Can you deny a bishop communion?
It would be interesting to see Supreme Knight Carl Anderson (see Paul Moses’ post below) face off with Archbishop John Onaiyekan of Abuja, Nigeria, who told NCR’s John Allen that he would “obviously” vote for Barack Obama if he could. That seems consistent with what I’ve heard from and about prelates outside the American ecclesial echo chamber. But Onaiyekan is particularly thoughtful in his remarks:
Known as a strong advocate for social justice, Onaiyekan said Obama’s pro-choice record wouldn’t stop him from voting for the Democrat.
“The fact that you oppose abortion doesn’t necessarily mean that you are pro-life,” Onaiyekan said in an interview with NCR. “You can be anti-abortion and still be killing people by the millions through war, through poverty, and so on.”
A past president of the African bishops’ conference, Onaiyekan is widely seen as a spokesperson for Catholicism in Africa. During the synod, he was tapped to deliver a continental report on behalf of the African bishops.
Onaiyekan said the election of an African-American president would have positive repercussions for America’s image in the developing world.
“It would mean that for the first time, we would begin to think that the Americans are really serious in the things they say, about freedom, equality, and all that,” he said. “For a long time, we’ve been feeling that you don’t really mean it, that they’re just words.”
Onaiyekan said he’s aware that many American Catholics have reservations about Obama because of his stand on abortion, but he looks at it differently.
“Of course I believe that abortion is wrong, that it’s killing innocent life,” he said. “I also believe, however, that those who are against abortion should be consistent.
“If my choice is between a person who makes room for abortion, but who is really pro-life in terms of justice in the world, peace in the world, I will prefer him to somebody who doesn’t support abortion but who is driving millions of people in the world to death,” Onaiyekan said.
“It’s a whole package, and you never get a politician who will please you in everything,” he said. “You always have to pick and choose.”
John (who is in Rome covering the Synod on the Bible, along with Onaiyekan and a cast of hundreds) also posts the full transcript of the interview here.
UPDATE! Via CNS, this story about a 106-year-old nun who is going to vote for the first time since 1952…and she’s going to vote for Obama! Maybe she and the Archbishop can talk shop while waiting in the non-communion line. It’s a very nice piece, actually.
ROME (CNS) — U.S. Sister Cecilia Gaudette, a 106-year-old member of the Religious Sisters of Jesus and Mary, will vote for the first time in 56 years and will cast her ballot for president for Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill. The nun, a retired music and art teacher, has lived in Rome for 50 years and only recently found out that she could register for an absentee ballot without returning to the United States.
…Sister Cecilia said she was sure Obama would win, just like the last U.S. presidential candidate she voted for — Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1952. “I always said, ‘I voted once and I won the election,’” she told CBS News.
Is it just me, or are Onaiyekan’s remarks about Obama primarily racial?
I’m glad no one finds it odd that people here would find nothing wrong with Archbishop Onaiyekan endorsing a candidate in our election. Yes, I know he is based in Nigeria. But give me a break.
The archbishop is certainly justified in feeling pride that an American who shares his African heritage may very well become the next president of the United States, but should the archbishop, even though ineligible to vote and not directly connected to the U.S. election, have expressed his preference for the November 4th election? Wouldn’t it have been more proper for a Catholic prelate to have used the occasion to reiterate the Church’s teaching on all issues that can be categorized as “pro-life,” and to point out the glaring deficiencies in both major U.S. parties on the pro-life issues?
…Or, perhaps, to point out the glaring deficiencies in both Obama and McCain on other pro-life issues besides abotion:
Both support federal funding for destructive embryonic cell stem research (a process that has the potential to dwarf abortion in terms of the human life intentionally detroyed), and both support capital punishment.
And, while I’m at it, neither Senator (and I’ll throw in Senator Biden for good measure) has yet to sign on in support of the Pregnant Women Support Act, which has been pending in the Senate since December 2007.
There’s plenty the archbishop could address that is not pro-life in both major candidates.
I’d like to suggest, whether one agrees orn ot with him, that bishop Oneyaiken’s views are from another culture and inded another part of the world’s perspective; it’s not necessarily, and as far as I can tell, probably not related to skin color – a terribly superficial view.
It’s noteworthy we’ve yet to not Allen’s interview with Archbishop Wuerll.
