Knights of Columbus Battle To Expel Pro-Abort Politician Members

DALLAS — As the American Catholic Church hierarchy contends with notorious pro-abortion Catholic politicians — who publicly defy Church teaching in their political lives while flaunting their Catholicism by receiving Communion — state delegates of the Knights of Columbus are contending with a proposal to expel member Knights in politics who support abortion rights.

This issue has been simmering in the Knights of Columbus for decades. But this year, as delegates meet in Dallas from August 3 to 5 for their national convention, a determined group of Knights from California and other states was expected to force the issue at the national convention.

Resolution N. 48 was submitted by ten KC councils in California; it was passed at the California KC State Convention in May. The resolution requires ipso facto forfeiture of membership for any public official who promotes abortion, infanticide, euthanasia, or assisted suicide.

As The Wanderer went to press on July 29, proponents of the measure were planning to go public to the international media covering the conference, and even to engage in public demonstrations to denounce any efforts to suppress the measure.

In California, two examples that Knights focused on were Los Angeles Assemblyman Rudy Bermudez and Orange County Assemblyman Lou Correa, both of whom have long public voting records supporting abortion and even celebrating the Roe v. Wade decision in legislative acts.

Bermudez publicly lists on his web site that he is a member of the Norwalk Knights of Columbus as he compiles a nearly perfect pro-abortion voting record. He has been recognized by Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California for his "unwavering 100% commitment to reproductive choice and family planning during the 2002 legislative year."

Correa, a member of the Garden Grove Council voted in four recent legislative sessions to give $200,000,000 to unrestricted Medi-Cal funding for abortion.

On a national level, the collaboration of Knight-politicians — who enjoy the privileges, honors, and benefits of the Knights of Columbus membership — in the "culture of death" machine is a scandal not only to all Knights, but to the entire Church in the United States.

For years, charges have flown that the Knights have an operative "house rule" on the matter of pro-abortion Knights who hold political office, which requires members not to raise the issue of a member’s personal or even public position on abortion.

Several years ago, a Massachusetts Knight obtained a tape recording featuring KC member Joe Mauro, now retired but then executive vice president of agencies and marketing for the national office, stating: "The house rule is anybody who writes you, or talks to you about it [abortion], I’d prefer you kept silent on the issue."

The tape surfaced after an outspoken pro-life insurance field agent, John O’Gorman, was forced out of the Knights following his pro-life activism.

One decisive action against a pro-abortion Catholic politician was taken by the late Bishop James McHugh, when he was bishop of Camden, N.J. He forced the state’s pro-abortion Gov. Jim Florio to resign from the Knights.

In 2001, when the Supreme Council of the International Knights of Columbus met in Toronto, with 2,000 members in attendance, a New York chapter called on the Knights to take more vigorous action against politicians who are pro-abortion. Ed McKee, co-chairman of this New York Council, said that they were getting nowhere with tactics employed at the time.

However, Canadian Phil Zakoor, chief administrative officer of the Ontario State Council, objected to the New York resolution calling for such things as advertisements at election times to encourage pro-life voting.

In a speech to the organization the next day, Supreme Knight Carl A. Anderson acknowledged that the order has the resources to do more to defend life than it has done; the Knights of Columbus would continue its "defense of human life at all stages, from conception to natural death."

The battle likely to be waged in Dallas is closely related to the hierarchy’s own stance, since the Knights and the hierarchy have appeared to be passing the buck back and forth on this matter for years, and now the buck seems to be stopped in both camps.

Supreme Knight Anderson, on his way to Dallas, was unavailable for comment, as was his spokesman Paul McGlinchey.

Pope John Paul II-- Evangelium Vitae, (The Gospel of Life) 1995

72. Disregard for the right to life, precisely because it leads to the killing of the person whom society exists to serve, is what most directly conflicts with the possibility of achieving the common good. Consequently, a civil law authorizing abortion or euthanasia ceases by that very fact to be a true, morally binding civil law.

