Bishops’ Conference Responds To 18 Democrats Critical Of Pope

[tee_eff_em]

Supporting legislation that permits abortion seems unarguably to be formal cooperation.

Though I am not trying to start an argument, I would disagree with that.

Tee’s point is more painful but is also valid: the bishops don’t appear to be willing to connect the dots and come to the same conclusion.

I would say the bishops connect the dots and come to a *different conclusion. *And I believe that fact ought to be given appropriate weight by all of us.

tee

 

[childofmary1143]

Though I am not trying to start an argument, I would disagree with that.
tee

It depends on what “formal co-operation” is defined. However I can’t see how a moral, intelligent person can disagree that the Politicians who do nothing about abortion are not formally co-operating. People are more likely to do something immoral if its civilly legal than if its not.

 

[Andy_K]

Weren’t Catholic politicians excommunicated for supporting segregation back in the 1960’s?

…

 

[Steve_O_Brien]

Weren’t Catholic politicians excommunicated for supporting segregation back in the 1960’s?

…

Absolutely. Judge Leander Perez, Sr., was excommunicated on April 16, 1962, by New Orleans Archbishop Joseph Rummel for opposing the desegregation of Catholic schools.

Which action is more evil: to exclude children from a school system because of their race, or to kill them before they can be born?

Keep and spread the Faith.

 

[tee_eff_em]

It depends on what “formal co-operation” is defined. However I can’t see how a moral, intelligent person can disagree that the Politicians who do nothing about abortion are not formally co-operating. People are more likely to do something immoral if its civilly legal than if its not.

It is difficult to decipher your string of negatives, but I hope you are not judging me to be amoral or unintelligent*? Or the bishops of the Church to be so?

Indeed, the question hinges on what constitutes “formal cooperation”, and that is not at all as plain to me (and, I suspect, others) as Ender would suggest.

(* Though perhaps inability to parse a string of negatives is indicative of the latter)

tee

 

[Ender]

the question hinges on what constitutes “formal cooperation”, and that is not at all as plain to me (and, I suspect, others) as Ender would suggest.

“Formal cooperation is that in which the cooperator wills the evil, either by an explicit act of the will or by actually sharing in the evil act itself.” (Catholicism and Ethics, ch 6) I’m not sure how reasonable it is to claim that a legislator who votes in favor of abortion isn’t willing the abortions his actions enable, but this isn’t the end of it.

“Material cooperation is that in which the cooperator performs an act which in itself is not wrong, though it is used by the principal agent to help him commit sin.” This type of cooperation is not always immoral; it depends on the proximity to the moral act itself. “The more necessary one’s material cooperation is to the performance of an act, the graver must be the reason to justify it morally.” Without laws permitting it there would not be 1.3 million abortions each year.

Older moral manuals used to list nine ways that a person could be an accessory to sin. Of those nine, three certainly apply to pro-abortion politicians: cooperation by consent, by silence, and by defense. Whether or not their cooperation is formal or material and proximate, there is no moral justification for failing to oppose abortion.

Ender

 

[Ender]

There has been a discussion of this topic in First Things regarding whether Canon Law 1398, which explains that latae sententiae excommunication automatically applies to someone who procures an abortion, also applies to politicians who support abortion.

firstthings.com/onthesquare/

The article refers to a canon lawyer who, convincingly I think, argues that it does not.

canonlaw.info/2007/05/case-for-applying-canon-1398-to.html

The lawyer doesn’t discuss any possible applications of other laws that might lead to automatic excommunication - which may or may not mean there are any.

Ender