Archbishop Burke backtracks:

Archbishop Raymond Burke is giving St. Louis Catholics a way to vote for politicians who support abortion rights without commiting a grave sin or having to go to confession.

In his latest clarification of controversial comments he made earlier this summer, Burke said Thursday he believes Catholics
could vote for a politician who supports abortion rights as long as that's not the reason they are voting for the candidate, and they believe the politician's stance on other moral issues outweighs the abortion-rights stance.

Previously, Burke had said Catholics who vote for a politician who supports abortion rights were committing a grave sin and must confess before receiving Communion. Those earlier comments - echoed by some other bishops around the nation - stirred up criticism from some area politicians, especially Democrats who felt the archbishop was overstepping his bounds and unfairly targeting Sen. John Kerry, the Democratic presidential nominee who supports abortion rights. Among those who voiced concern with the archbishop's stance were two influential Catholic Democrats and Kerry supporters - U.S. Rep. William Lacy Clay Jr., D-St. Louis, and St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay.

Clay, who has met with Burke, supports abortion rights; Slay opposes abortion. Slay said Thursday night he was pleased
with the archbishop's latest comments. "I think that's a more reasonable position," Slay said. "I, for instance, make decisions on whether or not to support candidates based on whether they are willing to help us improve the city of St. Louis. We have a great many challenges and opportunities that impact the
dignity of human life."

Paul Sloca, spokesman for the Missouri Republican Party,
said: "All voters should vote for the best candidate and the best candidate is always a Republican." Before he arrived in St. Louis in January, Burke got national attention after he issued a directive in Wisconsin that Catholic politicians who publicly supported abortion rights or euthanasia should be denied Holy Communion. And he added to the stir in his first month in St. Louis when he told a Post-Dispatch reporter he would deny Communion to Kerry.

In a pair of recent interviews, the archbishop said he had not changed his position on voting by Catholics, but realized he had to clarify it for those who were confused after his June comments. "People couldn't understand why I was saying
what I was saying," he said Thursday. "I believe now it is important to make the distinction in order to make the discussion full, to articulate the matter as fully as possible. I didn't articulate it with full distinction in June."

In a June interview with the Post-Dispatch, Burke said "it doesn't make a lot of difference" whether a Catholic votes for a politician who supports abortion rights because of that politician's stance on abortion, or for other reasons. "If the voter is aware of that politician's pro-abortion position, they would still be supporting someone who is cooperating in the promotion of abortion," he said. Earlier that month, he told the newspaper, "If someone knowingly and intentionally commits a grave sin, which it certainly would be if someone were
to support a pro-abortion candidate, then that person would need to confess that sin." In an interview with KMOX radio around the same time Burke said, "It's objectively wrong to vote for a pro-choice politician, once (Catholic voters)
understand that - if they know this and willingly do it - they need to confess that before they receive Holy Communion."

Burke now says there is one scenario in which a Catholic could vote for a politician who supports abortion rights without committing a grave sin. In that scenario, a Catholic who personally opposes abortion rights, votes for a candidate who supports abortion rights "for what are called proportionate reasons," he said. In other words, each individual Catholic must weigh all the moral issues a candidate stands for alongside the
candidate's position on abortion rights. "And that is called remote material cooperation and if the reasons are really proportionate, and the person remains clear about his or her opposition to abortion, that can be done," Burke said.

So, a Catholic who does not support abortion rights can vote for a candidate who does support abortion rights without fear of committing a grave sin. "The sticking point is this - and this is the hard part," said Burke. "What is a proportionate reason to justify favoring the taking of an innocent, defenseless human life? And I just leave that to you as a question. That's the question that has to be answered in your conscience. What is the proportionate reason?"

However, a Catholic voter is committing a grave sin if he or she knows a particular candidate supports abortion rights and votes for the candidate because of that position. "That is what's called formal cooperation in an intrinsically evil act," Burke said. Burke's comments on cooperation and intent are "standard Catholic moral teaching," said Robert E. Rodes Jr., professor of legal ethics at the University of Notre Dame. Burke said he was preparing a pastoral letter fully explaining his thoughts on the topic. "I think what I never did before was distinguish the two cases," he said. "One of the reasons I didn't go into it then, but have now, is that it is difficult to imagine what that proportionate reason would be."

Jo Mannies of the Post-Dispatch contributed
to this report. Reporter Tim Townsend E-mail: ttownsend@post-dispatch.com Phone:
314-340-8221

I'd be interested in finding out how many Catholics intend to vote for pro-choice candidates solely and primarily for abortion.

Proportionate reasons?
Thousands of dead innocent civilians in Iraq
A thousand dead US troops
An unjust death penalty
The death penalty
month old kids and families without health insurance
1 million people looking for jobs and can't find them
millions more people in poverty
45+million without health insurance
kids going to bed hungry
kids and young people without any hope due to lack of hope, education, discrimination, etc
Degradation of public trust through lies
...the list goes on