K
- Status
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
It’s in the Code of Canon Law. I forgot which one that allows automatic execommunication to any Catholic who directly involve in abortion.
K
Katie1723
Guest
I would appreciate your finding it, particularly the part that says a catholic who has an abortion is excommunicated
Kathy
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
I found it.
Can. 1397 One who commits murder, or who by force or by fraud abducts, imprisons, mutilates or gravely wounds a person, is to be punished, according to the gravity of the offence, with the deprivations and prohibitions mentioned in can. 1336. In the case of the murder of one of those persons mentioned in can. 1370, the offender is punished with the penalties there prescribed.
Can. 1398 A person who actually procures an abortion* incurs a latae sententiae
Can. 1397 One who commits murder, or who by force or by fraud abducts, imprisons, mutilates or gravely wounds a person, is to be punished, according to the gravity of the offence, with the deprivations and prohibitions mentioned in can. 1336. In the case of the murder of one of those persons mentioned in can. 1370, the offender is punished with the penalties there prescribed.
Can. 1398 A person who actually procures an abortion* incurs a latae sententiae
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
I also found addition information:
Today, Canon 1398 of the 1983 revision of the Code of Canon Law reads: “A person who actually procures an abortion incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.” The word “actually” indicates that the abortion must have been successful for the penalty to occur; the mere intent to have an abortion is not sufficient.
That the penalty is latae sententiae means it is automatic, and hence there is no need for an official decree. Most excommunications, by way of contrast, have to be proclaimed by church authorities in order to take effect; these are called ferendae sententiae. There are seven acts in canon law that trigger latae sententiae excommunication. Aside from abortion, they are: violence against the pope; sacrilege such as throwing away a consecrated host; absolving a person with whom one has sinned against the sixth commandment; consecrating a bishop without authorization; violating the seal of confession; and apostasy, heresy or schism.
Canon 1329 specifies that accomplices to an act that triggers a latae sententiae excommunication are also subject to the same penalty if “without their assistance, the crime would not have been committed.” Canonists believe such accomplices include the doctor and nurses who perform the procedure, as well as friends or family (such as the husband or boyfriend) who cooperate in a direct fashion, such as paying for the abortion or driving to the clinic.
Canon 1323, however, stipulates that no one can be excommunicated who:
*Has not turned 17;
*Was, without fault, ignorant of violating the law;
*Acted under physical force, or under a chance occurrence that *could not be foreseen or avoided;
*Acted under compulsion of grave fear;
*Lacked the use of reason.
Hence a woman who did not realize that an abortion triggers automatic excommunication is not subject to the penalty (unlike Anglo-Saxon civil law, in canon law ignorance of the law is an excuse). Similarly, a woman who was compelled into an abortion by an abusive husband, or a woman with Down syndrome who did not understand the nature of the act, is not subject to excommunication.
Johnstone said that determinations in specific cases can only be made under the guidance of a priest-confessor.
According to Canon 1331, an excommunicated person cannot have any ministerial part in the celebration of the Eucharist or other ceremonies of public worship; cannot receive the sacraments; and cannot exercise any ecclesiastical offices, functions, or acts of governance.
Canon 1355 gives the local bishop power to cancel a latae sententiae excommunication, usually in the context of confession. Many bishops grant all priests under their power permission to absolve from such an excommunication without getting the bishop’s permission, at least in the case of a first abortion. Canon 1357 allows a priest to lift the excommunication even without such authorization if it would otherwise be difficult for the person to remain in the state of grave sin.
Canon 1041 states that anyone who has cooperated in procuring an abortion is to be barred from ordination as a priest.
It’s an open question in magisterial circles whether politicians who vote for legal abortion, support public funding for abortion, and/or otherwise help make abortion available, should be considered “accomplices” and hence excommunicated. Johnstone said that most moral theologians believe such votes may be morally wrong, but they do not constitute sufficiently direct involvement in an individual abortion to trigger excommunication.
