Communion need not be a political weapon
By Steve Benen Tuesday Jun 03, 2008 6:40pmPepperdine’s Doug Kmiec, a conservative Catholic, raised quite a few eyebrows earlier this year when he endorsed Barack Obama for president. There have been several relatively high-profile Republicans to throw their support to Obama (some have taken to calling them “Obamacans“), but Kmiec was especially surprising.
Kmiec, after all, is also a staunch Republican who played a role with Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign. He also headed the Office of Legal Counsel for Presidents Reagan and H.W. Bush. Theologically, we’re talking about a man who can “cite papal pronouncements with the facility of a theological scholar,” and who opposes abortion rights and gay rights. He backed Obama despite his positions on these issues, not because of them.
And how did Kmiec’s Catholic Church respond after learning of his favored candidate? As E. J. Dionne Jr. explained today, by denying him Communion.
Kmiec was denied Communion in April at a Mass for a group of Catholic business people he later addressed at dinner. The episode has not received wide attention outside the Catholic world, but it is the opening shot in an argument that could have a large impact on this year’s presidential campaign: Is it legitimate for bishops and priests to deny Communion to those supporting candidates who favor abortion rights?
A version of this argument roiled the 2004 campaign when some, though not most, Catholic bishops suggested that John Kerry and other pro-choice Catholic politicians should be denied Communion because of their views on abortion.
The Kmiec incident poses the question in an extreme form: He is not a public official but a voter expressing a preference. Moreover, Kmiec — a law professor at Pepperdine University and once dean of Catholic University’s law school — is a long-standing critic of the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision.
Obviously, the Catholic Church is free to come up with its own rules. I’m not Catholic, and this doesn’t apply to me anyway. Who does or does not get Communion is the business of the church and its hierarchy.
That said, looking at this as an outsider, the church’s position — and punishment of loyal adherents like Kmiec — strikes me as wildly foolish.
I think it’s a mistake to deny Communion to public officials who, in their official capacity as policy makers, stray from the church’s doctrines. But this is adding insult to injury — targeting Catholic congregants based on their votes, rather than their beliefs and conduct.
In other words, at least in the abstract, John Kerry should be blocked from receiving Communion and Catholic voters who supported him should receive the same treatment.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a statement last year telling Catholics that they can’t vote “for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, such as abortion or racism, if the voter’s intent is to support that position.” That left voters plenty of wiggle room — a Catholic voter could back a pro-choice candidate (most U.S. Catholics are pro-choice by the way) and simply say that it wasn’t his or her “intent” to support the candidate’s position on abortion. Problem solved.
But that brings us back to Kmiec.
[B]ecause Kmiec is a private citizen and has such a long history of embracing Catholic teaching on abortion, denying him Communion for political reasons may spark an even greater outcry inside the church.
Kmiec says he is grateful because the episode reminded him of the importance of the Eucharist in his spiritual life, and because he hopes it will alert others to the dangers of “using Communion as a weapon.”
Login or Register to post comments.
foolish indeed
Why don't they stick to what they know how to do best . . . molesting young boys!
Ironically back in the late 80s Sen. Moynihan, when asked to explain the declining popularity of liberalism, cracked, "Keep excommunicating people and the next thing you know you're surrounded by Protestants."
Perhaps the Catholic Church is on the verge of becoming an unintentional liberal ally?
It sounds very medieval to me. And I say that because I'm a medieval historian. The Church has tried exactly the same tactics throughout its long history, and they've never really worked.
Doug Kmiec supported Alberto "I don't recall remembering" Gonzales for Attorney General and testified on his behalf. He should have been ex-communicated for that act alone.
Just another reason why I won't step foot in a church. I'm pro-choice, pro-gay rights, and live with my girlfriend. Believe me, the Catholic church wants no part of someone like me. And you know what? I can live with that. Some of the finest, most wonderful people I know belong to no church. Guess we'll just have to stick together.
please explain how you verified the accuracy of these facts. I am very skeptical of this story.
What the fuck is communion anyway? Religious fucking nutjobs need to get their brains checked. Maybe one day the imaginary man in the sky will talk to them and they can float up to heaven too. Psychos. No wonder America is so fucked up.
I wonder if Kmiec did it just to start the communion-denying ball rolling?
Men-of-God are capable of some pretty evil stuff.
Hope Colbert sees this and gets this guy on the show.
Religions are stupid.
Patrick Johnston @ 7:
Teh Google is your best friend.
so where is the coverage about Obamas longtime friend Antoin Rezko being convicted on 16 of 24 counts today. Or how he ASKED to be taken into custody immediately even though sentencing isn't due until September. I think you can expect Rezko to turn states evidence for a leaner sentence. Say hello to the indictment Mr Obama :D
I could make the argument that the church is interfering with an election and therefore violating the establishment clause of the constitution.
On a personal note, I think it is just shitty that the church is resort5ing to coersion.
My liberalism is informed by my Catholic upbringing. (Not molested, thank God.) To this day, there are people I admire greatly because of their Catholicism, not in spite of it: Archbishop Romero, Jean Donovan, Ignacio Ellacuria... It was a Catholic Bishop, Helder Camera, who said, "When I fed the poor they called me a saint; when I asked why the poor were hungry, the called me a communist."
My wife would like me us to attend Mass as a family, but I feel that our kind is just no longer welcome.
Supporting a candidate is a decision of a well formed conscience, and to narrow the core elements of our Faith (yep, its hard out there for a practicing Catholic and lifelong Dem) to 2 or even a handful of "non-negotiable issues" to the detriment of all others is to cheapen it, to make it a shadow of what it calls all Catholics to be.
