St. Louis Archbishop, Raymond Burke, Affirms That Pro-Abortion Politicians Should Be Denied Communion; "Catholics" For A "Free Choice" & Cardinal Theodore McCarrick Are Not Happy About It

St. Louis Archbishop, Raymond Burke has reaffirmed his position that pro-abortion politicians should not receive the Holy Eucharist.

Here's the story: Bishop preaches tough Communion rule

Here's a quote:

St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke, a veteran of clashes between Catholic bishops and politicians, has attempted for years to enlist fellow bishops to deny Holy Communion to wayward politicians. Now, the conservative cleric is invoking the church's highest punishment -- mortal sin -- to persuade the lay and ordained Catholics who distribute Communion at Mass to safeguard the sacrament.

Drawing on the works of the late Italian Jesuit scholar Felice Cappello, Burke says those ministers are "held, under pain of mortal sin, to deny the sacraments to the unworthy."

That argument could place Communion ministers on the frontlines of the "wafer wars" as the 2008 presidential race heats up, and as bishops debate a document on "faithful citizenship."

"It is clear that church discipline places an obligation on the minister of Holy Communion to refuse Holy Communion to persons known, by the public, to be in mortal sin," Burke writes in a new journal article.

Burke lays out his case like a legal brief in Periodica de re Canonica, a journal widely read in seminaries and published by Rome's Pontifical Gregorian University, an elite school for Catholic clergy.

"No matter how often a bishop or priest repeats the teaching of the church regarding procured abortion, if he stands by and does nothing to discipline a Catholic who publicly supports legislation permitting the gravest of injustices, and, at the same time, presents himself to receive Holy Communion, then his teachings ring hollow," Burke writes.

A former top official in the Signatura, the Vatican's high court, and a noted expert in canon law, Burke previously has kicked off public debates over policing the Communion rail. While bishop of La Crosse, Wis., he ordered clergy to refuse to offer the sacrament to certain pro-abortion-rights politicians.

In 2004, Burke and a handful of other bishops said they would refuse Communion to presidential hopeful Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass. Burke also said Catholics who voted for pro-abortion-rights politicians, such as Kerry, should refrain from taking the sacrament until they confessed their "mortal sin."

Archbishop Burke's position is in line with Pope Benedict XVI's comments on the subject as Cardinal Ratzinger.

Yet Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, the former ordinary for Washington D.C., is not happy about Archbishop Burke's statement. (This is probably because Cardinal McCarrick is very close to Senator Edward Kennedy and other key Democrats and he, and other leaders within the Church in the United States, know that denying Holy Communion to pro-abortion politicians will primarily harm Democrats and they don't want to hurt their favorite political party.)

"Catholics" For A "Free Choice", a group of dissenting "Catholics" is also unhappy with Archbishop Burke.

Here's that part of the story: Former Catholic Cardinal, Pro-Abortion Group Blast Communion Denial Quote

I wonder what Roger Cardinal Mahony, who opened the 2000 Democratic convention with a prayer (although he did pray for the unborn in that prayer), and who has honored pro-abortion politicians, including Bill Clinton; San Francisco Archbishop, George Niederauer, who refuses to deny Holy Communion to Nancy Pelosi and says he doesn’t know Ms. Pelosi's stance on abortion; Washington D.C. Archbishop, Donald Wuerl, who will also not prevent Nancy Pelosi from receiving Holy Communion; and Orange County Bishop, Tod Brown, who has given Holy Communion to pro-abortion Democratic Representative, Loretta Sanchez, and is reportedly on excellent terms with Ms. Sanchez, think about all of this.

Any thoughts?

Comments

[carolg]

I don't care what "Catholics" for Free Choice think. They are about as Catholic as Satan.

I will never understand why they insist on trying to be Catholic when they insist supporting abortion. If they want abortion on demand, that's one thing but then embrace what that is: humanism and paganism. What are they afraid of? Losing their excuse to go shopping at Christmas time?

Even people who HATE the Catholic Church know very well her teaching on abortion. If you ask people at Planned Parenthood what the Church teaches on abortion, they can tell you very plainly. How can "Catholics" for Free Choice claim to not have clarity on the issue?

And you'd have to live under a rock to not know what Nancy Pelosi thinks on the matter. The Archbishop doesn't want to stand up to her, that's all, and the sad thing is everybody knows it. Including every other pro-abortion politician out there.

