Communion wars resurface in Rhode Island

Dec. 07, 2009
Rep. Patrick Kennedy speaks at the funeral Mass for his father at the Basilica of Our Lady of Perpetual Help Church in Boston Aug. 29. (C.J. Gunther-Pool)

ANALYSIS

Though Rhode Island Congressman Patrick Kennedy may be the one facing a spiritual sanction in his recent standoff with Providence’s Bishop Thomas Tobin, some Catholics inside the Beltway are quietly worried that it could be the pro-life cause that pays the most immediate political price.

With a critical debate on health care reform underway in the Senate, in which funding for abortion is a central bone of contention, these observers say moderate Democrats now face another incentive to think twice about bucking their party’s official pro-choice stance: fear of appearing to cave in to pressure tactics from Catholic bishops.

In late November, the 42-year-old Kennedy, the third child of late Massachusetts Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, told a Providence newspaper that Tobin had barred him from Communion because of his pro-choice stance. Tobin then released part of a February 2007 letter in which he had asked Kennedy not to take Communion.

Whatever Kennedy’s motives for waiting almost three years to make that disclosure, it created a PR headache for the bishops at a moment when they had been on a roll. Most observers credit the bishops with helping secure passage of the Stupak amendment in the House, which bars the use of federal health care subsidies to pay for abortion.

Bishop Thomas J. Tobin (AP/Joe Giblin)Bishop Thomas J. Tobin (AP/Joe Giblin)Several newspapers in the Northeast accused Tobin of breaching church/state separation. Two leading candidates for the Senate in Massachusetts, both Democrats, defended Kennedy -- in effect, declaring they would not brook ecclesiastical manipulation. (Rep. Michael Capuano put his reaction in caustic terms: “And they wonder why people stop going to church.”)

In terms of public opinion, the unpopularity of Communion bans is well documented. In 2004, when a similar debate erupted around Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry, a pro-choice Catholic, a Pew Forum poll found that 64 percent of Americans felt the bishops were wrong to deny Communion to politicians who hold views contrary to church teaching. Strikingly, that opposition actually rose among Catholics, to 72 percent.

Given this background, some Catholic analysts suspect Kennedy’s revelation was timed to cast the bishops in a negative light.

Preview NCR's Family Life Issue

Watch this video from NCR Editor Dennis Coday for highlights from our annual Family Life special section.

You won't find these articles on our website. Subscribe now to receive all the content from each biweekly issue.

“The fact that our adversaries wish to continue to focus on the bishops suggests they think a focus on ecclesiastical power works for them,” said one longtime pro-life activist, who spoke on background for fear of further stoking the controversy.

Threats from bishops, this activist said, “alienate the very people we need,” meaning “Catholics and other Democrats who fear being portrayed as caving in to ecclesiastical pressure.” The activist pointed to moderate Democrats in the Senate such as Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Robert Casey of Pennsylvania, both Catholics, as figures who might fear that kind of blowback.

At this stage, most experts said, it’s too early to tell if the nasty exchange will have any impact on the Senate debate. The U.S. bishops have voiced disappointment with the bill currently proposed by the Senate’s Democratic leadership, criticizing an “abortion surcharge” that they claim would force insurance purchasers to pay for other people’s abortions; provisions that would allow the Health and Human Services secretary to mandate abortion coverage; and that the bill does not allow religious institutions to offer their own employees coverage that conforms to their institution’s teaching.

The crossfire involving Kennedy and Tobin erupted in mid-October, when Kennedy publicly criticized the U.S. bishops’ opposition to public funding of abortion in a health care reform package.

Kennedy wrote that his disagreement with the hierarchy on abortion “doesn’t make me any less Catholic.” That prompted Tobin to assert that when Catholic politicians break with the church on such an important matter, “It absolutely diminishes your communion with the church.” In a subsequent radio interview, Tobin appeared to invite Kennedy to leave the Catholic church, suggesting “maybe he can find another fine Christian denomination where he can be more comfortable.”

Both sides now apparently want to declare a truce. Tobin has declined new requests for comment, and Kennedy told a forum on health care reform at Brown University in Providence on Nov. 30, “These are personal issues of faith for me. I am not going to indulge in this debate anymore.”

Officially, the U.S. bishops treat eligibility for Communion as something each bishop has to work out in his own diocese, although a solid majority opposes Communion bans for fear of politicizing the Eucharist. As it did with Kerry, the Vatican sat out the Kennedy/Tobin row.

As the dust settles, one puzzle remains: why the story drew so much attention, since it’s hardly the first time such controversies have swirled.