The denial of communion to a supporter of a politician who purports to be pro choice is an act of moral absurdity. It suggests more of a desire to control than a desire to pastorally lead.
POdVet @ 12:
Can you say "off topic?"
Seems like a violation of their tax-free status.
Is it legitimate for bishops and priests to deny Communion to those supporting candidates who favor abortion rights?
Until they do the same for those who support the death penalty, no.
Religion continues to lose it's centuries-old iron grip on humanity. Thank God!
why can't these religious freaks just be normal. All of them. Instaed they are some of the most vile humans on earth. All religious hierarchy.
Patrick Johnston @ 7:
Patrick:
You should also Google "Archbishop Charles Chaput" and "Michael Sheridan" and "John Kerry," just for grins.
Peoples Front of Judea @ 13:
I'll second you. The evangelicals don't have the corner on that market; Catholics are in on it as well. A candidate's stance on abortion is only part of their platform and here it is being treated as the only criteria that should be considered.
I ended the previous topic with:
“Tony” Rezko was found guilty today of fraud, attempted bribery and money laundering. Watch the Right jump on this. It will be just one of the many “scandals” that the Rightwing (and their Media enablers) will create around Obama.
Now look at #12 above. The fun's just started.
The child molesting freaks and their odd rituals. Religions have alway been nuts and are still nuts. Who gives these people the right to tell anyone what to do or think!??
As several enlightened individuals have commented in the past on this site, religion is not about God, religion is about controlling the masses. If it was about God they would just teach and not always judge and punish when members don't tow the line. Hypocritically the leaders are interested in the money and participate in many practices that shock decent people. Hopefully this will wake up some people who have given control over their lives to corrupt religious leaders.
If he wants to receive communion, then he needs to go to another church... one where no one knows who he is. This denial of communion is stupid. No wonder I'm a recovering catholic. Just couldn't go along with the catholic church's plans.
nobody takes the "christ" out of "christian" like the catholic church!
as a 15-year-old orphan, i tried in vain to get a catholic priest to officiate at my devout but divorced father's funeral . . . finally found an episocopalian minister to do the job . . . haven't been on bended knee since
POdVet @ 12:
Can't you read? This has been addressed and clearly answered. There is a difference between an acquaintance and friend. My neighbors, whom I say hello to are acquaintances. I may go to some parties where they are also invited but that does not make them my friend. Instead of trying to climb up this tree, why not take a look at McCain's financial advisor? And that is just the starting point!
Then I suppose we should all take a "litmus test" prior to taking communion. If we support a woman's right to chose, then we can get a nice sign of the cross from the priest, but NO communion. How f*cking stupid can this get??
Maybe while we're at it, we should all have to pledge we haven't masturbated, or committed adultry, or a zillion other "damned to hell mortal sins" prior to taking communion.
It sounds like some Catholics are just as screwed in the head as this neocon fascist administration we are being suppressed by. God help us. When do we NOT damn others for their sins, lest we be damned? Such bullshit.
If the Catholic Church really takes a stand on this...I'M DONE..and I've spent 60 years as a practicing Catholic; but I'd quit today if I thought they are getting into politics of this sort.
Bill B. @ 2:
Actually, that's a misstatement what organized religion 'does best' is encourage it's followers, and that's what they do follow, to kill the members of other religions. Read your history. There can be no argument with my statement. The vast majority of humans murdered by other humans have died because they were of a differing religion. No other reason is needed.
Allowing the administrators of the Xtian Death Cult to rape young boys is a method of rewarding them for their main work.
Genocide.
Ben Grants @ 24:
Yes, these are the assholes who hid and defended the child molesters in their ranks for years and years and years. And you can bet they are still doing it. Then they pull this shit. If I were to become religious the last place I would look is the catholic church. I use to be a catholic but bailed out when I was about 12. Even though I was really young for that kind of decision I have never found a reason to reconsider my decision. Ever. 40 years later.
Wow! You'd think the Catholic Church was run by some kind of an ex-Nazi or something. Next thing you know, they'll be giving the Dalai Lama the brush-off.
EJG @ 28:
Please, for your own good stop guzzling the Kool-Aid.
Do your 'casual acquaintances' give you $900,000 for your back yard?
Getting morality lessons from a group of kiddy-fiddlers? Fuck the Catholic Church, they're perverted and antiquated.
These goddamn religions will be the death of us all!
The Church has rebuked the priest refusing communion. I don't want to defend my ex-church, but I just read the diocese was clear that a priest does not have the authority.
Another recovering ex-catholic here. And now you see why.
That thing sticks to the roof of your mouth.
Hmm. Wonder if the IRS will look into their tax exempt status? Nah. Just anti-war churches. Of all the religious nonsense I hate, this takes the cake.
One of Pepperdine's largest contributors is Richard Mellon Scaife.
It's where Ken Starr now teaches law.
miss_kitty @ 38:
Maybe you're doing it wrong. Oh, the wafer......;)
In Domine Sanctus.
moondancer @ 36:
And what about the Bishops who denied communion to Joh Kerry and said that anybody who supports a candidate who supports abortion should be denied communion?
I survived unscathed after six years as an Altar Boy. Today I am Atheist. Though I'm sure this won''t enter Mr. Kmiec's mind I'd recommend , should he still have the need for involvment with organized religion, to find needed spiritual support and guidance from a more honest, enlightned organization. Or maybe, just maybe, explore PESONAL spiriuality and set aside all the organized relgious garbage.
Well, there goes my communion. Scrow them!!!!!!! This is just faith.
38 miss_kitty Says: That thing sticks to the roof of your mouth.
Peanut butter or Bubba's jism?
