![o{]:¬)](http://www.wdtprs.com/blog/wp-images/topimage.JPG)
FLASH: New York’s Card. Egan: rebukes Giuliani for receiving Communion
This is just in from the Archdiocese of New York! Super WDTPRS kudos to a super alert fast friend for alerting me so swiftly!
Statement of Cardinal Egan
April 28, 2008
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: April 28, 2008
The following is a statement issued by Edward Cardinal Egan:
“ The Catholic Church clearly teaches that abortion is a grave offense against the will of God. Throughout my years as Archbishop of New York, I have repeated this teaching in sermons, articles, addresses, and interviews without hesitation or compromise of any kind. Thus it was that I had an understanding with Mr. Rudolph Giuliani, when I became Archbishop of New York and he was serving as Mayor of New York, that he was not to receive the Eucharist because of his well-known support of abortion. I deeply regret that Mr. Giuliani received the Eucharist during the Papal visit here in New York, and I will be seeking a meeting with him to insist that he abide by our understanding.
This raises the huge question.
What about other bishops who have prominent Catholics in their communion lines?
This may be a reaction to the piece by Robert Novak in the WaPo today!
wow
Comment by Volpius — 28 April 2008 @ 12:41 pmPapa’s visit is still bearing fruit!
Comment by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf — 28 April 2008 @ 12:51 pm“Hooray” for Cardinal Egan!
Comment by Matt M — 28 April 2008 @ 12:51 pmGod bless Cardinal Egan! I was shocked that Giuliani had received Communion, and couldn’t believe that Cardinal Egan would have knowingly let him do it. It seems my suspicions were correct, thank God!
I hope and pray that Archbishop Wuerl will do the same, but I doubt it.
Comment by Francesco — 28 April 2008 @ 1:05 pmIt is going to very interesting to see what, if anything, occurs when Democratic National Convention hits Denver, Colorado this summer. Hopefully others will have the courage and love for his fellow man as Cardinal Egan, Archbishop Burke and Bishop Bruskewitz. Please pray.
Comment by kdpfam — 28 April 2008 @ 1:07 pmThe Archdiocese has been blessed with some exceptional leadership, both past and present.
Comment by tertullian — 28 April 2008 @ 1:10 pmPleezzzze…the only thing Egan has done of any note is to change the name of
Comment by sedulus — 28 April 2008 @ 1:19 pmSt. Patrick’s Cathedral to the Cathedral of Saint Patrick.
Rudy Giuliani?
Is he the one the media was certain would be the Repub Presidential nominee? We were assured that it was going to be Rudy vs Hillary in November.
Comment by RBrown — 28 April 2008 @ 1:21 pmThis is major news. I thought that the Pope was probably leaving the enforcement till later, for the bishops to do (since, after all, it IS their responsibility). Cdl Egan obviously got the message. Will DC do likewise?
Comment by EDG — 28 April 2008 @ 1:50 pmThree Cheers for Cardinal Egan! I wonder if the Nuncio and Archbishop Wuerl will be following suit? However, as Mr Novak pointed out in an article found on the next posting, even if Giuliani recanted his position on abortion he still would be unable to receive Holy Communion because of his marital issues. I am sure Cardinal Egan didn’t want to get into that aspect of Giuliani’s personal life in this rebuke. Unfortunately, Giuliani is not alone in the overwhelming number of divorced and remarried Catholics who ignore or are not aware that they should not receive Holy Communion.
Comment by TNCath — 28 April 2008 @ 1:50 pmWhen Card. George was asked about Giuliani and Holy Communion, he said something like “well, I don’t think he’s even married in the church, so we won’t even have to get to the pro-abortion part.”
Comment by Patrick — 28 April 2008 @ 2:01 pmI am not a huge fan of Egan, but this is good because it definitely puts the pressure on Wuerl.
Comment by Terry — 28 April 2008 @ 2:02 pmCardinal Egan is being criticized in the liberal press for his statement on the reception of Holy Communion by Rudy Giuliani.
I think Cardinal Egan should be applauded for his stand and other Bishops and Cardinals should follow his lead in denying Holy Communion to others who represent the pro abortion movement here and throughout the world.
The snide and nasty remarks directed to Cardinal Egan made by some bloggers in the liberal press is another reason why the Catholic Church should move in unison toward ending the scandalous practice of pro abortion Catholics receiving the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
Comment by Humilitas — 28 April 2008 @ 2:08 pmI often wonder about how his marriage status isn’t also scandalous. I find
Comment by John Paul — 28 April 2008 @ 2:12 pmit sad, and I don’t wish his status on anyone. But if you are living outside
of a Church-blessed marriage, very publically in his case, I find that
more troublesome in some respects that that is ignored as well.
You’re absolutely right, Father. I too suspect that this is a reaction to the Novak piece.
Now that another really prominent churchman has come out on this, maybe it will increase the pressure on other churchmen to finally say something. Now it’s not just Archbishop Burke, whom many have unjustly portrayed as an ultra-right-wing lunatic.
