Posted on 10/05/2004 9:08:18 AM PDT by NYer
TEXAS, USA, Oct. 05, 2004 (CNA) - Bishop Rene Henry Gracida, Emeritus of Corpus Christi, Texas, in an article sent to Catholic News Agency, has followed up on his recent essay "Denying Holy Communion, A Case Study" responding to criticisms that the procedure he followed to issue an interdiction against a pro-abortion Catholic politician receiving Communion is “outdated,” and he has drawn up a “12-step program” to help bishops discern a course of action.
“Now we have candidates for the Presidency and Congress publicly professing to be practicing Catholics who, although supportive of many of the Church's teachings on social issues, on the most important issue - the inalienable right to life - are diametrically opposed to our Holy Catholic Faith,” writes Bishop Gracida.
“The most important issue facing the world today is the assault on the sanctity of human life,” he says and points out that the Magisterium, especially during this pontificate, “have taught repeatedly that the right to life is the foundation of all other rights in civil society. The denial of this basic right leads eventually to the denial of all others rights.”
“All other grave social issues,” he points out, “such as war, poverty, health, economic justice, immigration, etc. are of secondary importance and indeed pale in comparison to innocent human life under systematic annihilation.”
Bishop Gracida issued the interdiction in 1994 forbidding a politician from receiving Communion, yet he “felt that limiting Interdiction in the internal forum was important not only for the spiritual well being of the person being interdicted, but also for the spiritual good of the community.”
But, he says “in 1995 Pope John Paul II concluded that it was urgent to promulgate the Encyclical Evangelium Vitae. Some 12,000,000 abortions later, it has become crystal clear that the politician who actively engages his political skills to maintain abortion-on-demand and who protects the ongoing genocide by voting for legislation in favor of abortion formally cooperates in the evil of abortion itself.”
“In reality,” says the bishop, “the distinction between the abortionist and the politician is almost nominal: One, a murderer, is guilty of directly procuring abortions; the politician, makes it legally possible for the genocide to continue unabated.”
Recognizing the complexity of the situation in the Church and in our society at the present time I should like to help my brother bishops find their way through the thicket of conflicting opinions and proposals for action. After substantial reflection, I propose a twelve-step program for my brother bishops to help them decisively deal with the grave crisis facing our Church and our Nation.
He recommends twelve steps to help bishops to deal with the complex and grave crisis facing the Church and Nation and to “effectively remedy the crisis in all transparency yet resolute firmness.
The program outlines a specific course of action to be taken by bishops in dealing with publicly pro-abortion Catholics and includes recourse to fraternal and canonical correction and ultimately, if the individual obstinately refuses to recant, excommunication.
Read Bishop Rene Gracida’s complete article and 12 step program at http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/document.php?n=46
3000 dead babies a day isn't good politics. 1000 US soldiers is. They are sick beyond belief.
Essentially, the politician becomes an "enabler".
Thank you for sharing that!
excommunications are private, but these sicko's made the letters public in an attempt to turn the public against the Bishop.
Yes ... how typical of the liberal mindset to turn the table and make themselves into 'martyrs'. Look for John Kerry to pull a similar move, like intentionally going up for communionto Archbishop Raymond Burke, in order to be denied, before the rolling cameras. What better approach to 'gain' sympathetic catholic voters.
It didn't work. I spent many a Saturday doing clinic blockades. and bishop Gracida was always there to lead prayers..
I FERVANTLY believe this...but have reservations whether or not my bishop would adhere to this.
Deacon Francis
Well, I KNOW my bishop won't be applying this methodology.
"Albany’s controversial Bishop Hubbard said he would not deny a pro-abortion politician Holy Communion because he would also then have to deny people who favored the death penalty and war, and who neglected care of the poor and the hungry."
Prohibition is worthless without enforcement
He's on his way to Rome for an 'ad limina' visit. Perhaps the Holy Father can set him straight.
|
|
Any Catholic who obstinately denies that abortion is always gravely immoral, commits the sin of heresy and incurs an automatic sentence of excommunication.
