Are Bad Catholics Still Catholics? (Jimmy Akin article)

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Site Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Whoa before you hit the report button, this is a piece by Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin. I won't put up a survey because not everyone is Catholic in this forum (like yours truly).

A lot of words exchanged over the past week or so with Gov Cuomo gleefully signing a bill into Law expanding abortion to be a state constitutional right. We've seen the political threads and some Catholics calling for excommunication of Cuomo and pressure put on Cardinal Dolan.

Jimmy Akin addresses all of issues from a Catholic apologist perspective here is some of what he said in his titled piece "Are Bad Catholics Still Catholics?"
So, are such people still Catholics? Let’s start with the statement that Cuomo-type figures aren’t Catholics and that it’s an insult to say that they are.

This sentiment expresses a truth. When a public figure uses his fame and influence to betray the Faith, he is acting in an un-Catholic or even anti-Catholic way. And the profound contradiction between what he is doing and what he should be doing as a Catholic generates an objective insult to God. It adds injury to insult, for it wounds the body of Christ.

However, it isn’t literally true to say he’s not a Catholic. That’s hyperbole.

“But wait,” someone might say. “If someone betrays the Faith in this way, how can he still be a Catholic?”

To answer this question, we need to look at the Church’s official documents. According to the Second Vatican Council:

He is not saved . . . who, though part of the body of the Church, does not persevere in charity. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but, as it were, only in a “bodily” manner and not “in his heart” (Lumen Gentium 14).

By losing the gift of charity, a bad Catholic ceases to be a member of the Church “in his heart,” but he remains in it “bodily.”

The Church thus recognizes that there is a sense in which a bad Catholic ceases to be truly or fully Catholic, but there is another sense in which he still is Catholic.

So Jimmy is making a distinction here citing Vatican II between a 'bodily' manner and "in his heart' manner.

He continues:
Are there ways to lose that status altogether? Here the Code of Canon Law becomes relevant. According to it:

Merely ecclesiastical laws bind those who have been baptized in the Catholic Church or received into it, possess the efficient use of reason, and, unless the law expressly provides otherwise, have completed seven years of age (can. 11).

By being baptized in the Church—or by being received into it after being baptized elsewhere—one becomes subject to the laws of the Church, and these obligations remain even when one betrays the Faith in fundamental ways. This even applies in cases where one has committed heresy, apostasy, or schism, which the Code defines as follows:

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 (can. 751).

There are penalties for committing these crimes, including excommunication (can. 1364 §1). However, even excommunication does not mean that one ceases to be a member of the Church. Instead, as the Catechism explains, excommunication is “the most severe ecclesiastical penalty.” It “impedes the reception of the sacraments and the exercise of certain ecclesiastical acts” (CCC 1463).

This is verified by the Code’s explanation of the effects of excommunication (can. 1331), which lists the inability to participate in the sacraments and the inability to exercise ecclesiastical offices, ministries, functions, etc. However, the canon does not list ceasing to be a Catholic or being released from the Church’s laws as a result.

A person who has committed heresy, apostasy, or schism may no longer identify himself as a Catholic, but he’s still bound by the Church’s laws—including, for example, the obligation to attend Mass every Sunday (without receiving Holy Communion, of course).

This brings to mind the old saying, “Once a Catholic, always a Catholic.” There’s a sense in which that’s true, since the legal obligations we acquire upon being baptized or received into the Church continue to exist even if we renounce the Faith and no longer regard ourselves as Catholic.

It is even more clear that someone who still professes to be Catholic—even unfaithfully—remains so, even if it is purely in a “bodily” way and not “in his heart.”

Although there is no doubt that public figures—as well as private individuals—gravely compromise their communion with the Church when they reject key Catholic teachings and values, this doesn’t mean that they literally cease to be Catholics.

