|
Other Columns by Paul M. Weyrich
Paul M. Weyrich Bio
Printer-Friendly Version
Catholics, Communion and Kerry
By Paul M. Weyrich
June 22, 2004
Preston Noell of the American Society for Tradition Family and Property is a most agreeable fellow. He works tirelessly on public policy issues and is always kind and helpful in the process.
Thus it was unusual the other day when we had a little disagreement of sorts. It was not in any way a disagreement over policy. I would be terribly hard pressed to find anything about which we disagree. Moreover, his organization almost always pitches in to help, even on issues where others run for cover.
No, our little disagreement was about the impact of marketing one's views on public policy. You see the TFP had just placed an ad in the Washington Times challenging the Catholic Bishops on the so-called Kerry/Communion issue. The Bishops had been meeting near Denver and that issue was one they were discussing.
The TFP had a representative at the Bishop's meeting. He reported that when Archbishop Burke of St. Louis laid out his case for denying Communion to Senator Kerry, nearly 100 Bishops applauded. That is significant because for many years the number of Bishops who would approve of a stand such as Archbishop Burke has taken could be counted on one hand. Burke, the former Bishop of LaCrosse, Wisconsin, had already notified Catholic politicians in his diocese that if they were "pro-choice" on abortion and against the Marriage Protection Amendment, they were not eligible to receive Holy Communion in his jurisdiction. He waited about five minutes after being transferred to St. Louis to articulate the same view. That was because Senator Kerry was headed for St. Louis and some reporters wanted to know what his policy on that situation would be. (Archbishop Burke, by the way, says he is doing what he is doing out of charity for the souls of these politicians who are endangering eternal life by what they are doing).
Anyway, back to Noell, he said to me that the issue of Kerry and Communion was now out there and it would very probably cause Catholics to vote for President Bush.
I disagreed without, as we say in Washington, being disagreeable. I am willing to bet that not one Catholic in ten heard about this issue. Secondly, as the pollster John Zogby has suggested, not many Catholics vote as Catholics anymore. Also, the sex scandals have greatly diminished the credibility of the Bishops. Were this the 1950s, it would be an entirely different matter. Adlai Stevenson lost the Catholic vote to General Dwight Eisenhower in 1952, the first Democrat to do so in decades, primarily because he was divorced. Stevenson was not a Catholic and had no reason to follow Catholic teachings on the subject. Nevertheless, Catholics felt so strongly about the views of their own Church that they were willing to vote for a Republican. Furthermore, that was without Catholic Bishops as a whole taking a position on the matter. Nonetheless, powerful voices in the Church at the time, such as Cardinal Spellman of New York, made it known how they felt on the subject. Back then that was enough.
Today, even if the Catholic Bishops were to adopt a position that said you could not openly flaunt the Church's doctrinal position on issues and still receive the Sacrament of Holy Communion, two thirds of Catholics would ignore the views of the Bishops. The Bishops will not take this step. These days powerful voices such as Cardinal McCarrick of Washington claim to be "uncomfortable" denying Communion to someone such as Senator Kerry. No doubt that position will prevail. It is the easy way out. It permits every Bishop to speak for his own diocese and the matter is unlikely to become a significant issue in the campaign. No doubt Kerry will follow the advice of his campaign staff who is advising him to "lie low" when it comes to religion.
His colleague Senator Kennedy is not content to do so. Kennedy told the Vatican to go fly a kite when it comes to voting with the Church. Just recently he suggested that Pope John Paul II has absolutely no business telling Bishops in the USA not to give Holy Communion to Senator Kerry when he himself (the Pope) had given Communion to Gen. Augusto Pinochet when the Pope visited Chile and while Pinochet was still in power. Of course, Pinochet did not defy the Pope's position on abortion. Quite the contrary, he was an ardent supporter of that position. As to the charge that Pinochet was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of leftists before and after he came to power, one Vatican official at the time said, "We simply do not know. If true, he will have to stand before Almighty God and explain himself."
I do not think that the Kerry/Communion issue will sway the Catholic vote. There simply are not enough Catholics who have heard about it...unless Kerry himself makes it an issue. Why he would do so would be beyond my comprehension.
In political marketing we have what is known as the principle of the seventh mentioning. That simply means that the voter has to hear about an issue seven times before he is even aware that it is an issue. It is hard for me to figure any way that average Catholics will hear about this issue seven times between now and the election. It could happen perhaps in the dozen or so dioceses where Bishops have spoken clearly on the issue. The seventh mentioning could also occur in markets where the media tends to repeat things over and over as new developments occur. That, however, is true mostly in the smaller dioceses, the notable exception being St. Louis.
I recall a forum held at Catholic University by the late Brent Bozell, Sr. to discuss action at the time. It was 1968 and the late Patrick Cardinal O'Boyle of Washington D.C. had suspended a whole raft of priests who were dissenters concerning Pope Paul VI's encyclical on artificial birth control known as Humane Vitae. I got Bozell's attention when I said, "Unless the Cardinal is supported we will soon have a situation where a Catholic is simply a person who calls himself a Catholic". That, unfortunately, came to pass long ago. Now it seems you can believe whatever you wish and still be a Catholic...although "Cafeteria Catholic" would be perhaps more accurate.
In the case of Kerry, it seems one can speak to groups that openly promote abortion, pledging one's undying support. That is far more than just casting a vote on partial birth abortion, parental notification or federal funding. There are priests in every diocese, even in those like Archbishop Burke's, who will gladly give Senator Kerry Communion. Usually these are order priests, out of the reach of the local Bishop. They report to their own Bishops, often overseas. That is what happened on Easter Sunday, as both Senator and Mrs. Kerry went to a church run by a religious order where the priest was pleased to serve them Holy Communion. This occurred right after the new Archbishop of Boston, Sean O'Malley, told politicians who disagreed on abortion and marriage not to even present themselves for that Sacrament. Kerry and Tereza could not have cared less what the Archbishop said.
I am not critical of what the TFP has done to challenge the Bishops on the issue. Likewise, Judie Brown's American Life League is doing splendid work along these lines. Indeed, longtime Free Congress staffer Joe Starrs, along with another former employee of ours Joe Gigante, are first-rate activists encouraging Bishops to take a stand.
I wish them well. On the day after the election, if we see that President Bush is in for another four years, and it is because he carried the Catholic vote, I will call Preston, Judie and the two Joes and congratulate them on their valiant efforts.
My fear is, however, that I won't have to make those phone calls.
------------
Paul M. Weyrich is Chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation.
--------------------
Note -- The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of GOPUSA.
| 
