Joe Scarborough Hits Vatican Consultant for Call to Deny Communion to Gov. Cuomo
By Matt Hadro | February 23, 2011 | 18:13
MSNBC's Joe Scarborough, who was raised a Baptist, criticized Dr. Edward Peters, a Vatican canon law adviser, Wednesday on "Morning Joe," for his call to deny Holy Communion to a public figure who is living "in violation of a fundamental moral expectation of the Church."
"Deny Communion? I'm sorry, and not to get religious here, but Jesus said, you know, 'I didn't come here to heal the healthy,'" Scarborough trumpeted from his soapbox.
"Why don't they first open the books on past priests who have victimized children?" columnist and "Morning Joe" regular Mike Barnicle chimed in, following Scarborough's lead.."That shows rigor. That would be a mistake," CNBC anchor Jim Cramer lampooned the Church.
The issue at hand is not a matter of whether Dr. Peters is "butting in" and questioning Cuomo's faith or unduly condemning him. The Catholic Church's Code of Canon Law 915 explicitly states that those "who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin, are not to be admitted to holy Communion."
Dr. Peters told CNSNews.com in an interview that Cuomo, who himself is divorced and lives with his divorced girlfriend, is living in a state of "public concubinage" and adultery – gravely sinful and a state that excludes someone from receiving Communion. In addition, Cuomo supports abortion and gay marriage – both serious issues that are in direct opposition with Church teaching.
The story the panel was discussing was first reported Monday by CNSNews.com, a division of the Media Research Center, the parent company of NewsBusters. It was then picked up by the New York Times Wednesday and appeared on page A18 of the print edition. Scarborough reported the story in the bottom half of the 6 a.m. EST hour.
Gov. Cuomo attended a Sunday mass in January in the state capital, which was celebrated by the Bishop of Albany, and received Communion. Dr. Peters then referenced the incident on January 4 on his canon lawyer blog and called for Cuomo to be denied holy Communion.
"The governor, with complete freedom, is publicly acting in violation of a fundamental moral expectation of the Church," Peters wrote in an e-mail to CNSNews.com. "On these facts alone, his taking holy Communion is objectively sacrilegious and produces grave scandal within the faith community."
UPDATE: Ken Shepherd of NewsBusters also reported Whoopi Goldberg lashing out against Dr. Peters on ABC's "The View."
A transcript of the segment, which aired on February 23 at 6:24 a.m. EST, is as follows:
JOE SCARBOROUGH: The New York Times – a consultant of the Vatican's highest court is calling for Gov. Andrew Cuomo – uh – to be denied Holy Communion. The reason – because he lives with his girlfriend, Food Network celebrity Sandra Lee, without being married to her. Yes, I uh, I'm just not going to go there because I know Sister Margaret's probably watching and I –
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: You know, it's an interesting debate.
SCARBOROUGH: Right. Deny Communion? I'm sorry, and not to get religious here, but Jesus said, you know, "I didn't come here to heal the healthy." You know, it's like all of sin and falling short of the glory of God, to throw another one out there the people in the Vatican should know, and I think they should worry about themselves.
BRZEZINSKI: Again, you're so Clarence Thomas. What's the other side of the story?
MIKE BARNICLE: Why don't they first open the books on past priests who have victimized children –
SCARBOROUGH: I don't want to – I didn't want to –
BRZEZINSKI: You know what?
JIM CRAMER: That shows rigor. That would be a mistake.
BRZEZINSKI: It's just – there is another side to the story.
(...)
BRZEZINSKI: No, I was actually going to speak up for the Catholic Church. But that's okay, we'll do that later.
SCARBOROUGH: I love the Catholic Church.
- Matt Hadro's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Comments
I guess it's time to start
Submitted by Miss_Me_Yet on Wed, 02/23/2011 - 6:22pm.
I guess it's time to start questioning Barack & Michelle about their 20 plus years with front row seats in Rev. Wright's cult. I know, I know neither one inhaled.
Liberals ... we can't live with them, they couldn't survive without us ...
Stupid is as stupid does
Submitted by Thoreau on Wed, 02/23/2011 - 6:48pm.
Scarborough must think God is based on a Democracy. Sorry, but he doesn't get a vote. The Commandments are literally carved in stone. Jesus was very clear about that situation.
The woman at the well- remember that one? Maybe you don't.
I have no idea if Baptists even read the bible. I just see them flopping around in their seats most days. Or did that offend them? I'm sorry. Was the funky chicken in the Bible? Oooh.. did I offend them again. Shucks. Yes, I realize that's Southern Baptists, but who cares. 6000 flavors and nobody has their story straight.
Scarborough, stick to what you're good at, being a RINO. Leave Judeo-Christian law to people that were actually there.
Thoreau
Submitted by sentry_99 on Thu, 02/24/2011 - 9:13am.
I do take offense to your comments about Baptists. I have no idea why you even brought it up other than to be an azzhole.
I thought it was humorous and
Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Thu, 02/24/2011 - 9:48am.
