Breaking - SEN. JOHN KERRY “EXCOMMUNICATED,” ACCORDING TO VATICAN RESPONSE

SANTA MONICA, CA – A Los Angeles based expert in Canon Law, the legal code used by the Roman Catholic Church, announced Friday on EWTN's the World Over Live with Raymond Arroyo that an important Vatican congregation has given an unprecedented boost to his case for heresy against presidential candidate John Kerry. Marc Balestrieri, JCL who has filed a formal case for Heresy against Kerry for his support of the right to abortion, revealed that he has received a written response prompted by the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, affirming that Catholic politicians who persist in supporting the right to abortion are “automatically excommunicated.”

Mr. Balestrieri, Director of De Fide, said the Response was written by the Reverend Fr. Basil Cole, O.P., an expert theologian based in Washington D.C., who was delegated by the Undersecretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Very Rev. Fr. Augustine di Noia, O.P., to formally respond. As a result, the Response has encouraged him to expand his complaint to include four more pro-abortion Catholic politicians, both Democrat and Republican.

“I went to Rome in person to submit two critical questions to the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith,” said Balestrieri. “The first: Whether or not the Church’s teaching condemning any direct abortion is a dogma of Divine and Catholic Faith, with the denial or doubt of that dogma constituting heresy. The second: Whether or not the Church’s teaching condemning every right to abortion is a dogma of Divine and Catholic Faith, with the opposite error to that dogma heresy.”

In a four-page letter now posted at www.defide.com, Fr. Cole responded ‘Affirmative’ on both counts.

The Response is significant in that it represents the first time in modern history since Roe v. Wade in 1973 that such a clear reply is given to the Catholic faithful. Drafted under the auspices of the official Vatican Congregation with competency to decide doctrinal questions, it is entirely unambiguous and concludes:

“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.”

Mr. Balestrieri, a political independent, has repeatedly declared that his actions come to defend the Faith and Holy Eucharist from sacrilege and scandal, not as one focused on an electoral outcome. Catholics confess to the real presence—the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of God Himself—in the Sacrament of Holy Communion. “As early as today, Sen. Kerry, and all pro-choice Catholic politicians, who publicly call themselves Catholic yet who blatantly violate Canon Law by continuing to profess Heresy and receive Holy Communion, must publicly reject their abortion advocacy for the sake of their own souls, and the others they have scandalized. They have been excommunicated.”

Balestrieri went to Rome in late August and met with a dozen experts, all of whom confirmed the threefold unprecedented nature and scope of his canonical action in Church history: that it is a formal complaint for reparation for harm due to heresy; that this is analogous to a Common Law class action; and that the complaint was initiated by a layman. (In the past such actions regarding heresy would have been handled by the "Holy Office" vertically downwards, and would never have reached this point.)

Lacking guidance from the Vatican, he sought an appointment and was received by an official of the Congregation in its halls in Rome. On September 9th, less than ten days later, the Rev. Basil Cole, O.P., contacted Balestrieri to inform him of his delegation to answer the two questions. Three days later, the written Response was issued.

The Response states that any Catholic who denies or doubts the two main conclusions, after knowing of their existence, commits Heresy. The Response holds that the dogmatic force of the two propositions is “manifest,” a term not lightly used by any theologian. This means that one is dealing here not with a matter of a theologian’s personal opinion, but with two core non-negotiable Articles of Faith. The Response, therefore, is “official” and binding in that it simply restates infallible teachings of the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium, already stated unequivocally by Cardinals Joseph Ratzinger, prefect of the CDF, and Tarcisio Bertone, then secretary of the CDF, in their own commentaries to the Professio Fidei of 1998. Hence the Response’s rapid and forceful content.

The Response goes even further in specifying that any baptized Catholic who publicly states, “I’m personally opposed, but I support a woman’s right to choose,” is in fact presumed by Canon Law to be guilty of heresy, with the burden of proving that he is not shifted to the violating politician. A Catholic who publicly professes the right to choose heresy is automatically excommunicated, not by any declaration of the Church per se, but by the acts committed by the individual, and thus being in a state of mortal sin is ineligible to receive any of the Sacraments of the Church, including reception of the Eucharist, marriage, absolution from sin, and even Christian burial until the error is recanted and excommunication is lifted.

The often cited "Cuomo" defense, “I am personally opposed but I support the right to choose” has now been cut in half: A pro-choice Catholic politician who says that he is “personally opposed” to the ACT of abortion itself still commits Heresy by publicly supporting the civil RIGHT to choose abortion.

