 |
||
Posted on 06/18/2004 6:30:53 PM PDT by Polycarp IV
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
||||
June 18, 2004 Copyright © by United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
Catholics in Political Life
We speak as bishops, as teachers of the Catholic faith and of the moral law. We have the duty to teach about human life and dignity, marriage and family, war and peace, the needs of the poor and the demands of justice. Today we continue our efforts to teach on a uniquely important matter that has recently been a source of concern for Catholics and others.
It is the teaching of the Catholic Church from the very beginning, founded on her understanding of her Lord’s own witness to the sacredness of human life, that the killing of an unborn child is always intrinsically evil and can never be justified. If those who perform an abortion and those who cooperate willingly in the action are fully aware of the objective evil of what they do, they are guilty of grave sin and thereby separate themselves from God’s grace. This is the constant and received teaching of the Church. It is, as well, the conviction of many other people of good will.
To make such intrinsically evil actions legal is itself wrong. This is the point most recently highlighted in official Catholic teaching. The legal system as such can be said to cooperate in evil when it fails to protect the lives of those who have no protection except the law. In the United States of America, abortion on demand has been made a constitutional right by a decision of the Supreme Court. Failing to protect the lives of innocent and defenseless members of the human race is to sin against justice. Those who formulate law therefore have an obligation in conscience to work toward correcting morally defective laws, lest they be guilty of cooperating in evil and in sinning against the common good.
As our conference has insisted in Faithful Citizenship, Catholics who bring their moral convictions into public life do not threaten democracy or pluralism but enrich them and the nation. The separation of church and state does not require division between belief and public action, between moral principles and political choices, but protects the right of believers and religious groups to practice their faith and act on their values in public life.
Our obligation as bishops at this time is to teach clearly. It is with pastoral solicitude for everyone involved in the political process that we will also counsel Catholic public officials that their acting consistently to support abortion on demand risks making them cooperators in evil in a public manner. We will persist in this duty to counsel, in the hope that the scandal of their cooperating in evil can be resolved by the proper formation of their consciences.
Having received an extensive interim report from the Task Force on Catholic Bishops and Catholic Politicians, and looking forward to the full report, we highlight several points from the interim report that suggest some directions for our efforts:
- We need to continue to teach clearly and help other Catholic leaders to teach clearly on our unequivocal commitment to the legal protection of human life from the moment of conception until natural death. Our teaching on human life and dignity should be reflected in our parishes and our educational, health care and human service ministries.
- We need to do more to persuade all people that human life is precious and human dignity must be defended. This requires more effective dialogue and engagement with all public officials, especially Catholic public officials. We welcome conversation initiated by political leaders themselves.
- Catholics need to act in support of these principles and policies in public life. It is the particular vocation of the laity to transform the world. We have to encourage this vocation and do more to bring all believers to this mission. As bishops, we do not endorse or oppose candidates. Rather, we seek to form the consciences of our people so that they can examine the positions of candidates and make choices based on Catholic moral and social teaching.
- The Catholic community and Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles. They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.
- We commit ourselves to maintain communication with public officials who make decisions every day that touch issues of human life and dignity.
The Eucharist is the source and summit of Catholic life. Therefore, like every Catholic generation before us, we must be guided by the words of St. Paul, “Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the Body and Blood of the Lord” (1 Cor 11:27). This means that all must examine their consciences as to their worthiness to receive the Body and Blood of our Lord. This examination includes fidelity to the moral teaching of the Church in personal and public life.
The question has been raised as to whether the denial of Holy Communion to some Catholics in political life is necessary because of their public support for abortion on demand. Given the wide range of circumstances involved in arriving at a prudential judgment on a matter of this seriousness, we recognize that such decisions rest with the individual bishop in accord with the established canonical and pastoral principles. Bishops can legitimately make different judgments on the most prudent course of pastoral action. Nevertheless, we all share an unequivocal commitment to protect human life and dignity and to preach the Gospel in difficult times.
The polarizing tendencies of election-year politics can lead to circumstances in which Catholic teaching and sacramental practice can be misused for political ends. Respect for the Holy Eucharist, in particular, demands that it be received worthily and that it be seen as the source for our common mission in the world.
Fri Jun 18, 2004 06:56 PM ET
By Judith Crosson
DENVER (Reuters) - American Catholic bishops, seeking to avoid a political collision within their ranks, voted overwhelmingly on Friday to allow each diocese to decide for itself on whether to refuse communion to Catholic politicians who support abortion rights.
The decision comes five months before Americans vote in national elections in November and appears to be a compromise between conservative bishops who have said they will refuse communion to politicians who support abortion rights and others who say the best way to counter abortion is through persuasion.
The issue of whether Catholic candidates will support the church's position on abortion has become a subject in this presidential election year discussed by non-believers as well as the faithful.
President Bush, a Protestant, opposes abortion while Sen. John Kerry, a Catholic and the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, supports a woman's right to make that choice -- although he says he is personally opposed to abortion.
