Prominent Canon Law Prof Contrasts Archbishops Wuerl and Burke on Communion for Pro-Abort Politicians

Commentary by Ed Peters, Canon Lawyer
April 2, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) -

I often tell my students, the answer to a canonical question is seldom found in a single canon.

Two prominent American prelates,
Abp. Donald Wuerl of Washington DC and Abp. Raymond Burke of the Apostolic Signatura, are the lead figures in a significant disagreement over admitting certain pro-abortion Catholic politicians to Holy Communion. Wuerl basically believes that, under Canon 916, Catholics, including pro-abortion politicians, should determine their own eligibility for reception of Communion. Burke argues that, beyond Canon 916, Canon 915 requires ministers of Holy Communion to withhold the Eucharist from some pro-abortion politicians if they don't refrain from approaching on their own. Both sides can't be right, and I suspect that the more compelling case is made by reading the two canons together instead of reading one to the exclusion of the other.

Some preliminary thoughts toward sorting this out.

First, awareness of Church history helps contemporary Catholics sleep at night. This is not the first time that upright bishops have differed over important points of pastoral practice; for that matter, strong episcopal conflicts over (unsettled) matters of doctrine are not unknown in the Church. So, let's be confident in the Holy Spirit's power to lead the Church through this issue as He has led us through others.

Second, one must avoid "personalizing" the debate. Both archbishops are distinguished thinkers and both have many decades of loyal service to the Church behind them, including some services rendered under very difficult circumstances. In short, each is an attractive figure. But, while it's tempting to rally behind one or the other, personalities are not what's at issue here.

Rather, if we want to resolve the question of Communion admission, we must plainly identify the core of the disagreement. I think it's this: may one rely on a single canon to absolve arch/bishops of any direct responsibility to act when pro-abortion Catholic politicians present themselves for Communion, or must one read both the relevant canons in these cases, even if one of those canons requires ministerial intervention under certain circumstances?

The two relevant canons are not complicated.

Canon 916 expresses the fundamental responsibility of individual Catholics to weigh their conscience before approaching the Holy Banquet and to refrain from receiving Communion if they believe themselves to be in grave sin. Canon 915 requires ministers of holy Communion to withhold the Eucharist from Catholics who, though their public conduct is gravely at odds with Church teaching and/or morals, insist on presenting themselves for holy Communion.

I suggest that, for one to argue that Communion reception by Catholics is a purely personal decision under Canon 916 is to ignore impermissibly Canon 915 and its assertion of ministerial obligations in certain cases.

To be sure, both canons make serious demands on the faithful.

It's not easy for an individual Catholic to refrain from going to holy Communion at Mass. The so-called 'Communion fast' offers no cover for a Catholic with a doubtful, let alone a guilty, conscience. These days, to remain in the pew while everyone else goes to Communion is tantamount to saying "I think I'm in the state of grave sin." Who wants to imply that? But neither is it easy on a minister of holy Communion to withhold the sacrament from a Catholic seeking it. Who wants the responsibility of taking the most august sacrament, the source and summit of the Christian life (1983 CIC 897), into one's own hands, only to say to a fellow Catholic in the Communion line "move along"?

So the question squarely confronts us: is the answer to the canonical problem of admitting notoriously pro-abortion Catholics to Communion found in a single canon, or is it found primarily in two canons? Do we read Canon 916 as if it sufficed to let pro-abortion Catholics decide about their own eligibility to receive holy Communion, or do we read Canons 915 and 916 together, being willing to invoke Canon 915 against certain Catholics who insist on receiving holy Communion despite their public disregard of important points of Catholic doctrine and/or morals?

Wuerl seems to think that one canon, namely 916, settles the question. Burke says that we must read both norms, Canons 915 and 916, together to arrive at the correct answer.


What can I say? I think Burke's right.

