Vatican denies it responded to lawyer seeking Kerry's excommunication.

Catholic News Service ^ | October 19, 2004 | Cindy Wooden

[Remole]

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- An official at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith said a California canon lawyer seeking a formal decree of heresy against Sen. John F. Kerry of Massachusetts, Democratic presidential nominee, has misrepresented his contact with the Vatican office.

"The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has had no contact with Mr. (Marc) Balestrieri," said Dominican Father Augustine DiNoia, undersecretary of the congregation.

"His claim that the private letter he received from (Dominican) Father Basil Cole is a Vatican response is completely without merit," Father DiNoia told Catholic News Service Oct. 19, declining to discuss the matter further.

[St. Johann Tetzel]

Don't confuse Catholic World News, edited by Phil Lawler, with the Catholic News Service. It is like confusing the Catholic Register with the Catholic Reporter.

Well said and worth repeating.

[avg_freeper]

"HA HA HA HA HA HA! I feel so sorry for all of you who were hoping to strike the match and burn Kerry at the stake in Boston Commons."

I'll give you an 8.73 for reveling in the murder of the innocent and a 6.44 for gratuitous false witnessing.

Thanks for playing.

[shield]

His wifes monies are probably too important to the Catholic Church...you know the ole' saying: money talks bullsh*t walks.

[Flying Circus]

What is your fascination with burning at the stake? That was much more a protestant practice than a Catholic one.

Excommunication is a tool for instruction of the faithful. By letting people like Kerry and Kennedy appear to be Catholics in good standing the church undermines the message of the church. A public excommunication of these people would be a step towards taking away the rationalizations many Catholics are making to tell themselves they are good Catholics. And if anything of his alter days boy days stays with him, even Kerry may be given pause and repent of his position (too much to hope?).

[Capt. Tom]

Just because he's not excommunicated doesn't mean he's in good standing in the Catholic Church.

And, it appears a majority of Catholics know that.

Just after Kerry got the socialist (Dem) nod after Dean self destructed, and Kerry became the presidential candidate, I said to a group of my friends. I don't know for sure who will win the election but I know who will be the big loser. The Catholic Church. ( I just knew the abortion issue would surface and the Church would have to get tough on Catholic politicians who suport abortion, and the modern day Catholic hierachy doesn't have the stomach for that.)

And to this day the Church has done nothing to establish credibility. When the Catholic Church can't handle its own heretics defined by their own rules, they have no credibility. - Tom

[sinkspur]

I don't think anybody doubts where the Church stands on abortion, and where it stands regarding Kerry.

But, the Church in the US is not going to risk its tax exempt status. Nor should it, IMO.

[sitetest]

Dear sinkspur,

"But, the Church in the US is not going to risk its tax exempt status."

????

C'mon, gimme a break. Announcing that formal heretics are automatically excommunicated ought to have nothing to do with tax exempt status.

And frankly, if the US government were to revoke the Church's tax exempt status because the Church forthrightly told the truth about pro-abort Catholic politicians, then we'd be better off without it.

30 pieces of silver.


sitetest

[ninenot]

Not to worry. The Vat's comment is technically correct--they had NO communication with the man who filed the lawsuit.

Of course, the Dominican in DC who wrote the response MAY, indeed, have been in touch with the Vatican.

The case is patent. Open-and-shut. Kerry's a heretic, and under Canon law he is excommunicated. The Vatican hardly needs to write an essay on the topic.

[ninenot]

Sink, he's OUTTA there, Churchwise.

The Vatican will not issue a signed/sealed/delivered registered/return-receipt essay on the matter. All one needs is what Cole wrote: he's a heretic, latae-sententiae did it to himself.

Not that THAT will make any difference in the election.

[sitetest]

Dear ninenot,

"The Vat's comment is technically correct--they had NO communication with the man who filed the lawsuit."

I'm not sure Mr. Balestrieri would agree with that. It's a little long, but here is his account:

http://www.defide.com/news.html

Here is an excerpt:

"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."

sitetest

[redgolum]

Well said.

I just wish someone in Christanity had the guts to make a stand once in a while.

