San Francisco’s Catholic Archbishop Salvatore J. Cordileone has barred House Speaker Nancy Pelosi from receiving the Lord’s Supper. Pelosi is an Italian-American who comes from a notable political family with long ties to the Democratic Party. Her father Thomas d’Alesandro, Jr., had served in the US House of Representatives (1939-1947) and as mayor of Baltimore (1947-1959), the latter office subsequently occupied by Pelosi’s brother Thomas d’Alesandro III (1967-1971). As a Roman Catholic, Pelosi is in principle subject to the teachings of her church, as reflected in at least some of her political stances. With respect to climate change, she attributes her own position to her faith tradition: “For me, it’s a religious thing: I believe this is God’s creation, and we have a moral obligation to be good stewards.”
However, on abortion she is at variance with her church’s teachings. According to section 2271 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church,
Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion.
This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable.
Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:“You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.”
“God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.”
Section 2272 further states that “Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense.” Of course, the Catechism is a lengthy document, and ordinary Catholics may not be familiar with everything in it. However, Pelosi has been advised by her bishop that her pursuit of policies favouring the abortion licence places her in opposition to the church’s stance:
After numerous attempts to speak with her to help her understand the grave evil she is perpetrating, the scandal she is causing, and the danger to her own soul she is risking, I have determined that the point has come in which I must make a public declaration that she is not to be admitted to Holy Communion unless and until she publicly repudiate her support for abortion “rights” and confess and receive absolution for her cooperation in this evil in the sacrament of Penance. I have accordingly sent her a Notification to this effect, which I have now made public.
Is the Archbishop right to do this? Some critics would charge that he is “weaponizing the Eucharist,” that is, misusing one of the church’s sacraments to advance a partisan political agenda. Some would further hold that, in taking this action, he is causing the church to interfere in politics, where people of a variety of faiths must co-operate to serve the public interest. I do not find these objections persuasive.
Although I am not a member of Cordileone’s communion, I do not believe that he exceeds his legitimate authority over one of his flock. Of course, no church should pretend to instruct public officials who are members which policies they should be pursuing. This is one of the points I make in a “Concluding Ecclesiological Postscript,” which I appended to the second edition of Political Visions and Illusions. The institutional church does not possess the normative competence to pronounce on the specifics of concrete policies, although many denominational bodies routinely take positions on controversial matters over which there is legitimate disagreement, even among Christians. But the church, as a particular differentiated institution with its own divinely-appointed task, does indeed bear responsibility for disciplining its members, whether or not they hold public office. In fact, the Belgic Confession states that one of the marks of the true church is that “it practices church discipline for correcting faults.”
Not all churches maintain such discipline, of course. The current spirit dominating many churches would have us simply affirm people and include them without making demands that might entail sacrifice or even mild discomfort. Yet, as any parent of small children knows, genuine love requires discipline and correction. As the author of the letter to the Hebrews expresses it, “For the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant; later it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it” (Hebrews 12:11). A church that spurns discipline out of misguided sentiment risks losing its status as a church. Affirming sinners in their sin is not at all loving and places them in danger of divine judgement.
Cordileone’s pastoral concern is for a member of his own flock who just happens to be Speaker of the House of Representatives. Pelosi’s office does not and should not exempt her from his care for her spiritual well being. If ending the life of a child in the womb is indeed a sin and if encouraging one to commit this sin endangers one’s status before God, then Pelosi ought to be thankful that her bishop has seen fit to call her back to the path of truth, justice, and life. May God give her the grace to amend her life and her public witness through Cordileone’s ministry.