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, in a 183-6 vote during a closed meeting in the Denver suburb of Englewood, Colorado, said each decision about denying communion to some Catholics in public life should rest with the individual bishop "in accord with established canonical and pastoral principles." The statement also said bishops can legitimately make different judgments on the "most prudent" course of action.
Washington archbishop, Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, chairman of the task force on Catholics in political life, said the statement "reflects the bishop's role as teacher, pastor and center of unity. We address the moral issues that our society faces without endorsing parties or candidates."
"POLARIZING TENDENCIES"
The bishops also said they did not want communion, which Catholics believe is the body and blood of Christ, to be reduced to a political issue.
"The polarizing tendencies of election-year politics can lead to circumstances in which Catholic teaching and sacramental practices can be misused for political ends."
The bishops also said they need to do more to persuade people of their belief that human life, even of the unborn, is precious. "This requires more effective dialogue and engagement with all public officials, especially Catholic public officials."
The issue ratcheted up earlier this year when St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke said he would deny communion to Kerry. In May, Bishop Michael Sheridan of Colorado Springs, Colorado, took one of the strongest stands when he said communion should also be denied to people who vote for candidates supporting such issues as abortion rights, gay marriage, euthanasia, and stem cell research.
The bishops also called on Catholics in public life to protect the unborn and oppose legal abortion -- "lest they be guilty of cooperating in evil and in sinning against the common good."
Ping. (As usual, if you would like to be added to or removed from my "conservative Catholics" ping list, please send me a FReepmail. Please note that this is occasionally a high volume ping list and some of my ping posts are long.)"
Two minutes
Antonio Gramsci's battle plans are winning!
The 'american catholic church' is no longer a part of the True Catholic Church!
If I could, I would spit on these pigs that call themselves "princes of the church"
The poor Bishops are so weak. It is sad. I love them anyway.
15 minutes and counting, a personal record of late ;-)
Wimpy, wimpy, wimpy! What else can be said of this "sorry bench of bishops"?
Well, I'll love them, as Christ demands, but that doesn't mean I have to like them.
The bishops --with rare notable exceptions-- as a body have done more to undermine Catholicism in this country over the last 40 years than all her external sworn enemies combined.
Don't get me started. (I've already received half a dozen FReepmails from my Catholic peers this week reminding me to watch my tongue.)
That's because he was receiving communion at a protestant (AME) church in that photo.
 |
|
Catholic Ping - let me know if you want on/off this list
It's my bet, based on some internal knowledge, that the statement from USCC was authored by the President of same, or by another Bishop.
It is NOT a staff-generated release.
98 minutes -- somebody must be sleeping
On a Friday evening, no less. That's usually the worst time for it.
I don't agree with the criticism. This is a strong statement. The only exception I take to it is that weasel-worded "grave sin" when "mortal sin" would be a good deal clearer. But that's evidently what they mean.
As Cardinal Ratzinger has written, the status of the American Conference of Bishops in the Church is somewhat dubious. Each bishop is responsible for teaching and order in his own diocese. What this statement says is reasonable; that when it comes to applying general truths to particular cases, there is always an element of prudential judgment. It is the diocesan bishop's job to make such judgments in important public cases, such as whether or not to give communion to Catholic politicians with the press all observing from the sidelines.
It would actually have been more dangerous if the bishop's conference had pretended to lay down the law where it has no authority to do so.
You expect too much. The USCC is merely a bureaucracy and, as such, we can expect no more than tepid pronouncements at best.
The Bishops had their chance. If you ask me, it's time to go Papal!
I'm sick and tired of them.
(Inspired by the latest courageous stand taken by the US bishops)
A reading from the epistle of Paul Americanus to the Galatians:
O interesting Galatians! I am not entirely comfortable with some of things you may or may not be doing. I am forming a committee to draw up some guidelines that will help you grow as human persons. The committee's decisions will be published shortly after the Day of Judgment. Meanwhile, if any one is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, stamp your little feet. And please send me some more information about this former brother of ours, John Fisher, who has been causing disturbances among you. May God judge him accordingly. See with what a large computer I write. --Paulus AmericanusA second reading from the epistle of Paulus Americanus to Timothy:
Paulus Americanus, a member of several committess of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops to Timothy, a fellow on the move: As I urged you when I was going to the Los Angeles Catechetical Congress, do not teach any doctrines that might upset the people of God. Indeed, do not teach any doctrines at all. Be a people pleaser. We know that the law is good, but do not make too big a thing of it. I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all human persons, especially for the winner of the next election. Whoever that human person is, we were with him/her all along. We know that the law is nice if anyone wants to follow it.We know that there have been among you profane slayers of human persons, perjurers, Republicans, non-transgendered, and some who refuse to offer hospitality to those who enjoy an alternate life style, but all that is history now, thank goodness.
Do your best to come to me soon. A few angular and unpastoral types have refused to help build community and have deserted me. Fabian of Nebraska did me much harm and refused to enter into dialogue with our happy bench of bishops. The editors of the Boston Globe strongly opposed my message. May it not be charged against them.