[ELS]

It's called plausible deniability. The Curia is the world's oldest political organization. They have had plenty of time to master the political arts.

[Revel]

By not carring out its duty- the church is becoming involved in politics. They fear being labeled meddlers more than they fear God. This is exactly why the church has lost any real meaning. They are becoming more worldly than Christain.

[cpforlife.org]

Sadly the Vatican is as infected by partisan politics and the spirit of the world - mentality as Washington, D.C.

In the EXACT same situation, based on the words below, is there any doubt what Pope Pius XI would have said and done?!

Pope Pius XI "Those who hold the reins of government should not forget that it is the duty of public authority ... to defend the lives of the innocent ... among whom we must mention in the first place infants hidden in the mother's womb. And if the public magistrates ... do not defend them, but by their laws and ordinances betray them to death at the hands of doctors and others, let them remember that God is the Judge and Avenger of innocent blood which cries from earth to heaven" (Casti Connubii No. 67 - 31/12/1930).

“The floor of Hell is paved with the skulls of bad bishops.”
--St. John Chrysostom
Bishop, Doctor of the Church, born at Antioch, c. 347

[cpforlife.org]

Pope John Paul II-- Evangelium Vitae, (The Gospel of Life) 1995


72. Disregard for the right to life, precisely because it leads to the killing of the person whom society exists to serve, is what most directly conflicts with the possibility of achieving the common good. Consequently, a civil law authorizing abortion or euthanasia ceases by that very fact to be a true, morally binding civil law.


73. Abortion and euthanasia are thus crimes which no human law can claim to legitimize. There is no obligation in conscience to obey such laws; instead there is a grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection. From the very beginnings of the Church, the apostolic preaching reminded Christians of their duty to obey legitimately constituted public authorities (cf. Rom 13:1-7; 1 Pet 2:13-14), but at the same time it firmly warned that "we must obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29). In the Old Testament, precisely in regard to threats against life, we find a significant example of resistance to the unjust command of those in authority. After Pharaoh ordered the killing of all newborn males, the Hebrew midwives refused. "They did not do as the king of Egypt commanded them, but let the male children live" (Ex 1:17). But the ultimate reason for their action should be noted: "the midwives feared God" (ibid.). It is precisely from obedience to God—to whom alone is due that fear which is acknowledgment of his absolute sovereignty—that the strength and the courage to resist unjust human laws are born. It is the strength and the courage of those prepared even to be imprisoned or put to the sword, in the certainty that this is what makes for "the endurance and faith of the saints" (Rev 13:10).


In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to "take part in a propaganda campaign in favour of such a law, or vote for it".

[cpforlife.org]

"When there is an imminent danger for the Faith, Prelates must be questioned, even publicly, by their subjects."
–St. Thomas Aquinas
Summa Theologica II, II, q. 33, a. 4

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

It doesn't matter what any bureaucrat or functionary says. The reasoning is sound in the judgement that Kerry suffers automatic excommunication. A self-described "Catholic" who promotes the murder of the unborn is no longer in full Communion with the Catholic Church.

Kerry's statements speak for themselves. He has said publicly he "does not agree with" the teaching of the Church on life. That is a grave error.

Even if Pope John Paul II were to make as a grave a lapse in reason as to suggest that Kerry may receive Holy Communion while promoting senseless genocide, the Pope would be wrong.

[eastsider]

Summa Theologica II, II, q. 33, a. 4

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

"You can incur excommunication 'latae sententiae' (automatically) only if you procure or perform an abortion," one said."

That's an odd reading. If you agreed to drive a woman to a clinic, you are assisting in the abortion. If someone who was thinking about having one and asked your opinion and you implied that it was OK for her to have an abortion, you would be assisting. Political speech which does the same is in the same category. Kerry is excommunicated. He qualifies rather handily hands-down for 'latae sententiae'.

Kerry is not only winking to one woman to have an abortion he is actually saying he WILL FUND the slaughter of embryos for stem cell research. That is GENOCIDE. Mass murder. That's a lot worse than just one troubled and confused woman killing her child out of panic.