« 'Islamofascists' do exist | Main | It's called 'diplomacy' »

May 26, 2008

Sebelius and Communion

Frank Kessler's "As I See It" on Bishop Naumann's public rebuke of Gov. Sebelius makes a point, but not the one he intends (5/21, Opinion, "Archbishop Naumann was properly doing his job").

What many find offensive about Naumann's behavior is his selective application of Catholic doctrine to coerce voting behavior.

Far from combating "cafeteria Catholicism," Naumann exemplifies the practice. Naumann never publicly rebukes politicians on any issue, save abortion. Name one called to task over their support of the death penalty. When has he condemned justices who condone the use of torture? Show me where he publicly castigated politicians who voted to wage pre-emptive war.

With my vote I can't stop women from having abortions (they just have unsafe, illegal ones) but I do know that if Bush were not president 4,000 Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis would still be alive, and there would be 2 million fewer refugees in the world. Canon law does not give bishops the right to use sacraments as weapons to bully those who make different and, I would argue, more moral, political choices than their own.

I guess if Bishop Naumann can be a cafeteria Catholic, so can the rest of us.

Cynthia Spaeth
Kansas City

In regard to the "As I See It" written by Dick McCoy (5/15, Opinion, "Kansas archbishop's stand on abortion reaches too far"), I am amazed by the ridiculous ways in which he demonizes Archbishop Naumann and the Catholic Church.

Archbishop Naumann has no intention of telling Gov. Sebelius how she should vote. It is not within his authority to dictate politics. and he understands that. What Mr. McCoy doesn't understand it that the governor's example to the world is not Catholic. The archbishop did not tell her how to vote or what to veto. He simply said that her public actions are not Catholic and she should not receive Communion because of that, which is within his jurisdiction.

As far as Mr. McCoy's stand that babies are not the central issue in the abortion debate, I can only say I feel so bad for someone who could stand by and allow these atrocities to be committed and call them liberties. He was once a baby, and his mother obviously didn't have what he calls liberties. She gave him life so that he could be free to voice such heinous opinions.

Antoinette Jamerson
Trimble, Mo.

Comments

kcstar_is_one_sided

"What I find instructive on this thread and others on the same subject is the number of people, many of them Protestant, who feel themselves competent to instruct a Catholic Bishop on the interpretation of Catholic doctrine."

How true and how funny.

"I happen to know a lot of Catholic women (including a couple of my sisters who converted to catholicism when they married their husbands)who are on the pill and take communion. Being Protestant, I don't have a problem with them taking communion, however, I do have a problem with the Archbishop singling out Sebelius personally and stating that she shouldn't take communion while millions of Catholic women on the pill go unnoticed while they take communion even though they have committed a mortal sin under the catholic doctrine. As I mentioned earlier, I'm for fairness and consistency - this obviously isn't."

dolce - the difference here is the fact that one is private and the other is public. Like it or not, this has been used as a determining factor. Tell one of your sisters to run for office and make a pronouncement on how she takes the pill at that other catholic women should do so also. I think you find that she gets a different reaction from a priest than she has gotten already.

Engineer

dolcemusica
Like I said, it's amazing. Can anyone say "chutzpah"?

dolcemusica

I happen to know a lot of Catholic women (including a couple of my sisters who converted to catholicism when they married their husbands)who are on the pill and take communion. Being Protestant, I don't have a problem with them taking communion, however, I do have a problem with the Archbishop singling out Sebelius personally and stating that she shouldn't take communion while millions of Catholic women on the pill go unnoticed while they take communion even though they have committed a mortal sin under the catholic doctrine. As I mentioned earlier, I'm for fairness and consistency - this obviously isn't.

Engineer

What I find instructive on this thread and others on the same subject is the number of people, many of them Protestant, who feel themselves competent to instruct a Catholic Bishop on the interpretation of Catholic doctrine.

ChotoCK

perhaps the others responded to the Bishops request to not take communion, whereas Sebelius did not after 2 request from the Bishop.

Women on birth control are usually not standing up in front of a camera supporting birth control like Sebelius has with abortion.

dolcemusica

The issue for me is not that the Catholic church is against abortion, but that the Archbishop has singled out one individual in public service and, because of their stand (and party stand) on abortion - has questioned whether or not they (personally) should be taking communion or not. Yet, there are others in public office who are also catholic and support abortion or the women are on birth control, etc. All are mortal sins yet Sebelius was singled out amongst all of the catholics. Imagine at her church when (if) she tries to take communion - does the priest deny her? Do others whisper, etc? What about all of those women who are on the pill taking communion?

I'm not Catholic and I do not support abortion. However, I do believe in fairness and consistency. Targeting Sebelius while allowing others who might hold the same view or are actively commiting mortal sins partake in communion without notice smacks of hypocrisy to me.

Chris40

The Catholic Church takes abortion very seriously. There is nothing new about that.

The Democrat party takes abortion rights very seriously. There is nothing new about that either. Pro-life democrats have been censored at the Democrat convention for years and years.

solomon

Another great round of "find the non-Catholic"

ChotoCK

If the Church says no, it means no. No matter what the people may think. the Catholic Church, just like the Eastern Orthodox, are not democracies, never have claimed to be democracies. If it defines an action as morally reprehensible, or of grave matter, then to perform said action, or support of said action, will be grounds for being denied communion.

Cynthia, show me the statement from the CHurch stating the death penalty is a moral evil? etcha anything you will not find one, because there is not one. Your arguements on the war are quite interesting. If you claim the war in Iraq is a moral evil (which you have) then all those that participated, and died, are in a state of mortal sin. Are you saying then that they are bound for hell?

dolcemusica

It's interesting that the Archbishop is basically telling Governor Sebelius not to take communion because of her public stance on abortion. however, how many Catholic women are currently on the pill. Shouldn't they also not be taking communion? It's still listed as a mortal sin to take artificial contraception.

Seems like part of the cafeteria is o.k. and other parts aren't? Who decides what Catholics get to choose to follow in this particular region?

 
About KansasCity.com | About the Real Cities Network | Terms of Use & Privacy Statement | About Knight Ridder | Copyright