WASHINGTON — The American archbishop who heads the Vatican’s supreme court has apologized for the “confusion and hurt” caused by his criticism of fellow bishops who do not deny Communion to Catholic politicians who support abortion rights.
Archbishop Raymond Burke, formerly of St. Louis, was interviewed earlier this month by an anti-abortion activist in Rome, where he now is Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura.
During the interview, Burke implicitly criticized Archbishop Donald Wuerl of Washington and Bishop Paul Loverde of Arlington, Va., for not denying Communion to Catholic politicians who buck the church’s anti-abortion stance. Wuerl and Loverde were singled out because so many politicians live and work in their jurisdictions.
“It is weakening the faith of everyone,” Burke said in the interview. “It’s giving the impression that it must be morally correct to support procured abortion.”
Burke apologized Thursday (March 26) after a video of the interview was shown to media in Washington by Randall Terry, an anti-abortion Catholic activist who has lobbied the Vatican to removed Wuerl and Loverde from office.
“If I had know what the true purpose of the interview was,” Burke said, “I would have never have agreed to participate in it. I am deeply sorry for the confusion and hurt which the wrong use of the videotape has caused to anyone, particularly to my brother bishops.”
Burke has long advocated for bishops to take a firm stance on withholding Communion, but several Catholics said the public criticism of fellow bishops was a serious breach of episcopal etiquette.
Burke said he “was never informed that the videotape would be used as part of a campaign of severe criticism of certain fellow bishops.”
Loverde said on Friday that individual Catholics must determine their fitness to receive Communion.
“If you are Catholic, you have the responsibility to think carefully about what it means to present yourself for Communion,” he said. “You should present yourself for Communion when you are in harmony with the church’s teaching, free of mortal sin and living your life accordingly, and not receive when you are not.”
Susan Gibbs, spokeswoman for the Archdiocese of Washington, said Friday that the U.S. bishops overwhelmingly decided in 2004 to allow individual bishops to determine a Communion policy for their diocese.
Wuerl’s policy is “to respect the pastoral directives and guidance given to a public official by his or her own bishop while the official is working in Washington, D.C.,” Gibbs said. “That individual’s bishop presumably would know the person and the situation best and, therefore, be in a position to make a judgment about or a request concerning the person’s worthiness to receive Holy Communion.”
By Daniel Burke
c. 2009 Religion News Service
Copyright 2009 Religion News Service. All rights reserved. No part of this transmission may be distributed or reproduced without written permission.
Beliefnet
Advertisement
posted March 27, 2009 at 8:19 pm
Daniel Burke’s article reporting the statement issued by Archbishop Burke misstates the plain facts of the news item.
Specifically, Archbishop Raymond Burke stated the following in his release of March 26, 2009:
“I am deeply sorry for the confusion and hurt which the wrong use of the videotape has caused to anyone, particularly to my brother bishops.”
As is perfectly clear, the Archbishop never apologized for the content of the video recorded interview. He only expressed regret for the “wrong use” of the videotape.
How Mr. Burke was able to leap to his conclusion that the Archbishop retracted or apologized for the content of a message which is nothing but honest interpretation of can. 915 of the Code of Canon Law, is beyond me. It leads me to wonder if Daniel Burke is biased in his reporting.
posted March 27, 2009 at 9:07 pm
I tend to agree with Loverde that individual Catholics are the ones to determine if they should take communion, not the priest/bishop who is giving it. The church however seems to frown on a person being able to make that determination!
Also in 2004 the US bishops agreed that individual bishops would set the policy for communion for their diocese.
