Vatican: Kerry guilty of heresy; incurrs automatic excommunication

EWTN The World Over ^ | 10/15/04

[Salvation]

President Bush: Shares Our Catholic Values

President Bush and John Kerry: On the Issues Important to Catholics

"Seismic" Catholic Shift to Bush [Insight ]

Catholics for Bush

Analyst cites abortion stance as some Catholic voters shift to Bush

Poll: Catholics Trending Towards Bush

Kerry Losing Ground Among White Catholics

Voting Our Conscience, Not Our Religion [Catholic Prof Says "Vote Kerry"]

Vatican: Kerry guilty of heresy; incurrs automatic excommunication

[sitetest]

Dear sinkspur,

I'm not altogether sure that "internal forum" is the appropriate terminology for this case.

His actions are public. Canon law is clear. He has excommunicated himself by his public actions.

Mr. Balesteri, if I recall, his not suing him to have declared excommunicated. He is suing Mr. Kerry in ecclesiastical court for redress of damages.

As to what Mr. Balesteri gets or doesn't get, don't count on it. This letter pretty much forces the archbishop of Boston to have the trial.

In the meanwhile, the Catholic Church recognizes, although unofficially, that John Kerry is an excommunicant.


sitetest

[Salvation]

Catechism of the Catholic Church and what it says about those who support abortion

[sinkspur]

Why does that matter?

Because it will remain known only to those of us on obscure websites who have access to this letter.

I prefer that, actually. I want to freeze the Catholic vote where it is, right now.

Formalize the excommunication after the election.

[ELS]

Mr. Balestieri said in the interview that he personally visited the CDF in Rome and submitted two questions (dubiae?). Usually, the CDF does not respond to or communicate with laymen. However, in this case, not only did the CDF respond to Mr. Balestieri, but he received a response in 10 days. Perhaps the reason this response is "unofficial" is because he is a layman?

He also mentioned that when he visited the chancery in Boston and inquired as to the status of the denunciation that the Archbishop was considering the case. "Boston" told him that they have received many other denunciations.

One other interesting point that he mentioned was that he was in Washington, DC and happened to encounter McCarrick at some event. He asked McCarrick if one were to pubicly advocate a pro-abortion position, would they, in effect, excommunicate themselves. McCarrick, after thinking about it answered in the affirmative. (My memory isn't great at regurgitating interviews. I suggest taping and/or watching the rerun.)

[MegaSilver]

Heresy. Excommunication. Will this be part of our public debate?

I don't want his excommunication to be a part of the "mainstream" or "official" public debate (though Catholics can and should discuss it with regards to their votes--it is the job of the Church to tame its flock and it is doing that); I think his excommunication would speak for itself.

[narses]

"If you read the letter of the theologian, he makes clear that those who hold publicly that though abortion is wrong, it ought to nonetheless be legal, are also public heretics."

Assuming you are right, most Catholic elected Democrats are heretics and excommunicated. Is that a decent reading of your post?

[sinkspur]

He also mentioned that when he visited the chancery in Boston and inquired as to the status of the denunciation that the Archbishop was considering the case.

There will be no formal denunciation from O'Malley, at least not before the election.

[St. Johann Tetzel]

Well said. Gracias. I printed out the pdf file and scanned it as a text file, so we can examine its claims here:

Fr. Basil Cole, OP, SID Dominican House of Studies
487 Michigan Ave., NE
Washington DC 20017-1585

September 11, 2004

Dear Mr. Balestrieri ,

I received a request from the Very Reverend Augustine DiNoia, OP, the undersecretary of the Congregation for Doctrine of the Faith to respond unofficially to your dubia submitted in writing to the Congregation on August 30, 2004:

I. Utrum doctrina de peccato gravi cujuslibet aborti recta via procurati sicut dogma fidei divinae et catholicae, errore opposito adjuncto sicu1 heresia considerato in senso simili Paragraphi Primi Professii Fidei, qualificata esse possit.

ll. Utrum doctrina de illiceitate gravi cujuslibet juris ad abortum recta via procuratum sicut implicite soltem, sed etiam directe inter dogma dicta supra fidei divinae et catholicae, errore opposito adjuncto sicut heresia considerato in senso simili Paragraphi Prim; Professii Fidei, qualificata esse possit.

My response ad Ium: Affinnative.

