Giving or refusing Communion - 2

ON April 18 we commented on the debate going on in the United States as to whether Catholic politicians who publicly dissent from the Church's teachings should be given or refused Communion. The debate mainly centres on politicians who have voted in favour of abortion laws.

The issue of Communion had been brewing for a long time. It came to the fore as Democratic Presidential candidate John Kerry, who regularly and publicly receives the Eucharist, has repeatedly voted for pro-abortion legislation.

The debate raised many issues of wider importance, issues that also interest us in Malta. These include the relationship of the Catholic politician with Church authorities, the relationship between the pastoral and the administrative functions of the bishops, the extent of legitimate pluralism inside the Church. Why is there a debate about politicians who vote in favour of pro-abortion laws but no debate about politicians who vote for capital punishment or in favour of war?

The debate was recently joined by 48 Catholic Democrats in the House of Representatives, several of whom oppose legalised abortion while most favour it. In a letter to Cardinal McCarrick, who heads a task force of US bishops on this subject, these lawmakers said that public statements made by some bishops about withholding Communion fuel anti-Catholicism in society, lead to division within the Church and involve the Church in partisan politics.

The letter said that "attempts by Church leaders today to influence votes by the threat of withholding a sacrament will revive latent anti-Catholic prejudice, which so many of us have worked so hard to overcome... As Catholics, we do not believe it is our role to legislate the teachings of the Catholic Church."

They added that the Supreme Court has ruled that women have a right to an abortion and that "members who vote for legislation consistent with that mandate are not acting contrary to our positions as faithful members of the Catholic Church." Legislators are sworn to uphold the law and "are sworn to represent all Americans, not just Catholics," said the letter. "Each of us is in the best position to know the state of our soul and our relationship to God and our Church," it said.

Archbishop John Vlazny of Portland, Oregon, wrote in his local diocesan newspaper that Catholics who stand in public opposition to "serious Church teaching" should refrain from receiving Communion. However, he said he will resist efforts to have to refuse the sacraments to those who seek them.

He said that refusing Communion during a public liturgical service places a questionable burden on all who are ministers of the Eucharist, both ordinary and extraordinary. The archbishop also said that "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." However, he added that he believes every person can make that judgment for themselves.

Archbishop Vlazny had a very interesting comment about how Catholics may or may not vote. He said that Catholics may vote for pro-abortion politicians if they are not doing so because of the pro-abortion stance, but if "other candidates fail significantly in some matters of great importance, for example, war and peace, human rights and economic justice."

One of the healthy aspects of this debate is that it gives evidence to the level of pluralism that exists in the Church today. In contrast to the position of the Catholic politicians mentioned above and to a certain extent to that of Archbishop Vlazny is the position of Bishop Michael Sheridan of Colorado Springs, Colorado. Bishop Sheridan said a false distinction has been made between the realms of faith and politics and that when Catholics enter public office or go to the polls to vote, "they take their consciences with them."

Addressing the issue of publicly dissenting Catholic politicians, Sheridan did not mince his words: "Any Catholic politicians who advocate abortion, illicit stem cell research or for any form of euthanasia ipso facto place themselves outside full communion with the Church and so jeopardise their salvation. Any Catholics who vote for candidates who stand for abortion, illicit stem cell research, or euthanasia suffer the same fateful consequences." He added that these Catholics "may not receive Holy Communion" until they have recanted and been reconciled with God and the Church.

As noted earlier, Cardinal Theodore McCarrick is heading a US bishops' task force to discuss issues regarding the participation of Catholics in political life, including reception of the sacraments. He speculates that many US bishops would not like to see the Eucharist used as a sanction against pro-abortion politicians.

"I think that many bishops among us think that such persons should have canonical censures," the cardinal told 30 Giorni magazine. "But I also think that many bishops would not like the possibility of receiving the Eucharist to be a part of these sanctions.

"Personally, I think it should be a pastoral concern to avoid the Eucharist becoming a point of confrontation," he added. The cardinal hopes that the task force's conclusions will be available before the November presidential elections, but he cannot guarantee it, "as it is a complex and delicate question".