Bad Catholics are still Catholics. And that just makes their betrayal of the Faith worse.
Jimmy Akin source link: Are Bad Catholics Still Catholics? | Catholic Answers

Don't know about you, but this second quoted area from Akin is not convincing. Considering in the history of the church (and as many Catholics argue here vigorously the church does not change her doctrines) we have this:
"The sacrosanct Roman Church...firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that..not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life but will depart into everlasting fire...unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that..no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.” — Pope Eugene IV and the Council of Florence (Seventeenth Ecumenical Council), Cantate Domino, Bull

Jimmy vs, Pope Eugene. Who is right here?

I would love to discuss this without flame wars because the problem set facing the Roman Catholic church is every Christian church's challenge. We ALL have Mario Cuomo's sitting in our pews, serving in government and even in the clergy and ministry.

So (1) Catholic thoughts on this and (2) Protestant/Evangelicals lets take the beam out of our eyes too as we 'know' this is our problem set too within the church.

God bless you all!
 

~Zao~

Wisdom’s child
Site Supporter
Jun 27, 2007
3,060
957
✟100,595.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
By losing the gift of charity, a bad Catholic ceases to be a member of the Church “in his heart,” but he remains in it “bodily.”

The Church thus recognizes that there is a sense in which a bad Catholic ceases to be truly or fully Catholic, but there is another sense in which he still is Catholic.

So Jimmy is making a distinction here citing Vatican II between a 'bodily' manner and "in his heart' manner.......

.... (2) Protestant/Evangelicals lets take the beam out of our eyes too as we 'know' this is our problem set too within the church.

God bless you all!
Imo the distinctions are very much about losing/never having charity (love) as the article states. Jesus’ stated mission at His birth was to bring good-will and in retrospect the anti-christian thing to do is to bring ill-will in any form against those to whom He was sent. It seems to me that His end mission is to bring destruction to those who harm the earth and that would include those people and things living on the earth. Iow, those who devise evil (ill-will) against any of it. Outwardly can disguise the inwardly for a time but a closer look can usually discern the truth in just about all areas of our lives. Taking down the ‘beams’ in our own lives leaves room for God to built the pillars of His own temple in the heart.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tz620q
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Site Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Imo the distinctions are very much about losing/never having charity (love) as the article states. Jesus’ stated mission at His birth was to bring good-will and in retrospect the anti-christian thing to do is to bring ill-will in any form against those to whom He was sent. It seems to me that His end mission is to bring destruction to those who harm the earth and that would include those people and things living on the earth. Iow, those who devise evil (ill-will) against any of it. Outwardly can disguise the inwardly for a time but a closer look can usually discern the truth in just about all areas of our lives. Taking down the ‘beams’ in our own lives leaves room for God to built the pillars of His own temple in the heart.
So how would your church handle a situation where a public figure who is a member of your church publicly supports sin?
 
Upvote 0

~Zao~

Wisdom’s child
Site Supporter
Jun 27, 2007
3,060
957
✟100,595.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
So how would your church handle a situation where a public figure who is a member of your church publicly supports sin?
I actually didn’t read the article so could be inferring more than what I stated. :sorry: I’ll have to depend on love to cover that omission for me ;)
As a member of His Body prayer is the most effective. I think the problem comes about when identification with human leaders overrides identification with the Head. Personally we are all individual members, no matter what gifts are given we still make up the whole under One.
So I guess it’s who anyone considers to be leaders and whether or not they are willing to share the guilt and shame. jm2c
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Site Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I actually didn’t read the article so could be inferring more than what I stated. :sorry: I’ll have to depend on love to cover that omission for me ;)
As a member of His Body prayer is the most effective. I think the problem comes about when identification with human leaders overrides identification with the Head. Personally we are all individual members, no matter what gifts are given we still make up the whole under One.
So I guess it’s who anyone considers to be leaders and whether or not they are willing to share the guilt and shame. jm2c
In the case of Gov Cuomo he thumbed his nose at his own faith. He celebrated abortion with cheers and clapping. His church teaches that abortion is sin. Cuomo obviously is not in agreement with his own church. Some within his own church called for his excommunication, meaning removal from the sacraments of Communion and other matters of the life of the church.