In the Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae, Pope John Paul II clearly teaches the following:

62c. Given such unanimity in the doctrinal and disciplinary tradition of the Church, Paul VI was able to declare that this tradition is unchanged and unchangeable. [Footnote 72 deleted] Therefore, by the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter and his Successors, in communion with the Bishops-who on various occasions have condemned abortion and who in the aforementioned consultation, albeit dispersed throughout the world, have shown unanimous agreement concerning this doctrine- I declare that direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, always constitutes a grave moral disorder, since it is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. This doctrine is based upon the natural law and upon the written Word of God, is transmitted by tile Church’s Tradition and taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium. [Footnote 73 deleted]

 

 

No one is his right theological mind would claim that this truth concerning the sin of abortion simply defined by the Pope interpreting the papal and episcopal magisterium is a probable opinion, or non-infallible. h is definitive, certain, indubitable and infallible by the ordinary magisterium.

Now to the categorization of the doctrine, I would say the following. Although Pope John Paul II in Evangelium Vitae, 61 states that abortion is not directly and specifically, but only as a logical consequence, condemned by the Sacred Scriptures, the Holy Father does however subsequently teach in the same paragraph that abortion is directly and specifically condemned as a most grave sin by Sacred Tradition:

61c. Christian Tradition-as the Declaration issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith points out so well - is clear and unanimous, from the beginning up to our own day, in describing abortion as a particularly grave moral disorder. [Footnote 61 deleted] From its first contacts with the Greco-Roman world, where abortion and infanticide were widely practiced, the first Christian community, by its teaching and practice, radically opposed the customs rampant in that society, as-is clearly shown by the Didache mentioned earlier. [Footnote 62 deleted]

61d. Throughout Christianity's two thousand year history, this same doctrine has been constantly taught by the Fathers of the Church and by her Pastors and Doctors. Even scientific and philosophical discussions about the precise moment of the infusion of the spiritual soul have never given rise to any hesitation about the moral condemnation of abortion.

As the Church has defined, there are two fonts of Revelation in the Christian faith: the Sacred Scriptures and Sacred Tradition. This is why Canon 750, § 1 of the Code of Canon Law of 1983 is so important to remember:

All that is contained in the written Word of God or in Tradition, that is, in the one deposit of faith entrusted to the Church and also proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn magisterimn of the Church or by its ordinary and universal magisterium, must be believed with divine and catholic faith; it is manifested by the common adherence of the Christian faithful under the leadership of the sacred magisterimn; therefore, all are bound to avoid any doctrines whatever which are contrary to these truths.

A doctrine of Divine and Catholic faith may be contained solely in anyone of these two fonts. It is not required that it be contained simultaneously in both in order to fall within the First Paragraph of the Profession of Faith of 29 June 1998:

With firm faith, I also believe everything contained in the Word of God, whether written or handed down in Tradition, which the Church, either by solemn judgment or by the ordinary and written magisterimn, sets forth to be believed as divinely revealed.

As a theologian, the conclusion of my analysis of your first dubium is that the teaching against abortion is de Fide Divino et Catholica - of Divine and Catholic faith - under the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium.

Although the papal magisterium representing the universal Church has not used the exact clause "of Divine and Catholic Faith" in so many words, it easily could have said so. Just because it has not done so recently does not diminish the manifest truth that the doctrine is in fact of Divine and Catholic Faith. All Catholics are bound to believe in it with the firm and irrevocable assent of Faith admitting of no exceptions whatsoever. In public as in private, they can never deny or doubt this doctrine.

In regard to the level of magisterium, the teaching on abortion is not solemnly defined by the Roman Pontiff as in the case of the declarations of Mary's Immacu1ate Conception or her Assumption. The General Councils of the Church have not hurled anathemas against those who disbelieve this doctrine. To claim that this truth of our faith is a solemnly defined truth would not be factual, but is close to it and could be one day, if the pope ex cathedra, or a General Council in union with him, solemnly defined it as such.

The Church has prudentially thought that such solemn acts of definition are not needed. Perhaps one reason why the Church has not solemnly defined this and other matters of morals is quite simple: There is no massive theological movement against the teaching even though secular society dissents and an occasional theologian or religious teacher does the same thing. Similarly, the church has said little about the existence of the devil in a solemn way since there has been no major denial of his existence as taught in Sacred Scripture. Usually the Church uses her more solemn authority judiciously and more in dogmatic matters than in moral matters, even though dogma and morals are not totally distinct from each other since theology is one science not two.