[CatholicCrusader]

I am so envious of the people who live in the Archdiocese of St. Louis. They have an authentic Catholic shepherd in Raymond Burke, who is unafraid to speak up and proclaim Church teaching and let the chips fall where they may. Meanwhile, on the West Coast, we have horribly bad bishops who gambol in the gutter with homosexual drag queens dressed as nuns and who cynically send those who know too much off to Canada where they’re out of reach.

Bishops in California knowingly collaborate with “Catholic” politicians who brazenly support murdering unborn babies. Is collaborate too strong a term? No, because by giving these unrepentant public sinners Holy Communion, they confer a patina of respectability and give cover to the likes of Nancy Pelosi. Speaker Pelosi can then give television interviews where she can pretend to be a Catholic, and shame George Bush, claiming that she prays for him and “for the children.”

I see through this cheesy, insincere bleeding-heart liberal, and she makes my skin crawl, even as George Bush is far from being my favorite politician. Unfortunately, the American people, who are good for the most part, are a terribly ignorant lot because they don’t read, and thus are taken in by the phonies.

Imagine for a moment what the news in recent weeks would have looked like if we had good bishops like Archbishop Burke on the West Coast. Archbishop George Niederauer would have refused to give Communion to the “Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence,” because he would have had no fear that someone in the local gay community could retaliate by outing someone in the hierarchy or telling what they know about the Lavender Mafia. Bishop Brown would have said, “I’m going to get to the bottom of this once and for all,” and forced Monsignor John Urell to complete his depostion. Brown could have insisted on cleaning up the diocese and getting the whole truth out — that is, if his “Covenant With the Faithful” was worth the paper it was printed on. And Niederauer and Brown, along with Cardinal Mahony, would refuse Communion to pro-abortion politicians and threaten to excommunicate them, denying them the cover of claiming to be Catholics in good standing.

I keep praying for this to happen. Say, isn’t it time a co-adjutor was named for the Diocese of Orange? Brown is getting up there in age. I have a few good bishops in mind.

[carolg]

"Unfortunately, the American people, who are good for the most part, are a terribly ignorant lot because they don’t read, and thus are taken in by the phonies."

Catholic Crusader - I think this covers a lot of people but I think a lot of people like being fooled. We all have the natural law written on our hearts but some people just like to look the other way because it's easier.

[Bladerunner]

Oops--you forgot to ask what New York Cardinal Edward Eagan was thinking about this. You know, the Cardinal who counts amoung his sheep Rudolph Giuliani, the Republican presidential candidate whose pro-choice position on abortion rights was described by Providence Bishop Thomas Tobin as "pathetic, confusing and hyprocritical."

[A Simple Sinner]

"I don't care what "Catholics" for Free Choice think. They are about as Catholic as Satan."

Agreed. I go one step further: "Catholics" is a misnomer in two ways - it implies a plural membership and it implies that you can be Catholic and hold such views. As odd and inconfuent as "Catholics for Islam" or "Catholics for Atheism". Whatever.

In fact Francis Kissling - a one time 6-monther at a convent decades ago does, by her own admission, NOT attend Mass anymore, and it is pretty much a memberless organization propped up on grants from the Playboy Foundation.

That is right brothers and sisters, it is fueled and funded by the grand Hugh Hefner - America's favorite octagenarian teenage boy. (I have to say that it is funny to see him in his pajamas these days - at his age, it is mighty age appropriate!)

[A Simple Sinner]

"Bishops in California knowingly collaborate with “Catholic” politicians who brazenly support murdering unborn babies. Is collaborate too strong a term? No, because by giving these unrepentant public sinners Holy Communion, they confer a patina of respectability and give cover to the likes of Nancy Pelosi. Speaker Pelosi can then give television interviews where she can pretend to be a Catholic, and shame George Bush, claiming that she prays for him and “for the children.”"

You got that right! The value of the photo op is one that can't be measured. There is a good reason such prelates love to have their pic taken with the Pope... And there is a good reason pro-abortion politicians like their photos taken with Catholic bishops.

[CatholicCrusader]

Carolg –

You’re quite right. There are other kinds of Catholics. There are liberal Kool-Aid drinkers who provide an amen corner for the bad bishops and priests, no matter what they say. They’ve bought into the idea that nothing matters, nothing is intrinsically wrong, nobody is evil as long as you and they LOVE everyone. Love, love, love! But Our Lord also said, “If you love me, you’ll keep my commandments (John 14:15.)”