73. Abortion and euthanasia are thus crimes which no human law can claim to legitimize. There is no obligation in conscience to obey such laws; instead there is a grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection. From the very beginnings of the Church, the apostolic preaching reminded Christians of their duty to obey legitimately constituted public authorities (cf. Rom 13:1-7; 1 Pet 2:13-14), but at the same time it firmly warned that "we must obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29). In the Old Testament, precisely in regard to threats against life, we find a significant example of resistance to the unjust command of those in authority. After Pharaoh ordered the killing of all newborn males, the Hebrew midwives refused. "They did not do as the king of Egypt commanded them, but let the male children live" (Ex 1:17). But the ultimate reason for their action should be noted: "the midwives feared God" (ibid.). It is precisely from obedience to God—to whom alone is due that fear which is acknowledgment of his absolute sovereignty—that the strength and the courage to resist unjust human laws are born. It is the strength and the courage of those prepared even to be imprisoned or put to the sword, in the certainty that this is what makes for "the endurance and faith of the saints" (Rev 13:10).

In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to "take part in a propaganda campaign in favour of such a law, or vote for it".

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

2271: Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:

"You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish."

God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: Abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.

The Second Vatican Council, presided over by Paul VI, has most severely condemned abortion: "Life must be safeguarded with extreme care from conception; "abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes."

Pope Pius XI "Those who hold the reins of government should not forget that it is the duty of public authority ... to defend the lives of the innocent ... among whom we must mention in the first place infants hidden in the mother's womb. And if the public magistrates ... do not defend them, but by their laws and ordinances betray them to death at the hands of doctors and others, let them remember that God is the Judge and Avenger of innocent blood which cries from earth to heaven" (Casti Connubii No. 67).

Catholic Planet www.catholicplanet.com	[ Home \| Articles \| Poetry \| Music \| Theology \| Resources \| Links \| Contact ]
	Catholic Christian Article

Abortion and Excommunication
May 20, 2004

Any Catholic who obstinately denies that abortion is always gravely immoral, commits the sin of heresy and incurs an automatic sentence of excommunication.

Canon Law and Church Teaching

Canon 1398: “A person who procures a completed abortion incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.”

Canon 751: “Heresy is the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.”

Canon 1364 §1: “an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.”

The phrase “latae sententiae” literally means a ‘broad sentence’ or ‘wide judgment,’ in other words, a sentence or judgment which is applied widely. In this context, it refers to a type of excommunication which is automatic. Such a sentence of excommunication is incurred “by the very commission of the offense,” (CCC 2272) and does not require the particular judgment of a case by competent authority.

Apostasy, heresy, and schism are all offences which incur a sentence of excommunication automatically. Heresy is the obstinate denial of any truth of the Catholic faith, on a matter of faith or morals, which has been definitively taught by the Magisterium. The Magisterium has repeatedly and definitively taught that abortion is always gravely immoral. (CCC 2270 to 2275)

Pope John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae, n. 57: “Therefore, by the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter and his Successors, and in communion with the Bishops of the Catholic Church, I confirm that the direct and voluntary killing of an innocent human being is always gravely immoral. This doctrine, based upon that unwritten law which man, in the light of reason, finds in his own heart (cf. Rom 2:14-15), is reaffirmed by Sacred Scripture, transmitted by the Tradition of the Church and taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium.”

Obtaining an Abortion

Any Catholic who deliberately and knowingly obtains a procured abortion commits a mortal sin and is also automatically excommunicated, under canon 1398.

Under the laws of secular society, if one person commits a crime, then anyone who deliberately and knowingly provides essential or substantial means for that person to commit that crime is called an accessory to that crime and is also subject to the penalties of law. Similarly, any Catholic who deliberately and knowingly provides essential or substantial means for any woman to procure an abortion also commits a mortal sin and also incurs the same sentence of excommunication.

Any Catholic who substantially assists another in the deliberate sin of abortion is also guilty of serious sin and also incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.

Believing in Abortion

Any Catholic who obstinately denies that abortion is always gravely immoral commits the sin of heresy. The sin of heresy also incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.

Unfortunately, some Catholics obstinately deny that abortion is always immoral, and some Catholics claim that abortion can, at times, be a morally-acceptable choice, and some Catholics claim that a person can, in good conscience, choose abortion. Under the Code of Canon Law of the Roman Catholic Church, canons 751 and 1364, all such Catholics are automatically excommunicated for the sin of heresy.