I thought it was humorous and I be a Southern Baptist. Seems like all the people at my church and all the churches I have been in are sinners ... gasp. If we cant make fun of ourselves then its no fun. But, it seemed he was describing Pentecostals due to them flopping around. Most of the Baptist churches are pretty uptight and we act more like puppets; up and down and then parade to the alter then back ... dosie do.
Heal the healthy?
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Wed, 02/23/2011 - 6:48pm.
I'm sorry, Joe, but I just can't seem to find that Scripture.
Is it in the book of Hussein?
its
Submitted by TruthMonger on Wed, 02/23/2011 - 7:02pm.
its this...
http://bible.cc/matthew/9-12.htm
"On hearing this, Jesus said, "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick."
Congratulations Jimmy Carter!
But Jesus always required
Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Wed, 02/23/2011 - 9:26pm.
But Jesus always required faith to heal someone.
not up for a vote
Submitted by MidAmerica on Wed, 02/23/2011 - 6:55pm.
These chatterboxes are all off base. This isn't specifically about a teaching of Christianity. This is about a rule set by the Catholic Church. If people want to be Catholics in good standing then they obey the rules. if not, there are plenty of protestant denominations where they can receive communion, no questions asked.
Apparently plenty of Catholic
Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Wed, 02/23/2011 - 9:28pm.
Apparently plenty of Catholic Churches also.
If you want to be a member...
Submitted by onomatopoeia on Wed, 02/23/2011 - 7:15pm.
...you must be willing to follow the rules. This pertains to any organization. I've always maintained that one cannot be a member of an organization - be it a Church or a Fraternal Organization, etc. - and tell them that you will be a member, but not uphold what the organization stands for and its rules. People like Scarborough do not have even a basic understanding of what "Church" is, let alone pontificating (no pun intended) on how a church deals with its membership. Such ignorance and arrogance is endemic in our society. This is one way that the Catholic Church shows to the world that The Body of Christ (the church) is and has always been counter-cultural, at least where it hasn't allowed the tenets to be diluted by the lure of The World.
One thing is for sure, denying a persistant, public sinner at least gives a person a chance to repent, whereas, in the religion that is out-of-bounds to criticism, one would be beheaded or stoned to death!
Oh, dear, dear, dear
Submitted by CO2Maker on Wed, 02/23/2011 - 8:23pm.
"...you must be willing to follow the rules. This pertains to any organization. I've always maintained that one cannot be a member of an organization - be it a Church or a Fraternal Organization, etc. - and tell them that you will be a member, but not uphold what the organization stands for and its rules."
But that's what a number of universities try to do when they insist that a student organization accept someone as a member who doesn't support the core beliefs of the group, such as a Catholic student group that is required to admit an open advocate of abortion or gay marriage.
------------------
FWIW, the group that commands the greatest admiration is usually the group with the stringent admission policies. To receive Communion in a Catholic service, one must be Catholic, not just a baptized Christian (e.g., a visiting Protestant). To receive communion in an Episcopal church, one only needs to be a Christian (as I heard it announced at several Episcopal churches I attended); likewise for other Christian denominations.
Remember the discussions among the Greek proselytes mentioned in Acts and some of the epistles? They were interested in becoming Jewish, and the big question for them was "Do we have to be circumcised? Really? Please say no!"
How little they understand the Catholic church
Submitted by octavioj on Wed, 02/23/2011 - 7:28pm.
I always find it amazing these people fail to do some basic discussion and comprehension about Catholic teachings. They only show their simple minds that they cannot make a simple research into Catholic teaching.
You know
Submitted by Ozconservative on Wed, 02/23/2011 - 7:29pm.
You know......unlike ol' Joe here, you never seem to find a liberal that says they're a liberal but act like a conservative. As much as I detest them, at least they're true to themselves.
Popping off
Submitted by KC Mulville on Wed, 02/23/2011 - 7:48pm.
Joe thought about the issue for ... thirty seconds ... and pronounced his judgment on a Catholic sacrament. Then he said he didn't want the church to say anything about sin, because, you know, we're all sinners.
Does it get any more shallow than this?
In most cases, when someone speaks with confidence, you're lured into the assumption that they must know what they're talking about. But when they pop off about stuff they know nothing about, and yet speak with that same confidence, you realize that they don't know anything about politics, either. They just speak with utter confidence, unsubstantiated by any proof or evidence.
Joe needs to keep his mouth. He proves his ignorance every time.
And don't you love his
Submitted by motherbelt on Wed, 02/23/2011 - 8:46pm.
And don't you love his reasoning?
You know, it's like all of sin and falling [sic] short of the glory of God,
True, but Matthews interprets that to mean that there should be no rules, or at least no consequences for not following them.People like Joe Scarborough like to think that because God loves us He doesn't care what we do.
God is a loving father
Submitted by KC Mulville on Thu, 02/24/2011 - 1:38am.
And as we all know, loving fathers smile at their children all the time, no matter what, and never would criticize, or ... um, admonish ... or yeah, um ... well maybe some of the time ... oh never mind ...
Media vs. the Catholic Church
Submitted by Crumpets on Wed, 02/23/2011 - 8:22pm.