Commandments? We still have to follow those? You better believe it!

Some of these Kool-Aid drinkers know precisely what they’re doing, and others are know-nothings. They’re closely related to the Clock-Watcher Catholic, who still goes to Mass, but is mostly thinking about where he’ll go for brunch afterwards. This type loves, too — loves to be done with Mass and on to brunch and his couch, or perhaps a golf game.

It’s hard to get these people to resist or not to be taken in by the phonies.

[BMP]

Hello again, could someone update me as to the vernacular? What's a "Kool-Aid drinker"?

[A Simple Sinner]

FROM WIKIPEDIA:

The idiomatic expression, “drinking the Kool-Aid”, was originally a reference to the Merry Pranksters, a group of people associated with novelist Ken Kesey who, in the early 1960s, travelled around the United States and held events called “Acid Tests”, where LSD-laced Kool-Aid was passed out to the public (LSD was legal at that time). Those who drank the “Kool-Aid” passed the “Acid Test”. “Drinking the Kool-Aid” in that context meant accepting the LSD drug culture, and the Pranksters’ “turned on” point of view. These events were described in Tom Wolfe’s 1968 classic, The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test.[4]

It is also now closely associated with the 1978 cult suicide in Jonestown, Guyana. Jim Jones, the leader of the Peoples Temple, convinced his followers to move to Jonestown. Late in the year, he then ordered his flock to commit suicide by drinking grape-flavored Flavor Aid laced with potassium cyanide. In what is now commonly called the "Jonestown Massacre," a large majority of the 913 people later found dead drank the brew. (The discrepancy between the idiom and the actual occurrence is likely due to Flavor Aid's relative obscurity, compared to the easily recognizable Kool-Aid.) The precise expression can be attested in usage at least as early as 1987[4]. One lasting legacy of the Jonestown tragedy is the saying, "Don't drink the Kool-Aid." This has come to mean, "Don’t trust any group you find to be a little on the kooky side," or "Whatever they tell you, don't believe it too strongly."[5]

[BMP]

Thanks Simple, very informative.

-BMP

[Tomor]

Thank God for Archbishop Burke. Remember during the English Reformation, of the 32 Bishops of England, only one -- John Cardinal Fisher -- refused to sign the Oath of Allegience which unlawfully declared King Henry the head of the Church of England. John Fisher paid the price at the Tower of London when his head was cut off.

[LouisM]

This is the era of the ambivalent Church. The ranks of the clergy, especially senior clergy such as bishops and cardinals, are ambivalent to the Church teachings and laws, and therefore those of Christ. Why? Fear. Fear of losing that cherished interaction with high ranking politicians. Fear of being ridiculed and criticized as Archbishop Burke. Fear of losing parishioners for telling some what they don't want to hear. In short, many among the leadership of our Church are moral cowards.

[Patricia (Texas)]

Love Archbishop Burke and wish all the bishops and clergy in the United States had his backbone for doing right!!

[Constantine]

Thank God for Archbishop Burke? Are you kidding? This is the man who excommunicated an entire parish of Polish Catholics because they wouldn't pay $9 million in ransom! Despite a centuries old agreement between the archdiocese of St. Louis and one of its parishes, an agreement abided by cardinals and previous archbishops, this archbishop saw dollar signs. When his bullying didn't work, he excommunicated the entire parish. You see, in his theology, $9 million is worth a lot more than a few hunderd souls!

Thank God for Archbishop Burke? This is the man who withdrew his support of the Cardinal Glennon annual fundraiser for poor children. This is the event where nationally known celebrities DONATE their time to help raise money for the poor of St. Louis. When the archbishop found out one of the performers was pro-abortion, he picked up his marbles and went home. Never mind the chance to minister to a lost soul! Never mind the chance to show us how to minister to lost souls! Never mind the poor kids! And so predictably, the president of a Catholic
seminary, writes an editorial in support of this travesty because the archbishop must avoid the "appearance of impropriety"! I don't know about you, but I sure am glad that Jesus didn't avoid the "appearance of impropriety" or none of us would be saved!
Don't be fooled. With Archbishop Burke, its all about posturing - and not about pastoring.