I suppose the continuing thread on one issue prioirty stances will continue here and that’s part of the American phenomenon and how we all approach the issue of the full message of the Gospel from varying perspectives.
(A different note: are we going to have a thread on the synod, especilly the pope’s remarks today and the comen tfrom Fr. Massingale on behalf of the CTSA?)
Agree with you on that, William — both candidates and parties provide plenty of opportunity for instruction and correction. But I’d rather see that coming from a bishop in this country. Race, and the perception of American intentions, seems like a natural topic for an African observer to take up. I think “endorse” is not quite accurate, Aeodatus, since, as you observe, he is an African bishop, with no oversight or claim to authority in the country where said election is taking place.
I am always confused by references to persons being “African”. Africa is a big continent whose name is European. Is it true that Nigerians and the Touareg and Berbers and Ugandans and Zimbabweans and Kenyans and the Sudanese and… and… and… have a common heritage?
I forgot to give an answer to Mr. Gibson’s question. Certainly an archbishop may be denied communion. Consider how many bishops and archbishops were Arian.
And then there is Sr. Cecilia Gaudette. But, she is not ontologically and ecclesiastically and episcopally enhanced, so who cares what she says …. right?
Jimmy Mac–
Good for Sister Cecelia that she’s decided to roll the dice and go for broke on her Eisenhower/Obama daily double. ;)
I have a great-aunt who is a nun. She turned 102 a few weeks ago. I don’t have a clue who she’ll be voting for, however.
Gabriel–
True that Africa is a big place with wide diversity, but there are or were events in Africa that created at least some degree of common heritage over wide swaths of the continent. Slavery and colonization come quickly to mind. The Organization of African Unity (now the African Union) was founded to eradicate colonialism and its vestiges, and “to act as a collective voice” for the continent. Of course, the dissimilarites can unfortunately sometimes erupt into violence–e.g., between the Tutsis and the Hutus in Rwanda. Though not spoken continent-wide, Swahili, the only official language of the African Union that is indigenous to Africa, is something of a lingua franca in many parts of Africa. It would of course be wrong to lump everyone from Africa together as possessing some sort of pan-African culture, but I think there are aspects of Africa that many Africans can identify with as things they have in common. And the whole “Roots” phenomenon in the U.S. caused many African-Americans to turn their attention eastward and into the past.
The bishops in Texas may not be refused communion. The best punishment is to take away their tax exemption.
http://blog.au.org/2008/10/14/texas-side-step-bishops-letter-attacking-prochoice-candidates-attempts-to-sashay-past-federal-tax-law/
Just thought I’d mention again here the recent NCR piece, citing Peter Steinfels that Catholic laity are changing the conversation on abortion.
If there is any accuracy that many laity desire a less one issue focused approach from leadership, maybe the good African Bishop is sayin gsomething we should attempt to listen to more closely.
At the risk of alienating Bob Nunz, whom I very much respect, and many others with another post on life issues, I’m linking for your consideration an opinion piece by Prof. Robert George of Princeton comparing Senators Obama and McCain on the issues of abortion and stem cell research. I don’t deny that there is some partisanship in the opinion piece. Still, I think Prof. George makes the case that Senator Obama’s views on abortion and destructive ESC research are extreme.
Prof. George doesn’t mince words in his intro about where the article is heading:
“Barack Obama is the most extreme pro-abortion candidate ever to seek the office of President of the United States. He is the most extreme pro-abortion member of the United States Senate. Indeed, he is the most extreme pro-abortion legislator ever to serve in either house of the United States Congress.
Yet there are Catholics and Evangelicals-even self-identified pro-life Catholics and Evangelicals – who aggressively promote Obama’s candidacy and even declare him the preferred candidate from the pro-life point of view.
What is going on here?”
http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/viewarticle.php?selectedarticle=2008.10.14_George_Robert_Obama's%20Abortion%20Extremism_.xml
The hot link to the George piece seems to be degraded. I’ll try again:
http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/viewarticle.php?selectedarticle=2008.10.14_George_Robert_Obama's%20Abortion%20Extremism_.xml
Oh, well, if you have any interest in the article, click on the hot link, then “return to home page.” You’ll then be able to click on Prof. George’s article. (Sorry for the confusion.)
