President Biden and the Catholic Church

By David Montgomery

“Literally everyone knows that the Church considers abortion murder and not a “right.” Spare us the “right wing” garbage. The president is a dissenting Catholic in grave error who is causing scandal. He must not present himself for communion until he is reconciled.” Chad C. Pecknold, Associate Professor of Theology, The Catholic University of America

President Biden speaks openly about his faith. He presents himself as a devout Catholic who attends mass regularly, prays the rosary, and relies on his faith in his political life. In contrast, the chairman of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) Committee on Pro-Life Activities states that “The president should stop defining himself as a devout Catholic and acknowledge that his view on abortion is contrary to Catholic moral teaching.” 

This controversy has become front page news, leading to a flood of commentary by writers whose knowledge of Catholicism is, to be kind, nearly nonexistent. A common point of view among liberal, non-Catholic writers is that the conflict arises from changing points of view among Catholics, with up-to-date Catholics seeing nothing wrong with Biden’s actions and right-wing bishops opposing it for political motives. 

For example, a writer in the LATimes opines that “Biden has a liberal faith that closely aligns with many members of the country’s largest denomination who lean less rigid[ly] than their bishops and cardinals on matters of family and sexuality…” The Washington Post sent out the tweet “A rising group of right-wing U.S. Catholic bishops is colliding with a very Catholic president who supports abortion rights.” 

Though I have resisted bringing religious topics into the pages of the Chesapeake Observer, I feel an obligation to explain the Church’s actual teaching on what is required of Catholics. There are five steps that lead to the conclusion stated by Archbishop Naumann and Professor Pecknold.

• The unchangeable teaching of the Church that abortion is a grave evil.
• The principle of formal co-operation with evil
• The evidence that President Biden is formally co-operating with abortion
• The reason that receiving communion is so important
• The rule about who may and may not receive communion

The Catholic Church holds most emphatically that abortion is a grave sin. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) states that “Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable.” Pope St John Paul II stated this in the most forceful language possible in the Catholic tradition: 

“… by the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter and his Successors, in communion with the Bishops – who … have shown unanimous agreement concerning this doctrine – I declare that direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, always constitutes a grave moral disorder, since it is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. This doctrine is based upon the natural law and upon the written Word of God, is transmitted by the Church’s Tradition and taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium. [Evangelium Vitae, 63.]

There are several points to emphasize here, and I do so to make clear that there is no wiggle room in the teaching that every Catholic has vowed to obey about abortion. First, the statement that this teaching is unchanged and unchangeable. Catholics accept that the fundamental dogmas and doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church have been handed down unaltered from the time of the Apostles, and they cannot be changed by popular vote or even the Pope. Only a few fundamental doctrines have this status. 

As an aside, positions stated by Popes and bishops on political matters like climate change and immigration do not have this status. Such matters are reserved to “prudential judgment” and the Church only advises on the moral principles that should be applied in making those decisions. In contrast, some actions, including abortion, are “intrinsically evil,” meaning that they are “always and everywhere wrong.” 

Using the words “the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter and his Successors, in communion with the Bishops,” Pope St John Paul II declared that there is to be no dissent from the proposition that abortion is one absolutely prohibited at all times and places. The formulaic reference to the authority of the Pope and bishops is a signal to readers that this is an utterly non-negotiable teaching, just below the status of papal infallibility. Prudential judgment, and in particular balancing of benefits and costs, does not come into the matter. 

The next point is about actions to promote or assist in abortion. This rests on the philosophical concept of formal cooperation with evil. In a recent pastoral letter that stirred up the current controversy, Archbishop Cordileone of San Francisco wrote “The key to formal cooperation is that I will the evil that is being done by another, and my cooperation is given to help bring it about. This applies clearly to those who willingly kill or assist in killing the child, but also to others who pressure or encourage the mother to have an abortion, pay for it, provide financial assistance to organizations to provide abortions, or support candidates or legislation to make abortion more readily available. Formal cooperation in evil is never morally justified.”

President Biden has since his first day in office issued Executive Orders and promoted legislation that have the direct effect of “mak[ing] abortion more readily available:” 

• An Executive Order that will permit abortion to be promoted and funded by federally funded family planning programs (Title IX). 
• An Executive Order allowing U.S. taxpayer funds to be sent to organizations that both promote and provide abortions in developing countries. 
• A proposed Federal law that would codify Roe v. Wade and prohibit states from putting any restrictions on abortion.
• A plan to add abortion funding to Medicaid insurance under the Affordable Care Act (Hyde Amendment)

The predictable effect of these orders and proposed legislation is to encourage and enable abortions that would not take place without them. By taking these actions and tolerating those knowable consequences, President Biden formally cooperates with abortion. 