In order to satisfy their health conscious parishoners the Catholic Church has come out with a new low-calorie communion bread. It's called "I Can't Believe It's Not Jesus".
Rob M @ 47:
It's a miracle.
Any religion that wants to influence politics should lose their tax exempt status.
Period. End of story.
Captain Bitter Elitist Husein Kangaroo @ 48:
It's transubstantilicious.
ysbaddaden @ 46:
No place for that. Come on.
John XXlll was a great liberal pope. There have been a lot of great liberal priests, nuns, bishops and even cardinals. In the last 30 years, the conservatives have retaken control of the church and imposed their orthodoxy. Being conservatives, they will, no doubt, run the church into the ground. I don't think that there will be a liberal takeover, just that the Church will marginalize itself within the first world.
I take it they will also be denying communion to those who believe in the legalization of divorce and those who support the war in Iraq? No?
I am Catholic, and it really ticks me off when a priest does this type of thing for political reasons. There is no reason for it. When it comes right down to it, no one deserves Communion or a relationship with God for that matter - from a Christian perspective. The Church teaches that this only comes about from repentance and forgiveness when we go against God's will. Being a Democrat or Republican is not in the Bible and should not be a matter for confession. As it is there are plenty of Catholic Democratic Priest.
Unfortunately there are still plenty of brainwashed old-fart Catholic Priest who still think that the Republican party actually cares about abortion, when history proves that Republicans love abortions! It keeps stupid Republican Catholics on their payroll. Why would they want to get rid of it? If they really want to cut down on abortions they should vote Democratic, because this is the party that helps the general public get good paying jobs. When people are well employed they are less likely to have abortions.
The Church may have a right to do this, but they do not have a right to mess around in politics and claim tax-exempt status at the same time.
This seems to be an American Catholic thing. The Roman Catholic church doesn't do that sort of stuff. (At least in Europe, speaking from experience)
I actually love stories like this. I'm a PK and married to a dyed in the wool Catholic. These types of stories just serve to remind me that organized religion and the whole bureaucracy is NOT the "church". The "church" is literally made up of the people in the pews, not standing on the altar.
Just in the same way a democracy is made of voters, not the very flawed people who "lead" us.
Still, it cracks me up. "Do what we want or we won't let you have God".
I heard a wonderful homily from a priest just last Sunday that warned against "God language" in politics and it's not about how you worship but what you do. It was great and this was after the chicago archbishop told everyone to STFU about politics.
Archbishop in Kansas City, Kansas denies Governor Sebelius communion. As a practicing Catholic, this sort of behavior from the so-called leaders of the church needs to stop.
So why do they have tax exemptions?
Peoples Front of Judea @ 13:
For a private, non-established church to deny communion to its members violates the clause that says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion?" I don't understand that.
For those of you non Catholics I feel I should explain: Excommunication (as the denial of communion is called) is the Catholic equivalent of the death penalty!
Since every Catholic must take communion at least once a year and since excommunication involves denial of all the other sacraments also, it means "do not pass go, do not collect $200, GO DIRECTLY TO HELL!" (Failure to receive communion - or go to confession - at least once a year are "mortal" sins. Penance (confession) is also a sacrament denied to the excommunicated. The original "Catch-22.") If you get married (also a sacrament) your kids are bastards and every sex act is a mortal sin - and so on. A "mortal" sin, btw, means condemnation to hell and can only be forgiven by the priest in confession.
Going to another Catholic church only compounds the "sin!" Attempting to trick god is frowned upon. It's kinda like getting a parking ticket. If you don't move the car, they pile up, the car gets towed and you start racking up charges. If you got the tickets in New York City, a judge in Cleveland ain't gonna do anything about it - and couldn't if he tried.
BTW, stupid crap like that is one of the (many) reasons I am no longer a Catholic.
The interesting question is why the Knights of Columbus and such are getting their knickers in a knot about this. I'm inclined to think it's the same reason that Galileo was denounced and humiliated by the Inquisition.
Intellectuals and scientists in the Church knew Gallileo was right. But the fear was that, you let the camel get its nose under the tent flap.... The Church insists that a lot of things are true (you know, immaculate conception, virgin birth, resurrection, transubstantiation, and such--including that the sun revolves around the earth). If the Church is proved wrong about just one of these things, then why shouldn't folks doubt all of these things?
It's a bunker mentality.
Pretty ridiculous action especially when one considers how many sexually abusing priests were passing communion to members of Catholic Churches. Oh, well, church administrators are not required to practice equal justice. And the Catholic Church never has.
Now you can understand why I quit the Catholic Church...the hardcore conservatives running the Catholic Church have a hard time comprehending the concept of "forgiveness," especially the "forgiveness" that Jesus taught and demonstrated.
Lest we forget, though, for a Catholic to receive the Eucharist (Communion) they must first commune with a priest in a Confessional, essentially spilling their guts, telling the priest about all the "sins" they've committed, baring their soul as it were. Then, based on the Catholic Church's idea of "forgiveness," the parishioner is given a number of Our Fathers and/or Hail Marys to repeat, as an act of contrition. Finally, the parishioner is ready to receive Communion at the next Catholic mass.
I actually feel sorry for the Catholic priests hearing Confessions (as I did as a teenager following my going through Confirmation classes). But Catholic tradition is Catholic tradition, no matter how dangerous that tradition may be. What???
Think about it.
What better way for the Catholic Church leadership to keep tabs on the "sheep" under their control than to have the "sheep" required to spilled their guts in Confession every week, telling a priest about all of the sins that they committed that week. (Remember, in Catholicism it is a mortal sin to miss Sunday mass). So, for over a thousand years, Catholic "sheep" have been telling their parish priest everything every week, seeking "forgiveness," so they can then receive the Eucharist, walking up to the altar railing to parade their righteousness before everyone else in attendance.
