as an apostle, must speak with the apostles and obey God rather than man, and present to you the teaching of the Church on the proper relationship between our faith and professional life. Neither the media nor the theologians who support the separation will present the clear teaching of the Church. I have the responsibility and duty before God to teach and to present to you the teaching of the Church on the matter of living one's faith in the world".
Concerning sanctions for Catholics who are pro-abortion, Bishop Aquila cited the words of St. Justin Martyr, who said: "No one may share the Eucharist with us unless he believes that what we teach is true, unless he is washed in the regenerating waters of baptism for the remission of his sins, and unless he lives in accordance with the principles given us by Christ.
"I would remind Catholic politicians, clergy and all of the faithful of the words of St. Paul when he reminds the people who are not living their lives according to the Gospel of Jesus Christ and yet still receive the Eucharist that they bring judgment on themselves," he said. "They bring judgment on themselves. Let those words sink in."
(See below for Bishop Aquila's interview with National Catholic Register, May 23-29 edition.)
Bishop John M. D'Arcy of Fort Wayne-South Bend, issued a statement April 28, explaining his decision not to accept an honorary degree at the University of St. Francis because a pro-abortion speaker had been invited to give the Commencement address. (The school later withdrew the invitation. The speaker was not Catholic.)
Bishop D'Arcy's statement, posted on the diocesan web site (http://www.diocesefwsb.org), said, in part:
"Why did I choose to decline the honorary degree? A bishop is bound to preach the truth, not only in words, but also by his actions. The Church's position on unborn life is well known, and the Church's position is my position. It is my obligation to all the faithful and especially to the young graduates to make sure there is no confusion on this matter. I made the same decision, not to attend the graduation, in 1992 when Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan was awarded the Laetare Medal at the University of Notre Dame. In neither case, did I request that the invitation be withdrawn. As I said then and repeat now, I am simply following my solemn responsibilities as a pastor to avoid any confusion on truths so essential to the life of the Church and society, and always to make clear, in season and out of season, those eternal values for which the Church has always stood and for which she stands today".
On April 30, Bishop D'Arcy told South Bend St. Joseph High School to withdraw its invitation to Indiana Governor Joe Kernan to address its commencement. The governor, a Catholic, says he is "personally opposed" to abortion. St. Joseph is a diocesan school. (Story link to South Bend Tribune - subscription and article fee required.)
Bishop Joseph Galante "Faith and Life Cannot be Separate"
On April 29, the day before Bishop Joseph Galante, was installed as the new bishop of Camden, New Jersey, on April 30, told reporters that Governor James McGreevey could not receive Communion, because the governor, a Catholic, is divorced and remarried -- but Bishop Galante also made a point of citing MdGreevey's support for abortion "rights" and embronic stem-cell research, which conflict with Catholic doctrine.
Bishop Galante told reporters he felt duty bound to take a hard-line stance because "he said the public becomes confused about Church teachings when bishops fail to challenge Catholic politicians on their voting records". Bishop Galante is the former co-adjutor bishop of Dallas.
(Source: AP wire story "Bishop: Gov. McGreevey cannot receive Communion" - April 30, 2004)Bishop Galante confirmed his statements in an official diocesan news release issued May 5.
"A politician can make a decision and say, I'm going to distrgard the values I get from my faith life because they won't get me elected. Well say it. Don't pretend [that the views are compatible with the Catholic faith]" , the news release said. In response to a reporter's question about Governor McGreevy, Bishop Galante said, "He really can't go to communion." Pressed by a reporter who asked wht if the governor presented himself for Commnion, Bishop Galante said, "I'd give him a blessing".The Camden diocesan news release also referred to the Vatican "Doctrinal Note on the Participation of Catholics in Political Life", which said that Catholics have a duty to be "morally coherent".
Bishop John Smith - Faithful Citizenship
In his column April 29, "Faithful Citizenship", Trenton Bishop John Smith wrote that "The First Amendment protects the free exercise of religion. Separation of church and state does not mean that the Church and its members should not voice or advocate for their positions. ... the Church, its leaders and faithful, should speak up and they should speak loudly on public policy issues affecting our society. By so doing, we answer the call to 'faithful citizenship'.
"The Church's positions on issues may not always be the popular or easy road to take for those in public life. Politicians and elected officials often speak of their faith, the faith that guides their lives. They also say, sometimes in the same breath, that public and private beliefs are separate. But isnít that an attempt to justify going against the very faith one professes to believe? Catholic social teaching is being misrepresented in this way. The Gospel of Life places the dignity of all living persons first, for without life there would be nothing. One's faith cannot be separated between public and private. Our faith is lived in every moment. People are chosen to represent their constituencies because of what they profess as their values, their vision, and their ability to bring positive solutions to difficult problems. As people of faith, we too have a responsibility to our elected representatives to stand up for our beliefs and make sure that they are represented in public life. Always remember, it is our votes that place them in public office".