Bishop Elio Sgreccia, vice president of the Pontifical Academy for Life and a frequent Vatican spokesman on bioethics, nevertheless told NCR in a mid-October interview that it is his “personal opinion” that politicians who support permissive abortion laws are subject to the canonical penalties for accomplices.
Source link: ncronline.org/NCR_Online/archives/011703/011703d.htm
Today, Canon 1398 of the 1983 revision of the Code of Canon Law reads: “A person who actually procures an abortion incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.” The word “actually” indicates that the abortion must have been successful for the penalty to occur; the mere intent to have an abortion is not sufficient.
That the penalty is latae sententiae means it is automatic, and hence there is no need for an official decree. Most excommunications, by way of contrast, have to be proclaimed by church authorities in order to take effect; these are called ferendae sententiae. There are seven acts in canon law that trigger latae sententiae excommunication. Aside from abortion, they are: violence against the pope; sacrilege such as throwing away a consecrated host; absolving a person with whom one has sinned against the sixth commandment; consecrating a bishop without authorization; violating the seal of confession; and apostasy, heresy or schism.
Canon 1329 specifies that accomplices to an act that triggers a latae sententiae excommunication are also subject to the same penalty if “without their assistance, the crime would not have been committed.” Canonists believe such accomplices include the doctor and nurses who perform the procedure, as well as friends or family (such as the husband or boyfriend) who cooperate in a direct fashion, such as paying for the abortion or driving to the clinic.
Canon 1323, however, stipulates that no one can be excommunicated who:
*Has not turned 17;
*Was, without fault, ignorant of violating the law;
*Acted under physical force, or under a chance occurrence that *could not be foreseen or avoided;
*Acted under compulsion of grave fear;
*Lacked the use of reason.
Hence a woman who did not realize that an abortion triggers automatic excommunication is not subject to the penalty (unlike Anglo-Saxon civil law, in canon law ignorance of the law is an excuse). Similarly, a woman who was compelled into an abortion by an abusive husband, or a woman with Down syndrome who did not understand the nature of the act, is not subject to excommunication.
Johnstone said that determinations in specific cases can only be made under the guidance of a priest-confessor.
According to Canon 1331, an excommunicated person cannot have any ministerial part in the celebration of the Eucharist or other ceremonies of public worship; cannot receive the sacraments; and cannot exercise any ecclesiastical offices, functions, or acts of governance.
Canon 1355 gives the local bishop power to cancel a latae sententiae excommunication, usually in the context of confession. Many bishops grant all priests under their power permission to absolve from such an excommunication without getting the bishop’s permission, at least in the case of a first abortion. Canon 1357 allows a priest to lift the excommunication even without such authorization if it would otherwise be difficult for the person to remain in the state of grave sin.
Canon 1041 states that anyone who has cooperated in procuring an abortion is to be barred from ordination as a priest.
It’s an open question in magisterial circles whether politicians who vote for legal abortion, support public funding for abortion, and/or otherwise help make abortion available, should be considered “accomplices” and hence excommunicated. Johnstone said that most moral theologians believe such votes may be morally wrong, but they do not constitute sufficiently direct involvement in an individual abortion to trigger excommunication.
Bishop Elio Sgreccia, vice president of the Pontifical Academy for Life and a frequent Vatican spokesman on bioethics, nevertheless told NCR in a mid-October interview that it is his “personal opinion” that politicians who support permissive abortion laws are subject to the canonical penalties for accomplices.
Source link: ncronline.org/NCR_Online/archives/011703/011703d.htm
D
Deconi
Guest
It is quite clear that not all Christians hold the sanctity of human life to be the pinnacle of existence!
Perhaps we ARE NOT made in His Image!..after all!
…or am I to understand that SOME Christians NO LONGER BELIEVE THAT?
Perhaps we ARE NOT made in His Image!..after all!
