Chicago Bishop Makes Bad Call in Senator Durbin Award
The decision to honor Illinois Senator Dick Durbin with an award from the Archdiocese of Chicago, despite his long-standing pro-abortion record, is a scandalous affront to Catholic doctrine and a betrayal of the Church’s moral authority.
Catholic clergy, parishioners and members of the pro-life community were outraged when Chicago Archbishop Blase Cardinal Cupich announced plans to present Durbin with a Lifetime Achievement Award. Although Durbin has succumbed to pressure and decided not to accept the award, the controversy has exposed a moral duplicity on the part of the Catholic Church – and Pope Leo.
The award is said to be for his advocacy on immigration reform – but “lifetime achievement” suggests a broader recognition. Also, his support of the Democrats’ open borders policy – which has brought death, abuse and hardships to tens of thousands of migrants – seems hardly worthy of any award.
The award was to be presented at the archdiocese’s ironically named “Keep Hope Alive” celebration. The backlash was swift and fierce. Bishop Thomas Paprocki of Springfield, Illinois—Durbin’s home diocese—publicly condemned the decision, reiterating that Durbin has been barred from receiving Holy Communion since 2004 due to his unwavering support for legalized abortion.
This controversy reached the Vatican, where Pope Leo XIV weighed in with a tepid defense of the award. He stated that it was important to consider the “overall work” of the senator, citing his decades of service and support for immigrants. The Pope’s remarks make no sense. Critics of the award were the ones considering Durbin’s “overall work”.
Leo echoes the same equivocation that plagued Pope Francis—an unwillingness to enforce Church law when it comes to abortion, a sin so grave that many theologians consider it grounds for automatic excommunication. According to Catholic doctrine, the sin is so grave that it separates the person not only from the Church, but from the loving grace of God.
Let us be clear. Abortion is not a political issue. It is a moral one. The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches unequivocally that abortion and abortion advocacy aree “grave offense” and a violation of the Fifth Commandment— “Thou shalt not kill.” To honor a politician who has consistently voted to expand abortion access is to undermine the credibility of the Church’s teaching on the sanctity of life. It sends a dangerous message that political expediency and social activism can excuse even the most grievous moral transgressions as defined by the Catholic Church.
Durbin’s record on abortion is not ambiguous. He voted against bans even on gruesome late-term abortions (which more than 90 percent of Americans oppose), supported federal funding for abortion providers, and opposed conscience protections for pro-life medical professionals. These positions are not compatible with Catholic teaching. Bishop Paprocki rightly stated that Durbin is “unfit to receive any Catholic honor,” and that honoring him would cause “grave scandal”.
The scandal is compounded by the fact that Pope Leo, an Illinois native, chose to defend the award rather than uphold the Church’s moral standards. His comments suggest a troubling trend among Church leadership—a preference for dialogue over discipline, for inclusivity over integrity.
This is not an isolated incident. The Catholic Church has long struggled with how to handle pro-abortion politicians who profess the faith while publicly defying its fundamental teachings. President Biden, a self-described “devout Catholic,” has never been admonished by Pope Francis. In fact, Biden was warmly received by Francis, who never raised the issue of abortion in conversations with the President. After their last meeting, Biden claimed that the Pontiff told him that he was “a good Catholic”.
But some cardinals have taken action. Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone of San Francisco barred former Speaker Nancy Pelosi from receiving Communion in her home diocese. Other politicians who have faced Communion bans or public rebukes include Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, Governor Gavin Newsom of California, and former Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts.
These politicians often invoke their Catholic identity while promoting policies that directly contradict Church doctrine. They claim to be personally opposed to abortion but continue to actively support abortion-on-demand. This moral compartmentalization is not only intellectually dishonest—it is spiritually corrupt. It confuses the faithful and erodes the Church’s witness in the world.
Cupich’s justification—that the award was solely for Durbin’s work on immigration—is disingenuous. The Church cannot separate a politician’s record into morally acceptable and unacceptable compartments. Catholic social teaching is holistic. It demands a consistent ethic of life—from the unborn developing human being.
