April 25, 2004

Unmentionables


It is conventional wisdom that to be safe at social gatherings it’s best to steer clear of two subjects: politics and religion. But this being a presidential election year, such mingling is difficult to avoid.

And it’s made for some very ugly stuff.

Media reports of presumptive Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry receiving Communion in Boston and Illinois Sen. Richard Durbin, also a Democrat, receiving in Chicago are followed very quickly by angry demands that they be excommunicated—or denied Communion—because they vote for abortion rights.

Cardinal George got hit with the question during a talk at the City Club of Chicago April 7. Paraphrased, it went like this: Are you going to excommunicate, or at least deny Eucharist to, Catholic politicians who vote to support abortion? And, if not, why not?

For some Catholics, there is only one answer. It’s the answer a few bishops have given: an unabashed “You bet!”

Cardinal George’s nuanced answer, based in faith, church law, tradition and common sense, was more measured: “No; not at this point.” (For more, see The Cardinal’s Column, Page 3.)

However, to sum up his reply in so few words is not to do it justice: “You can’t excommunicate someone for how they vote for something,” he said. “It’s very clear.” There are “some penalties you can’t impose,” he said. “You have to govern by law;” adding that the power to excommunicate is “very, very narrow.”

Too narrow, some Catholics insist. And the cardinal’s answer evoked strong and ugly comments from those who think they know better.

One bitter e-mail even foolishly accused the cardinal of being “party to the American Holocaust” for not tossing pro-abortion legislators out of church. Another mocked the hierarchy for waiting for a committee of bishops to determine what sanctions—if any—the church should impose on politicians who don’t vote according to their faith.

That committee, headed by Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of Washington D.C., hopes to have a decision before November. It would likely be advisory, but would give church leaders a common basis for understanding.

Cardinal George also told the City Club gathering what he has said previously: he doesn’t “like public controversy,” preferring private conversations in an effort to persuade Catholic legislators to change unjust laws.

It’s a difficult place for the church to be in, believing—knowing—that a law of the land, abortion, violates not simply doctrine but common sense and human morality, and then having to work within a civil framework it disagrees with.

Following the City Club talk, Cardinal George clarified his comments: “At a public gathering, I was asked about imposing sanctions on pro-choice politicians and others who take public stands in opposition to Catholic teaching. My response was, ‘No, not yet.’ In taking this step to impose sanctions on politicians, it would be better for bishops to act together, if possible. If that is impossible, each bishop will have to determine what is pastorally necessary in his diocese. This issue, therefore, is being studied by a group of bishops.”

Would excommunication or denying Communion even work as some insist? Hardly. What it would accomplish would be to separate legislators from the very connection—and dialogue—with their faith that may ultimately change their minds. That, ultimately, is what faith does: changes hearts and minds.

A lesson from Scripture might be instructive: Jesus disagreed with, but never condemned, both the rich young man or the prodigal son. Neither was chased away. And one was finally welcomed home.

Finally, a closing word on life.

St. Michael the Archangel Parish is organizing a fund drive for Irma Reyes, a parishioner who needs a liver transplant. She’s on a waiting list at University of Illinois Hospital, but the costs are enormous, especially without medical insurance. If you can help, call (773) 523-1248.