Suddenly they see Him

Suddenly they see Him

The Village Voice, of all newspapers, has come to the defense of John Kerry and Catholic teaching, reminding the bishops that even Judas was able to receive Communion. So are we comparing Kerry to Judas now? Of course, as we’ve discussed on this blog before, the comparison is not apt since Judas had not yet betrayed Jesus, and Jesus, as God and as the Eucharistic Lord, can decide for Himself how to apply this rule, but we do not have the authority to change the rule ourselves. Plus the fact that not all of the Gospels are in agreement that Judas even received the Eucharist at the Last Supper and that it conveniently ignores St. Paul’s admonition that those who are in mortal sin should not partake.

But what’s most interesting is how radically secular liberals have suddenly discovered the sanctity and holiness of the Euchatist. A friend sent along the following comment:

Looks like we have a modern definition of “Transubstantiation”:  A Catholic doctrine teaching that Christ becomes present under the appearance of bread and wine exactly at the moment when communion is denied pro-abortion politicians.

Actually the article says that Jesus gave Judas “bread and water”. Did they run out of wine? Was Judas in solitary confinement? Can they not find any Catholics to actually help them write these things?

Written by
Domenico Bettinelli
6 comments
  • Unfortunately, the accounts in the New Testament are inclusive regarding whether Judas received “Communion” from the hands of our Lord or not.

    But then, this theory has been posited over and over again for the sake of those who want others to feel comfortable doing anything they wish.

  • The difference is, Judas had not actually committed a sin when he took Communion.  Nor was he publicly and unabashedly promoting evil.

    Bottom line – There are lots and lots of Catholics (especially Democratic politicians) who don’t want to be held to account for anything – and lots and lots of non-Catholics who don’t want Catholics (expecially Democratic politicans) to have to be held to account for anything.

    If one can promote evil in society, and then take Communion, the Eucharist will have been greatly devalued (not in its nature, but by us).

    Message to new young Catholics, yearning for meaning and rightness and for purity and holiness – we don’t care enough about the Eucharist to keep it from being defiled by those who promote baby murder and other forms of evil.

  • Why does Cardindal Egan have to do the right thing and come down equally on Bush and Kerry?

    Kerry is Catholic and Bush is not.  What the Church teaches about the Eucharist applies to Kerry, and, unless he converts, not to Bush.

  • True Judas was not a public sinner and Jesus denying him Communion would have been revealing a private sin.

    But also remember that the first mention of Judas inner betrayal was after Jesus gave the Bread of Life speech in John 6.

    And Larry is right that whether Judas received Communion is something that is disputed based on various Gospel passages.

    But I guess that they are now comparing Kerry to Judas is a step in the right direction.

  • For the folks at the Village Voice, Jesus was not “God and … the Eucharistic Lord”; he was a really nice homeless guy who fed the hungry, spoke “truth” to power, and liked to hang out with with prostitutes, tax collectors and a bunch of guys representing the working poor. In other words, he was the prototypical Democratic poster boy.

Archives

Categories

Categories