(Click title above to go to complete version on Trenton diocesan web site.)
May 2004 Bishop Michael Sheridan - A Pastoral Letter On the Duties of Catholic Politicians and Voters
On May 1, Colorado Springs Bishop Michael Sheridan instructed the Catholics in his care by a Pastoral Letter in which he said, "There must be no confusion in these matters. Anyone who professes the Catholic faith with his lips while at the same time publicly supporting legislation or candidates that defy God's law makes a mockery of that faith and belies his identity as a Catholic."
Bishop Sheridan strongly affirmed Church teaching not only on abortion and related life issues (illicit stem cell research and euthanasia) which, he said "trumps all other issues", but on other critical issues as well, such as "same-sex marriage".
He states clearly that the so-called "wall of separation" between Church and state does not mean, as some claim, that religion is to refrain from "influencing" society:
"In fact, the wall that separates church and state is the safeguard against both the establishment of a state religion and the imposition of sectarian religious beliefs and practices, such as particular denominational forms of worship or theological tenets. In no way does the American doctrine of separation of church and state even suggest that the well-formed consciences of religious people should not be brought to bear on their political choices.
Bishop Sheridan is emphatic in stating the consequences for all Catholics of supporting immoral legislation:
Any Catholic politicians who advocate for abortion, for illicit stem cell research or for any form of euthanasia ipso facto place themselves outside full communion with the Church and so jeopardize their salvation. Any Catholics who vote for candidates who stand for abortion, illicit stem cell research or euthanasia suffer the same fateful consequences. It is for this reason that these Catholics, whether candidates for office or those who would vote for them, may not receive Holy Communion until they have recanted their positions and been reconciled with God and the Church in the Sacrament of Penance.
Bishop Sheridan, a native St. Louisan, was auxiliary bishop of St. Louis from 1997 until his appointment as co-adjutor bishop of Colorado Springs in 2001. He became bishop of Colorado Springs in January 2003.
Click title above or HERE to read Bishop Sheridan's complete pastoral letter on this site.
In a May 14 interview with Laurie Goodstein, of the New York Times, Bishop Sheridan said, "I'm not making
a political statement. I'm making a statement about Church teaching." See story: "Bishop Would Deny Rite for Defiant Catholic Voters on New York Times web site (registration required).See also Bishop Sheridan's Column in June Herald
Bishop Carl Mengeling - Catholics must decide
Bishop Carl Mengeling, of Lansing, said individual Catholics are obligated to determine if they are fit for Communion, not priests, bishops or cardinals, according to an article that appeared in the Lansing State Journal published May 2, 2004.
"All Catholics, that includes myself, must examine themselves extremely carefully before they approach the Eucharist," Mengeling said. "Our Catholics are adults. We can't treat them like children."
The State Journal also interviewed Bishop Mengeling on the topic on May 2. In the interview, Bishop Mengeling said that Catholics should support policies consistent with Catholic teaching:
Q: Should Catholic politicians be required to support the Vatican's directives?
Bishop Mengeling: Yes, because I think all people that are elected to Congress in Washington or the state Legislature, they come from all different kinds of backgrounds and each one of them brings with them their particular convictions: personal, their particular experiences of life, their faith and all the rest of it.
And all of that plays into what they offer as they deliberate about issues. And I think that's rich.
Sure, they should. I would assume they would, just like I would assume that people from all other walks of life or different backgrounds would present their cherished values and profound insight. Why should they be silent?
Q: Why are pro-choice Catholic politicians being targeted? Why not Catholic pro-choice actors or Catholic newspaper editors who write opinion pieces or the average pro-choice Catholic?
Bishop Mengeling: Particularly the people that we elect, the people that make the laws, are determining the direction of this country. And there's where the real issues have to be dealt with, and especially if it's a Catholic who is legislating the right to kill, abortion.
Click highlighted text above to go to article and interview in Lansing State Journal web site.
Bishop Thomas Wenski - "Politicians and Communion"
In his column of May 3, 2004, published on the Orlando diocesan web site, Bishop Thomas Wenski, co-adjutor bishop of Orlando, wrote that "practicing" Catholics must "practice until we get it right." But "getting it right", he stressed, "means conforming oneself to the will of God as revealed to us through Scripture and Tradition and as definitely set forth by the teaching authority of the Church.
"A practicing Catholic cannot invoke 'conscience' to defy or disregard what the Church definitely holds as true for a practicing Catholic doesn't create his own truth but forms his conscience according to the Truth. ...
