Untitled Document
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, head of the Vatican’s Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith, sent the following memo to Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick
of Washington to offer guidance to the U.S. bishops during their June retreat
in Denver. It was published online by the Italian newspaper L'Espresso on July
3. It is reprinted here for the benefit of Register readers.
1. Presenting oneself to receive holy Communion should be a conscious decision,
based on a reasoned judgment regarding one's worthiness to do so, according
to the Church's objective criteria, asking such questions as: "Am I in
full communion with the Catholic Church? Am I guilty of grave sin? Have I incurred
a penalty (e.g. excommunication, interdict) that forbids me to receive holy
Communion? Have I prepared myself by fasting for at least an hour?" The
practice of indiscriminately presenting oneself to receive holy Communion, merely
as a consequence of being present at Mass, is an abuse that must be corrected
(cf. Instruction "Redemptionis Sacramentum," 81, 83).
2. The Church teaches that abortion or euthanasia is a grave sin. The encyclical
letter "Evangelium Vitae," with reference to judicial decisions or
civil laws that authorize or promote abortion or euthanasia, states that there
is a "grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection.
... In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion
or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to 'take part in a
propaganda campaign in favor of such a law or vote for it'" (73). Christians
have a "grave obligation of conscience not to cooperate formally in practices
which, even if permitted by civil legislation, are contrary to God's law. Indeed,
from the moral standpoint, it is never licit to cooperate formally in evil.
... This cooperation can never be justified either by invoking respect for the
freedom of others or by appealing to the fact that civil law permits it or requires
it" (74).
3. Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia.
For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application
of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that
reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive holy Communion.
While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise
discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible
to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment.
There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging
war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion
and euthanasia.
4. Apart from an individual's judgment about his worthiness to present himself
to receive the holy Eucharist, the minister of holy Communion may find himself
in the situation where he must refuse to distribute holy Communion to someone,
such as in cases of a declared excommunication, a declared interdict, or an
obstinate persistence in manifest grave sin (cf. can. 915).
5. Regarding the grave sin of abortion or euthanasia, when a person's formal
cooperation becomes manifest (understood, in the case of a Catholic politician,
as his consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia
laws), his pastor should meet with him, instructing him about the Church's teaching,
informing him that he is not to present himself for holy Communion until he
brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will
otherwise be denied the Eucharist.
6. When "these precautionary measures have not had their effect or in which
they were not possible," and the person in question, with obstinate persistence,
still presents himself to receive the holy Eucharist, "the minister of
holy Communion must refuse to distribute it" (cf. Pontifical Council for
Legislative Texts Declaration "Holy Communion and Divorced, Civilly Remarried
Catholics" [2000], 3-4). This decision, properly speaking, is not a sanction
or a penalty. Nor is the minister of holy Communion passing judgment on the
person's subjective guilt, but rather is reacting to the person's public unworthiness
to receive holy Communion due to an objective situation of sin.
A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to
present himself for holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate
precisely because of the candidate's permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia.
When a Catholic does not share a candidate's stand in favor of abortion and/or
euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered
remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate
reasons.