So, what do you think happened because of this Catholic Church policy requiring parishioners to confess their sins each week?
Before priests were required to be celibate (and even afterward), a priest could find out in Confession about all the sexual antics and sexual preferences of those under him in the parish, leading some priests to take advantage of this "insider" information to satiate their own sexual desires. (And don't tell me that priests can't tell who's doing the confessing in the confessional. I'm certain that after enough repetitions, the priest easily recognizes the voice of all the people in his parish).
But wait. Confession starts immediately after a young Catholic adolescent is Confirmed (at puberty, right around 12 to 13 years of age). This young Catholic adolescent is told to spill their guts, bare their souls, and tell the priest about all their sins, including anything involving sex.
Hmmm, so a young Catholic teenage boy confesses to his parish priest that he seems to have an attraction for other boys and not girls? You see where this is heading. Catholicism has had a problem with pedophilia since its beginning (as have Protestant groups), but especially since Catholic priests were required to be celibate, and to suppress their sexual urges. When you combine this with priests hearing about all the juicy sexual gossip in their parish, or having confessors (no matter what their age) telling them about their sexual preferences, then what happens next is not surprising.
As a teenager, I never met any sexual predator priests, and wasn't even aware that this was a problem in some parishes. But recent revelations have not only opened my eyes, but also led me to wonder what exactly might be behind some of this sexual predation. Answer: celibacy and the confessional.
this is a good example of why religion and politics do not mix. The church can punish you for what you think!!!!!
62 Scarabus Says:
It’s a bunker mentality.
Archie Bunker?
Communion is a weapon of mass destruction. Besides, didn't everyone whose surname starts with "Km" get put on the list already?
I wonder how many of those same hands passing out communion had once fiddled with little boy's peepees?
On another note, I can't tell you how many people in my church (All Saints Church in Pasadena) are former Catholics.
Doesn't this violate the Church's tax exempt status?
Because, if the Roman Catholic Church were subject to taxes, we could balance that budget and reduce/eliminate the national debt within a few years!
This is one big cash cow...
I was a practicing lifelong Catholic until our church deacon announced during mass in fall 2004 that we would all go to hell if we voted for John Kerry. My wife and I were appalled, and took our church-going ways down the street to the United Methodist Church. Everyone's welcome, and the only politics we hear concerns feeding the poor, sheltering the homeless, and working for peace. I like it like that.
I am Catholic and I would say, keep your damn host. I appeal to a higher order.
Mark @ 49:
Amen, brother!
Remove the Catholic church's tax exempt status -- immediately.
They can preach or they can play politics. They can't do both and have ALL of us help fund their political activities.
"Tax the **** out of the churches!" - Frank Zappa
This really raises an interesting question, which I have never seen addressed. If a church uses it's theology to threaten members to vote a certain way, why do they maintain a tax-exempt status? Threatening the withholding of communion which in catholic belief is a sacrament, is a much stronger influence (if one believes in the theology) than simply preaching one way or another from a pulpit.
From another, and more extreme, point of view catholics by their faith are required to follow the instructions of the pope, who is the head of a foreign state - the Vatican. If you think this is merely a formality, count the number of Vatican embassies around the world. If any other foreign head of state or his agents attempted to interfere in US elections, it would be a major diplomatic incident, if not cause for war. Furthermore, if someone swears allegiance to a foreign sovereign nation, they are relieved of their US citizienship. One could argue that catholic acceptance of papal infallibility (despite the limitations put on this) supercedes allegiance to the United States. While I would never advocate disenfranchisement of catholics, it is evident that the catholic church enjoys an unprecedented privilege in this country, and is opposed to exercising undue influence.
i am an agnostic. if the catholic church professes to follow the
teachings of "jesus" then why are they hypocrites when it
comes to something as simple as communion. jesus forgave
everyone.
oops. Not opposed
Charlie @ 73:
Don't just stop with the Catholic Church, all churches should lose tax exempt status. I am not happy seeing the FDLS, Scientology, or any other loony tune organization getting tax exempt status to build more expensive monuments to itself or having the monies to buy jets, million dollar homes, expensive vacations, cosmetic surgery, and any other outlandish thing they want. Enough of this wholesale thievery masking as religion. We don't need it.
The Church cannot continue to chase away and offend its more liberal members without ceasing to be influential. If you believe the tithes will continue to flow in as the church chastises its supporters, then you may be nuts!
"Tax the churches. Tax the property that belongs to churches" -- Frank Zappa
Pat J @ 78:
What about the small independent churches, who don't have jets and monuments? Heck, I've never even seen our pastor in a suit let alone the $5k duds I've seen on the televangelists. We can barely afford the building we're in and every extra penny we have goes to the poor and I'm not talking about buying Bibles for them - I mean food, help with utilities and medical care. We don't preach politics and, in return, don't want the government in our business either. Should we be taxed too because of the big 'Christian' organizations that rake in the bucks and tell their congregations how to vote?
The boys in black dresses just never learn. The bishop in San Diego decided to make a big fuss over a local politician's pro-choice position (although the cleric, of course, said it was a "pro-abortion" position, since allowing women to choose for themselves obviously means you really want them to abort). When the bishop tried to punish Lucy Killea by denying her communion just before a special state senate election, his intervention may have tipped the balance in her favor. If the Church wants to squander its capital on political vendettas, it will go ill with them. You can read more about the San Diego story in this post of mine from last year.
as far as i'm concerned the catholic church is every bit within its rights to deny a candidate communion for his or her political views, just as it is every bit the right of the IRS to revoke the tax exempt status of the catholic church for doing so.