If your church had someone who was in disobedience with the church statement of beliefs or Biblical commands for holy living, what would they do?
 
  • Informative
Reactions: anna ~ grace
Upvote 0

GingerBeer

Cool and refreshing with a kick!
Mar 26, 2017
3,511
1,348
Australia
✟119,825.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
A politician who is a state governor governs for the whole state population and not for catholics in that state alone. So is it fair and valid to demand excommunication for the state governor when he signs a bill about abortion into law after the state assembly has passed it? Can the governor use his religious views as a valid override of the elected government's law makers?
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Site Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
A politician who is a state governor governs for the whole state population and not for catholics in that state alone.
We are speaking of an immoral law. People resisted the genocide of Pol Pot because they knew what he was doing was wrong. Most ended up dead or worse in his camps. Read "The Killing Fields" or see the movie.

So is it fair and valid to demand excommunication for the state governor when he signs a bill about abortion into law after the state assembly has passed it?
Cuomo advocated for the bill so he could sign it into law. He cheered when it was signed, lit up skyscrapers in pink in celebration.

Is it fair the Catholic church has to keep Cuomo in communion with their church when he lives out his public life against the church?

Can the governor use his religious views as a valid override of the elected government's law makers?

Can a governor use his Christian upbringing to make moral decisions while in public office. Yes they can. There are governors who veto legislation which puts restriction on abortion and they cite their personal held and/or political views.
 
Upvote 0

Vicomte13

Well-Known Member
Jan 6, 2016
3,655
1,816
Westport, Connecticut
✟93,837.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Whoa before you hit the report button, this is a piece by Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin. I won't put up a survey because not everyone is Catholic in this forum (like yours truly).

A lot of words exchanged over the past week or so with Gov Cuomo gleefully signing a bill into Law expanding abortion to be a state constitutional right. We've seen the political threads and some Catholics calling for excommunication of Cuomo and pressure put on Cardinal Dolan.

Jimmy Akin addresses all of issues from a Catholic apologist perspective here is some of what he said in his titled piece "Are Bad Catholics Still Catholics?"
So, are such people still Catholics? Let’s start with the statement that Cuomo-type figures aren’t Catholics and that it’s an insult to say that they are.

This sentiment expresses a truth. When a public figure uses his fame and influence to betray the Faith, he is acting in an un-Catholic or even anti-Catholic way. And the profound contradiction between what he is doing and what he should be doing as a Catholic generates an objective insult to God. It adds injury to insult, for it wounds the body of Christ.


However, it isn’t literally true to say he’s not a Catholic. That’s hyperbole.


“But wait,” someone might say. “If someone betrays the Faith in this way, how can he still be a Catholic?”


To answer this question, we need to look at the Church’s official documents. According to the Second Vatican Council:

He is not saved . . . who, though part of the body of the Church, does not persevere in charity. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but, as it were, only in a “bodily” manner and not “in his heart” (Lumen Gentium 14).
By losing the gift of charity, a bad Catholic ceases to be a member of the Church “in his heart,” but he remains in it “bodily.”

The Church thus recognizes that there is a sense in which a bad Catholic ceases to be truly or fully Catholic, but there is another sense in which he still is Catholic.

So Jimmy is making a distinction here citing Vatican II between a 'bodily' manner and "in his heart' manner.

He continues:
Are there ways to lose that status altogether? Here the Code of Canon Law becomes relevant. According to it:

Merely ecclesiastical laws bind those who have been baptized in the Catholic Church or received into it, possess the efficient use of reason, and, unless the law expressly provides otherwise, have completed seven years of age (can. 11).


By being baptized in the Church—or by being received into it after being baptized elsewhere—one becomes subject to the laws of the Church, and these obligations remain even when one betrays the Faith in fundamental ways. This even applies in cases where one has committed heresy, apostasy, or schism, which the Code defines as follows:

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 (can. 751).
There are penalties for committing these crimes, including excommunication (can. 1364 §1). However, even excommunication does not mean that one ceases to be a member of the Church. Instead, as the Catechism explains, excommunication is “the most severe ecclesiastical penalty.” It “impedes the reception of the sacraments and the exercise of certain ecclesiastical acts” (CCC 1463).