When you come, be sure to bring with you my new jacket from Ralph Lauren. And do not forget the latest copy of the National Catholic Reporter. Take a little Absolut vodka with a lemon twist for your stomach's sake. The Lord/Lady be with you. --Paulus Americanus
|
Damn.
Canonically, this is probably correct, inasmuch as the USCCB cannot order a bishop to act in any situation. The bishops are only answerable to the pope, as far as I know.
OTOH, this statement implies that the failure of individual bishops to withold Communion from the Kerry's of the world is permissible.
This is an absolute disaster.
Chaput is right. Unless the pope steps in, it's now open season on unborn children in this country. The last obstacle has been cleard. God help us. This country isn't dying, it's dead.
A Catholic receiving "communion" in a Protestant church isn't licit either.
USCC suffers from a significant overdose of "mission creep."
At one time, it was an administrative clearing house for common Diocesan issues and problems, combined with a 'good-works' bunch (Natl Cath Welfare Conference) which had a fairly clean and simple agenda.
Along came Joey Bernardin, whose influence is suspicious, at the very best...
And suddenly, they have a zillion-dollar HQ edifice in DC, employees up the kazoo, lobbying on every single stinking piece of legislation in DC, (and on regulatory matters as well), and an agenda which less and less resembles Catholic.
Further, I am told that reform efforts are emphatically blocked or frustrated. There are still plenty of lefty-wonko Bishops who have influence and/or authority.
From a field full of low-hanging fruit (some pun intended,) the USCC would appear to be the most propitious starting-point for the work of the TTGC (see my tagline.) It would at least be time-efficient, as we could simply burn down the whole damn building.
Good stuff!
"Because you are not lukewarm, I spit you out..."
(Inspired by the latest courageous stand taken by the US bishops)
I would say about these bishops - they are the "Princes of Satan" and NOT of the Holy Church.
EGAD!
http://www.ratzingerfanclub.com/
I love the Ratzinger beer stien! I am going to have to being it to a Knights of Columbus apres-meeting.
I was thinking the same thing! Sadly, most of the meaning would probably be lost on them since the vast majority wouldn't know who Cardinal Ratzinger is.
This statement openly shows the de facto schism that has occurred in this country. Have the bishops ever put out any other statement where they openly admitted there isn't some phoney bolonga collegiality guiding them?
It scares me to think we are heading into open schism. I think a 100 years from now, students of Church history will look to this statement as showing the first clear cracks of the American Church's break with Rome. If I live to see the day when Mahoney, et al officially break away, I pray my bishop will have his feet squarely planted on the Roman side of the schism.
**this statement implies that the failure of individual bishops to withold Communion from the Kerry's of the world is permissible.**
Agree with your analysis. But each Bishop will bear the responsibility of his decision. So many our action step is to make them more aware of their responsibilities to Canon Law.
The St. Joseph Foundation has a packet that they can email to you if you need to provide your bishop with the canon laws. I think it's six pages, but really all you need to do is get like minded Catholics to sign and then fill in the blanks (politician's name, parish, etc.) It's like one of those one size fits all wills you buy at Staples.
www.St-Joseph-Foundation.org
Oops--
So many our action step
So maybe our action step
If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
Isn't it interesting how they don't even mention Canon 915, which would seem to mandate denial of communion to pro-aborts. But then again, the American Bishops don't have a very good track record of following Canon Law.
You make a good point about the Conference not overstepping their authority, but aren't they doing that when they say that a bishop can give communion to a pro-abortion politician if that bishop thinks it's the right thing to do? Although as you note, "[e]ach bishop is responsible for teaching and order in his own diocese," there has to be some common principles based in Catholic teaching (i.e., a bishop can't decide to remarry a divorced person who never obtained an anullment, can he?). I admit my initial reaction to that "enlisting the laity" part was to think "way to pass the buck." The most encouraging point I saw was the relatively firm statement about not giving honors, degrees, whatever, to certain recipients. It really bothers me to see pro-abortion "Catholic" politicians speaking at supposedly Catholic universities, getting honorary degrees, etc.
Well, I have to agree that it seems like a no-brainer to me. The bishop has to make a prudential judgment, but in the case of notorious pro-abortion politicians or divorced Catholics who have not received annulments, if I were the bishop I would withhold communion. I would warn the person not to come forward beforehand, because a public showdown should be avoided if possible.
Ordinarily it is the communicant's responsibility not to receive communion if he is in a state of mortal sin. But famous cases like Kennedy and Kerry don't leave much room for doubt. To give Kerry communion after the public fuss he has raised is a travesty. I assume that's why Father Drinan, one of the worst dissenting priests in the country, has told Kerry he should have shut up about it. Now it's out in the open, and I really don't think the bishops have a choice but to discipline priests who give him communion in front of the cameras.
I know this was posted last summer, but I think it deserves another bump right now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
This map has 17.5 states blacked out. The population of these states is equal to the number of “legal” surgical abortions since 1973. Perhaps this visual perspective helps one to grasp the number 44,000,000-that's 44 MILLION PEOPLE who are gone, dead--robbed of their God given Constitutional right to LIFE.