Mark @ 49:
Charlie @ 73:
John H @ 80:
sassafra @ 83:
I see no reason that churches should not be subject to the same taxes as any other organization that owns property. To subject them to the same taxation as every other entity in no way marks an establishment of religion.
UnEasyOne @ 61:
What you describe is mental and emotional abuse. How disgusting. Especially when drilled into the heads of children.
Please, Jesus, save me from your followers.
...and remember; there's a big difference between kneeling down - and bending over! Zappa
The Catholic Church rules ultimately come from Rome - the Pope has said that Catholics should not vote for pro-abortion politicians - the US council of Bishops can not override that. The rule applies to all. Oh - and Catholics who are "pro-choice" are excommunicated for holding that view - ipso facto - it doesn't need a public declaration. Excommunication means "outside communion" - ie, they can't receive communion (or the other sacraments).
Oh - and for those saying the Church is interfering in politics - the problem is that the state is now dealing in morals. When the state gets out of morals, the Church will not appear to be in politics.
Please have a little compassion for the Catholic clergy accused of child molesting. After all, many of them started out as altar boys themselves, and just got sucked in to it...
Karen @ 60:
Because the denial of communion is in retaliation for the church member supporting a specific candidate. The church therefore, is advocating a political position. For the church to advocate a candidate (or the opposition to one) is a violation of the establishment clause. Churches are not allowed to tell their members how to vote.
Wraith @ 89:
How exactly does the state deal in "morals?"
If you are talking about abortion, that is a personal choice and the government should have no say in it. If you are talking about gay and lesbian couples, that is a personal choice and the government should have no say in it.
Your church has every right to oppose issues on "moral" grounds, but don't expect the rest of the nation to submit to the opinions of the Catholic church. Keep your "morals" to yourself!
Wraith @ 88:
In other words, you have more allegiance to the Pope than the United States and the Constitution. It's attitudes like yours led to the development of all the anti-Catholic political parties in the 19th century.
There is no such thing as being "pro-abortion," by the way. But, I do like the term "anti-choice," because it sums up what the Catholic church stands for. It's obvious the Pope doesn't believe in Catholics thinking for themselves.
mike hussein @ 70:
I remember as a child in a Catholic church that the priest would give a special and extra sermon just before each election. He would always admonish the church members to vote. He made the point that living in a democracy was a great blessing and that the blessing should never be squandered. I do not remember a single time EVER when he told anyone how to vote. Just to vote.
Catholics for Choice:
http://www.catholicsforchoice.org/
* Only 25% of Catholics believe that church leaders should have the final say on abortion
* Only 22% of American Catholics agree with bishops that say abortion should be illegal
* 58% of Catholics believe you can be a good Catholic without agreeing with the bishops on abortion
* Only 13% of American Catholic priests belong to "Catholics for Life."
* 27% of women seeking abortions are Catholic
* 96% of sexually active Catholic women have used birth control
* Less than 2% of sexually active Catholic women use church-approved family planning methods
* 88% of Catholics believe in sex education in public schools while 83% believe birth control should be available to teenagers
* 93% of Catholics believe in the use of condoms to prevent sexually-transmitted diseases
* Only 7% of American Catholics believe the views of the US Bishops are "very" important in deciding who to vote for
* 74% of Catholics do not believe they have an obligation to vote against pro-choice candidates
* 66% of Catholics believe in international family planning
States with the highest percentages of Catholics - that also happen to be pretty liberal and pro-choice
Rhode Island
Massachusetts
New Jersey
Vermont
New York
New Hampshire
California
http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/history/95theses.htm
Maybe when that person reads this now, 500 years later, they'd understand.
And it sounds to me Sarah that alot of those Catholics are Protestants. Catholics believe that the Pope is an extension of God's will, so if they go againt him, they go against God (which means they wouldn't hold themselves as Christians at all). Protestants believe the Pope is just another dude, treated equally in God's eyes. Some however have destroyed this by 'popeing' themselves sadly, so not all Protestants are really Protestants, but segregate Catholics.
Confusing ain't it?
.
What the Catholic Church has long forgotten is that Christ, upon his return, will not wish to go to or see the churches dedicated to Himself, but rather wish to go to His Father's Temple.
QUESTION:
Did Christ refuse breaking bread with Judas?
Christians follow the footsteps of Christ. Anything other, is unchristian.
.
Percentage of American Catholic voters who attend mass once a week: 35%
Percentage of American Catholic voters who are pro-choice: 57%
Percentage of American Catholics who have no confidence in organized religion: 68%
Percentage of Catholic congregations that are theologically liberal and/or moderate: 61%
Percentage of Catholic congregations that are politically liberal and/or moderate: 57%
Percentage of Catholic congregations that are conservative, both theologically and politically: 27%
55% of Roman Catholic congregations do not believe the Bible is the literal word of God. This number is 51% among conservative congregations
51% of Catholic voters believe the Vatican should be treated as a nongovernmental organization
70% of Catholic voters believe Catholic bishops should not use politics to impose moral opinions
61% of Catholics support stem cell research
When Canada legalized gay marriage, our Prime Minister and a number of other government ministers happened to be Catholic and the Catholic Church here tried to muscle them by threatening to deny communion. These politicians responded that this was a civil matter, not a religious one, and they had been been elected to represent all of the public and to respect the law of the land, not just the beliefs of the Catholic Church. As far as I know, that was the end of it -- the bishops backed off.