Let me see if this works:
http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/viewarticle.php?selectedarticle=2008.10.14_George_Robert_Obama's%20Abortion%20Extremism_.xml
Weird. In any case, thanks for posting it, William. Alienation is an occupational hazard of blogs, but hopefully not a permanent state.
I just glanced at the piece, and to me (with my own Obama goggles on, of course) it seems too partisan by half. Starting out with the “pro-abortion” label argument seems off-putting. But I will read it more closely.
Thank you.
There is, it seems to me, a dangerous flaw in referring to “Africans”, as though geography defines a people. Do we refer to Europeans as having a common language? a common polity? a common culture? The continent seems rather to be going in the direction of Babel. As does also Africa with its several hundred languages, of which Swahili is common only on the middle east coast of the continent.
Having given up the meaningless word “Aryan”, there has arisen the curious habit of referring to pale-skins as “Caucasians”. [It is recommended, if one goes to Moscow or St. Petersburg, not to refer oneself [or others] as Caucasian. People from the Caucasus are regarded with the same aversion as the Mafiosi in northern Italy].
At the risk of alienating Bill C. ,who I respect, as he knows as well, the politicization of one issue politics in the church strikes me as counterproductive to what it seeks to promote.
Catholic hierarchy here, in general, continue to be percived as overreaching into the political areana, whereas the USCCB stresses a broad picture voters need to consider.
I further think the Republican party is trying to exploit this one issue approach.
As they are sinking further behind in the polls, the Republicans continue to put out “trust”" messages as the economy, as we saw today goes down the tubes further. It’s glossed over as “tough campaign”, even as we speak.
They still reach out to the likes of folk like Mr. Hudson.
They talk about us as the “light on the hill” to instruct the the rest of the world – the Bishop in Africa may have a perspective rather different, not just a metter of his race.
A real question then is whether folk tend to see the US hierarchy essentially conmnected to the Republican party .
As much of what America sees is and was good collapsing around them, focusing on one issue weakens the message of the goodness of that issue and the credibility of those who speak it.
And as I’ve stated in the Fr. Hesburgh tread, I think there is (as a generalization) a real lack of leadership in the American hierachy on this !
Right after I posted this, up popped an NCR report on a Pew study showing younger Catholics are far more progressive, that they are moving to end the culture wars, but…
they don’t tend to see abortion as an IMPORTANT(my italics) issue.
That’s sad, but… rather than blame their ignorance or promiscuousness,
I posit the one issue pro-lifers and their politiciztations with diminishing the message rather than promoting it at the heart of this problem.
On one thread, someone asked if folks who suppr tObama can be pro-life.
Not only can they be, they are
But some refuse muleheadedly to ask if their tactics in promoting the meassage of life is effective!
I do believe that Mr. Nunz has touched the overlooked nerve in these discussions:
“younger Catholics are far more progressive, that they are moving to end the culture wars, but…
they don’t tend to see abortion as an IMPORTANT(my italics) issue.
That’s sad, but… rather than blame their ignorance or promiscuousness,….”.
Promiscuousness!
Anent the Nigerian archbishop, there is our own Washington Bishop Martin Holley:
“As an African American, I am saddened by evidence that Black women continue to be targeted by the abortion industry,” the bishop began in a statement. “The loss of any child from abortion is a tragedy, but we must ask: Why are minority children being aborted at such disproportionate rates?”
The prelate stressed that since the Roe v. Wade decision, “the number one cause of death in the African American community has been abortion.” Because of this, “we have lost over 13 million lives. To put that in perspective, it is one third of our present Black population. Since 1973, twice as many Black Americans have died from abortion than from AIDS, accidents, violent crimes, cancer, and heart disease combined.”
Just want to add on the role of the hioerarchy, take a look at isa Chill Slowhe”s remarks on how some bishops are damaging the CatholicFaith tradition by their partisaning on the abortion issue (at today’s NCR recap.)
I reiteratethat the one issue corps of Catholic leadership is hurting, not helping, the good news not only about life but the entire Gospel message.
Speaking of damaging the faith tradition:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jiPlZPgP2opGSJfRLYsYEf_wGEbAD93TAPQ01
Nominations for denial, anyone? How about Martino, Burke and Bruskewitz for starters!