I agree under these conditions, otherwise there is so much misinformation out there about abortifacent contraceptives that I could never agree with saying it’s a direct abortion. Most people (I used to be one of these people) have been fooled into the lie that contraceptives like the pill don’t abort.I answered yes to both. I interpreted the question to mean that the woman believes herself to be pregnant and seek the “plan B” “contraceptive”. The intent is to stop (abort) the pregnancy.
Outside of at the very least the USA, but I believe it’s USA + Canada. There is a dispensation for us, even for direct intentional went to a PP clinic to get abortion, abortions. There is no automatic excommunication, and this course makes sense as any other policy would be one which would be very highly problematic with regards to the Church fulfilling her mission to save souls. When the average person finds they’ve been excommunicated they tend to panic, probably most people would simply (ignorantly) seek out another (protestant probably) Church thinking this “takes care of their excommunication” with out having to deal with it directly. They’d probably be too intimidated to request that the excommunication be lifted. This would serve to promote the damnation of souls en-mass give the poor state of our culture.So far, 50% of respondents hold that the Canon does apply to abortifacient contraception.
I think one person qualified that answer as referring to so-called emergency contraception. But I did intend the question to refer to all abortifacient types of birth control.
Here is the text of the Canon again:
Canon 1398: “A person who procures a completed abortion incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.”
yes, sorry i kind of said that at the end, but not specifically enough,Let us not blur terms…excommunication is an ecclesiastical penalty…which does not happen with every mortal sin…only very particular ones.
Yes of course each mortal sin separates one from God…but this is not what we call excommunication…so lets avoid blurring these … instead we need to use the terms the way the Church uses them…knowing of course all mortal sins are very bad…for they are spiritual death…
in both cases the hope is the person will turn to Christ in the sacrament of Confession and be reconciled…
Can you provide support for your claim that this Canon does not apply to persons in the U.S. and Canada? I can find nothing to support this claim, and I doubt that such a dispensation could be given without it becoming widely discussed due to the controversy that would result.Outside of at the very least the USA, but I believe it’s USA + Canada. There is a dispensation for us, even for direct intentional went to a PP clinic to get abortion, abortions. There is no automatic excommunication, and this course makes sense as any other policy would be one which would be very highly problematic with regards to the Church fulfilling her mission to save souls. When the average person finds they’ve been excommunicated they tend to panic, probably most people would simply (ignorantly) seek out another (protestant probably) Church thinking this “takes care of their excommunication” with out having to deal with it directly. They’d probably be too intimidated to request that the excommunication be lifted. This would serve to promote the damnation of souls en-mass give the poor state of our culture.
Thus while it certainly remains grave matter, procuring an abortion in the USA, for members of a diocese here do not automatically excommunicate them selves.
If anyone has any further questions about this, I recommend they talk to their pastor.
usccb.org/prolife/programs/rlp/97rlpang.shtmlCan you provide support for your claim that this Canon does not apply to persons in the U.S. and Canada? I can find nothing to support this claim, and I doubt that such a dispensation could be given without it becoming widely discussed due to the controversy that would result.
The source you cite for your claim that U.S. Catholics are dispensed from the Canon on excommunication for procured abortion is an article by a psychiatrist, not a magisterial document.
Ron,The source you cite for your claim that U.S. Catholics are dispensed from the Canon on excommunication for procured abortion is an article by a psychiatrist, not a magisterial document.
“Dr. Angelo is assistant clinical professor of psychiatry at Tufts University School of Medicine and a psychiatrist in private practice in Boston. She has been an active participant in Project Rachel locally and nationally for many years.”
Your claim that U.S. and/or Canadian Catholics are dispensed from that Canon is FALSE.
The article on the USCCB site to which you refer is NOT a document of the Magisterium, so it does not modify any doctrine or discipline in the Church.%between%
This modifies what I had previously heard, in some but not all cases an excommunication may still happen. I would suspect under the circomstances in which one would typically expect a mortal sin to happen, that is:
at least this is my understanding with regard to the information contained in this USCCB publication.