Regarding Paul #7 above: This story is 100% true. I've known about it since it happen. It happened at a meeting of Legatas. The chaplan was not from Pepperdine, but from Thomas Aquinas Catholic college.
Oh wow, you mean I don't get a cookie from the child molester??? AWWWWW, I'm devastated I tell ya!
The Truth Hurts @ 6:
First, let me say, he can come on over to my church, we'll serve him communion any day, any time of the day we can make it happen.
Secondly to the quote above...
It saddens me that some dogmatic and or extremist evangelicals can do so much harm to the Church. I'm a believer, I attend Church every Sunday and am very involved there. We support any and all that come - the idea that what you do and how you interpret the scriptures is between you and God. We have gay, lesbian, trans gender, and trans sexual members that are highly regarded.
I support abortion rights because i believe 2 things, first that it's my right to choose what to do with my body and secondly I don't belive that life begins at conception - a close look at the bible will agree with that, in that there are different punishments for killing a woman and child vs. killing a woman who is pregnant - there is a difference.
I'm not trying to preach - I prefer to live well, and evangelize through actions and attitudes - it's a leading by example approach which is encouraged in our Church.
Churches, Denominations, religions - they're like people, some are good, some are bad. There are good and bad people in them - but our (my) philosophy is that we are to Love and Include everyone - even to the extent of seeking to publicly join with other religions (Jewish, Islam, Bhuddist, etc.) in an effort to create peace and unity in our local communities, our states, our country and the entire world.
Ok, I'm rambling - it's the darvocet - sorry.
What I'm trying to say, truly, is if you want to attend a Church but have been turned off - try another one...ask around - don't let those hate-mongering jerks cause you to judge the rest of us.
peace,
Shirley
Peoples Front of Judea @ 91:
The real problem has to do with separation of church and state and their non-profit status. If a church violates the dictates that prevent them from involving themselves in politics (such as telling them who to vote for), then they are in danger of losing their non-profit status - which means they have to pay taxes on tithes, etc. Having said that, this administration has really not pushed the issue, unless the church in question was advocating someone other than Bush or Republicans...
The pope can do what he wants - he isn't a citizen of the US. So maybe the priests can't say anything from the pulpit, but the pope can get the word out...
just my 2 cents
First, religion is stupid, so why even bother asking questions that ultimately ask about consistency, logic, usefulness, or rationality when religion is so devoid in all of these things.
Second, the roots of Just War Doctrine is founded in the Catholic church. And it said the Iraq war was not a just war. I don't read or hear any of its leaders making such public pronouncements about denying communion or lollipops to politicians who have supported or even voted for the Iraq war.
Bunch of farking hypocrites, what do you expect? This is really surprising? Honestly?
I wonder - can you be denied communion for practicing cannibalism?
(Mmmm! This Body of Christ is especially tender today!)
Somewhere, Bill Donahue is felching a priest in honor of this news.
I have a Roman Catholic friend who is a scholar, and very well informed.
He tells me that if someone appears before the priest during Mass, the Priest MUST serve that person.
The priest has no choice.
This friend tells me that, at the church he attends, people in the congregation call out, "No! No! Do not serve that person" during Mass. What their objections are my friend does not know.
He says it is sometimes bedlam during Mass.
So, this fact that the priest is bound to serve someone who appears before him seems to be not widely known even in RC circles.
Since pre-emptive war is a violation of the "Just War" doctrine, I gesss anyone who voted for Bush must be denied communion.
Tax the church immediately!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I just want to go on the record as saying I'm quite disgusted by this knee-jerk pseudo-intellectual religion-bashing. Not all of the above comments fall into that category, but enough of them do. How are these offensive comments ANY different from the attacks we get so riled up about when the right wingers perpetrate them? We attack them for their intolerance, how are these comments any different?!? For the record, I'm a Christian who attends Catholic (both Anglican and Roman Catholic) church. I believe in human rights, including gay rights, a woman's right to choose, and the importance of protecting the weak from being preyed upon by those in a position of power. I'm not an end-timer, and I think we are charged with being stewards of the environment. I have found many, many churches where my viewpoint is welcome. In Protestant, RC and Anglican -- especially Anglican -- churches.
@97, Tantroo, you're making the common mistake of equating all Catholic with Roman Catholic. Anglican is Catholic as well, the split from the Vatican happened well after the Protestant Reformation.
After six years of schooling by, first, the Sisters of (Show No) Mercy, then six years of Benedictines followed by two years of the Jesuits, I'll add this to the list of reasons why I'm no longer a Catholic.
(I have nothing but love for the Benedictine monks I studied under. I owe them greatly and they would never have promulgated such nonsense.) The others...not so much.
What about the death penalty? Doesn't the Catholic church take a strong stand against that? Are Republican candidates who strongly support the death penalty being denied the sacrament? Last I heard, they were not. This idea of picking and choosing which church doctrines you decide to follow based on what your political affiliations are is reprehensible and vomitous, and just goes to show how much more weight political power has within the church than doctrine.
Perhaps he can receive communion from the holy Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. I hear they offer pasta with a wine flavored sauce.
seale33 @ 112:
This, it seems to me, is the decisive question, and the clearest demonstration of the theological and moral poverty of denying communion to those who choose to support those who choose to support a woman's right to decide the fate of her body. ("Choose... to choose": that's the issue here, no? Kmiec didn't have an abortion or say that he is suddenly pro-choice. He made the centuries-old bargain of faith and politics, siding with the candidate who overall best represented the principles of his religion.)
