Rhode Island Bishop Thomas Tobin's Response to Rep. Patrick Kennedy

This is not a issue of the Church trying to control the state - this is an issue of a pastor trying to fulfill his duties according to the teachings of the church both he and Kennedy belong to. Bihop Tom tried to keep this as a private matter, and knowing him personally in the years well before he was a bishop, I do not doubt his sincerity. But the point is this - if you're a person of faith, specifically the Catholic one, abortion has eternal implications that cannot separate oneself from, even if the courts refuse to decide when life begins, or choose a point after conception.

I don't claim to know when life begins personally, but without a clear understanding herself, the Catholic Church has chosen to go with the earliest possible moment under the idea of being "better safe than sorry". If you claim to believe in the teaching authority of the Church, as membership implies, you take a big risk spiritually the further if you push the starting point of life to the right pass conception. If you're a public figure using your membership in the church to gain political legitimacy with certain groups of voters, or even if you have no such selfish motivations for making your faith public, to promote a position on a life and death issue contrary to church teachings increases the spiritual risks for you, as well as millions of others that you may mislead by inferring that Catholics condone abortion. This is the point Bishop Tom was trying to make -PRIVATELY.

It's important to note that Bishop Tom did not forbid Kennedy from receiving communion - he asked the Congressman to refrain on his own as a matter of personal conscience. If Kennedy came to Tobin himself at Mass, he would still receive communion. Tobin is not trying to act as Kennedy' judge, he is trying to remind him that Catholics believe that they are ultimately answerable to a higher authority than either the US Constitution or the Catholic Church, neither of which can or do claim perfection.

Had to defend Bishop Tom on this one, and for your info, I am no longer a member o the Church because I differ on the Church's teachings on divorce, and ironically, I object to the Church's position on denying communion to those who fall outside certain criteria (we don't need to protect the almighty creator of heaven and earth from anyone). But Fr. Tom is not trying to impose church control on a politician; he's trying to get a follower to take personal responsibility for his faith. That' what I did, and it meant that I got out, still believing in God and the overall goodness of congregations of faith, but recognizing that they, like any human institution, are imperfect. I removed myself from membership out of respect for my differing personal beliefs, which I take ultimate responsibility for. Maybe Kennedy should do the same if he thinks the Church is wrong – or even wrong enough - on this one.

Dave L of PA 12:51PM February 07, 2010

What kind of nurse was Annamay? Surely not in a maternity ward? There are many reasons why some women can never safely be mothers. Some women are too young or too old. There are diseases of bones, hearts, kidneys, liver & other organs. Some parents carry genetic disease & should never reproduce. Some men are wife beaters & won't be good fathers. Some conceptions begin in brothels. Neither parent wants them so they're given for adoption, without telling adoptive parents their source. Ban-Abortionists criticize eugenics efforts, to "breed the best." But Ban=Abortionists run their own negative eugenics experiment. They keep in the gene pool the DNA of those I mentioned. They preserve DNA of people who are mentally ill but not confined. Some conceptions are ectopic. They fasten outside the womb & must be aborted. Ban-Abortionists make taxes higher when poor, religious unwed moms do not abort. It costs us $500,000 to give them welfare, ADC, food stamps, health care & subsidized housing. She can add as many more as she wants & we're stuck with each one for l8 years. Bishop Tobin does not have a secular education, but was limited to seminary training, so he attacks Kennedy with this terrible blackmail. He should be defrocked.

auradawn veirs of CA 3:10AM November 30, 2009

Where was the Catholic churches public statement when the priest who baptized my kids in RI in 1989 was later caught stealing parishoners contributions from the church? Then when he was later brought into court to testify for a drug addict at the Von Bulow trial. Because of the publicity the church transfered him to Texas so the talk would just go away. Years later it surfaced he abused young alter boys there on Texas and then it was found he also may have done similar things in RI as a priest. He continued as a priest this whole time. He later died of aids in a nursing home, and I heard they defrocked him while he was there at the nursing home. Good timing to finally say something don't ya think? What do you call a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion...I think the bishop should be careful who he calls a Hypocite.

Bill H of RI 9:18PM November 29, 2009

I address this mainly in response to "CW of CA." It is precisely this type of ignorance and illusory pride that undermines the foundations of religious freedom and civil tenets of American society. The issue at hand is very clear: either Patrick Kennedy is correct in his assertion that disagreement with "Catholic hierarchy" makes him no less a Catholic, or Bishop Tobin is correct. They cannot both be correct. The kindergarten Catholic knows that life and human individuality is held sacred from conception. Hear endeth the lesson for Congressman Kennedy. Also, Christ never promised that members of HIs church would not be sinners, but He did promise that the gates of hell would not prevail against His church. Can you possibly understand the difference?

So now back to the essential point: Do you know who you owe the Bible to, CW of CA? The Roman Catholic faith and its Judaic foundation. Without what is now known as the Roman Catholic faith, the founding fathers of the Church, who all were part of the Universal (or Catholic) Church established by Christ, the countless monks and apostolic "hierarchy" that you oppose so egregiously, the Bible as you know it would not exist. If you do not know that, then you are not in touch with reality or history. Further, your detractive and calumnious remarks about Pope Benedict are careless, reckless and unworthy of attention, other than to point out that it is a violation of the law of God as conveyed to us in the commandments to bear false witness. It states clearly in the New Testament that every idle word you say will be judged. Think, before you care to comment. Be sure to have facts, for without them, your voice is like the irrational sound of a deranged mind sounding off and dissipated in the wind because it has no one to speak to and no element of lasting truth in its syllables.

John Ray of FL 7:20PM November 25, 2009