Archbishop Cupich on Face the Nation: A Mixed Performance

By Dr. Jeff Mirus ( bio - articles - email ) | Dec 02, 2014

We can learn something about the new archbishop of Chicago, Blase Cupich, from how he answered the questions posed to him during the November 30th episode of Face the Nation. Guests on this program must be evaluated through a kind of television-induced haze of graciousness. The utility of such programs is very limited when the beliefs of the hosts and the guest are seriously different. In such situations, most of us try to be inoffensive while seeking common ground.

Our news story highlighted the question of whether Archbishop Cupich would withhold Communion from pro-abortion politicians. But if you read the entire transcript of the closing segment, you will see that he was also asked about his style of ministry, the Francis effect, immigration, same-sex marriage, clerical sexual abuse, and racial unrest in Ferguson, Missouri.

The Church’s stand on gay marriage joins the problem of communion for pro-abortion politicians as a key indicator of episcopal faith and discipline. On the latter, Cupich shied away from making reception of the Eucharist a battleground for politicians. Most bishops display a similar reluctance, partly because denial of Communion to those who advocate a political position will always be misconstrued in our culture as the Church meddling in politics.

Instead, Cupich emphasized the healing power of the Sacrament. Unfortunately, this approach obscures a pressing need for the sacramental discipline required in the Code of Canon Law. Such discipline is enormously clarifying. Ideas do have consequences, and sacramental discipline forces public advocates of evil to confront the implications of their position for their union with Christ and the Church.

Therefore, the best thing that can be said about the Archbishop’s response is that he refused to take the bait of classing the potential denial of communion as “politicization”. He also implicitly acknowledged that political support of abortion is wrong: “My hope would be that [Eucharistic] grace would be instrumental in bringing people to the truth.”

On gay marriage, he did better. Without commenting on the intellectual, moral and ontological  emptiness of gay marriage, Archbishop Cupich focused on the unique and privileged position of one man and one woman united in marriage in order to bring children into the world. He shrewdly framed the question in terms of the protection a sound society ought to demand for this privileged union, given its fundamental importance to the human race. Consider this exchange:

Question: “I understand the church's teaching, but just to be clear, so you do think there should be legislation to protect the parents who are bringing children into the world and caring for them that are in same-sex relationships?”

Answer: “Well, but no. I'm saying that the people who bring children into the world are [a] man and a woman in their own love.”

In “facing the nation”, Archbishop Cupich did not speak with maximum clarity. Nor did he take every opportunity to explain the moral law or the teachings of the Catholic Church. Conciliation seemed to come naturally; going on the offensive did not. But for a sound-bite conversation it was not all bad. It is true that he was not particularly forceful, but neither did the hosts of the program succeed in making him accept their categories. When pushed, the Archbishop of Chicago pushed back.