Is It Time To Excommunicate?

[TeresaBenedicta]

Matthew 18:15-17

“If your brother sins (against you), go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won over your brother. If he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, so that 'every fact may be established on the testimony of two or three witnesses.' If he refuses to listen to them, tell the church. If he refuses to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector.”


Have we established testimony of two or three (or the entire country) against these Catholic politicians who ignore the Church's teachings? Is it time for these to be excommunicated, so as to save the faithful from scandal?

[KnightofChrist]

Yes.

[TeresaBenedicta]

[As for myself, I don't know. But it's a question I've thought about, considering the grave scandal that is going by having public officials completely ignore the Church and the bishops.]

[Resurrexi]

[Groo the Wanderer]

As should priests who ignore the direction of the Magisterium

[MissyP89]

My opinion on excommunication is another matter, but I must admit just letting people continue misrepresenting the Church causes grave scandal.

[cmotherofpirl]

The excommunications should have started when the FIRST "catholic" politician crossed the line.
Moral authority evaporates if not exercised when necessary.

[CatherineM]

This was the topic of my pastoral theology term paper.

[TeresaBenedicta]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1880580' date='Jun 1 2009, 09:26 PM']This was the topic of my pastoral theology term paper.[/quote]

What was your thesis/conclusion?

[CatherineM]

[quote name='TeresaBenedicta' post='1880622' date='Jun 1 2009, 08:15 PM']What was your thesis/conclusion?[/quote]

That something needs to be done in a unified manner. That we need a definitive teaching from the Vatican to every bishop on how to handle the situation, and what would happen if they didn't follow what the Vatican required. We need a united front both for those who are trying to destroy us, and so that some don't have to carry the heavy load and feel like they have no support behind them.

[Spence06]

I mean, I can't say. I don't think there can be a one rule to judge them all with different circumstances and different people but I think its up to the Church leaders and they are wiser then us so I can't say.

[Marie-Therese]

If I am not mistaken, a public stance which is in opposition to the definitive teaching of the Magisterium of the Church falls into the category of heresy, which is defined in the CCC as "the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same."

To be classified as a heretic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication, meaning that the very act of heresy itself excommunicates you from the Church without any formal action by a bishop needed. The only action needed by these bishops would be to make a public proclamation that the excommunication had taken place.

The big issue is that these people, who are excommunicated by their own actions, continue in some instances to present themselves for the Sacraments. The clergy involved would have to inform these people that they are ineligible due to canonical penalty, and that they must present themselves to confession and renounce their heretical positions to be readmitted.

If I am in error, would someone kindly correct me? I don't want to proffer an incorrect Church position.

[CatherineM]

[quote name='Marie-Therese' post='1880776' date='Jun 1 2009, 10:39 PM']If I am not mistaken, a public stance which is in opposition to the definitive teaching of the Magisterium of the Church falls into the category of heresy, which is defined in the CCC as "the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same."

To be classified as a heretic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication, meaning that the very act of heresy itself excommunicates you from the Church without any formal action by a bishop needed. The only action needed by these bishops would be to make a public proclamation that the excommunication had taken place.

The big issue is that these people, who are excommunicated by their own actions, continue in some instances to present themselves for the Sacraments. The clergy involved would have to inform these people that they are ineligible due to canonical penalty, and that they must present themselves to confession and renounce their heretical positions to be readmitted.

If I am in error, would someone kindly correct me? I don't want to proffer an incorrect Church position.[/quote]


You have a grasp of the Canon Law involved, but some bishops are opposed to making a political statement with the sacraments.

[KnightofChrist]

Which is what I don't understand by doing nothing, they also are making a political statement with the sacraments.

[musturde]

No. Let the politician do whatever. If the Catholic Church begins excommunicating people, it'll be prone to become more political. Has the Catholic Church even excommunicated politicians lately? I haven't heard of any.