This is a GREAT question!
The way the law is written, it would seem to do so–at least in normal circumstances–since any perservering in manifest grave sin are to be denied Communion, and typical politicians who are pro-abort would seem to be persevering in manifest grave sin.
I’d be up for barring the whole lot of them.
But one should recognize the consequences of doing so, and these consequences may not always be good, depending on the circumstances. Consider this case:
In 1989, the Bishop [Maher of San Diego] barred a California Assemblywoman, Lucy Killea, from taking Communion because she supported the right to abortion. He told her that her views amounted to "a grave scandal against the Church."
The action drew nationwide attention to a bid by Mrs. Killea for a seat in the State Senate. It also created voter sympathy for Mrs. Killea, a Democrat, who won the seat in a heavily Republican district.
It’s an interesting question: "What do you place first? Your native pro-life instincts or possible longer-term harm to innocent life?"
I know what my instincts say . . . but longer-term questions also have to be asked. . . . And this kind of calculus may be part of why some bishops don’t take a more confrontational line with pro-abort politicians.
Or maybe not.
GET THE STORY.