This could get ugly; however, I suspect that it will actually be the beginning of something very good.
Comment by James — 28 April 2008 @ 2:22 pmIt sure would have meant something if the letter had been issued PRIOR to Robert Novak writing about it.
That would have shown real fortitude—the primary virtue lacking in ecclesiastical circles these days—always in deference to a false “prudence.”
Comment by Brian Mershon — 28 April 2008 @ 2:25 pmThose of you mentioning Giuliani’s irregular marital status are correct in saying it’s of a piece with his public support of abortion. Can. 915 takes care of both of those.
Comment by Jason in San Antonio — 28 April 2008 @ 2:30 pmI had been hoping that someone like Mr. Novak would point the spotlight on this still very unresolved issue again. This article will at least be very difficult to ignore, just look at the reaction by Cardinal Eagan today already. This is far too important an issue to let fall through the cracks as the USCCB would hope.
Comment by EJ — 28 April 2008 @ 2:35 pmWhat should happen with Bob Casey in PA and him receiving communion?? He is “pro-lfe” but actively and strongly campaigning for a guy who is militantly pro-abortion. It may not be the same as voting for abortion legislaion but can we deny that he is de facto supporting abortion by supporting Obama?
Comment by walter — 28 April 2008 @ 2:51 pmIt is a scandal that the bishops in the US do not speak with one voice on this issue. I guess the USCCB is more concerned with the
Comment by TJM — 28 April 2008 @ 2:55 pmminimum wage than abortion and other less pressing concerns. Tom
Three Cheers for Cardinal Egan. We much support our Bishops when the do something correct and speak up for for the Gospel. Extra prayers for the Cardinal this week.
Comment by Steve Ruyle — 28 April 2008 @ 3:14 pm“It sure would have meant something if the letter had been issued PRIOR to Robert Novak writing about it.”
Perhaps the cardinal hoped to rebuke Mr. Giuliani privately – to send a letter for his eyes only, or to have a meeting with him, where he could say, “I thought we’d agreed on this. I’m disappointed.” Whether or not you or I think the time has passed for private conversations only, Cardinal Egan might not agree with us.
Or, perhaps Cardinal Egan was moved to release the statement because of the piece in the Washington Post. In that case we should still be happy that he was embarrassed enough to release a statement like this one, instead of a statement claiming there was nothing at all wrong with Mr. Giuliani receiving communion, right?
Comment by cheyan — 28 April 2008 @ 4:57 pmSteve Ruyle:
“Three Cheers for Cardinal Egan. We much support our Bishops when the do something correct and speak up for for the Gospel. Extra prayers for the Cardinal this week.”
)(
Sure, it would be better though for bishops to act upon what they say than just going around saying a lot. It would also better for bishops to be pro-active rather than reactionary. This way something like Egan’s response doesn’t look questionably indecisive.
======
Francesco wrote:
“God bless Cardinal Egan! I was shocked that Giuliani had received Communion, and couldn’t believe that Cardinal Egan would have knowingly let him do it. It seems my suspicions were correct, thank God!
I hope and pray that Archbishop Wuerl will do the same, but I doubt it.”
)(
Yes, I doubt it also. For most part, bishops do things according to convenience also, not necessarily by passion for the Faith. My opinion anyway.
======
kdpfam wrote:
“It is going to very interesting to see what, if anything, occurs when Democratic National Convention hits Denver, Colorado, this summer. Hopefully others will have the courage and love for his fellow man as Cardinal Egan, Archbishop Burke and Bishop Bruskewitz. Please pray.”
)(
Your sincerity really is to be appreciated but it would be like hoping those in a house ill repute would have any consideration as to who was married or single.
======
Sedulus wrote:
“Comment by tertullian — 28 April 2008 @ 1:10 pm
Pleezzzze…the only thing Egan has done of any note is to change the name of St. Patrick’s Cathedral to the Cathedral of Saint Patrick.
)(
How dumb! What was the point of that name-change? What next? Archbishop Egan to Eagan the Archbishop?? LOL
======
RBrown wrote:
“Rudy Giuliani?
Is he the one the media was certain would be the Repub Presidential nominee? We were assured that it was going to be Rudy vs Hillary in November.”
)(
Yes, he was, and among the first to wither off the vine of candidates.
======
EDG wrote:
“...leaving the enforcement till later, for the bishops to do…”
)(
LOL Surely you jest? Save that of of the blessed Four—Bruskewitz, Burke, Burbidge and George ( wow, what great firm that would make!! ) it would be like hoping Enron takes care of your pension.
======
TNCath wrote:
“Three Cheers for Cardinal Egan! I wonder if the Nuncio and Archbishop Wuerl will be following suit? However, as Mr Novak pointed out in an article found on the next posting, even if Giuliani recanted his position on abortion he still would be unable to receive Holy Communion because of his marital issues. I am sure Cardinal Egan didn’t want to get into that aspect of Giuliani’s personal life in this rebuke. Unfortunately, Giuliani is not alone in the overwhelming number of divorced and remarried Catholics who ignore or are not aware they should not receive Holy Communion.”
