Bishop pans politicizing Communion
Never having been a fan of the Catholic Church (the doctrine, NOT the practitioners, OK?), the whole controversy regarding priests denying communion is something I find wholly repulsive.
Given the power and influence priest wield over their parishioners, you would think that most priests would handle that power with care and compassion. In fact, most do. Just as only a small percentage of priests are sexual predators, it only takes a few renegade priests to brand the entire Catholic Church as a refuge for the intolerant and compassion-impaired control freaks.
Wading into a national debate that has entwined presidential politics with religion, Bishop Joseph A. Fiorenza of the Diocese of Galveston-Houston said he does not favor denying Holy Communion to Catholic politicians who support abortion rights.
In a column published in diocesan newspaper the Texas Catholic Herald, Fiorenza wrote that denying someone Communion would, in effect, excommunicate the person — a "very serious sanction" that requires "strict criteria before it can be imposed.
"The tradition of the church does not make a public judgment on those who wish to receive Holy Communion," Fiorenza wrote in the June 11 letter. "The burden for judging one to be free of serious sin and worthy to receive the Eucharist is each person's own conscience."....
Catholic politicians with positions that differ from church teaching have become a hot topic in churches and on the campaign trail in recent months. Presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry is Catholic and supports abortion rights. Some church leaders, most notably Archbishop Raymond Burke of St. Louis, have said they would deny Communion to him and other politicians with similar views.
"The reality is that it has only been in the current election year where there has been serious discussion of denying people Communion by some bishops," said John Francis Burke, professor of political science at the University of St. Thomas.
Conservatives will no doubt argue that the Catholic Church has the right, nay, the obligation to enforce Church teachings. After all, why should one be able to pick and choose what doctrinal points one will follow? Since when does faith become convenient?
That is all well and good, but where does it stop? At what point do priests begin to exercise control over how parishioners think or vote by threatening them with the denial of communion or, worse, excommunication? If they can deny communion for being pro-choice, how about voting Democratic, or rooting for the Green Bay Packers (well, personally I have no problem with the last one, but I'm sure you get my point...)? Where does it stop? Where do you draw the line?
I realize, of course, that we are talking about a small minority of priests. Even so, when did Catholicism become more about power and control than charity and compassion? When did the Church become more concerned about ideological purity than the welfare of it's parishioners?
There is something to be said for the separation of Church and State. Perhaps if the Catholic Church could tend more to the spiritual needs of it's flock instead of trying to control their votes it would still have some credibility.