Many observers believe the drama was amplified because both sides had reasons for playing it up. For pro-choice activists, it was a way of disrupting the bishops’ lobbying efforts. For pro-lifers, it offered payback for what many considered an overly indulgent response from church leaders during Edward Kennedy’s funeral last August.

For those simply weary of the culture wars, however, the Kennedy/Tobin clash offered little more than an unwelcome taste of déjà vu.

One Catholic with a long history in Washington put it this way: “If bishops would talk less about politics, and politicians would talk less about theology, we’d all be better off.”

John L. Allen Jr. is NCR senior correspondent. His e-mail address is jallen@ncronline.org.

Thank you as usual for your

Thank you as usual for your column; however, that closing quotation falls short of an accurate assessment of the situation: The bishops are not spending time talking politics in the sense of party platforms and fair-game disagreements about the merits of various policies; rather, they understand that laws have consequences and that some of those consequences may be immoral. The bishops, in urging politicians to adhere to Catholic morality, are not turning the Church into another political party; rather, they are urging politicians not to do something immoral. They speak to the politicians as they do to any Catholic: follow the way of Christ. Flee evil, seek the good.

To call this mere "politics," with the implication that the bishops are acting like some sort of PAC, is obfuscation at best.

Why is this even an

Why is this even an issue?
The Church's teaching is clear; P. Kennedy dissents publically and uses his political power to advance the culture of death.
Is this a believing, practicing Catholic?
I don't think so.
Stop wringing your hands about the so-called political involvement of the bishops in this crucial issue. Life is given by God at conception. If we destroy the life of the unborn, we are all in serious, serious danger. Mother Teresa said it, the Church teaches it, why are we, as Catholics so anxious that the civil government wants something else? We must defend life, from conception to natural death.
The English martyrs defied the government of Henry VIII.
Are we so lukewarm and squeamish that we cannot stand for life, in imitation of the courage and steadfastness of such witnesses?

Mr. Allen, you are bring this

Mr. Allen, you are bring this up as a tactical issue. Although I normally feel you have a sensible approach to some issues that may be taken by catholics to some extremes, in this case I find you far far from the point. In the US Catholics are only a part of the prolife movement. Up to this moment many protestants could defend that the Catholic Church was really being soft on the issue: such "Catholic" politicians as Kennedy, Kerry and Pelosi are seen as the ground breakers on abortion "rights". When you see actual fetus and live babies in the womb the public is accepting the fact that this is terrible, and the Catholic Church would be scandalous if it were not firm on the issue. Regarding Rep. Kennedy he may be using the issue for political purposes, I believe bishop Tobin is sincerely urging him to move to a position in which he does not take responsibility in finalising the lives of unborn babies.

Mr. Allen, you are bring this

Mr. Allen, you are bring this up as a tactical issue. Although I normally feel you have a sensible approach to some issues that may be taken by catholics to some extremes, in this case I find you far far from the point. In the US Catholics are only a part of the prolife movement. Up to this moment many protestants could defend that the Catholic Church was really being soft on the issue: such "Catholic" politicians as Kennedy, Kerry and Pelosi are seen as the ground breakers on abortion "rights". When you see actual fetus and live babies in the womb the public is accepting the fact that this is terrible, and the Catholic Church would be scandalous if it were not firm on the issue. Regarding Rep. Kennedy he may be using the issue for political purposes, I believe bishop Tobin is sincerely urging him to move to a position in which he does not take responsibility in finalising the lives of unborn babies.

Why the HECK do you put in

Why the HECK do you put in that last statement? The bishops are not talking politics when they talk about how wrong the support of abortion is. It ain't that easy my friend. Our actions are first of all moral considerations and the Church needs more bishops to stand up these so-called Catholic politicians.

Can't help but be reminded by

Can't help but be reminded by the actions of our Bishops, of the Prophets of the OT who stood up and cried out against kings and fellow countrymen when they were living in a manner that was offensive to the Lord.

Since we have a

Since we have a democratically elected government, the Bishops are better served persuading the voters to their viewpoint, rather than pressuring the electeds. My Congressman's job is do what I and the other voters in my district want; so my bishop should be trying to convince me, not my representative.

Post new comment

NCR Comment code:

  1. Be respectful. Do not attack the writer. Take on the idea, not the messenger.
  2. Use appropriate language. Avoid vulgarities and slurs.
  3. Keep to the point. Deliberate digressions don't aid the discussion.

For more detailed guidelines, visit our User Guidelines page.

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
(if you have one; if not, leave this blank)
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <font> <swf> <swf list>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • You may use <swf file="song.mp3"> to display Flash files inline

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This is to prove you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.