"Serious sin breaks our communion with God and his Church as does refusing by one's dissent obedience to Church definitive teachings in matters of faith and morals. Before participating in the sacramental expression of that communion by partaking of the Body and Blood of Christ in Holy Communion - 'practicing Catholics' must be restored to spiritual union with God and with their fellow believers through Sacramental Confession in which they repent for the serious sin and express a firm purpose of amendment. Our admission to Holy Communion depends on our prior "visible" communion with the community of faith (i.e. that we are in fact Catholics) and of our prior "invisible" communion with the Lord (i.e. that we are not in the state of serious (mortal) sin. To insist on partaking in Communion in the first case would be, on the face of it, boorish behavior, (equivalent to a guest who behaves badly in his host's home) and in the latter at least objectively speaking sacrilegious (for as St. Paul says, unworthy reception brings judgment, cf. 1 Cor 11: 23ff).
"Bishops as teachers of the faith have no special competencies in the world of business or politics and in those worlds we have no regulatory or legal powers. We don't want such power nor should we. But precisely as teachers of the Catholic faith we do have competence to tell businessmen or politicians or anyone else for that matter what is required to be a Catholic. ...
"But to fail to rebuke when necessary is to fail in the charity we owe our brethren. (And we bishops will be apologizing for a long time for the failure to rebuke and apply sanctions to those wayward priests who criminally sinned against young people and children.)
Bishop Wenski points out that St. Thomas More is a "role model" for Catholic politicians:
"He did not draw any false distinction between his personal morality and his public responsibilities: he was his king's good servant, but God's first. Today, some self-identified Catholic politicians prefer to emulate Pontius Pilate's 'personally opposed but unwilling to impose' stance. Perhaps, they are baiting the Church, daring an 'official sanction' making them 'bad Catholics', so as to gain favor among up their secularist, 'blue state' constituencies. Such a sanction might turn their lack of coherent Catholic convictions into a badge of courage for people who hold such convictions in contempt. ..."
"You cannot have your 'waffle' and your 'wafer' too", Bishop Wenski concluded. "Those pro-abortion politicians who insist on calling themselves Catholics without seeing the contradiction between what they say they believe and their anti-life stance have to do a lot more of 'practicing'. They need to get it right before they approach the Eucharistic table.
Click title above or HERE to go to Bishop Wenski's complete statement on this site, reprinted here with the bishop's permission.
May 3, 2004
Bishop Joseph V. Adamec - Faithful Citizenship
Bishop Adamec's column in the Altoona-Johnstown Catholic Register
Click title to read the column on the Catholic Register website.
Archbishop John J. Myers -"A Time for Honesty"
On May 5, 2004, Newark Archbishop John Myers issued a Pastoral Statement that supported and amplified the earlier statements of his suffragan bishops, Bishop Joseph Smith, Trenton, and Bishop Galante (above)."Our times demand honesty", the archbishop began, and he included quotations from his pastoral letter of 1990 on the issue of Catholics in political life. Following are some excerpts:
"Communion is Not Private
"Because the Eucharist is the source and summit of our faith, the most sacred action of our Church, to misuse the Eucharistic symbol by reducing it to one's private "feeling" of communion with Christ and His Church while objectively not being in such union is gravely disordered."Catholics who publicly dissent from the Church's teaching on the right to life of all unborn children should recognize that they have freely chosen by their own actions to separate themselves from what the Church believes and teaches. They have also separated themselves in a significant way from the Catholic community.
"The Church cannot force such people to change their position; but she can and does ask them honestly to admit in the public forum that they are not in full union with the Church.
"One who practices such dissent, even in the mistaken belief that it is permissible, may remain a Catholic in some sense, but has abandoned the full Catholic faith. For such a person to express 'communion' with Christ and His Church by the reception of the Sacrament of the Eucharist is objectively dishonest."
Archbishop Myers also said, "As voters, Catholics are under an obligation to avoid implicating themselves in abortion, which is one of the gravest of injustices. Certainly, there are other injustices, which must be addressed, but the unjust killing of the innocent is foremost among them."...
"Among my most important responsibilities is that of pastor and teacher. In light of recent developments in our nation, I wish once again to affirm the teaching of the Church. Human life is a gift from God and as Catholics we have a most grave obligation to defend all human life from the moment of conception until natural death. God help us if we fail in this most fundamental obligation."
Click title above or go to Newark web site: http://www.rcan.org/archbish/jjm_letters/ATimeforHonesty.htm
SEE ALSO Archbishop Myers' important June 1990 Statement, The Obligations of Catholics and the Rights of Unborn Children,(on this site) which includes a clear and useful description of the meaning of "cooperation" in abortion, including "formal" and "material" cooperation., and the very limited circumstances where "remote material cooperation" can be morally permissible.
