www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Apostolic Nuncio Gives Holy Communion To John Kerry At Abp. Wuerl's Installation

Catholic.Org [catholic.org]

This appears to "pull the rug" out from under those Bishops who wish to enforce the canons (both Western and Eastern Catholic canon law have specific prohibitions) against giving Holy Communion to public, contumacious, serious sinners (especially pro-death "Catholic" politicians). Of course, in this case, I don't have any details, and I don't know whether or not there was discussion beforehand, or whether, in fact, Kerry may have repented of his pro-death position. However, this is a topic worth discussing.

Dn. Robert

Geez!

So, that means there's corruption from the top down in the Roman Church. Too much fakeness and pretenses in the Roman Church. Disgusting.

More reasons to become Orthodox, I'd say.

SPDundas
Deaf Byzantine

We have to give the Apostolic Nuncio the benefit of the doubt that he may not have known who John Kerry was. Not everyone follows American politics as much as we think they do.

Deaf Byzantine,

So I assume that pro-abort Orthdox politicians like my Senator, Paul Sarbanes, are denied communion? I don't think so. If I remember correctly, he was actually given an award by an Orthodox heirarch a few years back.

You know what they say about glass houses and rocks.

Dr. Eric,

If the papal nuncio to America can't recognize the Democratic nominee for President from two years ago, then he should have never been appointed as the papal nuncio to this country.

Francis,
I agree with what you posted, but... I still think that we have to give him the benefit of the doubt. I know of Silvio Berlusconi but I don't think I could pick him out of a line-up.

Dr. Eric,

So I'd say you are not qualified to be the ambassador to Italy.

I agree to always give others the benefit of the doubt. I just think that he knew who he was and decided to not withhold communion from him. Not what I would do, but then again, I'm not a bishop, so who cares what I would do.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by spdundas:
Geez!

So, that means there's corruption from the top down in the Roman Church.

Ya think? ;-)

More reasons to become Orthodox, I'd say.

I'm very tempted to dox myself, because I'm finding it hard to reconcile Roman Catholic doctrine and dogma with Orthodox theology and spirituality, and I'm tired of being half Eastern.

BUT, don't think there isn't corruption in the Orthodox clergy also. They have their share, as the recent scandal with the OCA shows. There's plenty of politics, intrigue, and corruption there in the Orthodox Church, only they haven't been infected with the rot of modernism as the Roman Catholic Church has. Orthodox priests don't just dole the Eucharist out to just anyone, for example; they won't administer Holy Communion to anyone they don't know, and some won't even administer it to faithful they DO know if they haven't been to confession to that priest recently.

Corruption is ever-present, because the Church's earthly leaders and lay faithful are sinners. And that is why we're in the Church in the first place-- to be healed of the sickness of sin, and to become one with the living God.

God bless,

Karen

I'm showing my ignorance again but is there a rule that precludes the distribution of communion to a politician who is pro-choice? If not, what is the basis upon which a priest can deny an individual communion? Is it really left to their discretion? I realize that with a pro-choice politician there is a certain public display of mockery of Church teaching. Would they need to make a similar public amends of their error?

Also, there was a statement about Orthodox priests denying commmunion to individuals they don't know or who haven't been to confession with them in awhile. That seems like a rather harsh standard. If I'm Orthodox and on vacation, I would be somewhat upset if a priest denied me communion. Also, for some individuals they may not be comfortable (rightly or wrongly) going to a certain priest for confession. I don't think that the priest should then withhold communion from an otherwise deserving individual. Ultimately the priest will never know the true state of an individual's soul. If an individual either misrepresents their actual religion (a Protestant who really knows the Orthodox faith) or their frequency of receiving confession, the priest may administer communion to individuals who are "deemed" unworthy. I guess the priest needs to have a certain comfort level with distributing communion to a person even if there is the potential that the person may mislead the priest.

I guess my ramblings lead me to (1) the question about whether there is a standard for distributing communion to pro-choice politicians and (2) whether a priest can deny communion for any reason?