Despite Durbin’s decision to decline the award, the damage to the Church has already been done. The controversy has again exposed deep divisions within the hierarchy and raised serious questions about the Church’s commitment to its own teachings. As the rhetorical question goes: Who will heed an uncertain trumpet?
If the Church is to remain a moral authority in the modern world, it must speak with clarity and conviction. It must hold its members—especially its public figures—accountable to the truth. It must not honor those who promote what the Church defines as grave moral evils, no matter how laudable their other achievements may be.
This particular controversy exists because the Catholic Church, itself, declares abortion among the most serious of moral transgressions and yet compromises on an issue in which there is no compromisable position. To allow people to take comfort in their personal religion while rejecting one of its supposedly strongest moral tenents of that religion, creates moral relativism. Inconsistency in opposing abortion essentially puts the Catholic Church in the awkward position of essentially supporting abortions for lack of opposition. The faithful deserve better.
So, there ‘tis.
Remember when we respected each other independent of our opinions on the issues of the day. Fuck that in Trumpistan.
“If the Church is to remain a moral authority in the modern world, it must speak with clarity and conviction. It must hold its members—especially its public figures—accountable to the truth” says the author with God only knowing what “accountable” means.
Don’t know Hoirst’s religion, if he even has one, but he is divorced which in Catholicism means “the Catholic Church views marriage as a permanent, God-created covenant, but recognizes separation or civil divorce may be necessary for safety and legal reasons, such as abuse or adultery, while upholding that the bond remains unbroken.” Gee, sounds like Durbin’s stand on abortion. Durbin feels “The Catholic Church views marriage as a permanent, God-created covenant, but recognizes separation or civil divorce may be necessary for safety and legal reasons, such as abuse or adultery, while upholding that the bond remains unbroken.” Go figure. And if Larry did remarry, hopefully he annulled the first one with the Church or else he’s in perpetual sin. It’s OK, confess, a few hail marries and all is forgiven.
I realize that Horist tends to grade “moral transgressions,” but really, how about we judge the entirety of the man? Makes me wonder how this righteous, moral, religious, man who judges others freely really feels about sexual abuse, defamation, tax cheating, and ripping off customers and workers alike, for a lifetime. Oh yeah, he votes for him. Three times.
“The Church cannot separate a politician’s record into morally acceptable and unacceptable compartments.” But Horist can. And does. A lot. You should see what he advocates for the brown people, most of who are devout Catholics.
Frank Danger … The commentary was about abortion and the Catholic Churches official position — and its failure to enforce its most serious laws Since you could not figure it out on your own, I will explain — accountability would be excommunication until the apostate repents. Not sure how you got so confused — ranting about divorce and my religion. And your nasty unjustified racist insult (also off topic) was so typical of you. Where you weaving, old man, or just not able to maintain a train of thought or make a cohesive argument?
Sorry Larry, I agree, my story was a very poor response. Thanks for the info and I doubt excommunication has any effect except personal.
I must have fat-fingered that second quote about Durbin’s abortion views which he said are: “The Supreme Court held in Roe v. Wade that the Constitution protects the right to have an abortion. The decision to have an abortion is a deeply personal one that is best left to a pregnant person—not judges or politicians. For nearly 50 years, millions of Americans have had the right to make the decision about how and when to expand their families.” Seems spot on to me but was the heart of my piece and missing makes it poor from the git go.
No rant, just noting as a divorced person, you are less than devout in the Catholic order and doomed if you marry again without a Church annulment. As in most things, Catholic forgiveness that has yet to be extended to abortion. Hey, is Durbin even Catholic? Did you do a similar “rant?” But in terms of divorce, Catholics sort of split the baby, they disavow divorce and consider legally divorced folks still married turning a blind eye to the legal reality. It’s a weird way to accept but not accept at the same time. But because of that, you cannot be remarried in the Church unless the Church provides an annulment, a process I am sure oh so many divorced couples would pursue. Fun facts: used to be 50K annulments per year, no below 30K, as people avoid Church marriages. US used to be more than 50% of world annulments and around 90% of annulments go through, so not so bad a grilling, I guess.