Archbishop Elden Curtiss - "The candidacy of John Kerry: A dilemma for Catholics in Nebraska and the nation" broken link 6/27/05
On May 7, Omaha Archbishop Elden Curtiss published a column in his archdiocesan newspaper The Catholic Voice, that observed,
"John Kerry claims that he accepts the teaching of the Church about the sacredness of all human life this is his personal belief and stance. But he thinks that, in a pluralistic society like ours, public policy should support the right of women to make their own decisions about whether to have an abortion or not. Therefore he supports legislation and laws supporting abortion, even the barbarism of late-term abortion. Somehow the Catholic conscience about supporting the rights of pre-born infants to life does not register in his public persona. It is fundamentally dishonest to claim one's conscience is opposed to abortion and then support abortion as public policy".The archbishop said that,"If a Catholic politician in this archdiocese is reported to me as being publicly supportive of abortion (or not supportive of other human life issues) then I will visit with that person and explain the position of the Church. Individual pastors should be willing to do the same. Public dissent against Church teaching is a serious matter for Catholics and a serious matter for the one who dissents...."
"I regret that John Kerry insists on giving public support to the abortion industry that promotes a culture of death in this country", the archbishop wrote. "He needs to be challenged by Catholics everywhere in this country. Because of the scandal his position is causing for the Church, he should refrain from receiving the Eucharist in public liturgies."
Click title above to go to Archbishop Curtiss's column dated May 7, 2004 on Omaha web site.
On May 6, Archbishop John Vlazny, of Portland, Oregon published "Public Dissenters Should Themselves Refrain from Communion" in his diocesan paper, The Catholic Sentinel. He explained that receiving the Church's sacraments, including Holy Communion, "is a sign that a person not only seeks union with God, but also desires to live in communion with the Church". Thus,
"Such communion is clearly violated when one publicly opposes serious Church teaching. Reception of Holy Communion by such public dissenters betrays a blatant disregard for the serious meaning and purpose of the reception of the Eucharist.
"We pastors, as teachers of the faith, must make this matter clear. Catholics who are not in communion with the Church (for example, divorced and remarried Catholics who have not received annulments from previous Catholic marriages) must similarly refrain from receiving the Eucharist. All Catholics in the state of mortal sin who are unrepentant also should refrain from the reception of the Eucharist. This does not mean that these people should refrain from a life of prayer, even in the company of the rest of the Church community. But the prayer of the Church will be for their conversion, not for the acceptance of their dissent.
"As a pastor, I find it difficult to make a public judgment that any person is "unfit" or "unworthy" for the reception of the sacrament. But I know I can make that judgment about myself and I believe every person can do the same. As a teacher, on the other hand, I can clearly state that, when individuals choose not to be in communion with the Church by their public dissent in serious matters, they should refrain from the reception of Holy Communion.
"This will be a matter of scrutiny in Catholic communities across the nation during this election year and beyond. I recognize that there is serious disagreement among Catholics about the pro-choice positions of some Catholic politicians. Should Catholics who choose to vote for pro-choice politicians refrain from reception of the Holy Communion? If they vote for them precisely because they are pro-choice, I believe they too should refrain from the reception of Holy Communion because they are not in communion with the Church on a serious matter. But if they are voting for that particular politician because, in their judgment, other candidates fail significantly in some matters of great importance, for example, war and peace, human rights and economic justice, then there is no evident stance of opposition to Church teaching and reception of Holy Communion seems both appropriate and beneficial.
"Catholics who do support pro-choice politicians still have serious responsibilities with regard to their stance on this matter. They must make it very clear to these politicians and governmental leaders that their support is in no way based on the pro-choice advocacy of these political leaders. ..."
To read Archbishop Vlazny's complete statement, click title above.
On May 7, Cincinnatti Archbishop Daniel Pilarczyk said there is a "justice issue" that bishops have to consider in deciding about giving the Eucharist to Catholic politicians who are open advocates of abortion and oppose other crucial moral teachings of the Church. The archbishop make these comments in an interview by National Catholic Reporter's John Allen, posted on the NCR web site May 11. (Mr. Allen describes Archbishop Pilarczyk as an influential "moderate". The NCR is known for challenging Church teaching.)
The archbishop, former president of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops,was in Rome for his ad limina visit with the Pope. In the interview Archbishop Pilarczyk also commented on the controversy over the sex-abuse scandal, though the fact that the archbishop had elected contempt-of-court rather than to turn over archdiocesan records on abusive priests was not mentioned.
Following are brief excerpts from the NCR's Interview with Archbishop Daniel Pilarczyk (Click title to access complete interview on NCR web site):
Mr. Allen: One curial official did enter it a couple of weeks ago, Cardinal Francis Arinze. In response to my question about Kerry, he said it's for the American bishops to interpret, but in response to a more general question he said pro-abortion Catholic politicians should not be given the Eucharist. What was your reaction?
