Life. Freedom. Conscience.

Some of the many things I'll be thankful for tomorrow.

 

This was inspired by musing on the fact that President Bush has now pardoned six turkeys, while his record for human pardons stands at one.

Who would Jesus feed?

Originally posted at BustedHalo. This picks up somewhere in the middle of a thread about bishops who deny the Eucharist to pro-choice politicians, and in general, whether any Catholic should be denied the Eucharist as what my worthy correspondent called a "loving invitation to self-correction."

* * * *

I wonder how many divorced Catholics--or their children--experience someone's exclusion from the Eucharist as a "loving invitation to self-correction."


Convert To Christ's first comment inspired me to spend some time reading about the Church's activism against the death penalty. Part of the reason the late Pope opposed it so strongly had to do with the fact that the death penalty can be applied arbitrarily and unjustly: accidents such as race or what state you live in factor into the choice of human beings killing another person.



A similar randomness, as ogica so wisely pointed out, is often used to judge a person's unity with Church teaching. A Catholic in public life who honestly believes that outlawing abortion is not the best way to lessen the number of abortions might be singled out while an unrepentant but incognito murderer could be welcomed to the table.


It can be gracious and dignified when someone excludes him or herself from the Eucharist willingly. I've seen people do this who might be living with a significant other but not married, or who might be angry at the church and know they are not loving enough to take Communion, or for other reasons. But at the same time, it makes me sad that someone would feel her or himself unworthy of encountering Christ, or unworthy of being part of the body of Christ, the people of God.


Look at it this way. I've never heard anyone claim that the Eucharist is not the Eucharist based on one's beliefs, in other words, that Jesus is only present in the bread and wine if you believe the right things. This is why Protestants or people of other faiths are expected to refrain from receiving Communion--since Jesus is really present and their theology does not recognize this, it would be disrespectful to Jesus, is the Catholic thinking. So if Jesus is really there, and the Catholic (however sinful) believes that He is really there, why would Jesus not want to be present to that Catholic, to teach them if they are wrong and to strengthen them if not?

"Sr. Joan Chittister is on the road"

And yet I continue to check her blog over at NCRCafe to see what the leading prophet of thinking spirituality has to say about the election results!

 

See, I know Sr. Joan won't come back from her peacekeeping mission only to tell us that everything is now A-OK stateside. She'll challenge American progressives to be as visionary in victory as they were in minority, to put the poor and marginalized first, and to look to their own houses. She'll remind us that God calls all of us to social justice and that we can't leave the responsibility for a better world with politicians.

 

Her speech at the Call to Action conference last week was emblematic. Everyone wants to hear about women's ordination and gay marriage, and God knows those are important to God's people. But Sister Joan, by focusing her address on economic justice and peace, subtly reminded us of how wide is the work to be done in the world. The poor will always be with us, needing God's love through God's people, no matter who is in Congress--or in the pulpit.

 

Come back, Sr. Joan, and be a voice of reason!

 

The mere announcement that she's away inspired, to date, 52 comments.

 

And if you can't wait, check out the discussion we're having over at BustedHalo.

Update: Sr. Joan is back with a moving story of ministry to Iraqi refugees in Syria.

"True family values are cognate with the liberal agenda"

Ken Mondschein, a Fordham sociologist, traces the decline of marriage to the decline of the middle class:

While they were dating, our parents and grandparents evaluated each other as potential life partners and helpmates. We, on the other hand, don't know if we will be working the same job, let alone dating the same person, in a year. If the traditional incentive for a long-term relationship — that is, building a shared life together — is a pipe dream, why commit? [ . . . ] If, in the end, we decide to act in "defense of marriage," we are going to need a program of paternity and maternity leave, affordable housing, guaranteed health care and social security. 

 

Start fighting for these things today at MomsRising.org. (And try not to kill the buzz by thinking of France.)