[carolg]

Constantine, you wrote:

"This is the event where nationally known celebrities DONATE their time to help raise money for the poor of St. Louis. When the archbishop found out one of the performers was pro-abortion, he picked up his marbles and went home. Never mind the chance to minister to a lost soul! Never mind the chance to show us how to minister to lost souls!"

I would like to re-direct your thinking if I may. If these celebrities wanted to do something for children, how about supporting their right to LIVE.

I find it ironic that you are upset with the bishop for pulling his support out of a children’s charity event where the major contributors of time and money are ardent supporters of the idea that children can be killed if their existence is inconvenient to others. I think you should be upset with the celebrities for claiming to want to help children but at the same time sanctioning their death.

And do you think these celebrities were doing this event out of their altruistic sensibilities? Do you deny there was any posturing on their part? You don’t think their PR people would circulate their actions all over the place trying to make them look pro-child when they in fact are pro-abortion? The very thing you accuse the Archbishop of (and we can’t judge the motivation of ones actions they way we can judge their actual behavior) could be the very thing the celebrities were doing.

And as far as this goes:
“Thank God for Archbishop Burke? Are you kidding? This is the man who excommunicated an entire parish of Polish Catholics because they wouldn't pay $9 million in ransom! Despite a centuries old agreement between the archdiocese of St. Louis and one of its parishes, an agreement abided by cardinals and previous archbishops, this archbishop saw dollar signs. When his bullying didn't work, he excommunicated the entire parish. You see, in his theology, $9 million is worth a lot more than a few hunderd (sic) souls!”

I have no idea what in the world you are talking about. Maybe you could fill us in.

[Constantine]

Carolg,

Thank you for your comments. I must deduce from them, however, that you are not familiar with the Archdiocese of St. Louis or its history.
So, if you will permit me a few brief notes as they relate to our interchange. John Cardinal Glennon was the head of the Archdiocese from
1903 until 1946. (He was named a cardinal in 1945.) In 1956, the Cardinal Glennon Memorial Children's Hospital was opened and is a teaching
arm of St. Louis University. In order to raise funds the hospital, with the support of national celebrities, some of whom are St. Louis natives
the hospital puts on an annual event to raise money for poor children in St. Louis who need, but cannot afford, health care. The event is a
hallmark and raises large sums for this very worthy charity. At the most recent gala, Bob Kostas, the St. Louis native turned national sports
announcer was the emcee and another celebrity, the one that raised the ire of the Arb. was recording artist Sheryl Crow. Apparently Ms. Crow
is misguided in her views about abortion. My point is that, rather than find an opportunity to pastor her (you can think here of Jesus and
the Samaritan woman if you like) the Arb. makes a nasty, public exit that cast a pall over the whole event. This, of course, caused great confusion
for the organizers of the event and provided a heyday for the local media. None of which cast a positive light on the Archdiocese, the archbishop
or the church.

As for the second event I mention, you can read about the history of St. Stanislaus parish in St. Louis here: http://www.saveststans.org/. As
I mentioned previously, this parish had an agreement with the Archdiocese dating back to the 19th century which allowed it to operate with a
lay board of directors. The parish operated peacefully and successfully through eight successive reigns of archbishops and cardinals for more
than 125 years, but when it was discovered that their assets recently exceeded $9 million and the archdiocese needed the money to pay for - yes, you
guessed it - sex abuse claims!, the gloves came off. (Now, to be fair, there may be other issues involved but the fact remains that the Arb.'s
excommunications coincide nicely with the sex abuse scandal. And none of his seven predecssors focused on this issue when St. Stan's didn't have
any money.) And the end result is he got neither the money nor the parish!!! This is apparently entirely consistent with his previous history
in Wisconsin which well suited him to be the head of the modern Inquisition. (I know, I know, its now called the Office for the Doctrine of the Faith.
But a rose by any other name....) Arb. Burke is a "prince of the church" in the true Machiavellian sense.

To add insult to injury, as I mentioned earlier, the president of a local Catholic seminary wrote an op/ed supporting the Arb. in his withdrawal from the fund raising event. His rationale was that the Arb. could not endure the "appearance of impropriety" by associating with sinners. How wonderfully ironic, because if Jesus had had the same view, He wouldn't have met with the woman at the well, or with tax collectors or left Heaven to save us!

So, Carolg, I hope that provides a little more background and I further hope that it will help guide your thoughts. All the best to you.

