Monday, June 14, 2004


Just finished reading Josh Marshall's recent post about Catholic bishops denying communion as a political sanction. The quote he includes from Deal W. Hudson was so breathtaking, I had to search the original article to see if there was missing context.

There wasn't. Apparently this Hudson character, who starts out by saying "Once you open this door, what's going to come rolling through it?...Pretty soon, no one would be taking Communion." sees no problem in opening that door for one special case: John Kerry. He didn't even bother to offer any kind of rationale or justification--he just wants it. And more, he wants priests to "read letters from the pulpit denouncing" Kerry.

Reminds me of that famous DeLay quote as to why he was pushing for another Texas redistricting: "I am the majority leader, and we want more seats."

Of course, another twist on Catholic debate I haven't seen mentioned is the pending legislation that would ease penalties for churches (or rather clergy members) involving themselves in political activity. But as far as I can tell, clergy would still be restricted from making partisan political statements from the pulpit. So what exactly is Hudson asking for?

Or is it considered not partisan if you say "John Kerry is the devil incarnate"? Maybe you have to actually use the word "elect" to get tagged on this law?