The strength of objections to President Biden’s continuing to receive communion arises from the Catholic belief about the nature of the Eucharist. Catholic doctrine is that the bread and wine become the body and blood of our Savior. This is called the doctrine of the Real Presence and is shared with some Anglican and Lutheran groups. Holy Communion is the most sacred sacrament in the Catholic Church, not just a symbol or a communal meal. Warnings about the consequences of receiving communion unworthily go back to the letters of St Paul.

For example, Church discipline requires that divorced and remarried couples do not receive communion. My wife and I chose not to receive communion for a number of years until our previous marriages were annulled. It did not matter that we contributed generously to the parish and Catholic charities, or that we attended Mass regularly. That one infraction was enough, just as Biden’s cooperation with abortion is not excused by any other claimed virtues or accomplishments. 

In an age of moral relativism, where subjective feelings define what is true and what is good, the Church’s 2000-year tradition of consistent doctrine and discipline and teaching of moral absolutes is a great attraction to many of us. Moreover, that obedience is necessary to be a “practicing Catholic:” none of the other rituals or observances are sufficient without it. 

Catholics are required to have confessed and been absolved of mortal sins and to be in good standing with the Church before receiving communion. By formally cooperating in the evil of abortion and through his actions publicly rejecting Catholic teaching on the subject, President Biden is held to have failed both requirements. 

There is more to it. To receive communion is to affirm publicly the faith and moral teachings of the Catholic Church, and to desire to live accordingly. Receiving communion while in practice openly rejecting its teaching is considered duplicitous.

Then there is the matter of scandal, defined in the CCC as “an attitude or behavior which leads another to do evil.” If church leaders continue to offer communion to President Biden, “this can lead Catholics (and others) to assume that the moral teaching of the Catholic Church on the inviolate sanctity of human life is not seriously held.”

These are some of the reasons why Archbishop Naumann, Archbishop Cordileone and a growing number of other bishops are calling on President Biden to cease presenting himself for communion and, in some cases, stating that they will refuse him communion in their diocese. (In a comment that follows this article, a canon lawyer discusses briefly his understanding of some of the arguments made by the supporters of the President).

Now briefly back to recent reports and commentary. Frequent comments about how most Catholics no longer oppose abortion (or many other social evils identified by their church) and agree with President Biden’s positions and policies suggest that the writers believe that the Church’s position on abortion is decided by majority rule, or swings with the winds of popular culture. Even those who argue that President Biden may receive communion agree that abortion is a grave evil, making the intimation that the Catholic Church is in any way divided on the permissibility of abortion particularly misinformed. Labeling those who do not believe Biden should receive communion as “the increasingly loud right wing of the church” and suggesting their position is politically motivated likewise ignores, or betrays ignorance of, the theological and canonical basis for their position.

Indeed, it is on the left that political sentiments seem to be influencing the positions of some bishops. Cardinal Wilton Gregory of Washington, DC was obvious in his dislike of President Trump, condemning President Trump for visiting a nearby church during riots in the District and admonishing the John Paul II Center for allowing him and the First Lady to visit. He has since announced his approval of President Biden’s receiving communion in his diocese. The outgoing Bishop of Wilmington, where my parish is located and where the President also lives, is also giving him communion, repeating the phrase that to do otherwise would “weaponize” the Eucharist. 

They should remember that in the 50s and 60s American bishops not only refused communion, but went so far to as to excommunicate, Catholic officials who opposed integration. Without denying the evils of racism, combatting it is a matter of prudential judgment while abortion is “always and everywhere a grave moral evil.” Politics indeed.

Another Perspective from a Canon Lawyer

A friend, whose understanding of these issues vastly exceeds my own, offers these observations on the complexities of determining whether an action by a politician constitutes formal cooperation with evil. He also sketches some arguments that might be used to justify President Biden’s continued reception of communion. 

I am aware that Catholic liberal/progressive politicians have been coached by prominent Catholic theologians in their thinking and crafting positions and public statements about abortion, so as you would expect the reasoning underlying their arguments and positions can be quite subtle (as is often the case with many of the positions of Pope Francis). Thus, I believe it’s worthwhile examining what they are actually saying and what’s underneath it.