- full knowlege of the gravity of the sin
- no unusual external duress
- they do it anyway, despite the church and God.
Ron, the link I provided you is provided by the USCCB which is that authentic authority in these matters for those of us who live in the USA…The article on the USCCB site to which you refer is NOT a document of the Magisterium, so it does not modify any doctrine or discipline in the Church.
Also, actual mortal sin is not the same as excommunication. All of these situations are possible:
The conditions for a sin to be actual mortal sin are separate from the conditions for an act to fall under the Church penalty of excommunication.
- committing an actual mortal sin without excommunication
- being excommunicated without committing an actual mortal sin
- both
- neither
* were under 16 years of age,
* were ignorant of violating the law through no fault of their own,
* were physically forced to carry out the action in question,
* acted under grave fear of something more terrible happening, provided that the action is not intrinsically evil or harmful to souls,
* acted in self-defense or defense of someone else against an unjust assailant, provided that the person only used that force deemed necessary in self-defense,
* lacked the use of reason,
* through no fault of their own, mistook a situation for one involving a grave necessity or the need for defense against an unjust aggressor.* only had the imperfect use of reason,
* lacked the use of reason because of drunkenness or other culpable actions that reduced their mental state,
* acted in a moment of passion without time to think carefully through their actions,
* were 16 or 17 years old at the time of the offense,
* acted under grave fear, if the act is intrinsically evil or harmful to souls,
* acted out of self-defense, but went beyond what was reasonably necessary to stop the aggressor,
* acted in response to someone who was being seriously and unnecessarily provocative,
* negligently mistook a situation for one involving a grave necessity or the need for defense against an unjust aggressor,
* through no fault of their own were ignorant of a penalty attached to the law,
* acted with only partial imputability in a very serious matter.Yes, such accomplices, as well as the person who deliberately chooses the sin of direct abortion, are excommunicated under Canon 1398.Does the excommunication of Canon 1398 affect those accomplices to direct abortion without whose help the crime would not have been committed?
So, if you are not Catholic, then contraception is not sinful? Hmm… So morality is relative? I thought that it was objective and applied to everyone. Stupid me. I thought what was was sinful for me would be sinful for everyone else.Using chemicals to prevent pregnancy is a grave sin. However I don’t believe it meets the criteria of the cannon, as it is not a direct abortion.
Edit: Also, if one is not Catholic, the Canon doesn’t apply.
I share your dismay. How can people think that killing a just conceived person is not murder completely escapes me. Of course, the Church completely supports your assertion.I’m surprised by the results of this poll so far. I did not expect so many posters to claim that the use of abortifacient contraceptives is not the sin of direct abortion. What is the reasoning behind such a claim? The Magisterium does teach that the use of abortifacient contraceptives (e.g. as a method of contraception) is both the sin of contraception and the sin of abortion.
“The close connection which exists, in mentality, between the practice of contraception and that of abortion is becoming increasingly obvious. It is being demonstrated in an alarming way by the development of chemical products, intrauterine devices and vaccines which, distributed with the same ease as contraceptives, really act as abortifacients in the very early stages of the development of the life of the new human being.” (Evangelium Vitae, n. 13.)
If you are not Catholic, then you cannot be excommunicated from the Catholic Church.So, if you are not Catholic, then contraception is not sinful?
However the “Pill” is in fact intrinsically evil which puts it in a different class entirly from the rest of those medications. That said, it’s primary puropse and normal usage is not abortion. More over, most people today don’t even comprehend how the pill could possibly cause an abortion, let alone understand that if you’re using it you’re in danger of causing one.The use of “pill” for both contraceptive and therapeutic uses acts in a small window of time. By the time a woman found out or thought she was pregnant, Plan B would simple not work. No intent or knowledge means they are not linked to the physical evil that an unintended abortion causes. If this was the case, the Church would have a long list of medicines for woman to not take since they as well can cause UAs, also weight, and family history as well.
crazzeto,However the “Pill” is in fact intrinsically evil