This is verified by the Code’s explanation of the effects of excommunication (can. 1331), which lists the inability to participate in the sacraments and the inability to exercise ecclesiastical offices, ministries, functions, etc. However, the canon does not list ceasing to be a Catholic or being released from the Church’s laws as a result.


A person who has committed heresy, apostasy, or schism may no longer identify himself as a Catholic, but he’s still bound by the Church’s laws—including, for example, the obligation to attend Mass every Sunday (without receiving Holy Communion, of course).


This brings to mind the old saying, “Once a Catholic, always a Catholic.” There’s a sense in which that’s true, since the legal obligations we acquire upon being baptized or received into the Church continue to exist even if we renounce the Faith and no longer regard ourselves as Catholic.


It is even more clear that someone who still professes to be Catholic—even unfaithfully—remains so, even if it is purely in a “bodily” way and not “in his heart.”


Although there is no doubt that public figures—as well as private individuals—gravely compromise their communion with the Church when they reject key Catholic teachings and values, this doesn’t mean that they literally cease to be Catholics.


Bad Catholics are still Catholics. And that just makes their betrayal of the Faith worse.
Jimmy Akin source link: Are Bad Catholics Still Catholics? | Catholic Answers

Don't know about you, but this second quoted area from Akin is not convincing. Considering in the history of the church (and as many Catholics argue here vigorously the church does not change her doctrines) we have this:
"The sacrosanct Roman Church...firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that..not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life but will depart into everlasting fire...unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that..no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.” — Pope Eugene IV and the Council of Florence (Seventeenth Ecumenical Council), Cantate Domino, Bull

Jimmy vs, Pope Eugene. Who is right here?

I would love to discuss this without flame wars because the problem set facing the Roman Catholic church is every Christian church's challenge. We ALL have Mario Cuomo's sitting in our pews, serving in government and even in the clergy and ministry.

So (1) Catholic thoughts on this and (2) Protestant/Evangelicals lets take the beam out of our eyes too as we 'know' this is our problem set too within the church.

God bless you all!
The Pope Eugene quote is unfortunate because it weakens your case. Since Vatican II, the Catholic position, as contained in the catechism, is that those who are not baptized Catholics may nevertheless be saved by God. So what Pope Eugene asserted back then is not really what the Church teaches anymore.

That's the first point.

Here's the second one, and it's a concern of every church, not just the Catholic. Consider Cuomo, a Catholic, or Pelosi, also a Catholic. Consider Obama, a Jim Wright Churchie, or Hillary, a Methodist, or Bill, a Baptist of some stripe. Consider any powerful politician - not just some hack but a powerful one.

Now consider what happens if, in retaliation for a political act by a an American politician, the Catholic Church, or the Baptist Church, or the Methodist Church - ANY church - takes formal public ecclesial action to excommunicate that public official over his political stance, as a elected official, on a public matter. Having embarrassed him publicly, and put all of the other politicians on notice, and having excommunicated him, or her, what happens NEXT?

Assume that Pelosi, or Cuomo, or any other powerful politician is VINDICTIVE, because they are.

What happens next is that Nancy, or Cuomo, or Hillary, or Elizabeth Warren, or whomever, immediately opens hearings to discuss stripping the Catholic Church, or the Baptist Church, or the Methodist Church - whatever the offending Church is - of its tax exempt status due to direct political interference.

The hearings are held, the investigations are launched - which then widen into larger probes, Mueller-like probes - of that Church's finances, of sexual abuse allegations, of every single crime committed by every single member of the clergy in every single parish for the last 50 years. A huge bill of particulars is prepared, prosecutions are made, public hearings are held, cases are brought before sympathetic judges and judgments are entered. That Church is stripped of its tax free status and has to pay taxes on its income, its real property, all of it.