Canon Law and Church Teaching Canon 1398: “A person who procures a completed abortion incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.” Canon 751: “Heresy is the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.” Canon 1364 §1: “an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.” The phrase “latae sententiae” literally means a ‘broad sentence’ or ‘wide judgment,’ in other words, a sentence or judgment which is applied widely. In this context, it refers to a type of excommunication which is automatic. Such a sentence of excommunication is incurred “by the very commission of the offense,” (CCC 2272) and does not require the particular judgment of a case by competent authority. Apostasy, heresy, and schism are all offences which incur a sentence of excommunication automatically. Heresy is the obstinate denial of any truth of the Catholic faith, on a matter of faith or morals, which has been definitively taught by the Magisterium. The Magisterium has repeatedly and definitively taught that abortion is always gravely immoral. (CCC 2270 to 2275) Pope John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae, n. 57: “Therefore, by the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter and his Successors, and in communion with the Bishops of the Catholic Church, I confirm that the direct and voluntary killing of an innocent human being is always gravely immoral. This doctrine, based upon that unwritten law which man, in the light of reason, finds in his own heart (cf. Rom 2:14-15), is reaffirmed by Sacred Scripture, transmitted by the Tradition of the Church and taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium.” Obtaining an Abortion Any Catholic who deliberately and knowingly obtains a procured abortion commits a mortal sin and is also automatically excommunicated, under canon 1398. Under the laws of secular society, if one person commits a crime, then anyone who deliberately and knowingly provides essential or substantial means for that person to commit that crime is called an accessory to that crime and is also subject to the penalties of law. Similarly, any Catholic who deliberately and knowingly provides essential or substantial means for any woman to procure an abortion also commits a mortal sin and also incurs the same sentence of excommunication. Any Catholic who substantially assists another in the deliberate sin of abortion is also guilty of serious sin and also incurs a latae sententiae excommunication. Believing in Abortion Any Catholic who obstinately denies that abortion is always gravely immoral commits the sin of heresy. The sin of heresy also incurs a latae sententiae excommunication. Unfortunately, some Catholics obstinately deny that abortion is always immoral, and some Catholics claim that abortion can, at times, be a morally-acceptable choice, and some Catholics claim that a person can, in good conscience, choose abortion. Under the Code of Canon Law of the Roman Catholic Church, canons 751 and 1364, all such Catholics are automatically excommunicated for the sin of heresy. This sentence of latae sententiae excommunication applies to any Catholic who denies that abortion is gravely immoral, regardless of whether they keep this denial hidden or publicly reveal it. Promoting Abortion Those Catholics who publicly announce their denial that abortion is always gravely immoral, or who publicly promote abortion, or who publicly argue in favor of legalized abortion, also commit a mortal sin and also incur a sentence of automatic excommunication. This sentence of excommunication applies to Catholics who are politicians, as well as to those Catholics who are political commentators, or public speakers, or who write or otherwise publicly communicate their erroneous view that abortion can be morally-acceptable or that abortion should be legal. This sentence of excommunication also certainly applies to those Catholics who claim to be theologians or Biblical scholars, but who believe or teach that abortion is not always gravely immoral. Those Catholics who promote abortion are automatically excommunicated for two reasons. First, they have fallen into the sin of heresy by believing that abortion is not always gravely immoral (canons 751 and 1364). Second, these Catholics are providing substantial assistance for women to obtain abortions by influencing public policy to make abortions legal, and to keep abortions legal, and to broaden access to abortion. Those who provide such substantial assistance commit a mortal sin and incur a sentence of automatic excommunication (canon 1398). Voting for Abortion Any Catholic politician who casts a vote with the intention of legalizing abortion, or of protecting laws allowing abortion, or of widening access to abortion, commits a mortal sin. When such a vote indicates that the Catholic politician believes that abortion is not always gravely immoral, such a politician incurs a sentence of automatic excommunication, under canons 751 and 1364, because of heresy. When such a vote is intended to have the effect of making abortion legal, or more easily obtainable, or more widely available, such a politician incurs a sentence of automatic excommunication, under canon 1398, as someone who is attempting to provide substantial or essential means for women to obtain abortions. Catholic politicians who pass laws which legalize, protect, or widen access to abortion, are providing essential assistance to women who want to obtain abortions. It is not sufficient for Catholic politicians to claim that they are “personally opposed” to abortion. If any Catholic politician favors legalized abortion, despite a claim of personal opposition, such a politician commits a mortal sin by promoting