This sentence of latae sententiae excommunication applies to any Catholic who denies that abortion is gravely immoral, regardless of whether they keep this denial hidden or publicly reveal it.

Promoting Abortion

Those Catholics who publicly announce their denial that abortion is always gravely immoral, or who publicly promote abortion, or who publicly argue in favor of legalized abortion, also commit a mortal sin and also incur a sentence of automatic excommunication.

This sentence of excommunication applies to Catholics who are politicians, as well as to those Catholics who are political commentators, or public speakers, or who write or otherwise publicly communicate their erroneous view that abortion can be morally-acceptable or that abortion should be legal. This sentence of excommunication also certainly applies to those Catholics who claim to be theologians or Biblical scholars, but who believe or teach that abortion is not always gravely immoral.

Those Catholics who promote abortion are automatically excommunicated for two reasons. First, they have fallen into the sin of heresy by believing that abortion is not always gravely immoral (canons 751 and 1364). Second, these Catholics are providing substantial assistance for women to obtain abortions by influencing public policy to make abortions legal, and to keep abortions legal, and to broaden access to abortion. Those who provide such substantial assistance commit a mortal sin and incur a sentence of automatic excommunication (canon 1398).

Voting for Abortion

Any Catholic politician who casts a vote with the intention of legalizing abortion, or of protecting laws allowing abortion, or of widening access to abortion, commits a mortal sin.

When such a vote indicates that the Catholic politician believes that abortion is not always gravely immoral, such a politician incurs a sentence of automatic excommunication, under canons 751 and 1364, because of heresy.

When such a vote is intended to have the effect of making abortion legal, or more easily obtainable, or more widely available, such a politician incurs a sentence of automatic excommunication, under canon 1398, as someone who is attempting to provide substantial or essential means for women to obtain abortions. Catholic politicians who pass laws which legalize, protect, or widen access to abortion, are providing essential assistance to women who want to obtain abortions.

It is not sufficient for Catholic politicians to claim that they are “personally opposed” to abortion. If any Catholic politician favors legalized abortion, despite a claim of personal opposition, such a politician commits a mortal sin by promoting abortion and by voting in favor of abortion.

The same is true for any Catholic who casts any vote with the intention of legalizing abortion, or of protecting laws allowing abortion, or of widening access to abortion. Such a voter commits a mortal sin and incurs a sentence of automatic excommunication for two reasons. First, they are committing the sin of heresy by believing that abortion should be legal and available. Second, they are committing the grievous sin of providing women with substantial or essential assistance in obtaining abortions, by attempting to legalize or broaden access to abortion.

However, if, for a period of time, Catholic politicians and voters are unable to enact a law prohibiting all abortion, then Catholic politicians and voters may in good conscience vote for whichever law offers the greatest restrictions and limits on abortion. Subsequently, Catholic politicians and voters are required by the moral law to continue to enact further restrictions and limits on abortion, to the greatest extent possible, and, at every possible opportunity, to vote for laws which completely outlaw abortion.

Voting for Politicians

In general, the moral law requires Catholic voters to vote for those candidates who oppose abortion over those who favor abortion. However, there are exceptions to this general principle. For example, if a political candidate favors abortion, but is a member of a party which generally opposes abortion, a Catholic voter may, in good conscience, vote for that candidate, with the intention of giving more political power to the party which opposes abortion.

In another case, a Catholic voter might, in good conscience, vote for a pro-abortion candidate, if the political office would offer no opportunity for the elected candidate to vote for or against abortion. Even so, every Catholic voter should consider that anyone who supports abortion, as if it were a woman’s right, or as if it could ever be a moral choice, must necessarily be someone who has a seriously limited understanding of morality and justice. Such a person would not often be the better candidate for any office in place of one who understands that abortion is gravely immoral.

In every case, a Catholic should vote in such a way as to obtain as many restrictions on abortion as possible, and so as to obtain the end to legalized abortion as soon as possible.

Constitutional Amendment

Within any constitutional form of government, it would be ideal to have a constitutional clause or amendment which permanently and completely outlaws all procured abortions. Such an amendment must ban all abortions, regardless of circumstance, so that the direct and voluntary killing of an innocent prenatal human being will be always contrary to human law, just as it is always contrary to the moral law.

