Why Did Kennedy Want Communion Anyway? — The controversy involving Congressman Patrick Kennedy (D-R.I.) and Bishop Thomas Tobin who heads the diocese in which Kennedy lives raises the question as to why the Congressman would think the matter is important.
On Feb. 21, 2007, the Bishop told the Congressman he should not receive the sacrament of Holy Communion due to Kennedy’s political positions implicitly regarding abortion.
Kennedy revealed the action in an interview with The Providence Journal published Sunday describing it as a ban.
Bishop Tobin pointed out that it was a not a political but a pastoral action he took involving the Congressman and that he had not intended for it to be made public.
Catholic clergy generally don’t take much issue with politicians reluctant to pass laws turning women who have abortions into criminals. It’s when the politicians start trying to promote the act — calling it a “right”, funding it, distorting the motivations of opponents, giving abortionist privileges not available to real healers such as acting without parental consent or withholding parental notification — that the Church notes that a line has been crossed.
Kennedy has clearly crossed it as have many other politicians who call themselves Catholic and who seem offended at being forbidden the sacrament.
OTOH, if it’s hard for one to understand the teaching “Thou Shalt Not Kill” it’s probably impossible for one to understand transubstantiation.
The Philadelphia Inquirer on Nov. 27 published a scathing editorial chastising Bishop Thomas Tobin of Providence, R.I, for making a request to Democratic Congressman Patrick Kennedy, also of Rhode Island to refrain from taking Holy Communion because of his support for abortion. Kennedy is for funding abortions, Bishop Tobin, obviously is not. The editorial offered “kudos” to Rep. Patrick Murphy, a fellow Democrat who came to the defense of Kennedy.
The editorial quoted, “Murphy of Bucks County, reiterated why it would be bad for church policy to shape public policy.” The editorial quoted Murphy as saying,” We don’t legislate at the orders of the Vatican,” He said.
The editorial writer did not confide in the readers what religion he or she practiced.
My suggestion to both Kennedy and Murphy or anybody else is this. If you don’t agree with the laws of your religion, go where you will be welcome. I’m sure Chicago pastor Jeremiah Wright who said ‘GodDamn America’ in one of his sermons would welcome Kennedy, Murphy and the entire Inquirer editorial department with open arms. I might have missed it but never ever saw any editorial chastising Rev. Wright for any of his comments.
I strongly suspect that the Inquirer might have a dog in this fight. The paper is on its last legs. It is losing circulation at the speed of light. Its present owners are trying to keep control of the paper and any of its assets. On Wednesday, Nov. 25, the paper printed a full-page ad quoted readers who indicated they want the present management to stay in control.
I also strongly suspect that none of those readers were persons who wanted to see their tax money used to kill babies.
Maybe one of these days the Inquirer will get around to printing something about the global warming scandal.