Chicago Cardinal George Asked if He’ll Seek to Deny Communion to Governor Pat Quinn Over Gay Marriage


Chicago Cardinal Francis George, who released a letter in church bulletins throughout the Chicago Archdiocese on Sunday condemning the state's same-sex marriage law, was asked if he'll seek to deny communion to three of Illinois' most prominent Catholic lawmakers, the Sun-Times reports:

Quinn“What’s the point of talking?” George told a Sun-Times reporter Sunday after Mass at St. Genevieve Parish, on the city’s West Side.

He made the comment after being asked specifically whether he would seek to deny communion to the trio of Chicago Democrats: Gov. Pat Quinn, who’s expected to sign the bill into law this week, as well as House Speaker Michael Madigan or Senate President John Cullerton.

Further commentary would be “creating a story of good guys and bad guys,” the cardinal said, adding that he feels his words are “sliced up without nuance.”

“So, I don’t see any point in talking,” George said.

Messages left with representatives of all three elected leaders were not immediately returned Sunday night.

George had said in his letter that the new law would " contribute over the long run to the further dissolution of marriage and family life, which are the bedrock of any society.”


  1. HadenoughBS says

    Is there any more explicit Christian hate-mongering than that offered by Catholic leaders like this Chicago Cardinal? Of all the examples of Christian love they should teach their parishoners, why are hateful messages directed toward the LGBT community foremost among them?? This is a prime example of Christ’s love toward humanity???

    The Papal hierarchy is a sick and twisted bunch in spite of what the new Pope Francis preaches to his flock.

  2. Kevin says

    With Cardinals like this,I’m still amazed our local priest hasn’t been defrocked for openly stating his pro-gay marriage views.

  3. Hey Darlin' says

    If you are going to stop talking then please stop talking.

    No church has any business attempting to influence politics in a self serving manner. They also have no business standing in the way of the progress of equality or making a mockery of equality in order to further their own multiple agendas. If they want to become a political machine and use their funds to provide influence they do need to pay taxes.

  4. Jack M says

    Yes, there’s no point in talking, because the Cardinal is obviously a hate-monger who doesn’t want to be called out on his BS. Guess he missed that little message from the Pope.

  5. Onnyjay says

    I think the gov and anyone with a functioning cerebral cortex should boycott “the church” until those elderly drag queens pull their collective head out of their collective arse.

  6. anon says

    It’s long been noted that church rhetoric fails to overcome its political instincts. The church rarely “punishes” politicians for their anti-church voting records or political views out of fear of political retribution, so in reality it would seem they don’t believe their own rules deep down.

  7. simon says

    Why is he afraid to spread “God’s words”? That’s an unholy thing to do. Where is his “conviction”?

  8. @jamal49 says

    Canon Law does not permit that the Cardinal deny communion to a practising Catholic who might be a politician who performs his duties as an elected official to carry out secular law.

    But, should he choose to do so, then I say it is high time that the Catholic Church and ALL christian churches be taxed.

    You want to practise your “deeply-held spiritual beliefs”, then by all means, please do. However, once those beliefs interfere in secular administration, then expect that your tax-exempt status shall finally be revoked.

  9. says

    There were similar “threats” made to Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin when he supported and pushed-through the federal legislation legalizing marriage for gay couples. Many non-bigoted denominations took the opportunity to extend to him, and any other canadians with consciences, the invitation to join their Affirming congregations.

    But this act of “shunning” so to speak is so prototypically ugly from conservative religious groups – punish those who are doing their jobs, attempt to make them pariahs, exclude exclude exclude. The exact opposite of everything that Jesus fella is attributed to practicing.

  10. iowan says

    just a point of note for you ‘tax experts': Churches, as are many non-profits, are awarded CERTAIN tax exemptions that vary state-to-state. You might be surprised to learn that churches often are required to pay most taxes any other business has to pay. And some non-profits are exempted from many more taxes than churches are. So, taking away the particular tax exemptions that churches can get isn’t all than onerous of a punishment. AND, would you please let that old-tired-overused line die… you sound silly and petty (and probably don’t know much about the actual tax situation).

    Mr. Towle – would you please move to a comment system like Disqus (or any others of note) that allows some moderation and feedback. It would be nice to have a voting ability, where once a threshold is met, down voted responses are no longer visible unless an individual wants to torture oneself and view them. Thanks! :)

  11. simon says

    In its heyday, the Roman Church was so full of themselves that they frequently used excommunications, interdicts etc against kings and emperors who dared to stand in their way.
    These are serious matters in those days which were equivalent to a death sentence. Even this moron sensed that the reporter was making fun of him by asking the question.

  12. Bill says

    @iowan: those voting systems can result in the comments reflecting “group think” as people with an agenda flag comments they simply don’t like, even when the comments are non-inflammatory and raise interesting points. An interesting point doesn’t have to be right to be useful as long as it is not right for reasons that end up helping improve your understanding of some issue or topic: for example, Einstein raised some objections to quantum mechanics and figuring out why those objections were not valid substantially improved our understanding of that subject.

  13. iowan says

    @Bill – what you say has merit. I also might advocate that the ‘group think’ process would benefit the majority the most by helping to keep the trolling and meanness at bay. If a move in the positive direction has some drawbacks, they can be worked on . Right now, with no action taken, nothing will improve as there is no vehicle to make it possible. Let’s try something and make adjustments where necessary. :) Inaction is often the worst choice, and too often chosen.