[carolg]

Constance, thank you for your response but I still think you may be over-reacting to the Archbishop’s handling of the fundraiser.

It is both ridiculous and disgusting to me to have a children’s healthcare fundraiser supported by pro-abortion people. To me, it makes no sense. It doesn’t matter how poor the kids are or how much a part of the community this event is – I would never seek help from an ardent abortion supporter like Cheryl Crow to raise money for a children’s health care charity. The truth of the matter is there are many pro-life people who would serve just as well in this position. And forgive me, but if the organizers of this event were embarrassed, they should have thought of the conflict they were creating in the first place. Is it possible they were so taken in by the ways of the world and what they thought worldly ways could do for them, and wanted to raise as much money as possible that they were willing to compromise or ignore some basic principles? I don’t know – it may have been an honest oversight on someone’s part too but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t have been challenged. The organizers of this event should have planned better, known better and should do better next time.

The Archbishop could have tried to reach out to Cheryl Crow but I doubt she would change her mind at all, let alone before the fundraiser. So you would still have the same situation. Also, none of us know what went on behind the scenes. But I think you’re being a little wide-eyed to think if he had just had the right approach to her the situation could have been fixed where everyone was happy and no principles were compromised.

There is something else I hope you come to terms with as well. You wrote:
“None of which cast a positive light on the Archdiocese, the archbishop
or the church.”
You may be relieved to hear that you are wrong. Archbishop Burke was a shining example of what strong leadership looks like. As you can see there are many people who wish we had a bishop who had the guts to stand up and do the unpopular but right thing – especially when it comes to life issues. The Archdiocese to me and to many became a beacon of light for truth and the hope for many Catholics. When you count your blessings, the fact that he is your bishop should be one of them.

As for the other situation you mention I don’t know enough about it to comment but I can say and I’m sure you agree that it’s always sad when a house of God closes.

[james rich]

Constantine,

You've lost the argument, in my opinion. Why does the Catholic Church put its approval on an event put on by a group that is at odds with its morality? The celebrities can raise their money however they want, and the Church can keep her good name by withdrawing its approval. What on earth is wrong with that?

And if this is your reading of the celebritz fundraiser event, then I can only surmise that your reading of the Polish Church thing must be equally tainted. At least, this is my suspicion.

[Constantine]

Carolg,

You wrote:

"The Archbishop could have tried to reach out to Cheryl Crow but I doubt she would change her mind at all, let alone before the fundraiser. So you would still have the same situation."

Your assessment of the Arb.'s skill in evangelizing, not to mention the Holy Spirit's, is very dismal. I wonder what would have happened if Jesus would have tried your approach.

"Well, you apostles can try to reach out to the lost, but I doubt they'll change their mind at all. So you will still be in the same situation." Better just go back to fishing. Forget the whole thing. The lost will have to stay lost. Oh, well. It's his JOB to be a pastor. It's his JOB to be a shepherd. It's his JOB to seek the lost - whether or NOT they change their mind.

You wrote, further:

"As you can see there are many people who wish we had a bishop who had the guts to stand up and do the unpopular but right thing –
especially when it comes to life issues."

As I mentioned earlier, the Arb. has an interesting record of "standing up". He "stands up" to John Kerry, whose bishops along with himself ignore the Arb. He "stands up" when he sees $9.5 million he'd like to have. But he does not "stand up" when he could pastor a young lady who's on the wrong path.

As far as "life issues" goes, saving the poor children of St. Louis who have no health care is a "life" issue. Raising money so the doctor's in that Catholic hospital can find more cures - is a life issue. Raising money so that a Catholic hospital can stay open is a "life issue".
But when the Arb. of the diocese that both founded the hospital and the university of which it is a part withdraws his support of these "life issues", so he can "show them", well, that's a dead issue.

James, I'm sorry that you've missed the point.

You wrote: "Why does the Catholic Church put its approval on an event put on by a group that is at odds with its morality?"

The "group" that put on the event is the Catholic Church, through its Catholic Hospital which is part of the Catholic University in St. Louis.
It's an annual fundraiser that has been going on for years. That's why the Catholic Church approved it - it's a Catholic event!

So I hope that un-"taints" your suspicions.

Peace to you both.

[A Simple Sinner]

Constantine, I think I get it.

The ends will always justify the means! Right?