It's a question that is resolved by Canon Law (and proper interpretation of it). Both the new Canon Law of the Roman Church, promulgated by Pope John Paul II in 1983, and the Canon Law of the Catholic Eastern Churches, promulgated by the same Pope in 1990, have provisions that the Holy Eucharist is not to be given to "public sinners" (I am at work, and don't have my texts available, so I forget the exact wording), i.e., those who publicly,willfully, and contumaciously, commit grave sin, and despite warnings from their hierarch, continue to do so. Most of the pro-abort Catholic politicians in Congress would seem to fit this category. Any bishop who feels an obligation to deny them Holy Communion, especially after having counseled them on the issue, is well within his rights, under Canon Law, to do so, and I would argue that he is morally obliged to do so. Hope this helps.

Dn. Robert

I don't think that a Catholic should be denied Communion for holding the wrong opinion about abortion if simply holding the opinion is all that has occurred; however, as I recall, you are excommunicate if you knowingly procure an abortion for yourself or if you knowlingly aid or abet another person in procuring an abortion.

I do not know the answer to this question and think it could be argue in shades of gray, but I think it must be answered in some consistent manner... the question, of course, is:

Does the act of introducing or supporting pro-abortion legislation or policies make an elected official an "aider" or "abettor" and therefore render him/her ineligible for Communion?

Holding a wrong opinion does not seem to be enough... but WHAT is enough that you have crossed the line and ought to stay in your pew when others go up to receive Communion?

t-bone,

With regard to Orthodox priests withholding communion, yes it does occur. The circumstances are a little different though in comparison to the Latin Church. Mnay Orthodox parishes, particularly in the US, tend to be smaller and the priests generally do know most of the regular communicants by name. If one is on vacation, it may be possible to phone the priest in advance and inform him of the fact that you are a visitor and wish to receive communion. In adddition, many priests are accustomed to having visitors at their churches and will ask anyone unknown to them who approach the Chalice a series of short questions to determine if that person is Orthodox.

Please also note that in Orthodoxy, as in the Latin Church, there is freedom with respect to choosing a confessor. Most priests will know who among their flock regularly confess to another priest and according this is not an issue.

As I indicated above, when a politician who claims to be Catholic, campaigns for,or suceeds in getting legislation passed, which results in the death of the innocent unborn, this falls into the category of "public sin", which is covered by Canon Law. The bishop can move against such a politician on that basis, hopefully after counseling the person in question, and instruct his priests, deacons, etc., not to allow such a person to communicate.

Dn. Robert

I guess Kerry would fall under the 1983 Code of Canon Law. Section 915 states "Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion."

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P39.HTM

I guess it then, as mentioned, becomes what is the appropriate interpretation/response to this Law in respect to pro-choice politicians.

I've attached a link with another view of this issue.

http://www.catholic.org/featured/headline.php?ID=989

In this link, I found #3 to be of real interest in the statement that you cannot deny communion to someone who is living in sin if the condition is known to the priest but unknown to the community at large. In the first instance, he cannot deny communion because it would might cause scandal for people to know about their sin. Once the community is aware of the sin, it would cause scandal to allow reception of the Eucharist. It would seem to me that with something as sacred as the Eucharist we would have rules that dictate its reception that would trump any consideration as to whether there is the possiblity for the gossip mill to get reved up at Saturday night bingo.

My opinion is one of great confusion. My emotion is one that would deny pro-choice politicians reception of the Eucharist, but I think there must be some reason the Vatican hasn't been more vocal on this issue. Someone tell me what I'm missing?

This is actually not a problem, as long as one prepares beforehand. When going on vocation, one simply obtains a letter from their priest stating that they are a parish member in good standing. Additionally, it's also a good idea to take along ones Certificate of Chrismation. Then, BEFORE Divine Liturgy, one approaches the priest of the parish you're visiting to introduce yourself and show him the documents if he so desires. Doing this usually prevents any problems when one latter approaches to receive.

~Isaac