…or am I to understand that SOME Christians NO LONGER BELIEVE THAT?
S
Sabbath_Keeper
Guest
It depends on what you mean by “Image”.It is quite clear that not all Christians hold the sanctity of human life to be the pinnacle of existence!
Perhaps we ARE NOT made in His Image!..after all!
…or am I to understand that SOME Christians NO LONGER BELIEVE THAT?
My way of thinking, and what I understand of the creation of man, when God created Adam, he made him perfect, in body and spirit. It boggles my mind what has in his head when he accepted the forbidden fruit from Eve, or what was in her’s to accept the lie told by the serpent (Satan). Such a loss for all of us and now look what we have to go through because of it. I’ll be glad when it’s all over.
P
Patrick_Murebil
Guest
This is the last sentence (highlighted in red) in the quote you provided from the official SDA teaching on abortion:
"Abortion, the intentional termination of an established pregnancy, is not morally acceptable for purposes of birth control."
Since birth control is the only purpose stated for which abortion is not morally acceptable in SDA teaching, I have a question.
What purposes/reasons for abortion are morally acceptable according to SDA teaching?
God bless all!!!
S
Sabbath_Keeper
Guest
Personal opinion, cause I haven’t asked the hierarcy.
By the looks of the statement it appears that birth control is acceptable but Abortion is not. I have listened to numerous sermons on this subject by SDA pastors and NONE of them have ever stated that Abortion is acceptable as a birth control method. Simple.
P
Patrick_Murebil
Guest
Yes I understand that they say abortion is not acceptable as a birth control method. I obiviously didn’t make my question clear, so let me try again.Personal opinion, cause I haven’t asked the hierarcy.
By the looks of the statement it appears that birth control is acceptable but Abortion is not. I have listened to numerous sermons on this subject by SDA pastors and NONE of them have ever stated that Abortion is acceptable as a birth control method. Simple.
When IS abortion acceptable?
God bless all!!!
P
Patrick_Murebil
Guest
Just my opinion, but God created man in His image, and to make that image complete He created woman. The creation story is about bringing life out of nothing…creating life. God also instituted marriage at creation and that certainly reflects God’s image as creator of life…when the two, husband and wife, come together and become one…one in the new life/lives they create with their child/children.
God bless all!!!
S
Sabbath_Keeper
Guest
God does what God will do, who are we to question. He puts us through trials for a reason. Abortion is not acceptable, for me anyway, period.
M
Marsha_Adams
Guest
When in the eyes of the SDA denomination is abortion acceptable?
By saying that it is immoral to use abortion as birth control but not saying that it is unequivically wrong period. The denomination tacitly approves of abortion. All that remains is to define when and where it is not morally wrong. Would the SDA denomination approve of abortion in cases of rape? Incest? To save the life of the mother? As a last resort if the birth control being used fails through no fault of the couple?
If the answer to any of these questions is yes, then the denomination is pro-abortion.
What does that say about the SDA denomination?
P
Patrick_Murebil
Guest
I am glad that you believe that way!! But please understand that SDA policy regarding abortion, both in the official church position and guidelines in SDA hospitals is so squishy, that abortions are being performed for reasons of birth control. They are just not referred to as birth control.
If someone wants to get an abortion for birth control, they can go into the hospitals and say they are depressed, or some other reason, and the hospitals will perform the abortion and say “well we didn’t do it for birth control reasons”. It happens and at one time I gathered abortion statistics in three Maryland SDA hospitals. 400-500 abortions per hospital per year is a lot of abortions for a Christian hospital.
If you are against abortion in your church facilities, and understanding the SDA church will probably never totally ban performing abortions, please try to influence your church to adopt a policy of performing abortions ONLY to save the life of the mother. This reason too will most likely be abused…but it should drastically reduce the numbers of abortions performed.
I tried to do this, as I know others have, but without success…maybe you can succeed!!
God bless all!!!