Abp. Pilarczyk: I guess I wasn't really ecstatic about it. Then when I got here, I found out that this second question came almost on his way out, over his shoulder as he left the room. Now, you were there and I wasn't
Mr. Allen: That's not completely accurate, though it did come towards the end of a press conference largely on a different subject.
Abp. Pilarczyk: Often American media are very naïve about the Holy See. 'The Vatican said ' I guess I would say this: It is my understanding and my impression that Cardinal Arinze did not intend to solve an extremely complex theological and sacramental question with a one-liner at the end of a press conference.
...Mr. Allen: Granted the complexities involved, the practical reality is that you're going to have candidates crossing the state over the next few months. What do you do?
Abp: Pilarczyk: Well, the first thing I'm going to do is to wait to see what Cardinal McCarrick's committee comes up with. Secondly, it seems to me we need to be very cautious about denying people the sacraments on the basis of what they say they believe, especially when those are political beliefs. So Kerry believes abortion is a good thing for our society, let's say. Do you refuse him communion on the basis of his opinions? What about people who don't like Humanae Vitae? What about people who don't like the church's teaching on the death penalty, or on homosexual marriages? Are we going to refuse them?
Mr. Allen: There's a swath of Catholic opinion that would say yes to that question.
Abp. Pilarczyk: I know there is. But there's also a justice issue here. It seems to me that the last thing any church, or any representative or agent of the church wants to do, is to deny the sacraments to anybody unjustly. It seems to me at this point that it makes a lot more sense to presume people's good will, presume erroneous conscience or perplexed conscience and give them Communion, rather than say, 'I think you think such-and-such.' ...
On May 13, Cardinal Roger Mahony stated his view that no Catholics should be denied Communion for their beliefs on abortion in an interview in Rome by John Allen of the National Catholic Reporter, in which the cardinal also responded to questions about the sex-abuse scandal in the United States. Concerning the Catholic politicians and Communion issue, the cardinal said that only after a formal excommunication procedure could someone be denied Communion.
Mr. Allen: You had a private meeting recently with Sen. John Kerry. I know the bishops are waiting for the McCarrick Commission to report, but in the meantime, what do you do if Kerry comes to Los Angeles and wants to take communion?
Cardinal Mahony: This is a bigger issue than just Sen. Kerry and right now, because there's a presidential election. Since Roe v. Wade, there have been a lot of Catholic politicians doing and saying things that would not be in line with the church's teaching. Over that period of time, there was very little action taken. I personally believe, as church law sets out, that sanctions are an absolute last resort, particularly penal sanctions of depriving people of the sacraments. In fact, canonically, somebody has to be publicly found guilty of something that merits excommunication, or interdict, or some public crime.Mr Allen: You mean there ought to be a judicial process?
Cardinal Mahony: That's right. There has to be some process that leads to formal guilt, that then leads to sanctions. Obviously we don't have that situation. Moreover, in Evangelium Vitae, our Holy Father expressed many areas of concern with life issues, not just this one. In fact, he hit the death penalty as hard as many of the others. You have Catholic politicians who may be in favor of one but not the other. They're following their own different lights on these issues. With respect to Holy Communion, it is up to the communicant to decide whether they are in a state of grace and worthy to receive the Eucharist. Each one of us makes that decision. The church never has the minister of communion make that decision, except in that rare case of public sinners who have been so found guilty. I'm puzzled by people rattling sanctions at the moment. That has not been our tradition over the years.Mr. Allen: Bottom line: You are not prepared to withhold communion from Sen. Kerry or anyone else?
Cardinal Mahony: Or anyone else, exactly. Our priests know that. This has come up before, and I've said this is not our role. I also believe we will do far better in changing hearts and minds to sit down with our Catholics who are running for office. I found out that many of our Catholics simply don't know what the church teaches, and why, on a lot of issues, and therefore are saying things that they think are okay. They simply don't know, because we haven't taken the effort to meet with them informally and to dialogue. I think we'd find a lot more success.To a question about whether a politician could be pro-life and also not oppose banning of abortion, Cardinal Mahony responded, affirmatively:
"The value of the church's tradition, scripture, teaching, etc., is to help illuminate the contemporary social issues, to look at them through the lens of a faith tradition that has a moral and ethical basis. That's what I think is at the heart of what we should be doing, rather than getting involved in questions of sanctions."
(To read entire interview with Cardinal Mahony, go to NCR online: http://ncronline.org/mainpage/specialdocuments/mahony.htm )
Cardinal Theodore McCarrick - "If the world loves you"
In his May 13 column in the Catholic Standard, "If the world loves you", Washington's Cardinal McCarrick wrote, ", I have had a consistent position on the obligations of every member of our Catholic family to follow the teaching of the Church on the gravely important issues of our time", but, he said,
The disagreement that I have with the folks who are annoyed at me is that I disagree that in this instance we should use denial of the Eucharist as a public sanction. As a priest and bishop, I do not favor a confrontation at the altar rail with the Sacred Body of the Lord Jesus in my hand. There are apparently those who would welcome such a conflict, for good reasons, I am sure, or for political ones, but I would not.