If priests are going to refuse the sacraments to individuals who do not follow Rome's stance on abortion, then the sacraments must, logically, also be denied to supporters of the death penalty and supporters of preemptive wars. That this hasn't happened, at least not on any scale that registers in the media, suggests that the denial of communion to supporters of choice is about something other than protecting the "unborn". ("Maybe punishing women who want control of their reproductive organs?" he asks cynically...)
This is yet another case of the perverse constriction of the meaning of "morality" in contemporary American politics. I look forward to the day when some young person stands up in a Presidential town hall debate, tears in her eyes -- you may remember the anti-choice version of this from the Kerry-Bush debates -- and asks pleadingly why her tax dollars should be used to execute prisoners, when she opposes the death penalty, or why her tax dollars should be used to pay uniformed brutes to torture accused terrorists in secret US prisons, etc. But I'm not holding my breath.
"the church’s position — and punishment of loyal adherents like Kmiec — strikes me as wildly foolish."
Why limit it to the church's position? Just about all of christianity (yes, the lack of capitalization is deliberate) strikes me as wildly foolish.
Andrew W @ 110:
Actually you're both right and wrong. The English church fully split from the Vatican during Queen Elizabeth's reign 1553-1603. They see-sawed back and forth for awhile, because Elizabeth's predecessor was Mary, a staunch Catholic, as was her successor James II. Under King William of Orange they included in the coronatioin a denouncement of the belief in transubstantiation. Elizabeth II had to recite it too, possibly for the last time. However to the Puritan, their were still too many high rituals in the religion so they wanted to purify it, thus became known as Puritans.
Henry VIII didn't create a new church in Anglicanism, but restored the old one of the Saxon King Harold, that was stomped out by the mailed boots of Norman Roman Catholics.
It continued. In the 19th century, there was the Evangelical Church in England prominent in the begining, the High Church (which was very liturgical with a belief in apostolic succession) in the middle and toward the end of the century the Broad Church that tried to combine the other two.
That's what I like to worship, broads.
Then in 1977 due to the ordination of women in Canadian/US Episcople churches ordination of women as priest came out a new movement called the Anglican Catholic Church. They seem to be gathering strength since Katherine Schori became he leading bishop of American Episcopalian church and the ordination of the openly gay Gene Robinson as a bishop.
Funny thing, racially speaking, many Episcopal's are now identifiying themselves as Anglican and are trading American Episcopal bishops for African and South American dioceses.
James II wasn't Elizabeth immediate successor first there was James I (James VI of Scotland), Charles the I, the Regency of Oliver Cromwell, Charles II and then James II.
Sorry, the Regency was after George III after he flipped his lid, but while George the IV was acting as his regent, before becoming king on his death. I believe Cromwell was called the Protectorate, but I'm still sleepy.
Better that we should have a president who kills actually born human beings. Now that's okay.
109 Andrew W
The difference is political candidates don't seek our endorsement.
"Vote for me, Stu Shboitnik endorsed me!"
Why don't they feel the same about divorce? It is considered a sin to be divorced in the Catholic religion yet they vote for the sinner John McCain. They need to stop voting on a single issue. They're only showing their hypocracy.
As a practicing Catholic I know says, "fuck the Pope."
I heard this guy interviewed on NPR this week & then they talked with Catholic scholars about the incident. the priest was not within his rights to deny the man communion. That has to handed down from some level of Bishop. A priest can't just arbitrarily decide that someone isn't a good enough Catholic to receive communion.
Of course the good news, is that it brings more into the news the fact that a conservative Republican is supporting Obama.
RELIGION IS HELL!
There is a core of misogynist old bishops and priests who do this sort of thing. These are the same guys who vigorously oppose women priests; fortunately, they are a dying breed (literally). Most of the pastors I know are generous and caring and expect people to follow their conscience.
The Catholic Church in particular and Christianity in general have thrived for 1700 years based on the principle of accommodating and supporting the power of the state. When they attempt to assert their religious principles--even stupid ones like trying to prevent abortion rights--that conflict with the dominant political views of a society, they undermine their futures. Accordingly, I am delighted when they deny communion to people because of their politcal views. It hastens the day when religion disappears from the earth.
Sounds to me like a legitimate reason for the IRS to revoke the tax free status of any parrish that does such a move. That is clearly involving the church in campagin politicking, and doing it through extortion.
Prof Kmiec was my con law professor. Although I rarely agreed with him, he was one helluva professor and I've always had deep respect for him. After some of his classes, I'd often feel as though applause was called for. He was (is) that good. I feel bad that he is being treated this way for his political decision.
patrick@7
The story was first reported on NPR by Nina Totenberg on June 2. by Nina Totenberg. I hope that crooksandliars will link the audio so that people can hear the full report.
The story really has larger implications in the current political climate. For me, this isn't an issue of liberal v. conservative, or Republicans v. Democrats. The issue is intolerance, and how we conduct a civil debate about the issues.
Take your pick -- Rev. Falwell, Rev. Hagee, Rev. Wright, Joe "Only I know what's good for Israel" Lieberman, et al., they all represent a position that one side has knowledge of a position that is given devine sanction. When you start with that kind of attitude, how can you have a rational discussion of any issue?
When it comes to having a "civil debate" I give you the response that was given to the performance of the catholic priest at Sen. Obama's Trinity Church about Hillary Clinton. (He actually was dead on about Hillary's sense of entitlement, but that's off topic.) The response of the church members -- stomping, laughing, waving -- what the heck was that all about? But the Trinity folks are not an aberration in the world of religion. You can find the same intolerance (perhaps with another ethnic overlay) in white churches, synagogues, and mosques.