Yes, that Church will be martyred, certainly. Economically martyred. The thing about martyrs is that their brave, but they do die.

Declare war on Cuomo or Pelosi, and you have declared war on the police, investigative and tax authorities of the countries in which you sit. Churches lose those wars. Westminster Abbey used to be a Catholic Church. Oxford used to be a Catholic university. The Catholic Church used to own a quarter of the property in Cuba. Not any more.

It may seem a noble thing to do, but declaring war on the most powerful political figures in a country does not end well for the churches that do it. The rewards may be rich in the afterlife, but in this life the Churches who do it get wiped out.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: anna ~ grace
Upvote 0

Concord1968

LCMS Lutheran
Sep 29, 2018
790
437
Pacific Northwest
✟23,029.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
The Pope Eugene quote is unfortunate because it weakens your case. Since Vatican II, the Catholic position, as contained in the catechism, is that those who are not baptized Catholics may nevertheless be saved by God. So what Pope Eugene asserted back then is not really what the Church teaches anymore.
So you admit the Catholic Church HAS, in fact, changed it's teaching?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Vicomte13

Well-Known Member
Jan 6, 2016
3,655
1,816
Westport, Connecticut
✟93,837.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
So you admit the Catholic Church HAS, in fact, changed it's teaching?
Obviously.
All old churches do. Have to.
Exhibit A: All of the old Western Churches (Catholics, Lutherans, Calvinists, Anglicans) justified killing people as "witches". None justify that anymore, or even dare to try.

Some pretend that "nothing has changed", but that's just a lie.
 
Upvote 0

Concord1968

LCMS Lutheran
Sep 29, 2018
790
437
Pacific Northwest
✟23,029.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Obviously.
All old churches do. Have to.
Exhibit A: All of the old Western Churches (Catholics, Lutherans, Calvinists, Anglicans) justified killing people as "witches". None justify that anymore, or even dare to try.

Some pretend that "nothing has changed", but that's just a lie.
Now, if you were to go over to Catholic Answers Forum and say that the Catholic Church has changed it's teaching, you'd set off a crapstorm of epic proportions and would probably be banned.
 
Upvote 0

GingerBeer

Cool and refreshing with a kick!
Mar 26, 2017
3,511
1,348
Australia
✟119,825.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Cuomo advocated for the bill so he could sign it into law. He cheered when it was signed, lit up skyscrapers in pink in celebration.
Does he own the skyscrapers? It seems that the owners would be the ones lighting them pink.
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Site Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
  • Agree
Reactions: Gigimo
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Site Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The Pope Eugene quote is unfortunate because it weakens your case. Since Vatican II, the Catholic position, as contained in the catechism, is that those who are not baptized Catholics may nevertheless be saved by God. So what Pope Eugene asserted back then is not really what the Church teaches anymore.

That's the first point.

Here's the second one, and it's a concern of every church, not just the Catholic. Consider Cuomo, a Catholic, or Pelosi, also a Catholic. Consider Obama, a Jim Wright Churchie, or Hillary, a Methodist, or Bill, a Baptist of some stripe. Consider any powerful politician - not just some hack but a powerful one.

Now consider what happens if, in retaliation for a political act by a an American politician, the Catholic Church, or the Baptist Church, or the Methodist Church - ANY church - takes formal public ecclesial action to excommunicate that public official over his political stance, as a elected official, on a public matter. Having embarrassed him publicly, and put all of the other politicians on notice, and having excommunicated him, or her, what happens NEXT?

Assume that Pelosi, or Cuomo, or any other powerful politician is VINDICTIVE, because they are.

What happens next is that Nancy, or Cuomo, or Hillary, or Elizabeth Warren, or whomever, immediately opens hearings to discuss stripping the Catholic Church, or the Baptist Church, or the Methodist Church - whatever the offending Church is - of its tax exempt status due to direct political interference.

