An Imperfect Catholic On The Kennedy Communion Controversy

By Alicia Colon

Contrary to some malicious liberal bloggers, it was Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-RI), not Bishop Thomas Tobin, who went public about his dispute with the bishop over his pro-choice abortion stance.

At a recent press conference, Mr. Kennedy inaccurately stated that three years ago the bishop of Providence had instructed him not to receive communion and had ordered diocesan priests to deny Mr. Kennedy the Eucharist. But Rev. Tobin says he merely made a request to Mr. Kennedy and never ordered priests to enforce it. Now whom shall we believe?

For that matter, why did the congressman announce the tiff now? It seems that last month Mr. Kennedy questioned the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' vocal objections to a health-care bill that includes subsidies for abortion coverage. Loyal Democrat that he is, Mr. Kennedy put his own spin on a matter that would ordinarily be kept very private.

Portraying the Catholic Church as an autocratic institution and himself as a caring politician concerned with his constituents is an opportunistic move for Mr. Kennedy, who's up for reelection next year. However, it's in fact the bishop's duty to teach the faithful the canon law of the Church. Rev. Tobin didn't demand anything from Mr. Kennedy. He simply requested that he refrain from receiving the Eucharist, which Catholics believe is the actual body and blood of Christ, not just a symbol. It's called transubstantiation. To receive the Eucharist while not in good standing with the faith is considered blasphemy. Mr. Kennedy is exploiting a private conversation to enhance his position with the pro-choice advocates who helped get him elected.

The reaction from this crowd on many of the liberal blogs was predictable. They accused Rev. Tobin of being hypocritical and suggested that he should be banning the Eucharist from fellow priests serving time as convicted pedophiles.

Critics of the Catholic Church always bring up the issue of separation of church and state, but the Constitution clearly states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Informing Mr. Kennedy of the laws of the Catholic faith is not establishing a religion but performing his duty as a bishop.

I consider myself an imperfect but practicing Catholic. At times I'm even a poor Catholic but I am a true believer who knows the precepts of my faith, perhaps more than many of our so-called Catholic politicians. If one cannot respect and adhere to a vital core of a faith, why define oneself as a member unless it's to exploit it for political purposes? Why not simply join another Christian church that shares the same liberal positions on abortion and gay marriage?

Therein lies a clue. Roman Catholics are a huge voting bloc, even with their diminishing church attendance statistics, and most are registered Democrats or at least have been so in the past.

Even with this abortion flap and the bishops' hard stance on the health-care bill, it's unlikely that those Catholics will change this affiliation.

However, how they'll vote in 2010 is as up in the air as it was in 1980 when they became Reagan Democrats. Ronald Reagan was adamantly pro-life and largely responsible for adding that plank to the platform of the Republican Party.

Pro-choice Catholics include the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, Senator Chris Dodd, Rep. John Murtha, and Rep. Dennis Kucinich. They're all up for reelection next year and still quite confident that they'll be voted back into office. Their supporters don't understand why Catholic politicians are being singled out for what they were elected to do, which is to represent their constituents, not the Pope.

However, this isn't a Catholic issue. This is a moral one concerning life and death. The blogger at "A Woman's Place" said it best: "If you're a Catholic politician who has chosen to be in the public eye, advocating abortion, you have freely placed yourself in a scandalous position. More than that you are working to ensure that more women can kill more children. Because of their influence in lawmaking and policy that means that Catholic politicians who support abortion are responsible for the deaths of the children that their policies allow to be murdered."

As William F. Buckley, Jr. once described himself, I'm a congenital not a born-again Christian, raised in the Roman Catholic faith. Although I've met clergy and religious who were less than perfect, it's always been to me a matter of not the singer but the song.

Someone once wrote asking an advice columnist - I can't remember if it was Abigail Van Buren or Ann Landers - who the founders of all the religions were and only mine had as founder, Jesus Christ. It made perfect sense for Him to establish a church for how on earth would his disciples have been able to fathom future ethical questions on subjects such as in vitro fertilization and embryonic stem cell research? Ergo, I believe in the moral authority of the Church. I'm also free not to believe in it, but then it would be dishonest of me to call myself a Catholic.

I wish I could be a perfect Catholic but the world is too much with me and it's very difficult to get back to the rapture that it held for me in the innocence of my youth. Nevertheless, I'm in awe of those Catholics who are as close to perfect as I'd like to be. They've not lost that ability to turn their lives over to a higher power.

Last week, I went to a Mass celebrating the 25th anniversary of the priesthood of my pastor, Fr. Peter Byrne. He may not realize that he does this but at the most sacred part of the Mass, the consecration, when we believe he turns bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ, he stumbles over the words as if he's still overwhelmed by this responsibility. After observing how some Catholic politicians dismiss its sanctity, it's truly glorious to see the Holy Eucharist respected for the miracle that it is. C

Alicia Colon lives in New York City and can be reached at aliciav.colon@gmail.com and at www.aliciacolon.com