[Joe]

AB Burke does it again ::three cheers::

[carolg]

Constance,

You wisely use Our Lord as the example for all of us to evangelize. I would like to direct you to Matthew 23; Matthew 15:1-15 and Matthew 12:34 . . . these are just a few passages I could find in one gospel in a few short minutes . . . there are many more I could find if given the time.

When you read these passages, you may wonder to yourself, why isn’t Jesus trying to evangelize? He’s being so mean. He’s calling people fools and hypocrites and there are exclamation points involved. He’s calling people a brood of vipers and asking them how they are going to escape the wrath of hell – why isn’t he trying to use a better approach and win them over?

Our Lord is the Incarnation of perfected goodness, patience, kindness and love. Do you think that if He had the right approach, He would have converted the Pharisees, who were His sworn enemy and wanted to kill Him? If there were anything that could have been done to convert them, Christ would have done it. Christ is the perfect evangelist. Clearly there are times when you have to stand up to something that is wrong and you have to draw a line with people. Our Lord gives us these important examples for more than one reason. First, some things need to be said or done for others who are listening or watching. And second, things may need to be said or done in a way that outwardly appears harsh in order to impress upon someone or many people the severity of what they are doing, and that can lead to their conversion.

This is not a perfect analogy but you asked why isn’t your Archbishop being more like Christ by trying to ‘be nice’ and evangelize, and my response to you is that he is following Our Lord’s example very well.

Cheryl Crow can have whatever silly opinion she wants when it comes to abortion. But there is a very important principle at stake here. This was an event that was Catholic or supported by the Catholic Church to raise money for children’s health. And when we in the United States have, by some estimates, 1.5 million abortions a year the issue of abortion can not be overlooked – but especially as it relates to children’s health care. When every third or fourth baby in this country is being picked off by a brutal violent death we all, but especially Catholics, have to fight abortion at every turn. Abortion is intrinsically evil – it can never be justified, supported, condoned or have it’s evil minimized. And yes, that means that when you have a children’s fundraiser for a Catholic hospital or whatever the case was, you don’t want public, ardent abortion supporters like Cheryl Crow headlining it. Don’t you see how that undermines basic Catholic principles?

I don’t think Cheryl Crow will change her mind when it comes to abortion but I could be wrong. But you don’t know that this incident couldn’t play a hand in her having to, at the very least, examine her position on abortion, which could lead to her changing her mind. And yes, it is a quality of life issue, and maybe a matter of life or death for the kids in the hospital. Neither myself, nor anyone else on this blog, thinks that those kids shouldn’t have a first class fundraiser but at what cost do you raise the money? Let me go to some extremes to prove my point: should they have wet t-shirt contests? Should they have Larry Flint come talk and ask people for money with a bunch of his honeys? How about have Planned Parenthood pitch in? Where would you draw the line? I’m sure they can get just as much money if not more by using someone who is pro-child for their fundraiser!

The Archbishop is responsible for all the souls of St. Louis whether they are Catholic or not. He has to send a clear message to everyone that support for abortion is intolerable. If there was any hope for Cheryl Crow to change her position on the matter, I’m sure he would have welcomed her conversion with open arms. I hope you will realize he did the right thing. God could very well reward the show of faith with a windfall of needs being met at the hospital. His ways are above our ways; His thoughts are above our thoughts. It would be foolish to waver from Him and His ways.

[thetimman]

For anyone else reading this thread, I am a St. Louisan and can assure you that Constantine's account of the St. Stanislaus situation is not correct. Archbishop Burke did the right thing there, too, and the former parish continues to slander him.

We love the Archbishop, and his actions in that matter were perfectly consistent with the rest of his actions, that you have read about. Rest easy. Pray for the excommunicated St. Stan's board and those who support them. They need our prayers-- for conversion.

the archbishop shoud be ashamed of him self,after all the polish people went through during and after ww2.

[ECMO1]

Don't say "We" when describing St. Louisan's affection for our "shepherd" Burke. His lack of compassion and bullying tactics have alienated more than you expect. Our late Holy Father Pope John Paul II found compassion in his heart to meet and forgive the man who tried to kill him. Burke, however, cannot find the courage to descend from his throne on Lindell Boulevard and resolve a dispute with a parish board of faithful Catholics. "Save St. Stanislaus!" That's not just some slogan worn on buttons...It's a prayer for Burke to do his job as shepherd of this flock.