It seems Burke might have checked out what the video was going to be used for before he agreed to do it. Guess it is OK to critize other bishops privately but not in public! He’s sorry it got out in public, not for what he said.
posted March 27, 2009 at 9:59 pm
Waiting for an equally vociferous call to deny communion to divorced and re-married Catholics, nevermind the priests that ignore that magisterial teaching too…
Selectivity indeed.
posted March 27, 2009 at 11:19 pm
The archbishop had a little lesson on the morality of some of the people he’s in bed with.
posted March 28, 2009 at 5:20 am
There’s some good news this morning. Dr. George Tiller, the courageous Kansas abortion provider who’s been harassed by both Republican and Democrat Kansas attorney generals was acquitted. I don’t know how many brave providers there are in Kansas but surely not many so the women and families of Kansas can breath a little freer knowing he’ll be available, not in prison.
posted March 28, 2009 at 12:22 pm
Of all the adjectives I can think of to describe Tiller, brave and courageous don’t even begin to come to mind.
posted March 28, 2009 at 12:45 pm
The article I read didn’t say what happened to the Dr. that used his office nnmns, she was looking at two yrs., do you remember if they mentioned her in the article you read? Dr. Tiller has been married for 47 yrs. I think, and they have three sons, two of them also doctors. You march to your tune Tom and other people march to theirs, and although you don’t agree, it isn’t fair to judge other peoples character. I doubt if he would judge you so harshly.
posted March 28, 2009 at 1:55 pm
I didn’t see anything about that Henrietta.
I think there’s no question what he does takes courage given the nuts out there who’ve been told by their priests, etc. that abortion is murder and perhaps aren’t smart enough to realize that abortion is not murder.
posted March 28, 2009 at 2:31 pm
Good news indeed, nnmns, for the folks in Kansas.
posted March 28, 2009 at 4:23 pm
Some of us nuts actually take the time to study the physiological aspects of fetal anatomy/development and the abortion procedure itself to determine the fact that abortion is murder rather than take the words of our clergy simply on blind faith. People who don’t know that abortion is murder simply don’t understand what is involved and should refrain from saying things that aren’t true, implying that those of us who study up and actually know what we are talking about are mere simpletons.
Henrietta, I’m admittedly not a good judge of character, least of which my own. I do base my opinions on what I see, hear, and read on the man. This doesn’t mean that I’m judging his character, yet I hope he is genuinely mistaken about his course of action and not just willfully committing malicious acts.
posted March 28, 2009 at 8:25 pm
Abortion is not murder.
Murder is the killing of a person, often involving fear and or extended pain and/or concern for loved ones.
A blastocyst, zygote, embryo or fetus (a bzef) is not a person. Aside from the definition of person (and definitions are often important) people typically have friends who love them and, when they get old enough, whom they love. People often have others who depend on them, either financially or for friendship or support. People (at least should) have had considerable investment in them, by parents, grandparents and society. None of those things is true of a bzef, with the possible exception of an investment, primarily by the mother to be who has decided an abortion is necessary.
Also a bzef has no chance to experience fear due to the abortion and little time to experience pain and likely no concept of loved ones, let alone an opportunity to be concerned for them.
Abortion is not murder.
posted March 28, 2009 at 9:16 pm
Just keep talking, nnmns. Continue to show everyone reading your thorough understanding of the topic.
posted March 28, 2009 at 11:02 pm
Ok.
posted March 29, 2009 at 4:32 am
Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City has his concerns about Gov. Kathleen Sebelius and her possible future as HHS head under President Obama. Referring to his fellow bishops: “Together – regardless what we may do in terms of instructing politicians whether they should present themselves to Communion or not – we have to be clear in our teaching how their conduct is simply inconsistent with our Catholic belief and we have to make sure our people understand that” – posted on LifeSiteNews.com 3/5/09.
posted March 29, 2009 at 7:59 am
I suspect there’s more plasticity to peoples’ “Catholic belief” than the bishops care to admit. Of course rather than it stretching, they’d be better off if it just broke.
posted March 29, 2009 at 12:58 pm
Again, whether to allow a person to take communion or not,is a control issue, IMO, by the big dudes in the RCC. I thought I understood that the RCC thinks a person should be able to decide if they are mentally “in good standing” or whatever with the RCC, to have their snack on those days they attend. And if an RC feels it isn’t their place to tell others whether to have an abortion then they aren’t violating RCC doctrine, as they themselves wouldn’t have one (if they were a woman, of course) due to their beliefs. IOW, they mind their own business. As for supporting a candidate who is pro-choice…there again, if that candidate is promising to give them what they want (no new taxes, better schools etc.) and the abortion issue is just one part of the plans, then why not vote for them??