For years, Catholic politicians have struggled to rectify their political views with their spiritual lives.But most ignore questions about what political aims Catholic clergy and theologians should have and whether the church should have any political aims to begin with.Believers who support denial of communion to politicians who support abortion rights tend to suggest that letting those politicians off the hook when it comes to communion contributes to an apathetic societal demeanor to voters’ moral responsibility.But what about Catholics who supported the Iraq War, even as two popes condemned it? And why not deny communion to “pro-lifers” who have taken part in a divorce or used birth control?Denying communion based on voting records creates a double standard — a standard that should be applied not just to Catholic politicians on both sides of the aisle but also to Catholic voters.The ethical dilemma arises as to whether politicians who support capital punishment — including Gov. Bobby Jindal — should be denied communion.Some Catholics feel that because support for abortion rights is not in line with Catholic doctrine, it constitutes grounds for the denial of communion. In the sacrament of communion, Catholics believe Jesus’ body and blood are present in the bread and wine presented by a priest at the altar. Catholics believe this act does not represent a symbol, metaphor or idea. They believe they observe Jesus’ actual presence in the Eucharist.In explaining why the Eucharist is the climax of Catholic spiritual life, former Pope John Paul II explained in “Theology of the Body” that communion was the spiritual equivalent of sexual climax between married partners.So communion is a pretty big deal.The Eucharist can be denied to those a priest considers unworthy because, in the Church’s eyes, to be unfit for communion is to be unfit for family life.Beliefnet.com, a Christian news Web site, explained that those who formally cooperate in evil — or those who permit evil to occur, directly or indirectly — are guilty of sin and should not receive communion.When Big Ben was still a cardinal, he claimed in a letter to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops that issues like capital punishment and warfare don’t carry the same moral weight as sins like abortion and euthanasia. Consequently, abortion has priority over all other political issues in the Catholic world.Using the Eucharist as a tool to influence policy corrupts the sacrament of communion as it manufactures confrontation at the altar of God by using Jesus’ body as a weapon.If the Eucharist is a reflection of Jesus’ sacrifice for humanity, then Catholics hoping to receive communion should look to emulate that sacrifice. With no intention of making a sacrifice so that others might live, Catholics should refrain from receiving communion until they are prepared to foster a culture of life at the two extremes of life — birth and death.Prohibiting abortion and the death penalty are not the best ways to foster that culture. In fact, they’re quite the opposite. Excluding warfare — which creates an entirely new and unrelated set of dilemmas — life cannot be defended by taking life.Catholics, individually and collectively, must consider how much of their own lives each is willing to sacrifice so that others might live.As the Catholic News Service made apparent, denying communion because of political views generates the misperception that abortion and capital punishment are exclusively Catholic issues.Without educating Catholics about Church legislation, Catholics can’t expect others to understand their apparent hypocrisy.Section 2270 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the authority on Catholic teaching, explains human life must be protected and respected absolutely from the moment of conception.In his encyclical “The Gospel of Life,” John Paul II stated that execution is only appropriate in cases of absolute necessity, or “when it would not be possible otherwise to defend society.” He added that steady improvements in the penal system make such cases almost nonexistent.Catholic priests should not be held responsible for deciding who is worthy of communion — they can’t know each individual member of their flocks. Instead, that burden should shift to participants. The unworthy should refrain from presenting themselves for communion rather than forcing priests to make that decision.Daniel Lumetta is a 22-year-old mass communication senior from Metairie.– – – -Contact Daniel Lumetta at [email protected]