I do think the basis of the positions of pro-choice Catholic politicians is more complicated than represented in polemical exchanges about the abortion issue. I am not persuaded at this point that President Biden through his basic positions on matters of government policy is formally cooperating with abortion, at least not in all instances. In some instances, I think he may be, especially when he advocates for taxpayer funded abortion and funding abortion agencies overseas knowing that he is facilitating the use of public monies to pay for abortions that he knows with certainty will be performed, although I can say that I am not entirely sure on this point, either.

While his policies enable abortions to occur, I can understand what is meant when someone would say that he does not intend that any abortions be performed (a requisite for formal cooperation). Rather, he may be engaging in a balancing act that says: “I do not intend that anyone have an abortion; and yet, I know that people do have abortions. Clandestine abortions often enough have horrific consequences that would not occur if the abortions were performed in a licensed and safe medical facility by a competent surgeon. Therefore, it is a lesser evil to provide government healthcare money to assure that when someone does choose to have an abortion it is done safely, rather under circumstances that often lead to even more horrific consequences than just the abortion itself.”

It is a “lesser of two evils” kind of argument. The moral issue of cooperation in evil is not the only metric of calculation for difficult moral issues involving grave evils, however: the other metric is, not cooperation in evil but the toleration of evil when not tolerating it leads to even worse consequences. 

What some of those who criticize President Biden often fail to address is that it is also a principle of Catholic moral theology that it is not always necessary to insist that civil law embodies completely all the principles of moral theology. Certain evils can be tolerated in the civil law under certain circumstances, which St. Thomas Aquinas himself taught. For instance, he taught that legal prostitution can be tolerated if seeking to outlaw it would result in greater evils (sex-crazed men raping women in dark alleys, for instance). That, I believe is the key to the position that some theologians have crafted for progressive Catholic politicians: seeking to completely outlaw abortion leads to equal or greater evils, therefore it is morally acceptable to tolerate legalized abortion while working to make it “unnecessary”, as was the position with respect to prostitution which led to it eventually being outlawed in almost all Western nations.

Also, I don’t think progressive politicians reason that their policies are directed toward there being more abortions. I believe they think their policies are intended to result in fewer abortions—in particular fewer clandestine abortions, with all of the undesirable consequences of “back-alley” abortions; and also more choices for women that allow them to avoid unintended pregnancies in the first place, pregnancies which lead to feelings of desperation and seeking abortion (legal or illegal) to get out of the situation the woman feels she’s in.

I by no means mean to contradict that induced abortion is always a grave moral evil, only that I don’t think Biden’s positions necessarily directly intend that there be more abortions, but rather that they are directed toward reducing the number of abortions and the horrific consequences of “botched” illegal abortions. Underlying this thinking is the presumption that the moral evil of abortion can be tolerated in civil law, although the grave evil of the act must be affirmed, when it is known that some people are going to do it anyway (some people are always going to engage in prostitution, whether legal or illegal; some people are always going to use narcotics, whether legal or illegal—thus we should tolerate these evils legally while seeking to reduce and hopefully eventually eradicate them), in order to try to avoid equally bad consequences or worse, while also attempting to remove the reasons why people resort to these moral evils in the first place.

I am troubled, however, that President Biden and Speaker Pelosi and Sen. Durbin and other Catholics in public life, and many Catholics in the pew, do not seem to believe that abortion is a grave evil. Agnosticism respecting what is gravely evil implies its own kind of cooperation with evil. One can tolerate some evils, even grave evils, consistent with Catholic theology and the requirements of being a Catholic, so long as you recognize that they are grave evils and seek to make it possible that they be avoided and ultimately eradicated. If you adopt the belief that they simply “are no big deal”, then you have crossed the line between a good and an ill-formed conscience (all the worse if you take such a position knowing that it actually is a “big deal” morally). 

Fifty years ago when people were still arguing about whether a human fetus is really a human being (to my mind a proposition that answers itself: of course a human fetus is a human being), after Roe vs. Wade I predicted the day would come when pro-choicers would stop arguing about the status of the fetus as a human being and acknowledge that human fetuses are fully human but can be killed anyway because there is a good enough reason for doing so. I have recently read articles and heard speakers take that position. That, I would submit is by-and-large where we are today, and the implications are frightening: the law will give you a license to kill another human being if in your own judgment you have a good enough reason, and no one can question your judgment on the matter. This constitutes moral relativism taken to the limit, a limit that no society can embrace and survive indefinitely, particularly when it begins to be extended to other contexts (for which there are recent historical precedents).