A constitutional amendment can permit certain medical procedures, which are absolutely necessary to save the life of the mother, and which indirectly result in the unintended and unsought death of the prenatal, only if there is no possible way to save the life of the prenatal. A prenatal is defined as any human being from conception to birth. Every reasonable effort should be made to save the lives of both mother and prenatal. If the life of the prenatal can be saved by no other possible option than by risking or allowing the death of the mother, then the prenatal must be saved.

Catholic teaching clearly allows for certain medical procedures, which indirectly and involuntarily result in the death of the prenatal, to save the life of the mother, but only when all options to save the life of the prenatal have been exhausted. Such a procedure is not an abortion and is not an exception wherein abortion is allowed.

On the other hand, a constitutional amendment which bans abortion with exceptions for various cases, such as rape, incest, or a risk to the mother’s life, would be worse than having no such amendment at all.

Any woman who is willing to commit the sin of abortion, would also be willing to lie. If a constitutional amendment permitted abortion in cases of rape, then any woman willing to lie and to falsely claim that she was raped, would be able to also claim that she had a constitutional right to an abortion. The result would be that a constitutional amendment, which seems to ban abortion with some exceptions, would end up giving every woman who is willing to tell a lie, a purported constitutional right to abortion. This situation would be worse than having no such constitutional amendment at all.

Therefore, the only acceptable pro-life constitutional amendment would be one that, in accordance with Catholic teaching, bans all procured abortions without exception.

Here is an example of a just constitutional amendment protecting human life.

--- by Ronald L. Conte Jr.

Return to Catholic Planet main page. All articles are copyrighted by their respective authors, unless otherwise noted.

Election Day and Christian Responsibility

Printer Friendly

The elections of 2004 are a critical juncture for the future and direction of our nation.

This year voters will either defend the Culture of Life, or advance the culture of death. As Christians, we have a clear and moral obligation to register to vote and to carefully consider the candidates' position on the sanctity of LIFE when we cast our vote.

Christians are called to vote with a PROPERLY FORMED CONSCIENCE. This can be explained with one sentence from our LORD, which applies, even inside the voting booth, “Whatsoever you do to the least of these my brethren, you do to Me” (Mt.25:40). From The Gospel of Life: “Abortion and euthanasia are crimes, which no human law can claim to legitimize. In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to `take part in a propaganda campaign in favor of such a law, or vote for it'.”

What about the other issues? "Calls to advance human rights are an illusion if the right to life itself is subject to attack." Faithful Citizenship. A powerful consideration from Fr. Frank Pavone, "If a candidate can't respect the life of a little baby, how is he supposed to respect ours?" From A Brief Catechism for Catholic Voters: “A disqualifying issue is one which is of such gravity and importance that it allows for no political maneuvering. It is an issue that strikes at the heart of the human person and is non-negotiable. A disqualifying issue is one of such enormity that by itself renders a candidate for office unacceptable regardless of his position on other matters.” FIVE such disqualifying issues are Abortion, Euthanasia, Fetal Stem Cell Research, Human Cloning, and “homosexual marriage”.

Participation in the political process is a virtue, and every vote counts. Christians have every right to strive by legitimate means to shape public policy according to their moral convictions. We are each, individually, called to help build a Culture of Life-voting in defense of LIFE is among the most important ways.

Children waiting to be born cannot speak for themselves-we are their voice. We must speak up in their defense at the voting booth. If we do not, millions more will never be allowed to speak.

This map has 17.5 states blacked out. The population of these states is equal to the number of “legal” surgical abortions since 1973. Perhaps this visual perspective helps one to grasp the number 44,000,000-that's 44 MILLION PEOPLE who are gone, dead--robbed of their God given Constitutional right to LIFE.

Help end this tragedy, promote registering and VOTING PRO-LIFE.

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797)

Kevin Jeanfreau

Louisiana Director

Knights for Life

Ed Jeanfreau

Louisiana Chairman

Knights for Life

Please Copy and Distribute widely

Download this document and others related at:

www.KnightsForLife.org

http://cpforlife.org/id126.htm

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.