The hearings are held, the investigations are launched - which then widen into larger probes, Mueller-like probes - of that Church's finances, of sexual abuse allegations, of every single crime committed by every single member of the clergy in every single parish for the last 50 years. A huge bill of particulars is prepared, prosecutions are made, public hearings are held, cases are brought before sympathetic judges and judgments are entered. That Church is stripped of its tax free status and has to pay taxes on its income, its real property, all of it.

Yes, that Church will be martyred, certainly. Economically martyred. The thing about martyrs is that their brave, but they do die.

Declare war on Cuomo or Pelosi, and you have declared war on the police, investigative and tax authorities of the countries in which you sit. Churches lose those wars. Westminster Abbey used to be a Catholic Church. Oxford used to be a Catholic university. The Catholic Church used to own a quarter of the property in Cuba. Not any more.

It may seem a noble thing to do, but declaring war on the most powerful political figures in a country does not end well for the churches that do it. The rewards may be rich in the afterlife, but in this life the Churches who do it get wiped out.
First I did qualify this is not just a Catholic problem set and believe me I know this well.

Maybe you can opine more on this as a Catholic, but does Dolan need to give the Eucharist to Cuomo who is not in obedience to the church?

What’s happening now is the very threat you speak of, Cuomo knows Dolan won’t rock the boat. He knew it as he was grinning ear to ear singing Satan’s bill into law. And then lit up the altar of the Tower of Babel pink.

I agree these vindictive politicians would make life legally miserable, but then what does that say to the faithful? As long as I don’t take my public sin to church I’m ok?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

GingerBeer

Cool and refreshing with a kick!
Mar 26, 2017
3,511
1,348
Australia
✟119,825.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Site Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
And what do you expect his priest or his bishop to do?
Is on demand abortion moral?

What do you think the teachings of the Catholic Church are on abortion?
 
Upvote 0

GingerBeer

Cool and refreshing with a kick!
Mar 26, 2017
3,511
1,348
Australia
✟119,825.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Is on demand abortion moral?

What do you think the teachings of the Catholic Church are on abortion?
I think that his bishop (or priest) would want to apply proper justice to any proposed action.
 
Upvote 0

concretecamper

Member of His Church
Nov 23, 2013
6,786
2,580
PA
✟275,101.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Roman Catechism

Those Who Are Not Members Of The Church

Hence there are but three classes of persons excluded from the Church’s pale: infidels, heretics and schismatics, and excommunicated persons. Infidels are outside the Church because they never belonged to, and never knew the Church, and were never made partakers of any of her Sacraments. Heretics and schismatics are excluded from the Church, because they have separated from her and belong to her only as deserters belong to the army from which they have deserted. It is not, however, to be denied that they are still subject to the jurisdiction of the Church, inasmuch as they may be called before her tribunals, punished and anathematised. Finally, excommunicated persons are not members of the Church, because they have been cut off by her sentence from the number of her children and belong not to her communion until they repent.

and

Canon 1398 reads, “A person who procures a completed abortion incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.” The term latae sententiae is equivalent to “automatic”—as opposed to ferendae sententiae, meaning “imposed by competent authority.”

The canon refers to the person who had the abortion and those who directly assisted in it. That would probably include any third party who knowingly financed it.

Therefore, Cuomo is no longer Catholic.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,352
10,607
Georgia
✟912,487.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
A lot of words exchanged over the past week or so with Gov Cuomo gleefully signing a bill into Law expanding abortion to be a state constitutional right. We've seen the political threads and some Catholics calling for excommunication of Cuomo and pressure put on Cardinal Dolan.

Jimmy Akin addresses all of issues from a Catholic apologist perspective

So fine - Akin is ok with saying Cuomo is Catholic in name only -- but not in spirit.

But what about a "Catholic catholic" like Pope Francis?

When NY joins the other 7 states in "abortion at any age" devaluation of human life - at what point does Francis focus more on the killing of babies rather than opening doors for acceptance of the LGBT redefinition of marriage and open borders into a country that has already declared war on terrorism in the middle east, condemning that country from within his walled city?
 
Upvote 0