Vatican Official: Bishops Have no Choice But to Refuse Communion to Pro-Abort Politicians

By Hilary White
ROME, January 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com)

Archbishop Raymond Burke, in an exclusive interview last week, told LifeSiteNews.com that the issue of pro-abortion politicians continuing to receive Holy Communion is still one of major concern and that it is the duty of bishops to ensure that they are refused.
He told LifeSiteNews.com, "I don't understand the continual debate that goes on about it. There's not a question that a Catholic who publicly, and after admonition, supports pro-abortion legislation is not to receive Holy Communion and is not to be given Holy Communion."
"The Church's law is very clear," said Archbishop Burke, who was appointed last year by Pope Benedict XVI as the head of the Church's highest court, the Apostolic Signatura. "The person who persists publicly in grave sin is to be denied Holy Communion, and it [Canon Law] doesn't say that the bishop shall decide this. It's an absolute."
Among the US bishops directly to address the issue, Archbishop Burke was one of around a dozen who vigorously supported a directive of the Vatican that said pro-abortion Catholic politicians "must be refused" Holy Communion if they attempt to receive at Mass. Others have refused to abide by the Vatican instruction and the Church's own Code of Canon Law, saying they would rather focus on "education" of such politicians.
Archbishop Burke called "nonsense" the accusation, regularly made by some bishops, that refusing Holy Communion "makes the Communion rail a [political] battle ground". In fact, he said, the precise opposite is true. The politician who insists on being seen receiving Holy Communion, despite his opposition to the Church's central teachings, is using that reception for political leverage.
In 2004, when self-proclaimed Catholic and candidate for the Democrat party, Sen. John Kerry, was frequently photographed receiving Holy Communion despite his vigorous support of abortion, the US Bishops Conference issued a document which said only that it is up to individual bishops whether to implement the Church's code of Canon Law and refuse Communion. The issue has remained prominent with the appointment of Joe Biden, another pro-abortion Catholic politician, as Vice President of the United States of America.
Archbishop Burke recalled previous experiences with Kerry, pointing to the several occasions when the senator was pictured in Time magazine receiving Communion from Papal representatives at various public events. Burke said that it is clear that Kerry was using his reception of Holy Communion to send a message.
"He wants to not only receive Holy Communion from a bishop but from the papal representative. I think that's what his point was. Get it in Time magazine, so people read it and say to themselves, 'He must be in good standing'."
"What are they doing? They're using the Eucharist as a political tool."
In refusing, far from politicising the Eucharist, the Church is returning the matter to its religious reality. The most important reasons to refuse, he said, are pastoral and religious in nature.
"The Holy Eucharist, the most sacred reality of our life in the Church, has to be protected against sacrilege. At the same time, individuals have to be protected for the sake of their own salvation from committing one of the gravest sins, namely to receive Holy Communion unworthily."
Archbishop Burke also dismissed the commonly proffered excuse that such politicians need more "education". Speaking from his own direct experience, he said that Catholic politicians who are informed by their pastors or bishops that their positions in support of pro-abortion legislation makes it impossible for them to receive Holy Communion, "I've always found that they don't come forward."
"When you talk to these people, they know," he said. "They know what they're doing is very wrong. They have to answer to God for that, but why through our pastoral negligence add on to that, that they have to answer to God for who knows how many unworthy receptions of Holy Communion?"
Archbishop Burke said that the issue had been debated enough. He rejected the idea that the matter should be left to the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, saying the Conference has no authority in the matter. "This is a law of the universal Church and it should be applied."
"I think this argument too is being used by people who don't want to confront the issue, this whole 'wait 'til the Conference decides'...well the Conference has been discussing this since at least 2004. And nothing happens."
When asked what the solution was, he responded, "Individual bishops and priests simply have to do their duty. They have to confront politicians, Catholic politicians, who are sinning gravely and publicly in this regard. And that's their duty.
"And if they carry it out, not only can they not be reproached for that, but they should be praised for confronting this situation."

Pro-Life People Must Not Lose Heart with Obama Election Says Vatican Archbishop

Says the movement must never stop trying to overturn Roe v Wade

By Hilary White - Rome Correspondent

VATICAN CITY, January 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) –
In an exclusive interview with LifeSiteNews.com earlier this week, Archbishop Raymond Burke sent a message of support from Rome to those in the U.S. who defend human life and the traditional family, telling them not to give up the fight, even though things may seem dire with the election of Barack Obama. The Archbishop particularly urged pro-life people to continue the political and legal battle against the 1973 US Supreme Court decision, Roe vs. Wade, that legalised abortion.

