Fr. Moloney's melodramatic malarkey

Here is one the strangest things I read this past week, from LifeSiteNews.com:

The Catholic faithful from around the world who protested against the lavish public funeral of the late, notoriously pro-abortion Senator Edward Kennedy were self-righteous "holier-than-thous" who lacked compassion, writes Fr. Gerard Moloney in an editorial of the October issue of the notably liberal Reality magazine.

Moloney, a member of the Redemptorist religious order and editor of Reality, said that when it was announced that the funeral was to be held in a Redemptorist church in Boston, the order started receiving numerous calls and emails from Catholics protesting the funeral.

The messages, said Fr. Moloney, "were not only angry - they were hate-filled; they dripped with righteous indignation."

...

Moloney singled out US canon lawyer Edward Peters, a notable defender of the Catholic Church's teaching on life and family issues who had criticized the manner in which Kennedy's funeral was conducted, calling his tone, "So sanctimonious, so judgemental, so self-righteous. Not much charity or compassion there. No sense of the possibility of redemption."

Uh, what exactly did Fr. Moloney read by Dr. Peters? Was it this, penned by Peters on August 27th?

Now, any man with a 100% rating from NARAL (to highlight just the tip of the iceberg of Teddy's decades-long campaign against natural rights) has, to put it mildly, the burden of proof in seeking a Catholic funeral (okay, technically, his executors have the burden of proof, but you see the point) in that notorious pro-aborts seem to be "manifest sinners who cannot be granted ecclesiastical funerals without public scandal of the faithful."

Unless, that is, "they gave some sign of repentance before death." And there is at least some evidence that Ted Kennedy did just that.

Mark Leibovich of the New York Times notes that, among things, "The Rev. Mark Hession, the priest at the Kennedys' parish on the Cape, made regular visits to the Kennedy home this summer and held a private family Mass in the living room every Sunday. Even in his final days, Mr. Kennedy led the family in prayer after the death of his sister Eunice . . . [and when] the senator's condition took a turn Tuesday night a priest, the Rev. Patrick Tarrant of Our Lady of Victory Church in Centerville, was called to his bedside."

Folks, my reading of the canonical tradition behind Canon 1184** says that those actions suffice as "some signs of repentance", making Ted Kennedy eligible for a Catholic funeral. Of course I wish that Teddy's repentance, if that is what it was, had been more explicit, for the scandal the man left was enormous and demanded great atonement in this life (or more dreadfully in the next). But on the narrow question as to whether Edward Kennedy is eligible for a Catholic funeral, the information before me suggests that he is, and that a bishop who permits such rites can find support in the Code of Canon Law for his decision.

If so, one has to wonder how well Fr. Moloney comprehended the plain meaning of Dr. Peters' text or how sincere he was in accurately conveying it. Not surprisingly, Dr. Peters—who is a friend of this blog and who was my canon law professor—has responded:

At first, yes, I was angry: accused of taking a position on an important ecclesiastical matter that I never took, and in fact, one I had repeatedly argued against!

Next, I was sad, sad that a Catholic priest and religious, editor of what I assume is a respected Catholic publication, would so meanly rebuke another in obvious disregard for what that other had actually said on the matter.

But finally, as the cleric parlayed his gross mistakes about my alleged position on Ted Kennedy's funeral into an attempt to cast blame on folks like me for -- are you ready this? -- the Irish clergy and religious child sexual abuse scandal (!), I ran out of emotions, and now feel, I dunno, nothing.

Read his entire post, and ponder the question, "Who is really being so sanctimonious, so judgemental, so self-righteous?"

Comments

[Dan Deeny]

Fr. Moloney seems to be yet another troubled Catholic priest. Let us pray for him and for ourselves.

[Nancy]

Those who profess to be Catholic know that all those who Walk in The Spirit, choose Life, and any act that is not oriented to the Will of God, is not an act of Love to begin with.

Failing to always live our Lives according to The Truth and asking for God's Forgiveness is not the same as denying that The Truth is The Truth.

[Robert J. Stipp]

They can't refuse him a church burial one week and show up for the reading of the will the next, now, can they?

[LJ]

I seriously would really like to hear how Fr. Moloney gets from perceived opposition to and criticism of Kennedy's funeral liturgy to the Irish abuse scandal.

I've thought about it and the only way I could possibly follow that train of thought is by wide vague generalizations, and even then it would be a stretch.

Very odd indeed. As to the funeral in question, I accept Dr. Peters Canon Law explanation and conclusion. As to non-Catholic friends who are scandalized I compare it to the Catholic funerals of Mafiosa. We can't read the heart. Although it could be argued that the political stance on abortion of such a high profile and respected politician may well have led to far more deaths than any Mafia godfather could ever contemplate.

But that is to rehash the debate.

[thomas]

We, too often, are involved in items that should not merit this much attention.The funeral is over and the choice was made.
Focus instead on God's mercy as it may relate to you and your's. He has already been judged and by now knows when life begins.

[Carl E. Olson]

Surely, Thomas, you don't think we should give people—priest or otherwise—a free pass when it comes to false witness? This is not so much about Ted Kennedy, but about a priest making false and rather slanderous accusations against a well-respected canon lawyer. That warrants the attention it is getting here.

[LJ]

One way that can help to understand the Church's thinking as represented in Canon Law is in the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard. Matthew 20:1-16. That comes directly from Jesus Christ.

There was a time in the early days of the Church when penance was very public and very heavy, and as a consequence there were some people who "converted" but waited till the end of their lives to be baptized. A calculated risk and one which would seriously cast doubt upon their genuine repentance for sin. But again, God knows the heart.

Thomas, you are right that by now Ted Kennedy knows the truth. But the entire episode should not be let slide, regardless of how we view the Bishop's decision. There is a great waft of scandal, in and out of the Church, and we must ask at the very least, how it is possible that a man who defies unequivocal Church teaching could carry as much political sway as he did, and could get away with the public self representation as a son of the Church all the while, regardless of any change of heart along the way.

It seems to me that the only way he could get by with that is if many Catholics were ignorant of the teaching of the Church, or defiant themselves. So, in a sense, the moral of the story is that there a lot of Catholics, perhaps all of us, who can share the blame for the harm to unborn children that can be honestly said is a huge part of the legacy of Ted Kennedy. And the lesson is that if Catholics were simply faithful to the teaching of the Church regardless of political ideology, such people as Kennedy would not have been given such positions of influence, or would have been shouted down in protest if they claimed to faithful to the Church while acquiecsing to and promoting the murder of babies.

And we know there are many others of a high political profile who claim to be "devout" Catholics who carry the same pro-abortion banner. Ted Kennedy was probably the most influential for the longest time but the over-arching issue is still very much on the table and will continue to be.

[Jack]

Moloney's article brought to mind Archbishop Burke's recent speech.