Publisher, editor fired over Canadian PM communion controversy

Remember that "Canadian Prime Minister pockets consecrated host!" story from earlier this month? 

In my coverage, I focused on the duty of the officiating Archbishop to refrain from giving communion to someone who isn't in communion with the Church. 

AmP readers were also quick to point out that in the distributed video, the Prime Minister is not actually seen "pocketing" the consecrated host.

Well, it looks like he did actually consume it, instead of pocketing it, and the publisher and editor cooked the story on the writers:

"The publisher and editor of the New Brunswick Telegraph-Journal are no longer with the paper after it was forced to apologize to Stephen Harper and two of its own reporters over a story about whether the prime minister took communion at the state funeral of former governor general Roméo LeBlanc.

CBC News has confirmed that editor Shawna Richer has been fired and that Jamie Irving is no longer the publisher of the paper. Earlier, their names had been removed from the paper's list of senior staff.

The apology, which ran on the provincial newspaper's front page on Tuesday, said the story that ran on July 8 that accused Harper of placing a communion wafer in his pocket was "inaccurate and should not have been published."

"There was no credible support for these statements of fact at the time this article was published, nor is the Telegraph-Journal aware of any credible support for these statements now," the apology said.

"Our reporters Rob Linke and Adam Huras, who wrote the story reporting on the funeral, did not include these statements in the version of the story that they wrote. In the editing process, these statements were added without the knowledge of the reporters and without any credible support for them." (CBC News)

Let's still be clear, the Archbishop still shouldn't have given him Communion in the first place, he had no business accepting it, and the fact that the above story is headlined "Publisher, editor out over wafer story" tells you how far we still have to go when it comes to informed, respectful reporting of matters Catholic.

In Boston, billboards announce the return of perpetual adoration

For the first time in 40 years, no less:

"To see the image of God in Boston, a passerby need only look up.

Two billboards featuring the Eucharist displayed in a monstrance tower over the streets in Brighton and East Boston. The words under the image read, “The Son’s rays for your soul.”

These advertisements are meant to get the word out about the return of perpetual adoration to Boston after a 40-year absence. St. Clement Eucharistic Shrine on Boylston Street will mark the start of adoration with a Mass celebrated by Cardinal Seán P. O’Malley on Aug. 15, the Solemnity of the Assumption.

From then on, the Eucharist will be exposed in a monstrance all day, every day, apart from regularly scheduled Mass times. - Boston Pilot

More on the Canadian Prime Minister/Eucharist controversy

"Canadian Papist" and AmP reader Matt with a useful comment:

Hey, just wanted to throw you a line to let you know that the PMO (Prime Minister's Office) confirmed that the host was, in fact consumed. Also, in knowing the Archbishop of Moncton, who gave Prime Minister Harper the host, he really dropped the ball. He should be a lot more careful in giving out the Eucharist, as I'm certain Harper had no idea what was going on. 

"Unfortunately, the camera did not stop long enough on the prime minister, but, as I told you, the prime minister is a Christian, and when he was offered communion by the priest, he accepted it and consumed it as well," Soudas said. 

Soudas is his spokesman. Is it still wrong for Harper to consume it? Sure, but he didn't know better, and he can't be held responsible for his ignorance.

My father, Canon Lawyer Ed Peters, focuses in his commentary on the ministerial obligation of protecting the Eucharist - and in this case - the Archbishop's woeful neglect of said obligation.

Is Sebelius banned from receiving communion in DC?

So is Sebelius banned from Communion in DC, or not?

Her hometown Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City has already said last year that she should refrain from presenting herself for Communion.

Julia Duin in the Washington Times on Tuesday the 24th: "A spokesman for Archbishop Wuerl said church officials in Washington would act in accordance with the admonition from Kansas City. A church official in Washington said the admonition does not prohibit priests from serving Mrs. Sebelius if she does present herself, but declined to speculate on what would happen in that event."

Deal Hudson mentions: "Joelle Santolla, spokeswoman for the Arlington Diocese, announced that Bishop Paul Loverde would expect the same while she was in Northern Virginia." Hudson adds:

"The ramifications are enormous: For example, if Sean Cardinal O'Malley of Boston stated publicly that Sen. John Kerry was in violation of Canon 915, he would not have been able to receive communion at Pope Benedict XVI's Mass in Washington, D.C., a year ago. Rep. Nancy Pelosi would not have been able to celebrate her elevation to speaker of the House with a special Mass at Trinity College, if Archbishop Neiderhauer had found her wanting according to the standard of Canon 915."

Meanwhile reports continue to circulate like this one:

Two Washington, D.C.-area Catholic bishops have instructed Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, D-Kan., President Barack Obama’s pick to Be Secretary Of Health and Human Services, to refrain from receiving Holy Communion on account of her stances on human-life issues such as abortion and embryonic stem cell research.

