Communion as a Political Weapon

While widely reported and discussed in many forums, I have refrained from posting about the recent Kmiec matter, because I find it so distasteful and offensive. Professor Kmiec, a strong conservative and active defender of the unborn, was denied the sacrament by a Catholic priest due to Professor Kmiec's stated intention to vote for Senator Obama. I have received similar charges, that as a pro-life Obama supporter, I should be denied the sacraments. I offer this reflection now, because it seems reasoned and thoughtful. Little is more offensive than telling faithful Catholics that they are to be denied the sacraments. Even to stand in silence while others say this is unacceptable. Nothing but rancour and strife can come when one element of the church seeks to spiritually abuse another element. Let us pray that this matter is quickly put behind us.


May 24, 2008

CARY MCMULLEN

In my religious tradition, the eucharist (or communion or the Lord's Supper, if you prefer) is referred to as one of the 'means of grace.' That's a slightly archaic way of saying that the elements of bread and cup are an open window through which believers may know and receive the love and forgiveness of God.

In previous centuries, Protestant clergy were known to withhold communion from those judged morally unworthy. That practice mercifully has disappeared. For Catholic priests who administer communion — for them a sacrament with a lot more portent — that kind of discipline technically remains an obligation. Only it recently has taken on political dimensions.

In 2004, a minor controversy blew up over whether the Democratic presidential candidate, U.S. Sen. John Kerry, a Catholic, was entitled to receive the eucharist. A few Catholic bishops insisted that Kerry and any politician who supported abortion rights should voluntarily refrain from partaking of communion. Those who presented themselves for the sacrament anyway should be denied it, said the hardliners. There were no reported instances of this, but it made for some lively hypothetical situations.

It seems the eucharist is even being used — in the hands of an isolated few — as as a cattle prod to force Catholic voters into political line.

Such was the experience related by Douglas Kmiec, a professor of law at Pepperdine University in California. Kmiec is a constitutional expert who was a legal counsel to Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, so he can scarcely be regarded as a flame-throwing liberal. He is also a traditionalist Catholic who recently endorsed Barack Obama.

In an essay last week on Catholic Online, an independent news and reference Web site, Kmiec first offered his reasons for supporting Obama.He was, he wrote, 'drawn to Senator Obama's remarkable ‘love thy neighbor' style of campaigning, his express aim to transcend partisan divide, and specifically, his appreciation for faith.' He did not expect, he says, 'to be clobbered by co-religionists.' Kmiec said Catholic bloggers told him he had excommunicated himself for supporting Obama. Then, at a Mass before a dinner at which Kmiec was to speak, he said, 'a very angry college chaplain excoriated my Obama-heresy from the pulpit at length and then denied my receipt of communion.' Kmiec went on to offer some thoughts on how Obama might 'unbuild walls' that have been erected on the issue of abortion. He also stated clearly and without rancor why he thought the chaplain was wrong.

He quotes the U.S. Catholic bishops, who have advised their American flock that it would not be permissible to vote for Obama if the intent was to vote in favor of abortion. But Kmiec is convinced that Obama himself is neutral on the question of government's role in abortion, leaving it to a woman's conscience and medical situation. And there may be reasons to support Obama on grounds of Catholic social teaching, he said.'Catholic voters are asked to consider what other social goods Obama represents and whether they can honestly and openly say that they are supporting him for that reason and not his stand on abortion,' he wrote.'[I]t is important to both reaffirm civility and the related principles of religious freedom that refute gleeful crusades, at home or abroad, to single out supposed apostasy where none exists.' That is well said. Four years ago, Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of Washington remarked that the communion rail is not the place to hold these discussions. And I think Kmiec himself would say that most bishops and priests would not behave as the chaplain did.

The hand that holds out the bread and cup should not be clenched.

Cary McMullen is religion editor for The Ledger in Lakeland, Fla.