P
Protestant101
Guest
Patrick; it appears that you are saying here: “Murder is OK if it’s for the right reasons.” This is exactly what you accuse our Church of doing. I have outlined in red the phrase you used which gives us this idea. But you have to admit, that if this is your official Church policy, then you are no different than us in this respect.
No matter what ideas our respective churches come up with on this subject; those ideas will be subjected to abuses; but it in no way reflects official Church policy.
You have obviously never worked in the medical profession as I have done in the past for over 14 years. There are dilemas which these people face that we will never have to face; and I don’t think we need to get on our “high horses” and condemn and judge them. Given the terrible trauma that abortion afflicts upon women who have it done - no matter the reason; it is very unhelpful, to say the least, to blanket all in our church with condemnation who do not think as you do on the subject.
And to excommunicate such ones in your church is even worse! What a thing to put a woman through!
The redemptive approach that our church takes on this subject has taken all kinds of accusations in the past. “Murder” is just one of them. I see the Adventist policy of leaving the final decision to the people involved as a very wise move that in no way negates our repugnance with murder and killing.
V
Valke2
Guest
Did the serpent actually lie? Where?
P
Patrick_Murebil
Guest
Ok 101, try and follow me on this and I will try to make it as clear as possible to you.
- Murder is not OK…there are no right reasons to murder someone.
- Read the entire sentence that I wrote, of which you only highlighted a portion.
a. The policy of the SDA church allows their hospitals to perform abortions…many abortions.
b. The SDA church is not concerned with eliminating abortions in their hospitals.
c. Since it is likely that they may never adopt a position against performing abortions completely, the next best thing would be to eliminate performing as many abortions as possible and allow a greater number of children to live.
d. This can be acheived if they adopt a policy of only performing abortions to save the life of the mother.
e. The ideal policy for a church that claims to follow the 10 commandments, the law of love, the testimony of Jesus, would be to have a complete ban on performing abortions in THEIR hospitals. - Yes, if the policy of the Catholic Church on this issue was the same as the policy of the Seventh Day Adventist church, then I would have to admit that we were the same.
Of course policies can be abused…but the Seventh Day Adventist church policies regarding abortion throws the door wide open for abuse.
Based on many of your previous posts of judging and condemning many Catholic beliefs, I find your moral realativsim astounding.
Have you considered that maybe, just maybe, that teaching has kept some, if not many, from pursuing an abortion, thus saving them from even more trauma and pain in the future, as well as the life of their child?
Would you consistently apply that “wise move” of a policy to acts such as rape, spousal abuse, child abuse, armed robbery, home invasions… tobacco use, alcohol use, eating pork…“sunday keeping”?
P
Protestant101
Guest
You have no proof of this.
A truly “redemptive approach” to all of these things would be applied in different ways - but with the same policy and principles in mind.
Let me answer more clearly by asking you a question about your own Church’s wise policies:
Do you condone murder (abortion) to save the life of the mother, or do you promote assisted suicide/sacrifice of the mother to avoid abortions? What is the official teaching that Catholic hospitals go by here?
I understand your point above about thinking how relative I am because of my many posts of objections to Catholic beliefs but my comments about “not judging” are not intended for the purpose of defending my Church and condemning yours. I am thinking of the people who have to go through such things in real life, and to whom none of this is theory, or posted on some forum, or written in some religious book. It is real life that people in both of our Churches face; and when I see too harsh of an attitude with this kind of thing by either of our Churches, I will say it is wrong.
Our Church is saying that we must allow people some latitude on such things; but we can better apply such a “wise policy” with clearly illegal acts such as you referred to above by reporting such things to police.
S
Sabbath_Keeper
Guest
What has all this to do with Amazing Facts Study Guides?
M
Marsha_Adams
Guest
It has morphed into Catholic/SDA Discussions. As long as no one minds, I say lets just keep it going from one issue to another. It is so much less complicated than changing threads with each new issue.
Marsha
- Status