c. 2005 Religion News Service

VATICAN CITY _ When Archbishop William Levada, the Vatican’s doctrinal watchdog, urged a synod of bishops to weigh in on how the Roman Catholic Church should confront politicians who profess the faith but defy its moral teachings, many expected a chorus of input to ring through the assembly hall.

What Levada heard instead was the echo of a few Vatican officials accompanied by the sound of silence from bishops around the world.

The question of denying Communion to wayward public figures may seem essential to Levada, the former archbishop of San Francisco, and to many Americans with fresh memories of Sen. John Kerry’s run-in with Catholic authorities during the 2004 presidential race.

But the issue seems remote to the hundreds of bishops gathered in Rome to advise Pope Benedict XVI. Lately their focus has been less on withholding Communion than on finding ways to broaden its distribution despite an ongoing global priest shortage.

“This is a time of sharing problems and situations, so there is no time to discuss it,” said Cardinal Telesphore Placidus Toppo of Ranchi, India, describing the Communion debate as “a problem for the episcopal conferences to discuss in detail.”

According to Toppo, the policy of the universal church is unambiguous: Deny Communion to no one, even public figures who contradict church teaching.

“The church’s position is clear. Whatever position a politician takes, he takes at his own risk,” Toppo said in an interview. “Who is in a state of holy grace to receive Communion? Only the person knows. If he considers himself worthy, I don’t think anyone can refuse him.”

The synod Post Discussion Report, released Thursday, recorded that three of a total 256 synod participants substantively engaged Levada’s request, noting “the grave responsibility of legislators and those who govern above all.”

In an interview, veteran synod participant Bishop Donald Wuerl of Pittsburgh described the option of withholding Communion from politicians as an “isolated matter” that reflected a “non-traditional approach, and it hasn’t garnered a lot of support.”

“I don’t think this is something we’re hearing (about) in other countries and other parts of the world,” said Wuerl.

Despite the dearth of commentary, however, few believe that the issue is going away.

Thursday, the synod concluded its discussion phase, breaking into small groups to formulate their final message to Benedict. Whether that message will recommend stiffening the church policy depends largely on which prelates are making their voices heard over the cacophony of synod topics.

Apart from Levada’s appeal, the other synod responses happened to come from two influential Vatican cardinals who used their 6-minute speeches to push for greater activism.

“Can we allow access to Eucharistic communion to those who deny the human and Christian principles and values?” asked Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo, president of the Pontifical Council for the Family, addressing the synod Oct. 7.

Trujillo said any attempt to tackle the issue on a “circumstantial” case-by-case basis would lead to confusion among the faithful.

“These problems need to be clarified and illuminated by the word of God in the light of the Magisterium of the Church,” he said.

Opus Dei Cardinal Julian Herranz, who is president of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, echoed Trujillo in his Monday (Oct. 10) address arguing that there are “cases of outward conduct that is seriously, clearly and steadfastly contrary to the moral norm and that impedes access to Eucharistic Communion.”

Both Vatican cardinals are natives of Spain, a predominantly Catholic country that finds itself increasingly in conflict over church teaching on a number of moral issues.

Under the leadership of Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, the Spanish government recently legalized gay marriage and the adoption of children by gay couples.

Spanish church leaders held a high-profile demonstration against Zapatero’s reforms this summer, but there haven’t been any reports of Spanish bishops withholding Communion.

Denying Communion would also have explosive consequences in Italy, where center-left politician Romano Prodi, a publicly devout Catholic and a supporter of abortion rights, is challenging Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi for power in 2006.

“It’s not surprising that there’s been no response” to Levada, said Alberto Melloni, a church historian at the University of Modena in Italy, noting that many bishops are reticent to take on a potentially divisive issue.

(OPTIONAL TRIM FOLLOWS. STORY MAY END HERE.)

Archbishop Raymond Burke of St. Louis, for example, has not received resounding support for his decision to deny Communion to Kerry, D-Mass., a Catholic, during the 2004 election.

In separate interviews, Wuerl of Pittsburgh and William Skylstad, president of the U.S. Bishops Conference, both described the taking of Communion as an individual decision that should not be overruled by bishops.

“The great tradition of the Church has been that a person who presents himself or herself for Communion is responsible before God for the rightness or wrongness of that act,” Wuerl said.

Bishop Paul Kouassivi Vieira of Benin, Africa, said he believed the synod would address the issue more carefully in the coming days.

“It is true there is a problem of consensus,” he said. “But this is a problem that the universal church must confront. It’s not just an American problem.”

In his home diocese of Djougou, Vieira said, politicians who defy church teaching usually avoid Mass by their own volition.

MO/RB END RNS