The fact that the Response was provided to a layman at the request of the Undersecretary, in writing, and in only eleven days is considered unique by numerous Bishops familiar with the matter. The extensive detail of the response, decisively clarifying the matter was unexpected. Normally, only a bishop may request such clarification of doctrine from the CDF and receive an official reply. Such responses usually take a much longer time to be received, and they are rarely made public.

Balestrieri also announced that the Denunciation for Heresy, a kind of lawsuit under the Catholic Church's Canon Law, filed against Senator Kerry is now pending before Kerry's bishop, Archbishop Sean O’Malley of Boston, according to the head of the Tribunal of the Archdiocese of Boston whom Balestrieri met with in person at the offices of the Metropolitan Tribunal at the end of July. The judge told him explicitly twice that the case had not been rejected, and that it was “now in the hands of the Archbishop.” At the same time, Balestrieri was informed that the Tribunal simply did not have enough time to properly handle the sheer number (thousands upon thousands) of Denunciations and Complaints from ordinary Catholics that have poured in by certified mail. He also clarified that the Archbishop had not yet decided whether to instruct the Promoter of Justice, whose job is similar to that of a prosecutor, to formally charge Kerry with Heresy or any of the five other ecclesiastical violations Balestrieri had denounced him for.

Balestrieri is asking all individuals and groups seeking to join his canonical actions, as a result of the Tribunal’s hesitation in handling the cases, for all future denunciations and complaints to be sent to Archbishop Sean O’Malley directly, in accordance with instructions which he will be sending out over the next few days, as posted on the DeFide.com website and sent to the thousands of supporters by e-mail.

With account taken of the developments and advice received while in Rome, Balestrieri has now decided he is able to broaden the actions he has filed to include other notoriously pro-abortion Catholic politicians of both the Republican and Democrat parties. Apart from amending his Denunciation and Complaint against Sen. Kerry to include the Response, four additional Denunciations and Complaints have been filed 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. They have been filed today in the five Ecclesiastical Courts of the five separate Dioceses of Boston (MA), Fall River (MA), Des Moines (IA), New York (NY), and Portland (ME). Balestrieri said the four have been chosen based on their consistent, extensive, and public pro-abortion records.

Balestrieri has appealed for the thousands of joinders to be vigilant for procedural updates and specific canonical instructions which he is sending out this week.

Dear el_chupacabra,

Mr. Balestrieri filed a case specifically against Mr. Kerry in the ecclesiastical court of the Archdiocese of Boston.

He personally asked two questions of the Congregation of Doctrine and Faith (CDF) whether a Catholic politician who upholds the legal right to abortion is automatically excommunicated.

The CDF asked an American theologian to reply to Mr. Balestrieri. The theologian replied in the affirmative.

There isn't a lot of wiggle room, as the the theologian specifically holds that the "personally opposed... but can't impose my morality by law," opinion is heresy and formal adherence to this view incurs automatic excommunication.

I'm sure Mr. Kerry (and Mr. Kennedy, and Mr. Pataki, and others) will go down swinging, refusing to recognize the truth of this. I'm also reasonably sure we will not see Thunder from the Vatican prior to Nov 2 concerning this.

But I think in the not-too-distant future, it will become clear that pro-abort Catholics have read themselves out of the Catholic Church. Officially.

sitetest

"Would this help or hurt Kerry"

Essentially what this article is saying is that John Kerry excommunicates himself (ipso facto excommunication) by refusing to adhere to a very serious Church ruling; namely, that abortion is the murder of a child, and that to be part of it in any way violates God's Commandment "Thous Shalt Not Kill". This Church teaching applies especially to Catholic politicians because they are civially empowered to either continue on or put an end to abortion. When they unrepentently fight for "choice" they sin gravely and place themselves outside of Christ's Community.

So to answer your question, it hurts Kerry, and it hurts him plenty. Especially when you're considering the state of his eternal soul.

Dear sinkspur,

Mr. Kerry's excommunication needs the same official declaration as the neighborhood abortionist's excommunication. That is to say, it is self-evidently true, needing no recognition from higher authority.

Nonetheless, to me the actions of the Vatican show that they are likely moving in that direction, of an official recognition of the excommunicated status of pro-abort politicians. And sooner, rather than later, although I don't think before Nov 2.

sitetest

I'm just worried about backlash from the anti-Catholic zealots out there.

Anti-Catholic zealots, by and large, are already voting for Kerry. This country has come a long way from 1960. No thinking person is under any illusions that the pope is pulling Kerry's puppet strings.

