Editor's Note: To submit a faith question to Catholic Exchange, email href=”mailto:jtaylor@catholicexchange.com”>jtaylor@catholicexchange.com. Please note that all email submitted to Catholic Exchange becomes the property of Catholic Exchange and may be published in this space. Published letters may be edited for length and clarity. Names and cities of letter writers may also be published. Email addresses of viewers will not normally be published.
Dear Catholic Exchange:
After reading the article on Senator Tom Daschle, I'm very confused about something. Tom Daschle presents himself as very proud to support and promote abortion. So why has he not been excommunicated? Doesn't Canon Law require someone who aids in obtaining an abortion to be automatically excommunicated? I've copied part of the article from CE below to show that Tom Daschle himself proudly proclaims not only his pro-abortion position, but also his direct action in promoting abortion on a wide scale:
U.S. Democratic Senator Tom Daschle, the Senate Majority Leader and a Roman Catholic, has put aside all pretense and exposed himself as a single-issue pro-abortion activist politician. Moreover, in writing a begging letter for the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL), the Democrat Majority Leader made it plain that Democrat control of the Senate means pro-abortion control of the Senate.
Daschle's begging letter on behalf of NARAL, disseminated to email lists, contains five separate appeals from Daschle for readers to send money to NARAL, with links to the NARAL website. “As the Majority Leader of the U.S. Senate, I've stood up for a woman's right to choose, and the pro-choice leadership of the Senate has made a difference by safeguarding women's rights from the anti-choice agenda of the Bush administration,” writes Daschle.
God Bless,
Amy
Dear Amy,
Peace in Christ!
The penalty in the Code of Canon Law for procuring a completed abortion is excommunication latae sententiae, which means that the penalty is incurred by the very commission of the act (see canons 1314 and 1398; cf. Catechism, no. 2272). In this case, the act is “formal cooperation” in bringing about an abortion. One “formally cooperates” in a grave evil when, while not actually committing the offense, a person assists in carrying it out and intends for the evil to be completed (e.g., the boyfriend who wants his girlfriend to have an abortion, so he pays for it and drives her to the clinic). This is contrasted with material cooperation, which is when one assists in a wrong act, but does not approve of the wrongdoing. For example, when a person patronizes a store that sells contraceptives, he or she may not approve of contraceptives, but is materially cooperating in the distribution of contraceptives by patronizing the store. It is clear that Sen. Daschle approves of the evil of abortion. The debate centers on whether he can be considered to be formally cooperating, because he is not directly participating in particular abortions, but supporting laws which make abortion accessible. In any case, laws that allow abortion are “unjust laws” and it is immoral to support such laws (see Evangelium Vitae, no. 73-74). Rather than get into this debate, the question should be asked whether excommunication is always the expedient or effective thing to carry out.
Excommunication is a drastic remedy in the Church. It is intented to bring around a wayward Catholic. It is not a means of making a political statement and achieving other desired effects, even though that's a very tempting reality these days. An interdict or other lesser but meaningful penalty often is more appropriate in such cases. In the case of Sen. Daschle, would an ecclesiastical penalty at this point be an effective, appropriate measure in that particular situation? Maybe so, but like a just war, excommunication really is intended by the Church to be a pastoral last resort, regardless of what other effects we desire to achieve.
Bishop Robert Carlson of Sioux Falls is Sen. Daschle's bishop. Bishop Carlson has prophetically spoken out in his diocese and Sen. Daschle has not responded very favorably. Even more, Bishop Carlson has diligently tried on a one-on-one basis to bring Sen. Daschle around to a view that upholds Catholic teaching. What recourse the Bishop takes is a matter of his own prudential judgment before the Lord. The Bishop is Sen. Daschle’s shepherd and the one who is directly involved in the situation, thus in the best position to know all the facts.
For further reading, see the position paper of Catholics United for the Faith (CUF) on Catholic politicians and abortion advocacy.
If you have further questions on this or would like more information about Catholics United for the Faith, please contact us at 1-800-MY-FAITH (693-2484). Please keep us in your prayers as we endeavor to “support, defend, and advance the efforts of the teaching Church.”
United in the Faith,
David E. Utsler
Information Specialist
Catholics United for the Faith
827 North Fourth Street
Steubenville, OH 43952
800-MY-FAITH (800-693-2484)