I was always taught not to open my mouth about things that I know nothing about. These people know nothing about the Catholic Church and they show that by what they say. Then they always have to bring up the sex abuse if they have nothing else to slam the church on. But they never mention that a child is more apt to be molested by a family member, a teacher or a protestant minister than they are by a Catholic priest. They are ignorant and even worse, they don't know that they are ignorant.
What did Rumsfield call that?
Submitted by CO2Maker on Wed, 02/23/2011 - 8:36pm.
"They are ignorant and even worse, they don't know that they are ignorant."
What did Rummy say about that? Oh yeah, the unknown unknowns, the things that we don't know we don't know.
Joe, you know nothing about the Catholic church
Submitted by WarEagle01 on Wed, 02/23/2011 - 11:37pm.
For Catholics, there are strict rules for taking communion. If one doesn't like them, one is free to find another church. I've attended a Catholic church for years, but have never taken communion. Why? Because I haven't yet been taken into full communion.That's just the rule and I respect it. (BTW, I hope to rectify this situation on Easter Sunday). Scarborough's comments display a remarkable ignorance of and disrespect for a faith he claims to "love."
Welcome Home WarEagle01
Submitted by John F. Kennedy on Wed, 02/23/2011 - 11:49pm.
Welcome Home WarEagle01
Congrats
Submitted by GW on Thu, 02/24/2011 - 8:53am.
I converted and got Confirmed on Easter Vigil 1999. I first met my wife the following Easter vigil. And let's not forget that a certain Joseph Ratzinger was born on an Easter Vigil.
If there's a debate on Canon Law between Ed Peters and
Submitted by GW on Thu, 02/24/2011 - 9:03am.
almost anyone else ...I'm going to put my money on Ed Peters.
http://www.aodonline.org/SHMS/Faculty+5819/Edward+Peters+13692/Edward+Pe...
Dr. Edward Peters, one of the most widely-known lay canon lawyers in North America, joined the graduate faculty at Sacred Heart Major Seminary in 2005 with his appointment to the Edmund Cardinal Szoka Chair.Born and raised in St. Louis, Missouri, Peters went to Saint Louis University on a musicianship award, majoring in Political Science (B.A. 1979). He became active in pro-life activities and Catholic discussion groups and for two years was a member of the schola cantorum of Msgr. Martin Hellriegel's renowned Holy Cross Parish in North St. Louis. Peters next attended the University of Missouri at Columbia School of Law where he took his J.D. degree in 1982. He was a Superior Oralist in Tate Hall's Moot Court, received a teaching assistantship in the law school's Legal Research and Writing Program, and began writing for religious and legal journals. After completing civil law school, he worked for two years in California for educational and Catholic television projects.
In 1985 Peters began studies in canon law at the Catholic University of America in Washington, DC. He earned his licentiate degree (J.C.L.) in 1988 and was the first canon law student to be named a Johannes Quasten Fellow at CUA. He completed doctoral course work in 1990 and defended his dissertation "Penal Procedural Law in the 1983 Code of Canon Law" in August 1991.
For the next ten years Peters served variously as diocesan Vice-Chancellor and Chancellor, Director of the Office for Canonical Affairs, Defender of the Bond, and Collegial Judge for diocesan and appellate tribunals in the Dioceses of Duluth (Province of St. Paul/Minneapolis) and San Diego (Province of Los Angeles). Throughout this time he continued writing for a wide variety of religious and secular publications (his articles and reviews have since appeared in some fifty publications) and served as canonical consultant to numerous ecclesiastical institutions and persons. During this same time, in addition to several years of adjunct teaching in canon law for pastoral and graduate programs through the University of Dallas, Peters made dozens of appearances in Catholic and secular media explaining the interplay between Church law and life.
From 2001-2005 he taught canon law and liturgy/sacraments with the (Graduate) Institute for Pastoral Theology in Ypsilanti, Michigan. These same years saw the completion of his 1917 Pio-Benedictine Code of Canon Law in English Translation (2001), the re-publication of his Annulments and the Catholic Church (2004), and the release of his textual history of the 1983 Code, Incrementa in Progressu 1983 Codicis Iuris Canonici (2005). Peters maintains a prominent educational website dedicated to ecclesiastical law, www.Canonlaw.info.
Dr. Peters and his wife Angela have six children, several godchildren, and through PIME Missionaries of Detroit, they sponsor two children overseas. Their family interests include American Sign Language, chess, astronomy, classic cinema, and good books.
What this biography seems to miss is that Dr. Peters was recently named as a consultant to the Vatican, the only Lay canon lawyer to have that honor.
http://www.jimmyakin.org/2010/05/i-want-a-word-with-dr-edward-peters.html
"In a move recognizing a canonist held as one of the nation’s “premier” specialists in church law, the pontiff named Dr Edward Peters — the discipline’s lead hand at Detroit’s Sacred Heart Major Seminary — as a referendare of the Apostolic Signatura, a consultant to the church’s highest court. (One now, of course, led by its first-ever American prefect.)
A blogger and father of six beyond the classroom, the honor for a layman is unique — Peters becomes the lone non-cleric among the dozen or so consultors. What’s more, the four priests likewise added to the group this morning are all based in Rome or Milan."