abortion and by voting in favor of abortion. The same is true for any Catholic who casts any vote with the intention of legalizing abortion, or of protecting laws allowing abortion, or of widening access to abortion. Such a voter commits a mortal sin and incurs a sentence of automatic excommunication for two reasons. First, they are committing the sin of heresy by believing that abortion should be legal and available. Second, they are committing the grievous sin of providing women with substantial or essential assistance in obtaining abortions, by attempting to legalize or broaden access to abortion. However, if, for a period of time, Catholic politicians and voters are unable to enact a law prohibiting all abortion, then Catholic politicians and voters may in good conscience vote for whichever law offers the greatest restrictions and limits on abortion. Subsequently, Catholic politicians and voters are required by the moral law to continue to enact further restrictions and limits on abortion, to the greatest extent possible, and, at every possible opportunity, to vote for laws which completely outlaw abortion. Voting for Politicians In general, the moral law requires Catholic voters to vote for those candidates who oppose abortion over those who favor abortion. However, there are exceptions to this general principle. For example, if a political candidate favors abortion, but is a member of a party which generally opposes abortion, a Catholic voter may, in good conscience, vote for that candidate, with the intention of giving more political power to the party which opposes abortion. In another case, a Catholic voter might, in good conscience, vote for a pro-abortion candidate, if the political office would offer no opportunity for the elected candidate to vote for or against abortion. Even so, every Catholic voter should consider that anyone who supports abortion, as if it were a woman’s right, or as if it could ever be a moral choice, must necessarily be someone who has a seriously limited understanding of morality and justice. Such a person would not often be the better candidate for any office in place of one who understands that abortion is gravely immoral. In every case, a Catholic should vote in such a way as to obtain as many restrictions on abortion as possible, and so as to obtain the end to legalized abortion as soon as possible. Constitutional Amendment Within any constitutional form of government, it would be ideal to have a constitutional clause or amendment which permanently and completely outlaws all procured abortions. Such an amendment must ban all abortions, regardless of circumstance, so that the direct and voluntary killing of an innocent prenatal human being will be always contrary to human law, just as it is always contrary to the moral law. A constitutional amendment can permit certain medical procedures, which are absolutely necessary to save the life of the mother, and which indirectly result in the unintended and unsought death of the prenatal, only if there is no possible way to save the life of the prenatal. A prenatal is defined as any human being from conception to birth. Every reasonable effort should be made to save the lives of both mother and prenatal. If the life of the prenatal can be saved by no other possible option than by risking or allowing the death of the mother, then the prenatal must be saved. Catholic teaching clearly allows for certain medical procedures, which indirectly and involuntarily result in the death of the prenatal, to save the life of the mother, but only when all options to save the life of the prenatal have been exhausted. Such a procedure is not an abortion and is not an exception wherein abortion is allowed. On the other hand, a constitutional amendment which bans abortion with exceptions for various cases, such as rape, incest, or a risk to the mother’s life, would be worse than having no such amendment at all. Any woman who is willing to commit the sin of abortion, would also be willing to lie. If a constitutional amendment permitted abortion in cases of rape, then any woman willing to lie and to falsely claim that she was raped, would be able to also claim that she had a constitutional right to an abortion. The result would be that a constitutional amendment, which seems to ban abortion with some exceptions, would end up giving every woman who is willing to tell a lie, a purported constitutional right to abortion. This situation would be worse than having no such constitutional amendment at all. Therefore, the only acceptable pro-life constitutional amendment would be one that, in accordance with Catholic teaching, bans all procured abortions without exception. Here is an example of a just constitutional amendment protecting human life. --- by Ronald L. Conte Jr. |
 |
|
|
|
We can only hope...but don't hold your breath.
Hear, hear!
Abortion and excommunication
http://www.catholicplanet.com/articles/article78.htm
http://www.priestsforlife.org/preaching/never.html
http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/abortio2.htm
http://www.catholicherald.com/saunders/02ws/ws020124.htm
BUMP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Bumping!
When I mentioned this subject to a Catholic who said they were voting for Kerry today, they were totally shocked. Were not even aware that bishops had spoken out in this way.
I then asked her if she had read what it said about abortion in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Her answer was no.
And I just left it there saying it might be good to check out the facts.
Aye! Yi! Yi!
Are you planning on getting the "Voter Guide for Serious Catholics" to her?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
