Posted on 10/18/2004 9:13:08 AM PDT by kerrywearsbotox
17 October 2004 RE: KERRY HERESY CASE – MAJOR DEVELOPMENTS
The denunciation and complaint is pending before Archbishop O’Malley of Boston, according to the head of the Tribunal of the Archdiocese of Boston whom I met in person at the Tribunal of Boston at the end of July. He told me explicitly that the case had not been rejected. He also detailed how the Tribunal has been massively overwhelmed by the thousands upon thousands of individual denunciations and complaints. As a result I am asking all of you to, from now on, only to contact Archbishop Sean O’Malley directly, but only UPON SPECIFIC CANONICAL INSTRUCTIONS which I will be sending out over the next few days, as posted on the website and sent to you by e-mail. The Tribunal has sent the case upwards to O’Malley. I went to Rome in late August and met with 10 experts, all of whom confirmed the unprecedented nature and scope of the action in Church history. Moreover, as I had consulted everyone else, I decided in conscience that I had to go and consult the Vatican. I was received by an official of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith. We had a detailed meeting. I submitted two doctrinal questions in Latin to the CDF: First, Whether or not the Church’s teaching condemning any and every direct abortion is a dogma of Divine and Catholic Faith, and if the denial and doubt of the same constitutes heresy. The Second: Whether or not the Church’s teaching condemning any and every right to abortion is a dogma of Divine and Catholic Faith, and if the denial and doubt of the same constitutes heresy. Less than ten days later, the Rev. Basil Cole, O.P., an expert theologian called me to inform me that he was “delegated” by the Very Rev. Augustine di Noia, O.P., Undersecretary of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, to fulfill the task of responding to the question. He studied the matter carefully, and has responded “Affirmative” on both counts. The response is extraordinary: It is now posted in full in .pdf format at www.defide.com One may right-click on the document and choose “save as” to obtain the form. Here is the critical excerpt: “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. 751 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.”***The “Gordian Knot” of the Cuomo defense, “Personally Opposed but Support the Right to Choose” has now been cut in half: A pro-choice Catholic politician may not be guilty of the heresy denying the grave immorality of the ACT of abortion itself, but falls into the pit of committing the heresy supporting the RIGHT of a third party to freely commit abortion.The fact that the Response was provided 1) under “delegation” of the Undersecretary, 2) in only eleven days; 3) in writing; 4) decisively clarifying the matter and 5) in far greater detail than a typical official reply is wholly unique, from what supporting Bishops have expressed. The Congregation had no obligation to respond by “delegating” this matter to the expert theologian.As a number of Bishops have already told me, if any baptized Catholic denies or doubts the two main conclusions of the Response, after knowing of its existence, he or she commits heresy, since, as the theologian states in the text, the dogmatic force of the two propositions is “manifest.” We are not dealing here with a mere opinion about a “matter of opinion.” The two core teachings of the Response are already defined official teachings of the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium. This easily explains its rapid composition and receipt. For all of the above reasons, I have been encouraged to now finally broaden the action: An amended Denunciation and Complaint against Senator John F. Kerry including the Responsum, and four new Denunciations and Complaints against Sen. Ted Kennedy (D) of Massachusetts; Sen. Tom Harkin (D) of Iowa; Mr. Mario Cuomo (D), former Governor of New York; and Sen. Susan Collins (R) of Maine, will be filed Monday in the five Ecclesiastical Courts of the five separate Dioceses. Please, keep a close watch daily of www.defide.com and your e-mail box for updates on how to proceed. IT IS CRITICAL THAT COORDINATION AND QUICK RESPONSE BETWEEN ALL JOINDERS BE ACHIEVED IN ORDER TO SUCCEED IN THE SUITS. For every one of you with Press contacts, the publicizing of these developments is critical to achieving public awareness of the action. Please send in e-mail requests to have the story treated by the big mainstream newspapers and news programs, not to mention cable. With those of even greater influence, please do what you can. This life-threatening heresy must stop. Your donations are earnestly needed as the plan is being finally broadened in scope: Please consider the following hypertext link: http://www.defide.com/contact.html Please help DE FIDE achieve its mission for the greater glory of God and the greater good of this great Nation. Please keep DE FIDE and me in your prayers. Thank you for your very timely support. Yours truly,Marc Balestrieri, J.C.L. DE FIDE1223 Wilshire Blvd.PMB 346Santa Monica, CA 90403Tel.: (310) 917-2719Fax.: (310 496-2843secretary@defide.com
Thanks for the corroboration of this information. To what extent do you suppose the church hierarchy is intentionally keeping a lid on this to prevent it from being used as political fodder by those who would turn Kerry into some sort of martyr?
Thanks.
And if O'Malley did answer yes, Greely and O'Brien and a not a few other Catholics will be brought on all the shout shows. They will muddle the waters by distorting the docterine of conscience, the separation of Church and state and whatever else.
I don't know. I don't have much hope about all this. Catholic docterine is esoteric and easily misrepresented. I think there is hiding room in it for hesitant bishops.