If religious leaders and institutions are going to weigh in on the issues of the day, they ought to bring the some perspective, moderation and tolerance to a problem. Unfortunately, the Kmiec situation is indicative of a Stalinist mindset.
neverbeenfooled @ 113:
Yummmm! Its sacrilicious!
innocent bystander @ 27:
God love ya!! As a divorced person, I will take communion when ever I want to. Last time was St. Patrick's day, 2002. Attending in-laws 50th. this month, will be a great party, but mass first. I intend to march right up there and take communion. I follow my spirit, not some man-made rule.
How many face-in-the-crowd type of people are denied communion?? Zero! My only queston is WHO is it that actually tells these clergy guys to deny the Public figure communion????? Of course, if they admitted some higher-up ordered it, that could cause a lot of problems. The CC would go totally bankrupt if they lost their tax exempt status.
Andrew W @ 109:
At least in my case, it is not knee-jerk at all. It took slightly more than a decade for me to go from devoutly Catholic accepting every nook and cranny of Catholicism, to atheist.
And stating that religion bashing is pseudo-intellectual suggests that there is potential intellectualism in religion, which is inherently not an intellectual exercise. There's nothing intellectual about faith. Faith is necessary because of a lack of knowledge or understanding about how the world does or should work. Replacing that with fairy goddesses, unicorns, Zeus, Thor, Aphrodite, Allah/Yahweh/Jehovah or any of the many gods that man has created out of thin air, is the cheap and easy way out instead of having to think critically.
I don't attack them for their intolerance. I attack them for their ignorance and stupidity. They make BAD DECISIONS. Their entire philosophy is faith based and not just when it comes to religion. When it comes to making money, it's faith in pure capitalism, screw everyone who is not involved in the buy/sell relationship. When it comes to foreign policy, it's blind faith that democracy is the one true god and everyone should have it, even if they have to swallow it at the barrel of a gun.
If all you're doing is attacking them for their intolerance then you've got it exactly ass backwards. The source of their intolerance is that they're idiots. They aren't intolerant out of thin air. That is a learned behavior, secured by power.
Anglican church is not Catholic. It's the Church of England and has exactly zero assocation or recognition by the Pope. Going to church and taking communion in an Anglican church doesn't "count" toward your Sunday obligation.
Someone else's stupid game, and their stupid rules. All designed to collect power into the hands of a few. It has nothing to do with salvation. It has nothing to do with learning the mysteries that science and math and literature can't help us out with. A long time ago religion said "we have figured everything out" and decided they alone did not need to improve any understanding of magic pixie dust.
If your local bishop knew you believed in a woman's right to choose, your church that you supposedly believe in for reasons unknown, would deny you communion. That is the edict from Rome. American Bishops tend to look the other way so long as such individuals aren't public figures, and even then are disinclined to get involved primarily due to the sticky issue of law and IRS regulations. But if they applied their own rules the way they wanted to, you would not be in communion with your church because of your beliefs. Try it, go ask your priest.
And guess what? You'd still be moral and a good person even if you weren't Catholic, even if you didn't believe in the pink fairy in the sky, because those things are not the origin of your morality.
The RCC has become a disgusting right bag of hypocrites. Sad watching the Church turn into this right wing house of horrors. They do this but will gladly hand out communion to people who were in on the premeditated murder of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's for no reason.
The Bible predicts that at the end time christians will be mislead and they are NOW!! If they aren't ponying up to Sun Myung Moon they are using Christ as politcal tool for their own bigotry and hatred.
When ARE they going to cut off the Pope and Bishops who covered up the alterboy diddling?
I am Catholic and they may have the right, but it does not make them right. There is a whole section of Catholic teaching that is being ignored by my church; which is/has become a haven for many of the business worlds worst offenders in human rights.
Liberation theology, Oscar Romaro... where are they?
Peoples Front of Judea @ 91:
I still can't square that position with the text of the First Amendment. Not that First Amendment jurisprudence doesn't get as convoluted as your interpretation, but textually, it just doesn't follow.
The First Amendment prevents the United States Congress from passing laws that in any way respect an establishment of religion. And that's all it says. Private Church action is not covered by that clause without logical and linguistic contortions that yield an historical-semantic animal balloon.
As a church, the Roman Catholic Church -- its leaders and members -- have a Constitutionally protected freedom to practice their religion without interference from the government. If the hierarchy refuses communion for someone because of her political beliefs, so be it. That action, in and of itself, in no comprehensible way violates the establishment clause.
To argue that it does would be like taking a law that says, "The state of California shall not run public motorcycle repair shops," and interpreting it to mean that owners of private motorcycle repair shops are not allowed to voice political opinions.
God, this makes me sad.
I'm a through-and-through C&Ler, have been for years now, and it so saddens me to see this kind of invective by my peers on this site trashing the Catholic Church as a whole for something a minority of its followers has done. Yeah, this priest was a bastard. Doesn't mean the rest of us agree with him or take what he says as Gospel. There are so many false assumptions by the majority of commenters on this post, so many misrepresentations of Catholic doctrine, so many rumors evolving into "hard truthiness."
You had a bad experience with the Catholic church? Fine, I'm sorry, glad you're happier now without it. You know someone crazy who's also Catholic? Congratulations, I know a bunch too. You have a problem with one of the teachings of this church? I do too, and I am a practicing member, and no, that doesn't mean I need to find another church. Having faith doesn't mean you ignore your conscience, and I along with my parish family would never take seriously any priest who claimed otherwise. Do we have to spread hate because of your personal experiences? I guarantee, for each bad Catholic you've encountered in your life who got up in your grill, there's 50 more you haven't met who live peacefully and are good for the community at large, and at least one atheist or member of another religion who is equally as vile. Catholics are not evil as a whole, and I thank you for remembering that.
Login or Register to post comments.