Though the cardinal did not explain what he meant by "in this instance", presumably he refers to the fact that several prominent Catholic politicians are publicly opposing fundamental Church teachings but continue to receive Communion -- such as Senator John Kerry, the likely candidate for president from the Democratic party, a Catholic who has vigorously and consistently advocated abortion "rights".
Cardinal McCarrick suggested that relaxing certain rules concerning Communion has led to mistakes,
I realize that in modern times, perhaps even more since the '60's, some Catholics have fallen into a new and false understanding of the Blessed Sacrament, one that does not recognize the awesome nature of the Eucharist and our need for great respect in the way we approach it. In the days when we had to fast from all food and drink from the previous midnight in order to receive Holy Communion, our sense of the wonder of the Eucharist was enhanced. When the Church, in order to encourage us to partake of the sacrament, relaxed those rules, some people may have incorrectly concluded that the rule about being in the state of grace was relaxed as well. Maybe the presence of this controversy is itself a special grace to give us a chance to clarify what our personal dispositions must be in order to receive the Eucharist worthily.
He said that the commandment to "love God and neighbor" means that "This would exclude from Communion anyone who would hate his neighbor or harm his neighbor, in particular when that neighbor is a little unborn baby in its mother's womb".
Cardinal McCarrick said he would ask the Catholic Standard to publish the rule about worthy reception of Communion that "appears in the 'missallettes'", that one should not be conscious of serious sin. "Therefore", Cardinal McCarrick said, "each one of us must not presume to approach Holy Communion if we are not, in our informed conscience, already with the Lord and in communion with the teachings of His Church".
Click title above to go to Cardinal McCarrick's May 13, 2004, column on the Catholic Standard web site.
-----------
Letter from 48 Democratic Congressmen to Cardinal McCarrick as task force chairman, dated May 10, 2004.
The Congressmen state that "We also do not believe that it is the obligation of legislators to prohibit all conduct which we may, as a matter of personal morality, believe is wrong"; but also that "For any of us to be singled out by any bishop by the refusal of communion or other public criticism because we vote in what we believe are the requirements of the United States Constitution and laws of our country, which we are sworn to uphold. is deeply hurtful."
(Click title to go to complete TEXT of the letter on this site, and a link to a PDF file of letter.)
Bishop Robert J. McManus - "Pastoral Note of Clarification" - May 21, 2004
On May 21, Bishop Robert McManus, installed as bishop of Worcester on May 14, published a "pastoral clarification" in response to a report in the Sunday Telegram of May 16, that David J. Rushford, Worcester City Clerk, believes that "allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry is in line with Catholic teaching which emphasizes 'inclusivity, universality, and respect for the dignity of each individual."
"As chief teacher of faith and morals in the Diocese of Worcester, it is incumbent upon me to point out that Mr. Rushford's opinion, as stated, is morally incorrect and pastorally misleading", Bishop McManus wrote in the Catholic Free Press, May 21, 2004 edition. Following are quotes:
Same-sex unions are clear and serious violations of the law of God and moral teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. In no way can they be "in line with Catholic teaching," as Mr. Rushford mistakenly thinks. Same-sex unions contradict the moral wisdom of natural human reason and the cultural patrimony of the thousands of years of civilization. The judicial decision of a court can never make morally right what is by nature morally wrong.
The teaching of the Catholic Church on the moral unacceptability of same-sex unions is not an exercise of unjust discrimination against people with a homosexual orientation. The Catholic Church recognizes and embraces people with homosexual orientations as brothers and sisters in the human family. In the case of baptized Christians, they are, indeed, brothers and sisters in Christ. Yet this acceptance of our brothers and sisters with homosexual orientations cannot morally justify a situation like same-sex unions that are morally flawed.
Moreover, it must be pointed out that Catholics, especially public officials, who willingly and with approval facilitate the legal sanctioning of same-sex unions are involving themselves in cooperation with evil. Such cooperation is not free from serious moral and spiritual harm.
(Click title above to go to the original on Catholic Free Press web site.)
Archbishop Michael Sheehan - Politicians, Voters and Withholding Communion
In a press release reproduced in its entirety below, Santa Fe Archbishop Michael Sheehan said that there are "other issues" besides the right to life to be considered, and cautioned against "sanctions", such as denying Communion to a pro-abortion Catholic politician.