To claim that the teaching on abortion is not definitive and can be dissented from would, therefore, be erroneous and heretical theologically. If you or I deny it, it is heresy in the Thomistic sense of the word. The denial or doubt of the teaching on abortion does, furthermore, qualify as the heresy envisioned by Canon 751 of the Code of Canon Law:

Heresy is the obstinate denial or doubt, after received baptism, of a truth to be believed by divine and catholic faith.

The condition of obstinate denial or doubt is met, from the theological point of view, when there is the existence of an objective situation of sin that endures in time and which the will of the individual member of the faithful does not bring to an end, no other requirements (attitude of defiance. prior warning, etc.) being necessary to establish the fundamental gravity of the situation in the Church.

The requirement of knowledge is met if one knows or doubts, even if only in confusa (the solid opposite possibility) that Church teaching officially condemns abortion as a sin.

Theologians, therefore commonly teach that the exact level of certainty ("of Divine and Catholic Faith") need not be known.

To commit the sin of heresy, you do not have to deny solemnly defined truths of the faith only. It suffices to deny truths contrary to the manifest understanding of the Sacred Scriptures, such as denying the truth of any of the ten commandments. Thomas himself occasionally cal1s people heretics who deny the manifest and obvious sense of biblical texts. This isn't to say that moral teachings cannot be defined because some very few have been defined solemnly by the Church especially the Council of Trent on marriage, and against polygamy.

So, if I obstinately deny by teaching and preaching, or doubt that abortion is not intrinsically evil, I commit the mortal sin of heresy. All things being equal, I am automatically excommunicated according to the provisions of Can. 1364, § 1, provided that the presumptions of knowledge of the law and penalty (Can. 15, § 2) and imputability (Can. .1321, § 3) are not rebutted in the external forum:

With due regard for can. 194, § 1, n. 2, an apostate from the faith, a heretic or a schismatic incurs automatic excommunication and if a cleric, he can also be punished by the penalties mentioned in can. 1336, §1, nn. 1,2, and 3. §2. If long lasting contumacy or the seriousness of scandal warrants it, other penalties can be added including dismissal from the clerical state.

My response ad IIum: Affirmative.

It should be obvious fron all that I've said that for anyone to maintain a right to abortion piggybacks on the heresy and becomes part of its darkness.

Consequently, if a Catholic publicly and obstinately supports the civil right to abortion, knowing that the Church teaches officially against that legislation, he or she commits that heresy envisioned by Can. 151 of the Code. Provided that the presumptions of knowledge of the law and penalty (Can. 15, § 2) and imputability (Can. 1321, § 3) are not rebutted in the external forum, one is automatically excommunicated according to Can. 1364, § 1.

[Sincerely in the Lord Jesus]

[Fr. Basil Cole, OP]

[narses]

I want it public, on every front page, on every TV screen. Why keep it secret?

[sitetest]

Dear narses,

Yes.

All Catholic politicians who support a right to legal abortion are public heretics and are thus automatically excommunicated.


sitetest

[ELS]

The formal excommunication (read: expulsion from the Church) of a United States presidential candidate will not be announced by a low-level Dominican priest.

No one is saying that this letter is a formal excommunication, especially Mr. Balestieri. It is a response to two questions asked by Mr. Balestieri.

[Ciexyz]

I hate to be picky, but you misspelled the word "incurs" in your title post.

[St. Johann Tetzel]

Excommunication is attached to specific acts, such as procurement of abortion.

And HERESY! (i.e., a Catholic publicly and obstinately supports the civil right to abortion)

[narses]

Deo Gratias!

[cpforlife.org]

From http://www.catholicplanet.com/articles/article78.htm

Catholic Planet www.catholicplanet.com	[ Home | Articles | Poetry | Music | Theology | Resources | Links | Contact ]
	Catholic Christian Article

Abortion and Excommunication
May 20, 2004

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.

 Return to Catholic Planet main page.   All articles are copyrighted by their respective authors, unless otherwise noted.

[The Great RJ]

I think a televised "bell, book & candle" service is in order. The symbolism is that the funeral bell is tolled signifying the death of the soul, the book of life is ceremoniusly closed and the candle symbolizing the light of Christ is extinguished.

[sitetest]

Dear sinkspur,

"Formalize the excommunication after the election."

It already is formalized, it already is official.

All that is currently unofficial is the recognition of it.

And, an official recognition isn't actually needed.


sitetest

[St. Johann Tetzel]

If a Catholic publicly and obstinately supports the civil right to abortion, he commits formal heresy.

[sinkspur]

No one is saying that this letter is a formal excommunication, especially Mr. Balestieri. It is a response to two questions asked by Mr. Balestieri.

The poster of this thread did.