With a nod to David Gibson, who says the reality of this decision "seems to be a good deal less than is being advertised", here is what I think is safe to say:

• Kathleen Sebelius was told last year by her home Archbishop to cease presenting herself for Communion (to my knowledge, she has not done so since in her home archdiocese)
• Archbishop Wuerl of DC and Bishop Loverde of Arlington have made it clear that she ought not to present herself for Communion in their(arch) dioceses either (we don't know if this was done through a personal communication, or simply by going on the public record)

Two primary questions remain:

• If Sebelius does present herself, what ought the (extra- or ordinary) minister do in that situation, if he or she is aware that Sebelius has been told not to present herself?
• Will Archbishop Wuerl (and Bishop Loverde) honor the public declarations of other home bishops when it comes to the suitability of politicians approaching the Eucharist in DC/VA?

For now, I think that is where we are at. Barring unforeseen circumstance, Kathleen Sebellius will soon be approved as the new Head of U.S. Health and Human Services, which means her moving to the region.

Between Wuerl and Burke, who is right on Communion?

My father Canon Lawyer Ed Peters attempts an adjudication:

I often tell my students, the answer to a canonical question is seldom found in a single canon.

Two prominent American prelates, Abp. Donald Wuerl of Washington DC and Abp. Raymond Burke of the Apostolic Signatura, are the lead figures in a significant disagreement over admitting certain pro-abortion Catholic politicians to holy Communion.

Wuerl basically believes that, under Canon 916, Catholics, including pro-abortion politicians, should determine their own eligibility for reception of Communion.

Burke argues that, beyond Canon 916, Canon 915 requires ministers of holy Communion to withhold the Eucharist from some pro-abortion politicians if they don't refrain from approaching on their own.

Both sides can't be right, and I suspect that the more compelling case is made by reading the two canons together instead of reading one to the exclusion of the other.

He sorts it out here.

Reviewed: DC to remain "green zone" for reception of the Eucharist by pro-aborts?

An update on the Archbishop Burke saga from last week (here and here):

[Correction: Bishop of Arlington] 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." (Religion News Service)

A friend of mine has said that this solution in effect sets up a "Green Zone" for pro-abortion politicians to receive communion while in Washington DC despite what their hometown bishops may have decided.

Sebellius is coming....

Abp. Burke in interview says pro-aborts are to be denied communion

Flash: Abp. Burke clarifies he was misled about Communion interview agenda

This is very newsworthy.

Terry Randall of Operation Rescue went to Rome recently and conducted an interview with Archbishop Burke, who is completely uncompromising in his interpretation and application of Canon 915. He hits the ground running:

"Mr. Terry: For the umpteenth time, I and the others are asking, under Canon 915 what should or should not be done?

Archbishop Burke: The Canon is completely clear, it is not subject in my judgment to any other interpretations. When someone is publicly and obstinately in grave sin we may not administer Holy Communion to the person. And that, basically, for two reasons: number one, to prevent the person himself or herself from committing a sacrilege, and secondly, to protect the sanctity of the Holy Eucharist. In other words, to approach, to receive our Lord in Holy Communion, when one insists on remaining in grave sin, is such a violation of the sanctity of the Holy Eucharist, so that Communion must not be given to people who are publicly, obstinately, in grave sin.

And that's just a start. Read the full transcript here.

Archbishop Burke will address the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast on May 9th.

More Martino Gutsiness in PA

I'm pressed for time today, but Diane is covering the latest acts of bishop Joseph Martino in Scranton.

Report: Kerry didn't receive Communion at Ash Wednesday Mass

My friend Eric passes along some reliable heresay, which I paraphrase:

During Ash Wednesday Mass, at St. Joseph's on Capitol Hill, I was sitting two pews behind [Senator John] Kerry. He left before Communion, right after Cardinal McCarick's sermon and getting his ashes.

There are two reasons I could see for Kerry's choice: 1) He knew he shouldn't present himself for Communion so he didn't, or 2) he had another meeting and just wanted to get his ashes.

Option 2) Seems very plausible to me. I know when I was at Mass yesterday, I sat next to a young woman who promptly disappeared after recieving her ashes.

Option 1), on the other hand, sets up an interesting third-way solution to the problem of pro-abortion politicians receiving Communion - just don't try to receive! I mean - sure, by all means, come to Mass - but don't present yourself for Communion.

Plenty of the rest of us have to do this from time to time.

Cartoon: Joe Biden at Mass

For full-size version, click here or click on the cartoon:

By John Francis Borra, SFO. Used with permission.