An Interesting Read in the Independent...

Ultimately wrong-headed... but seeing more clearly than many of her pro-abortion colleagues:

Cardinal Keith O'Brien is the kind of Christian we seldom see any more on these shores: a real old-fashioned fire-and-brimstone merchant. The leader of Scotland's Roman Catholics this week spelled out, in unusually robust terms, his church's position on abortion - or as he put it, "the wanton killing of the innocent".
"We are killing, in our country, the equivalent of a classroom of kids every single day," he thundered from his Edinburgh pulpit. "Can you imagine that? Two Dunblane massacres a day going on and on. And when's it going to stop?" He called upon Catholic politicians to take a stand against this "unspeakable crime", hinting that those who continue to support the 1967 Abortion Act should perhaps review their relationship with the faith. "They must consider their own consciences and whether or not they can approach the altar to receive Holy Communion."
Clearly, the Cardinal set out to provoke - and he succeeded. The liberal establishment went into conniptions. "You can't impose on the conscience of others," huffed the Labour MP Peter Kilfoyle, apparently unaware that the entire purpose of a Catholic priest is to guide the conscience of his flock. It's "undemocratic and unacceptable," whinnied Terry Sanderson of the National Secular Society. I should have thought the freedom to voice one's beliefs was a central feature of any democracy.
In this newspaper, Joan Smith railed against the religious right for attempting to "impose its opinions on the rest of us" - as if we liberals would never dream of imposing our ideas about, say, gay adoption upon a doubtful public.
There is a valid anxiety behind all this fulmination. Hitherto, the abortion debate in Britain has been conducted with admirable decorum. We look with horror at the situation in America, where Roe vs Wade has become political shorthand for a divided nation: on the one hand, the doctor-slaying fundamentalists of the Republican Bible Belt; on the other, the feminists, pansies and peaceniks.
The fear is that pro-life fundamentalism, like junk food and gun crime, might be another American bad habit that we can't help picking up. Cardinal O'Brien, with his US-style fiery rhetoric, would seem to be deliberately leading us down that rancorous route.
As a pro-choice lapsed Catholic, I know where my loyalties lie. I would like to see the liberals win - but to do so having faced the arguments head-on. At present, the pro-choice argument is riddled with dishonesty and evasion.

The whole thing is worth reading...

Scottish Cardinal Speaks Out on Abortion

From the Telegraph:

Britain's two most senior Roman Catholic leaders intensified the debate on abortion yesterday by warning Catholic politicians who support terminations not to receive Holy Communion.
Cardinal Keith O'Brien, the leader of Scotland's Catholics, said the abortion rate north of the border was now equivalent to "two Dunblane massacres a day".
(snip)
In a sermon marking the 40th anniversary of the Abortion Act, Cardinal O'Brien told Catholic politicians of "the barrier such co-operation (on abortion) erects to receiving Holy Communion". He also urged Catholic voters to consider "all the views" of those seeking election.
Outside St Mary's Cathedral in Edinburgh after the service, the Cardinal said he would like to see a change in the law governing what he labelled "an evil trade".
He added: "We are killing - in our country - the equivalent of a classroom of kids every single day.
"Can you imagine that? Two Dunblane massacres a day in our country going on and on. And when's it going to stop?"
But he denied wanting pro-choice Catholic politicians to be cast out of the Church.
"They must consider their own consciences and whether or not they can approach the altar to receive Holy Communion," he said.

Needless to say, there was some uninformed comment from these politicians.

Jim Devine, the Labour MP for Livingston, said that the Cardinal's comments were an "affront to democracy".
He added: "Abortion is not the issue. This could be about nuclear weapons or Iraq or anything where the Catholic church has a view.
''To tell practising Catholics how to vote is unacceptable."
Terry Sanderson, president of the National Secular Society, said: "There is an implied call to Catholic politicians and health workers to place Catholic doctrine above the wishes of the electorate.
''This is undemocratic and unacceptable."

What annoys me particularly is the disingenuousness of these arguments. It is perfectly democratic for the Church to teach her doctrine and advise her members on their moral responsibilities. Even from a purely secular view, does not the Church have the right to express her views and advise her members who adhere to the Church by virtue of their own decision?
Secondly, if a politician's duty is merely to act as a passive conduit for the views of the electorate, without regard for any objective idea of truth or justice, then the whole political apparatus should simply be dismantled, as modern technology can come up with better ways of polling the general public and determining their will than the old fashioned system of political parties and elected representatives.

Excommunication, Exclusion from the Eucharist, Abortion Legislation and Canon Law

Dr Edward Peter's concise post is essential reading for anyone who wants to be informed about the various canonical issues that surround politicians, abortion and excommunication.
Very importantly he highlights the distinction between excommunication and being in a state of grave sin that excludes one from receiving Holy Communion:

Here's the Shorter Version: First, Canon 916. There are lots of mortal sins out there; if you commit any one of them, you're not supposed to go to Communion. It's your obligation to stay away. Next, Canon 915. Some mortal sins are committed under circumstances that, if the Church finds out about them, not only are you supposed to the stay away from Communion, but the Church is supposed to turn you away if you try to receive. Finally, Canon 1331. A few mortal sins are serious crimes under canon law; if you commit one of those, you can suffer the penalty of excommunication, and one of the consequences of excommunication is, you can't go to Communion.

He also draws the following conclusion that gels pretty well with my reading of the
1983 Code:

(3) Under the current Code, no one can be excommunicated (automatically or otherwise) for pro-abortion legislative activity. Such activity is nevertheless potentially punishable under other canons (e.g., Canon 1369) albeit not with excommunication. Moreover, particular legislation, personal precept, or contempt for lesser penalties, might make pro-abortion legislators liable to excommunication in the future. To my knowledge, though, none of these options is being pursued.

Please note... whilst the 1983 Code does not give excommunication is a possibility for pro-abortion legislative activity, this does not exclude legislation of this sort being introuduced by bishops at a local level.
Anyway, his entire post should be read to make the above clear.