Moments ago, Edward Cardinal Egan issued a statement saying he deeply regrets former mayor Rudy Giuliani received communion during Pope Benedict XVI mass at Saint Patrick's.Meantime, columnist Robert Novak (himself a Catholic convert) weighed in on the communion issue in today's column:
This came out of the blue today. Yes, there was some controversy when this first happened, but for Cardinal Edward Egan to come out and say he "deeply regrets" it, that's a strong statement.
It all has to do with Giuliani's stance on abortion.
Rudy Giuliani stood in line at St. Patrick's Cathedral when the pope was here a week ago Saturday to receive communion. It is a high honor. Rudy Giuliani is pro-choice, which is in direct conflict with the position of the church, strictly pro-life.
According to the Archbishop of New York, Cardinal Egan, he made it very clear to Rudy Giuliani when he was mayor that he could not receive the Eucharist because they disagreed about abortion. And so it was surprising to find out Rudy Giuliani received it from the pope anyway.
Cardinal Egan released this statement a short time ago. "The Catholic Church clearly teaches that abortion is a grave offense against the will of God...I deeply regret that Mr. Giuliani received the Eucharist during the Papal visit here in New York, and I will be seeking a meeting with him to insist that he abide by our understanding."
Eyewitness News has placed a call to Rudy Giuliani's people who confirm they have received the statement from Cardinal Egan but have not said anything beyond that.
In the aftermath of the U.S. visit by Pope Benedict XVI, traditional Catholics are asking a troublesome question: Did pro-choice politicians receiving Communion at the papal Masses indicate the pope had softened on the abortion question? The answer is no. On the contrary, it reflected disobedience to Benedict by the archbishops of New York and Washington.Novak has much more on the subject -- well worth reading -- at the link.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Sens. John Kerry, Christopher Dodd and Edward M. Kennedy received Communion at Nationals Park in Washington, as did former mayor Rudolph Giuliani at Yankee Stadium in New York. Archbishop Donald Wuerl of Washington and Cardinal Edward Egan, archbishop of New York, invited them. Given choice seats, they took Communion as a matter of course.
Vatican sources say the pope has not retreated from his long-held position that pro-choice politicians should be deprived of Communion, but the decisions in Washington and New York were not his. The effect was to dull the pope's messages of faith, obligation and compassion. In his Yankee Stadium homily, he talked of "authority" and "obedience" -- acknowledging that "these are not easy words to speak nowadays." They surely are not for four former presidential candidates and two princes of the church, representing Catholics who defy their faith's doctrine on abortion.
Benedict's position was unequivocal when he was Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Asked in 2004 whether Kerry, as the Democratic presidential nominee, should be allowed to take Communion, he replied, "The minister of Holy Communion must refuse to distribute it."
Ratzinger's demeanor necessarily has changed with his elevation from doctrinal enforcer to global pastor, but he has not altered his position. When the pope arrived in Brazil a year ago, he declared: "The killing of an innocent human child is incompatible with going into Communion in the body of Christ."
UPDATE: The blog at America, In All Things, offers one more perspective on this controversy:
The pope has been supportive of local pastors as they seek to address this issue. He has shown no desire to turn the altar rail into a frontline in the culture wars. He has not removed any bishop for taking one side or the other in the debate. And, Benedict realizes, as many conservatives do not, that simply denying communion to pro-choice politicians will hardly advance the pro-life cause. Wuerl, who had clearly indicated he would not support any effort to issue blanket prohibitions, was Benedict's first major appointment to an American see. The first Americans raised to the cardinalate by Benedict, Cardinals Levada and O'Malley, also declined to join the conservative culture war at the altar rail.
I am tired of conservative laymen denouncing our bishops when they fail to follow the talking points from the Republican National Committee. Benedict is not dumb. He knows what he is doing.
Posts
6 comments:
And, of course, Guiliani is in an irregular marriage of the sort that would also demand refraining from communion. Indeed, that's even more cut and dried.
That's what amazes me about this story: nobody (especially the good Cardinal) mentions the simple fact that, in the eyes of the Church, he's living in grave sin.
Dcn. G.
As always America magazine is being a bit disenenious. He also hasn't removed any bishops at all for any reason, so to say that this is a defining point is simply not true. This is no GOP talking points. Catholics upset about the scandal of pro-aborts receiving Communion are upset whether it is Kerry or Rudy.
When then-Cardinal Ratzinger gave a letter to Cardinal McCarrick (which Cardinal McCarrick never released or told other bishops about till it was leaked) it quite explicit on what the norms are in this case.
Read "Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion: General Principles" and tell me there is any real leeway in this.
Don't bishops care that public sinners are "eating and drinking judgement" on themselves as St. Paul says. Their souls are too important to let them receive unworthily and scandal caused is only secondary.
Canon Lawyer Archbishop Burke wrote an extensive article on Canon 915.
http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/holycom/denial.htm
I am tired of conservative laymen denouncing our bishops when they fail to follow the talking points from the Republican National Committee.
Could you elaborate? To what talking points are you referring?
However you feel regarding this issue – scandal has ensued. It’s sad that these men and woman place themselves above everything else. It isn’t enough that they publically rebuke the Church’s teaching. They go further and present themselves publically to receive communion.
If they wish to receive communion, why don’t they do so discretely out of the public eye? Why do they make a public spectacle and elicit scandal for themselves and the Church, placing the bishops in a tough spot?
What is it going to take to get the Cardinals to realize that we who sit in the pews Sunday after Sunday are watching all this, and they want obedience from us. Start demanding it from the top. It's time to start denying the politicans the Eucharist....see how many Protestants will come over when they see we truly believe what we profess!
I don't understand why Archbishop Wuerl and/or Cardinal Egan invited Kennedy, Pelosi, Giuliani, Dodd, etc. to the Papal Masses in Washington or New York to begin with. Inviting them also invited this issue of receiving/not receiving the Eucharist to become a prominent issue as most in the media knew it would. The fact that the television camera did not miss their reception of the Eucharist attests to this. Both Masses were "by invitation only" and Wuerl and Egan were ultimately responsible for the guest list.
Post a Comment