ALBUQUERQUE- Friday, May 21, 2004- IMMEDIATE RELEASE
The Church teaches that abortion is morally wrong as it takes innocent human life. The most basic human right is the right to life. Abortion is never allowed. The 2002 Roman Document on the participation of Roman Catholics in political life says that Catholic politicians have a grave and clear obligation to oppose any law that attacks human life.
The Document, however, is silent on sanctions such as the denial of Communion to pro-abortion Catholic politicians or those who would vote for them. It is left to their consciences to decide whether or not to approach Holy Communion. Catholics must examine their conscience on a variety of moral issues before receiving Jesus Christ in the Eucharist. The Church must be careful to keep the reception of Holy Communion separate from politics.
The Church will continue to teach about the immorality of abortion. But there are other issues of public policy that must also be considered in the political process. The United States Bishops' statement, Faithful Citizenship calls Catholics to political responsibility. We speak to the issues but do not endorse particular candidates or parties.
Go to original: http://www.archdiocesesantafe.org/Offices/Communications/PressReleases/04.05.24.Withholding.html
Bishop Thomas Olmsted Responds to Arizona Republic Article Printed May 21, 2004
On May 21, 2004, the Arizona Republic published a story, "Bishops won't link politics, Communion", which said that both Bishop Gerald Kicanas, of Tucson, and Bishop Thomas Olmsted of Phoenix were opposed to denying Communion to Catholics who are actively pro-abortion.
On May 24, Bishop Olmsted issued a clarification, which follows.
(Statement on Diocese of Phoenix web site. See above for link to Bishop Olmsted's March 18 column on being "Catholic...but")
--------------The headline in the Arizona Republic (5/21/04), "Bishops won't link politics, Communion", misrepresents my position. Abortion is the killing of a completely innocent life and thus bad news for both unborn children and their mothers. It is a horrible wrong. It is intrinsically evil. We have a serious obligation to protect human life, and especially the most innocent and vulnerable. Whoever fails to do this, especially when they are able to do so, commit serious sins of omission. They jeopardize their own spiritual wellbeing and they are a source of scandal for others. Should they be Catholics, they should not receive Holy Communion.
No one who is conscious of having committed a serious sin should receive Holy Communion. For the Eucharist is the very Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, our most precious gift in the Church. And St. Paul warns us (I Cor 11:27-29): "Whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself."
I call upon all Catholics, especially those in public life, to examine their consciences, and to refrain from receiving Holy Communion if they are unambiguously pro-abortion. As a bishop, I shall continue to pray for an end to abortion and other sins against life; I shall stand up for the life and dignity of every human person and I urge all people of good will to do the same. Should some Catholic politicians who are presently pro-abortion obstinately persist in this contradiction to our faith, this becomes a source of scandal and measures beyond those of moral persuasion would be needed. As God tells us in the Book of Leviticus (19:16), "You shall not stand by idly when your neighbor's life is at stake."
Bishop Donald Wuerl - Faith, Personal Conviction and Political Life
On May 25, Pittsburgh Bishop Donald Wuerl presented the annual St. Thomas More Society Loebig Lecture, on the impact of faith on political action. Bishop Wuerl emphasized that it is important that legislation be in line with the moral law, and stressed that some issues are more important than others. He explained the purpose of the Holy See's 2002 Doctrinal Note:
"Its purpose is to help everyone but particularly Catholic politicians understand the relationship between abortion itself and the legislative support of it. The Doctrinal Note reminds us that it is wrong not only to perform an abortion but also to support legislation that enables an abortion. While the Vatican document does not seem to ascribe to both the procuring and performing of an abortion and the voting for abortion legislation the same level of moral turpitude, it does state that the legislator has a 'clear and grave obligation to oppose such legislation.'"
Besides teaching consistently what the Church teaches about moral law, what further action are bishops to take, Bishop Wuerl asks.
"In considering sanctions, which has always been the last response of the Church, other very serious questions arise. Even when we recognize the special level of moral gravity attached to the taking of innocent human life, once we start down the road of disciplinary action where does it lead? Should the same actions be taken against those politicians who support or do not oppose legislation undermining other fundamental human values?...
"Should people, any and all persons, who are not living in conformity with the Church's moral teaching and/or who reject it come forward to receive Communion?
Bishop Wuerl does not believe that not receiving Communion "necessarily follows" from rejection of Church teaching. He explains:
"The statement of the Doctrinal Note that one has a 'clear and grave obligation' to vote against abortion legislation is not a declaration of or confirmation that such a person voting in this manner is in personal grave sin. The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that "for a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: 'mortal sin' is sin whose object is grave sin and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent' (CCC 1859).
"Given the long standing practice of not making a public judgment about the state of the soul of those who present themselves for Holy Communion, it does not seem that it is sufficiently clear that in the matter of voting for legislation that supports abortion such a judgment necessarily follows. The pastoral tradition of the Church places the responsibility of such a judgment first on those presenting themselves for Holy Communion."