“We are in a very dark period for the pro-life movement, which means that now we have really to re-double all of our efforts,” he said.

The new president, Archbishop Burke said, must hear from the American people “who I believe are, in the end, pro-life, above all else.” But the time has come, with the election of the man who is being called by pro-life advocates the “most pro-abortion president” in US history, to announce clearly and firmly the message of the sanctity of life and family more than at any other time.

“There can never be any let-up on the effort to overturn Roe versus Wade,” he said, “because there is, at its deepest core, our most unjust judicial decision. It has to be overturned.”
He agreed that people of good will could work with the Obama administration to provide improved services to women in crisis pregnancies and pointed out that the Catholic Church has “above all, been in the forefront of that.” But, he said, “that can never exempt us from the duty” to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

Despite the difficulties ahead, he urged the pro-life people to be the “tough who get going when the going gets tough.”

“It’s going to depend upon the pro-life movement to make that voice heard, and to get people to express to the president their dismay with what he’s doing, so that he understands that the people of the United States are not for the murder of infants in the womb.”

LifeSiteNews.com spoke to Archbishop Burke, who is regarded as a hero by many in the pro-life and family movement, at his offices in Rome, where he was recently appointed by Pope Benedict XVI as head of the Catholic Church’s highest tribunal, the Apostolic Signatura. The office of Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura is normally regarded as a “red hat” position that brings with it appointment as a Cardinal. It is widely expected among Vatican watchers that Pope Benedict will name Archbishop Burke a Cardinal at the next consistory.

He told LifeSiteNews.com that he is becoming “very concerned” at the number of people who have written to him to say that the election of Obama is a sign that the pro-life movement has definitively failed to overturn Roe vs. Wade. He particularly denounced the idea, put forward by some in the pro-life movement in the US, that the time has come to abandon the fight against Roe and turn exclusively to “education” and to cooperate with the new administration in “reducing abortions” by improving welfare and health services for women.

Archbishop Burke responded, saying, “To me this is a form of self-deception because the law itself is one of the principle teachers in any culture, and you have a law, a decision of the Supreme Court of your country, which says, in effect, that an infant in the womb can be destroyed right up to the time of birth and even in the act of birth.”

Until Roe vs. Wade is overturned, he said, “that law remains a teacher in the culture” and “represents a direction given to the life of the society, of the nation.

“So I’m very concerned that some of the dedicated pro-life people don’t fall prey to this false reasoning, and then not continue their work for the repeal of this Supreme Court decision.”
Archbishop Burke is known in the US as one of the most outspoken members of the US hierarchy on the Church’s teachings on the sanctity of life. He was the first among a very small number of US Bishops who enforced can. 915 of the Code of Canon Law, saying that pro-abortion Catholic politicians are not to be given Holy Communion. His position was confirmed by a letter of then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger in June of 2004.Upon the announcement of his transfer to Rome, Judie Brown, the president of the American Life League, said, “Archbishop Burke's contributions to the Church go beyond anybody's imagination. He is among the most courageous bishops that I have known in my entire life.”

The archbishop said, “I have been for years very much in the heart of the pro-life movement as I believe that I should be as a bishop.”

“It was painful for me to leave the United States because of my strong conviction about the importance of strong leadership, a prophetic leadership on the part of the bishops in the whole work of promoting the respect for human life.”

He particularly urged pro-life and family people to be on guard against becoming discouraged. “Discouragement is itself a prime temptation that Satan uses to get people to stop working for the good,” he said. “But the minute you give into discouragement he can get you to do whatever he wants. But if we are people of life, if we are people who honour the dignity of every human life, then we also are necessarily people of hope.

“I understand, from a human point of view, why people are discouraged and why they want to give up or try some radically different approach, but as people of hope we don’t have any choice in this matter. We have to continue the battle.”