Nasty? According to experts, the term “brown people” is only considered nasty in context, same with the term being considered racist. We see it used all over the place, especially now. They are not a race; they are Caucasian it’s an ethnicity. But you know that. Nasty is what Trump is doing to them and how he is doing it. There are numerous better ways to accomplish his goals. E-Verify is the best and easiest and the bipartisan law has been waiting for a vote forever. Johnson and Thune should get it done. Pretty sure we are still allowed to say black people too. And let’s face it, no one is going to be called racist for saying white people. But in the case of what I said, I am pretty sure anyone who looks Latino is living in fear right now, citizen or not. And I am pretty sure these citizens don’t feel any safer for being legal
Frank Stetson … This is not a round of quibbling with you. That requires time I do not wish to waste. But when you attack me through you imaginary Larry Horist, I feel a need to expose you dishonesty. I was never married in a catholic church. Episcopal — and the first marriage was annulled on the basis of my wife abandoning me and the children. Frankly, I never asked for the annulment. The church insisted. Durbin’s religions is irrelevant. For the record, he had a Catholic education. Cannot say where he is on religion at this time. “Brown people” is not a racist term, but you use it to imply racism. And, or course, who have dishonestly called me a racist several times. Whatever faults I many have, racism is not one of them. But that is the Larry Horist of your imagination — the straw man you use to misinform.
“Frank Stetson … This is not a round of quibbling with you.” Lawrence, what a gracious way to accept my apology, a ranting quibble where in your normal dismissive way you get all defensive and whiny. Again, where’ the attack? Where did I call you a racist? Where did you “expose you dishonesty?” Although not quite sure what you mean by that turn of a phrase.
And, I spell my name: Danger, which has one less letter, easier to spell. And I am frank which rubs against some of the more sensitive amongst us.
Also, glad you belong to a religion that recognizes the right of women to make informed decisions about their pregnancies but accepts you and your position as well. It was my Baptism church too, but lapsed many years ago to more modern faiths. Gotta love those red doors.
Again, “Sorry Larry, I agree, my story was a very poor response. Thanks for the info and I doubt excommunication has any effect except personal.” And I will add, sorry you got abandoned too, hopefully, at least, you saw it coming. Surprises are the worst. Although not much experience with it, don’t do that in our family. We mate for life, and then some :>) I mean my grandmother threw my grandfather out, but they still stayed together, apart, for the rest of their lives. Strict Catholics from the old country.
As to the rest, to use a favorite Trump administration adult response: FO.
I like Durbin’s stand on abortion, am glad you belong to such a woke church, too bad you can’t agree with their acceptance of a woman’s right to control her body, her life, her future. Hopefully with the full support of her partner or spouse. The Episcopal Churches stand on abortion is spot on, although evolving.
Nice not talking to you, as always. Be better to have an actual discussion, but I do understand.
Racism? Surely you jest?
Are you not an advocate of the Trump forced deportation policies and all that it entails?
Who do you think is being targeted? How do you rhink they are being targeted if mot skin color first, tats second.
If you support these policies, tis you that is racist.
Hey Dunger. Fuck you and your race card. So forced deportation is racism? Good!!! Bring it on. Why not say that cops are racist because buckwheat and rastus don’t want to get into the police cars? But I’m glad that you are free to post your thoughts. I strongly disagree while saying “fuck you and your commie cult. But what is great is that we are talking out country back from wetbacks who have no legal right to be here
If you bring the bipartisan e-verify bill to a vote; the undocumented will be unable to work, unscrupulous employers will be unable to hire them. And over 13m will no longer be able to work in this country.
Yeah, it’s that easy. And we can save all this money we are wasting on Trump’s cruelty circus.
And then we can get back to focusing on the remaining ones who have criminality as their advocation.
There is no “brown people” race. Except to racists that equate off-white as not being Caucasian. But of course those racists are not educated enough to begin with. Fyi: brown folks are the same race as we white folk. Mostly Catholic too.
Then again, who cares. The fact is Trump is profiling brown people, especially brown people with tats. And apparently any tat will do.