)(
To the first part of your post, whether or not Egan the Archbishop makes reference to Rudy’s personal life, it goes hand in hand. When a person becomes a public figure, one’s personal life must be exemplary of what it is one stands for. As we have seen, this goes for Clergy as well as lay public figures.
This bring up Father Z’s question. “What about other bishops who have prominent Catholics in their communion lines?”
Well, those other prominent Catholics in line ought to speak up and make their own phone calls. One layman telling another to knock it off is helpful also. At the same time, Chaput had an incident last year. We saw where that went. Nowhere. Burke and Bruskewitz have both stated the same but I believe they are more willing to follow through given the proven strength of their character. If the more high-profile the diocese is is a consideration, all the more those bishops have a responsibility to make good on their words. The rest of the world is watching!
Comment by Matt Q — 28 April 2008 @ 5:00 pmYou know, after Benedict’s visit to Brazil, the Brazilian bishops all of a sudden developed some backbone and they are now being much more forceful in opposing abortion and other moral evils in that country. I wonder if this action by Cardinal Egan (particularly in light of the somewhat odd, confessional statements made by Cardinal Mahony that Fr. Z posted) is an indication that a similar effect might take place here. I wonder if the Pope talked with some of these bishops and told them to shape up or ship out…I sure hope so.
Comment by Johnny Domer — 28 April 2008 @ 5:09 pmHere in Colorado, our archbishop has an agreement with the governor, who is a pro-abortion Catholic. The governor receives the Eucharist, and the archbishop talks about immigration.
Comment by peretti — 28 April 2008 @ 5:14 pmPeretti wrote:
“Here in Colorado, our archbishop has an agreement with the governor, who is a pro-abortion Catholic. The governor receives the Eucharist, and the archbishop talks about immigration.”
)(
Gah. ...And I openly supported the idea of him coming here to take over in Los Angeles in the next couple of years. It’s only because of his open support of the Usus Antiquior I thought would be great if we got him. Now… ????? Where does he really stand regarding the Tridentine Mass?
I know, how about if we get Ranjith over here? LOL Oh what a lightning bolt that would be. I doubt it though because I am hoping he gets Prefect for CDF and would be able to do a lot good there. He would be able to do a lot of good here too but… As Father Z posted, if you don’t believe in or ask for miracles, you don’t get any.
Comment by Matt Q — 28 April 2008 @ 5:42 pmMatt Q: Ranjith for LA Archbishop, sounds good to an LA prisoner here. That would cause a stirr for sure.
I’ve also noticed the change in the Brazilian Hierarchy, hopefully he same happens here in the US.
Let us pray that 915 starts to be inforced everywhere.
Comment by Joe of St. ThĂ©rèse — 28 April 2008 @ 7:19 pmWhile I’m all in favour of denying baby-killers Communion, this episode has raised a couple of questions.
#!. His Lordship worked on the Rota and Signatura. As an attorney, wouldn’t he have felt that
the marriage argument made for an easier case than this.
#2. Which makes Rudy the bigger martyr? Gay rights, Abortion, or being “married” thrice?
#3. Why was Rudy even there?
I think someone got to His Eminence, and it wasn’t Novak!
http://streetcornerconservative.com/2008/04/20/rudy-giuliani-embarrasses-roman-catholic-church-at-popes-st-patricks-cathedral-mass-by-george-j-marlin/
Comment by Tom Ryan — 28 April 2008 @ 8:25 pmIf you are denied the Eucharist for supporting abortion, does that also mean that those who are in favor of the death penalty and such be also denied?
Comment by EG — 28 April 2008 @ 9:05 pmIf you are denied the Eucharist for supporting abortion, does that also mean that those who are in favor of the death penalty and such be also denied?
Comment by EG
Being against the Death Penalty is not the doctrine of the Church. The DP is allowed as a matter of self-defense.
Comment by RBrown — 28 April 2008 @ 9:19 pm“Rudy Giuliani?
Is he the one the media was certain would be the Repub Presidential nominee? We were assured that it was going to be Rudy vs Hillary in November.”
Yes, he was, and among the first to wither off the vine of candidates.
Comment by Matt Q
You’re late. The joke (and answer) was contained in the question.
What little support Rudy had—and mostly, it was from the media—was a function of him having been burgermeister of NYC (the media center) on 9-11.
Comment by RBrown — 28 April 2008 @ 9:24 pmI can’t believe that keeps coming up?
Comment by Tom Ryan — 28 April 2008 @ 9:24 pmWhat’s to be thrown out next as a moral equivalent ; opposing the Minimum Wage?
Interesting that his Eminence did not say anything about our new governor in New York recieving from the Holy Father at Yankee Stadium. He is currently in office and has an important bill on abortion on his desk which he has not publicly denounced. He appears to be very much for abortion rights, yet we hear nothing about him.
Comment by Ray Brown — 29 April 2008 @ 9:02 am