Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Monday, April 28, 2008
Robert Novak :: Townhall.com Columnist
Disobeying the Pope
by Robert Novak
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


WASHINGTON, D.C. -- In the aftermath of the visit by Pope Benedict XVI, a troublesome question is asked by traditional Catholics: Did American pro-choice politicians receiving Communion at the papal masses indicate a softening on the abortion question by the pope? The answer is that it did not. On the contrary, it reflected disobedience to Benedict by the archbishops of New York and Washington.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Sens. John Kerry, Christopher Dodd and Edward M. Kennedy received Communion at Nationals Park in Washington, as did Rudolph Giuliani at Yankee Stadium in New York. They were present because they were invited to the masses by Archbishop Donald Wuerl of Washington and Cardinal Edward Egan, archbishop of New York. Given choice seats, they took Communion hosts 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 messages of faith, obligation and compassion conveyed by Benedict. 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 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 in his elevation from doctrinal enforcer to global pastor, but he has not altered his position on abortion-communion. When as Benedict he 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."

Benedict did not reiterate that position in Washington and New York, because a pope traveling abroad is influenced by the stance of local church authorities. American bishops are divided. Archbishop Raymond Burke of St. Louis leads those who believe pro-choice politicians cannot receive Communion. Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, Wuerl's predecessor as archbishop of Washington, took a position opposite to Burke's. Blessed with charm and political finesse, McCarrick was not about to clash with his archdiocese's most famous parishioners.

Wuerl is considered less political than McCarrick, but he is hardly less averse to colliding with powerful laymen. He could have avoided any confrontation at Nationals Park by simply not inviting the pro-choice politicians to a mass where there was no room for the vast majority of Catholics who wanted to attend. The five pro-choice Catholics took Communion from the hand of Archbishop Pietro Sambi, the pope's representative to the United States as apostolic delegate.

In New York, Giuliani receiving Communion was even more remarkable. Unlike Pelosi and Kennedy, who are regular Mass attendees, the former mayor of New York says he goes to church only "occasionally," usually for holidays or funerals. Abortion aside, Giuliani's third marriage would make him ineligible for Communion because his second marriage was not annulled by the church. But in New York, Cardinal Egan is no more apt than Cardinal McCarrick was to offend the powerful, and Giuliani was invited to the Mass.

There are devout pro-life Catholics who oppose rejection of any worshiper at the Communion rail, but they believe bishops should publicly manifest disapproval of Catholic politicians who support abortion rights. The bishops of Washington and New York do not. During Wuerl's installation mass as archbishop of Washington in 2006, he shook hands with Kerry and Kennedy, seated side by side.

At Yankee Stadium, Benedict spoke of the "inalienable dignity and rights" of "the most defenseless of all human beings, the unborn child in the mother's womb." In parishes across the country, the faithful hear their priests echo the Holy Father's words. Those professions ring hollow when pro-choice politicians are honored as they were during the pope's visit.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Robert Novak (1931-2009) was a syndicated columnist and editor of the Evans-Novak Political Report.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
To cse45
just a thought. Does townhall allow
and or assist people exchanging e-mail
addresses if both parties agree.

Scott writes:
1. God’s Word CAN be understood by regular men and women.

[Unless God, being perfect (Matthew 5:48) either failed, or unless He only meant for men in a church that didn’t even exist when His Word was written down (i.e., the Roman Catholic Church), men with doctoral degrees in theology from universities that also didn’t even exist when His Word was written down.]

2. God meant for us to understand His Word

[Unless God was just wasting His time and effort for a lark]

The unfortunate fact that men (Roman Catholics, Protestants and everyone else) understand His Word differently is not a reflection on God, it is a reflection on men who ultimately desire to make His Word say what they want it to say, rather than simply allowing the Scripture to “interpret” itself and accepting what it actually says.

Where does your one "true" church stand as it relates to your own statements? I could just as easily replace "Roman Catholics" in the above with "Scott" "Scott's Church" "David Pratte" etc. Your opinion that the RCC didn't exist when God's word was written down is beyond logical. Did you exist, did the preacher David Pratte exist, did the group of Christians referenced on your website exist? What is the exact date you base "written down" on? What the heck did Christians do before that elusive date?Who actually compiled all the Scriptures that constitute the version of the Bible you are reading right now? Unless you can provide an exact date you are dealing with an abstract in making your point Why should anyone believe you unless we believe your abstract? Carefull the more you justify and interpret Scripture in your statements the more it starts to imply the "wisdom of men". Isn't that what you accuse Catholics of blindly following?
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.