Dear DestroytheDemocrats,
Actually, Catholic doctrine is usually pretty simple and clear.
However, life is messy and muddied, and often, the Catholic Church is careful how doctrine applies to the actual circumstances of an individual life.
sitetest
Dear DestroytheDemocrats,
"And if O'Malley did answer yes, Greely and O'Brien and a not a few other Catholics will be brought on all the shout shows. They will muddle the waters by distorting the docterine of conscience, the separation of Church and state and whatever else."
Well, wheat and tares.
Although, don't be surprised if Fr. Greeley is a little hesitant to publicly denounce a doctrinal ruling that ultimately emanates from Rome. Even he can feel the hot breath of orthodoxy on his neck.
Sartorius pinged folks, including myself, to an interesting article by Fr. Neuhaus at First Things. It's about the latest meeting of the Catholic bishops. Things appear to be changing in interesting ways.
sitetest
Meaning individual priests, right? Priests do not determine Church doctrine. Priests that knowingly promote heretical doctrines are formal heretics.
I'm glad you put that in quotes. These people are CINOs.
Don't forget that practicing Catholics, and the Church as a whole, represent the backbone of the pro-life movement.
What is First Things. I'd like to read the article.
Dear fraidycat,
First Things is a magazine edited by Fr. Richard John Neuhaus, a Catholic convert from Lutheranism.
There is a link to the article in post #73 above.
sitetest
My mistake. Post #48.
Dear redgolum,
I think it is more likely that they'll make me pope than it is that Fr. Neuhaus' superiors will censor him for anything he's done publicly to date.
Which is to say, there is no chance of it at all. ;-)
sitetest
LOL! I tend to agree! He has made a few enemies though, on both sides.
BTW
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1248843/posts
Maybe Kerry will be excommed before the election!
What remains is an public acknowledgment of that fact. So if a reporter asks Bishop O'Mally the right question such as, "Has John Kerry excommunicated himself according to canon law?" All the bishop has to do is answer "YES".
Correct?
That's how I read it. If O'Malley says ANYTHING else, he is admitting that neither he nor his predecessor ever had formal interview with Senator Kerry to apprise him of his danger. Thus, O'Malley would be publicly admitting to being in violation of canon 386 himself. I don't know if O'Malley is a canon lawyer (most bishops are), but he would be a real foolish man not to be talking to one right now.
O'Malley has GOT to be sweating bullets, hoping no one asks that question for a couple of reasons. First, the answer places him squarely against canon 386. Second, the only reason any other bishop has leeway on giving Kerry the Eucharist right now is that Kerry's own bishop hasn't publicly pronounced on the matter. Once O'Malley publicly answers that question with a "yes," EVERY OTHER BISHOP MUST DENY KERRY THE EUCHARIST.
If anyone refuses, they are now at odds with the presiding bishop and arguably in formal schism.
These next few days are absolutely ticklish for O'Malley and for Kerry's presidential bid. This is, no lie, the October surprise that kills Kerry's bid.
Dear redgolum,
He already is excommunicated. That's the upshot of all this.
The CDF has ruled unofficially on a formal question of doctrine and faith brought to it by layman and canon lawyer, Marc Balestrieri. The CDF has ruled that Catholic politicians who uphold a right in law to abortion incur automatic excommunication by virtue of being formal heretics.
Mr. Kerry IS RIGHT NOW EXCOMMUNICATED.
All that lacks is an official, formal recognition of that excommunication. But that isn't actually needed.
Mr. Kerry is as excommunicated as the local neighborhood Catholic abortionist.
sitetest
Dear skellmeyer,
"Once O'Malley publicly answers that question with a 'yes,' EVERY OTHER BISHOP MUST DENY KERRY THE EUCHARIST."
Actually, there was a case out in California, I think, of a bishop denying the sacraments to a pro-abort Catholic pol. The neighboring Catholic bishop invited the pol to the Eucharist in his diocese.
In this case, where one bishop didn't recognize the excommunication of another, it wouldn't mean schism, but it would mean that if the excommunicating bishop wished to enforce the excommunication across the board, he'd have to bring it to Rome. I think this has happened before.
Practically speaking, however, I think the deal is cut. The "fuzzy" bishops may have lost at the June bishops meeting, and the "burn-'em-at-the-stakers" appear to be moving with quiet Vatican backing.
sitetest
"They do this, because the Church has tacitly allowed them to.
Meaning individual priests, right? Priests do not determine Church doctrine. Priests that knowingly promote heretical doctrines are formal heretics."
I'm quite sure that's true, but the fact remains.
Well, technically, that IS schism. The Church is either in full communion with itself or it isn't. If it isn't, then the fabric of the Church is torn. That's the definition of schism. We've been in material schism since the USCCB ruling that blessed this situation of geography determining when you can receive. But, since no one has publicly said it out loud, it isn't formal schism yet.
Thank you. I posted before seeing your link. Very good article. The church may yet get back on track.
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.