Thanks mostly to the pro-life movement, but also to changing demographics, evagelical Christians and Catholics are now more acquainted with each other. I think many evangelicals today are familiar enough with the Catholic faith to understand that there are requirements to be a Catholic and that Kerry doesn't make the cut.

Many people who don't like the Catholic Church are not afraid to vote for Rick Santorum, a genuine Catholic. They know exactly where he stands on the issues.

True, in that abortion providers (doctors/ nurses/ pregnant woman/ parter, if in the picture) excommunicate themselves ipso facto (in technical terms, they are excommunicate "latae sententiae); but that verdict does not apply to the regular person who may hold a pro-choice opinion in his/her heart and does not speak it publically. But a public official such as Kerry, et al, opens himself to this judgment.

Nonetheless, to me the actions of the Vatican show that they are likely moving in that direction, of an official recognition of the excommunicated status of pro-abort politicians. And sooner, rather than later, although I don't think before Nov 2.

You may be right, though JPII has been reluctant to pull the trigger on excommunication. And it could backfire if the Church made a big deal of it before the election.

There's no chance that O'Malley will do anything.

Most who are anti-Catholic are also anti-abortion. This should have negligable effect at best amongst those.

There's a difference between being anti-Catholic and being a bigot. Most pro-life non-Catholic Christians are not bigots. The real anti-Catholic zealots are the feminazis, the college professors, and the rest of the liberal elite.

At the same time, Balestrieri was informed that the Tribunal simply did not have enough time to properly handle the sheer number (thousands upon thousands) of Denunciations and Complaints from ordinary Catholics that have poured in by certified mail.

"Thousands upon thousands"? When did this start? I never even heard of such a thing until it was reported that Balestrieri had filed his. (I wonder if they're all about Kerry . . .)

Dear sinkspur,

The trigger's already been pulled. The CDF has made certain that the Church's position is clear and unambiguous, if presented quietly: pro-abort Catholic politicians are automatically excommunicated.

Mr. Kerry is currently in a state of self-excommunication.

All that is missing, and it isn't quite necessary, is the official recognition by name. Which is formally redundant.

I believe that Archbishop O'Malley may have few choices in the matter. It has been reported that when asked, even CARDINAL MCCARRICK admitted that a pro-choice Catholic politician incurs automatic excommunication.

sitetest

Seems to me if this were the case that a WHOLE lotta Catholics would be in the same boat.

Bingo!!! We have a winner!

I'd qualify that by saying they aren't Catholics, they are CINOs.

Well this isn't news, imho. Catholics and those who've studied Catholicism know that his rabidly pro-abortion position is contrary to his claim to *be* a Catholic.

He said at the last debate, "We're all God's children." There's an exception, for him, if you're a baby in the womb!

It's *his behavior* (lack of prepentence and repudication for his pro-baby killing voting) that makes him in a state of heresy and "excommunicated" and *not* an action by the Church. They don't have to formally say it. That they took the case is interesting.

For political purpoes, I hope this doesn't get officially resolved until after the election because I think the controversy could HELP Kerry.

No declaration is necessary. The excommunication is "latae sententiae," and the letter makes clear that the burden of proof is on Kerry to demonstrate that the conditions under which the excommunication occurs do not exist.

Posted and debunked here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1246841/posts

It was not "debunked". Get your facts straight.

Kerry has incurred latae sentatiae excommunication.

Formal excommunication proceedings by the Church are very rare but automatic excommunication like this is common -- you don't hear about it because there's no public announcement from God on the matter.

The only issue I have (being that I am a new Catholic) is that I believe God gives us "free will" and while I don't want any of my tax $$$ going to abortion, how do you stop a woman that clearly doesn't want her child by not sabotaging the pregnancy either by an abortion or causing the pregnancy to end by other means?

I would never vote for Kerry but I think I can understand the problem one would have when you have someone that clearly doesn't view life beginning at conception. I do, so of course I am pro life and advocate all the things that would do away with Roe vs Wade. I think it's up to the states to decide. If Rhode Island is inhabited by a bunch of atheists and they want Abortion on demand. Fine but you won't see me living there. If I did, I would protest and try to change the state law..

So back to the ruling... it concerns me a little bit b/c there are probably some people that (unlike Skerry) that really are Pro Life but are representing a bunch of atheist feminazis and trying to separate the Pro Life stand with the "others" that cling to Roe vs Wade.

That's my rant. I just don't see this as a way to solving our problem. Yet, I don't like people who are hypocrites taking credit for things they clearly don't beleive in.

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.