Rather than attempting to judge "grave sin" by the person's active support of abortion, then, bishops should make the Church's teaching clearer, perhaps have private conversations with pro-abortion politicians who are not convinced that abortion is sinful. Bishop Wuerl concludes:
"All of us have an obligation to be informed on how critical the life-death issue of abortion is, and how profoundly and intrinsically evil is the destruction of unborn human life. Our political actions, out of which come the laws of this country, must be based on the natural moral law and the most basic of all human rights - the right to life."
(Click title above to go to the bishop's complete address on the Pittsburgh diocesan web site.)
See also Catholic News Service news brief May 27 (on CNS site) - Bishop says denying Eucharist not part of church's pastoral tradition
Archbishop Charles Chaput - It's a Matter of Honesty: to Receive Communion we need to be in CommunionOn May 26, Denver Archbishop Charles' Chaput published a statement in the Catholic Register, subtitled "If we claim to be Catholic, we need to act like it -- all the way, all the time, without excuses". (See also Archbishop Chaput's April 14 column above.)
"We're at a time for the Church in our country when some Catholics - too many - are discovering that they've gradually become non-Catholics who happen to go to Mass. That's sad and difficult, and a judgment on a generation of Catholic leadership. But it may be exactly the moment of truth the Church needs."
(Click title above for complete statement on this site)
Cardinal Arinze Explains Reasons for Instruction on Eucharist "The Greatest Treasure the Church Has"
On May 26, Rome-based Zenit news agency published an interview with Cardinal Francis Arinze, prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, who responded to questions on the Instruction, Redemptionis Sacramentum. An excerpt appears below. (Click title above to go to complete interview on Zenit's web site. The Instruction is on Adoremus web site.)
Q: In the United States, but also in Europe, a great debate erupted over the consistency of Catholic politicians. There are several cases in which politicians declare themselves Catholics and then vote on laws and make statements in clear contrast with Church teachings, as is obvious in the case of the support of laws that facilitate abortion, euthanasia, homosexual marriages, and the spread of anti-life contraceptive schemes. Access by these public personages to the Eucharist creates scandal among the faithful. Does the instruction address this problem? What are the indications furnished on this matter by the dicastery over which you preside?
CARDINAL ARINZE: Moral theology and canon law explain which Catholics may and which may not receive holy Communion.
The instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum mentions some of these details in paragraphs 81 and 82 [see Vatican section], but does not examine the question you pose in a direct way. It is for the bishops in each diocese and country to explain to their people this discipline and the doctrine that gives origin to it.Q: More than on the errors, Redemptionis Sacramentum emphasizes the central importance of the Eucharist. How much does the Eucharist count in the life of the Church and of the Christian community?
CARDINAL ARINZE: The Eucharistic sacrifice is "the fount and apex of the whole Christian life." The Eucharist is at the center of the life of the Church. The holy Eucharist is the greatest treasure that the Church has on earth: It is Christ himself.
Is it any wonder if the Church is careful to protect and guard the celebration of this august mystery and to promote the worship of it?
Bishop Samuel Aquila - Interview by National Catholic Register
In the May 23-29, 2004, National Catholic Register, an interview with Bishop Sam Aquila by Tim Drake gave the Fargo bishop an opportunity to revisit his April 25 homily (see above). Following is an excerpt from the interview:
-----Q: Do you support the idea of sanctions, such as the denial of Communion, for pro-abortion Catholic politicians?
Bishop Aquila: I believe, in terms of Catholics who support the right of abortion, that they really should not be receiving holy Communion. The Eucharist is a sign of our unity with Jesus Christ and with the Church and the Church's teachings.
The separation, especially on such an essential issue of the faith as the dignity of human life as clearly presented in The Gospel of Life, is one of those foundational principles that one cannot deny and still be in communion with Christ and the Church.
If a lay Catholic is truly informed and still holds that position publicly and then receives holy Communion, he or she is causing scandal to other Catholics and therefore should be denied holy Communion.
Q: Is abortion such a social evil that no politician can be permitted to call himself a Catholic and support the right to choose it?
Bishop Aquila: Yes, that is the definitive and consistent teaching of the Church thoroughly explained in Evangelium Vitae.
Q: Do you think the confusion surrounding this issue stems in part from a misunderstanding of what the Eucharist is?
Bishop Aquila: There is a misunderstanding about the meaning of receiving the Eucharist. When one receives holy Communion, one is entering into communion with Jesus Christ, who is truly present in the Eucharist, and one is also in communion with the Church and is identifying himself as being in union with the one holy, apostolic Catholic Church and with the Holy Father and bishops. ...
(Click title above to go to complete version on the Catholic.net web site.)
Bishop John Kinney - "Holy Communion Must Not Be Used As A Weapon"