Politicians and Excommunication - A Brief History Lesson

It's does well to recall "Catholic" politicians' arguments this past century in the US - arguments which were used to oppose the Church. Today's excuses and arguments sound no different than those of yesteryear...all are foundationally baseless.

A Liberal Mix of Religion and Politics
When Catholic politicians face excommunication.

In March 1962, Archbishop Joseph Rummel of New Orleans announced that all Catholic schools in the archdiocese would be integrated starting that fall. At the time, eight years after Brown v. Board of Education, public and private schools throughout Louisiana were segregated. Rummel, who condemned racial segregation as a sin in 1956, found that his plan met organized resistance among Catholic parents. The opposition was led by Leander Perez, the president of the Plaquemines Parish council and one of the most powerful political bosses in the state; Jackson Ricau, the executive director of the South Louisiana Citizens Council, which opposed all integration efforts; and B.J. "Una" Gaillot, the president of Save Our Nation, an organization that asserted that the Bible mandated racial segregation.
On March 31, 1962, the archbishop sent letters to Messrs. Perez and Ricau and Mrs. Gaillot warning that if they continued to oppose his efforts "through word or deed," he would excommunicate them. Mrs. Gaillot made the ailing 85-year-old prelate's letter public. On April 16, Rummel carried out his threat and announced the excommunication of all three.

They objected, of course--making arguments that seem familiar today. [edited for "clarity"]

Mr. Perez invoked democratic principles, stating that "the vast majority of [Catholic] parents" supported racial segregation. He also saw Rummel's action exclusively in political terms, saying "we cannot recognize any threat of excommunication by any temporary officers of the church on matters especially which have nothing to do with religion, but which are used as threats to impose forced racial integration or communistic regimentation of our children."

Mr. Ricau insisted he was simply following his conscience. "I have done nothing but fight for racial integrity, as is my prerogative under the Constitution," he said, "and to tell the truth about the controversial compulsory integration movement."

Finally, Mrs. Gaillot argued that the excommunication was unjustified because Rummel never "refuted that God demands segregation of the races in His Scriptures."

Have we not heard it all before?...This is a good article by Dimitri Cavalli. I wonder if we would still be witnessing the daily flagrant and scandalous pro-death legislation, rebellion, and disobedience IF the bishops would speak with one voice or if more bishops would follow the example of Bishop Rummel?

Just how much public defiance, scandal, and rebellion does it take before the spoiled child is sent to the corner with a sore bottom?