Under canon law, a person “who uses physical force…against a Bishop incurs a latae sententiae interdict” (Canon 1370, sec. 2), that is, the penalty is incurred at the moment of the violation and requires no episcopal or judicial declaration.

The three bishops of the State of Washington, of the Archdiocese of Seattle and the Dioceses of Yakima and Spokane, publicly opposed an attack on the Church in the form of legislation, known as Senate Bill 5375, that would require priests to break the seal of Confession in certain instances. The bishops were not making a strongly-worded policy argument but were repelling an attack on the life of the Church — the entire Church, priests and laity. (To give full context: the bishops did not oppose the entire piece of legislation. A May 7, 2025, editorial in the National Catholic Register observed: “Catholic leaders in the state were supportive in principle of the Evergreen State Legislature’s desire to designate clergy as mandatory reporters, alongside of other previously designated groups whose professional responsibilities can place them in a position to hear disclosures of child abuse. In fact, the local Church’s internal policies already require clergy to be mandatory reporters, except when information is obtained during confession.”)

Some of the people who publicly supported this legislation, and voted for it, hold themselves out as Catholic. They have, figuratively, slapped the faces of the three bishops. They merit canonical penalties now. It is not enough for the bishops to say, as they have said, that no priest will ever obey this law. It is not enough that the bishops hope to overturn the law in their lawsuit filed May 29, or that they await the outcome of the suit filed June 23 by the U.S. Department of Justice. Even if the law is overturned, the governor and legislators who hold themselves out as Catholic and who supported this law must face both ecclesiastical justice and their Maker.

The State of Washington House voted on April 11 in favor of the law, 64-31. All 58 Democrats and five Republicans were in favor. I have not researched which House members in favor hold themselves out as Catholic. The state Senate voted on February 28 in favor, 28-20. Twenty-eight of 30 Democrats voted in favor. For most of the 28, I have tried but not been able to identify the religious affiliation of the senators. Of course, the constituents of each legislator know whether or not they hold themselves out as Catholic. I have, however, identified the following three senators as Catholic: Bill Ramos, Marcus Riccelli, and Rebecca Saldan. Senator Ramos died April 19.

The death of Senator Ramos manifestly demonstrates how important it is for our bishops to exercise pastoral care by issuing canonical warnings, rebukes, censures, and even excommunication in instances like this, with the hope that Senator Ramos would have (re)examined his conscience and would have seen what grave error it would be, or was, to vote for this bill.

Governor Bob Ferguson took office on January 15, 2025. He graduated from a Catholic high school and worked with the Jesuit Volunteer Corps. He holds himself out as a Catholic. He signed Senate Bill 5375 into law on May 2 and the law is supposed to take effect July 27.

I am not a canon lawyer but my review of the Code of Canon Law suggests the following provisions as relevant:

Canon 1311 The Church has the innate and proper right to coerce offending members of the Christian faithful with penal sanctions.

 Can. 1339 §1. An ordinary [that is, a bishop], personally or through another, can warn a person who is in the proximate occasion of committing a delict [that is, a wrong] or upon whom, after investigation, grave suspicion of having committed a delict has fallen. §2. He can also rebuke a person whose behavior causes scandal or a grave disturbance of order, in a manner accommodated to the special conditions of the person and the deed.

Can. 1369 A person who in a public show or speech, in published writing, or in other uses of the instruments of social communication…gravely injures good morals…or excites hatred or contempt against religion or the Church is to be punished with a just penalty.

Can. 1375 Those who impede the freedom of ministry…or who greatly intimidate…one who exercises ecclesiastical power or ministry can be punished with a just penalty.

Can. 1399 In addition to the cases established here or in other laws, the external violation of a divine or canonical law can be punished by a just penalty…when the special gravity of the violation demands punishment and there is an urgent need to prevent or repair scandals.

I recognize that the governor cannot, at this date, withdraw his signature and the legislators cannot withdraw their vote, but a penance may still be imposed upon them according to Canon 1340:

Can. 1340 §1. A penance, which can be imposed in the external forum [that is, publicly disclosed], is the performance of some work of religion, piety, or charity… §3. According to his own prudent judgment, an ordinary can add penances to the penal remedy of warning or rebuke.

In addition to the governor and legislators, Father James Connell, a retired priest from the Archdiocese of Milwaukee, a member of the Clergy Accountability Coalition, publicly supported this legislation. He should be punished under the above canons as well as Canon 1374, which provides: “A person who joins an association which plots against the Church is to be punished with a just penalty.”