Are you really Catholic

[jlac001]

If you know the catholic churches stance on contraception and you use it are you really catholic?

If you know the catholic stance on abortion but are for pro-choice are you really catholic?

These are just a few question I often wonder when I’ve been watching the news since the Pope passed away.

 

[mercygate]

A lot of “Catholics” today don’t know much more about their faith than the guy sitting in the Baptist church down the block. This certainly applies to the question of birth control.

I would say that if you are Catholic and using contraceptives, you should, trust in the faith and the goodness of Church teaching, and stop receiving Communion until you have done some homework on this issue. You will be rewarded.

There is a LOT more to it than just “you can’t do that!” The proscriptions aginst contraception address the very core of the human spirit. And, no, it doesn’t mean you have to have 15 children!

A good place to start is with some of the things written by Christopher West. Couple to Couple League is helpful with the mechanics. Many people on these forums have a lot of great insight into this matter.

Of course, you will then come to confession and start over on the right foot. Your life will change for the better.

 

[atsheeran]

We are Catholic by virtue of our baptism. If we renounce our faith in some public way (such as joining another religion) then we might not be considered Catholic any more. However, I don’t think sinning alone is enough to make us “not Catholic.”

When we use birth control we are Catholics who have sinned.

If we procure an abortion we are excommunicated so that is a different story.

 

[1ke]

jlac001:

If you know the catholic churches stance on contraception and you use it are you really catholic?

If you know the catholic stance on abortion but are for pro-choice are you really catholic?

These are just a few question I often wonder when I’ve been watching the news since the Pope passed away.

You are a sinning Catholic in these examples.

If you procure an abortion or perform an abortion, then you are an excommunicated Catholic.

 

[StPeterRules]

While I abhor abortion, it cannot mean excommunication.

This would nullify reconciliation for the deed, which we always have as an option.

 

[Scott_Waddell]

StPeterRules:

While I abhor abortion, it cannot mean excommunication.

This would nullify reconciliation for the deed, which we always have as an option.

2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. **The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication ** to this crime against human life. “A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,” “by the very commission of the offense,” and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law. The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.

Scott

 

[StPeterRules]

So now besides despair, there is ANOTHER unforgiveable sin?

Not that I mind the rule for me, but it seems a bit harsh.

Why do people go to confession and receive absolution post-abortions if it cannot be granted. If I got excommunicated, I doubt I’d go to Church any more, since it by definition would do no good. I would no longer be a member.

Seems a lot of Priests are in the dark apparently, as was I.

This seems to run contrary to the notion of EVERYTHING being forgivable, assuming one comes to God with a contrite heart and receives Reconciliation.

Can anyone elaborate?

 

[chevalier]

I believe abortion is murder, euthanasia is assisted suicide, contraception is wrong. But this doesn’t automatically make me a good Christian. In everyday life, many of those pro-choice Christians may well be better Christians than I am.

 

[Christy_Beth]

The church diffentiates (sp?) between mortal and venial sins. Abortion, along with any participation in it (even voting for someone who is pro abortion) ,is a mortal sin. Contraception is also a mortal sin. Receiving communion in the state of mortal sin is also a mortal sin. Getting married, or confirmed, while in the state of mortal sin is a mortal sin. Mortal sins break off our relationship with God.

Venial sins are still sins, and they damage our relationship with God. But they don’t “kill” it like mortal, deadly, sins do. Sin is sin. If you know it’s a sin, why would you want to do it?

 

[Church_Militant]

The question is not are they really Catholic, but are they in sin?
They are Catholics…they are just fallen into sin. Part & parcel of the human condition and always a matter for much prayer. remember that most all of the epistles in the NT were written to Catholics who had problems in their churches, not to outsiders and unbelievers. It’s all about reconcilliation when someone errs or falls into sin isn’t it?
Pax vobiscum,

 

[StPeterRules]

I am clear on the difference between mortal and venial sins.

The hellbound danger of mortal sin can be undone by confession, but the damage cannot. Confession cannot undo that which only Purgatory can.

I guess I am confused on the definition of excommunication. it says it cannot withhold the scope of mercy.

How does confession undo excommunication, which is what this seems to imply?

I go to confession weekly worst case, sometimes, twice a week.
**Is everyone guilty of mortal sins automatically excommunicated? If so, confession must undo the excommunication. **If so, I have been excommunicated in the past and not even know it.

 

[Scott_Waddell]

StPeterRules:

So now besides despair, there is ANOTHER unforgiveable sin?

Not that I mind the rule for me, but it seems a bit harsh.

Why do people go to confession and receive absolution post-abortions if it cannot be granted. If I got excommunicated, I doubt I’d go to Church any more, since it by definition would do no good. I would no longer be a member.

Seems a lot of Priests are in the dark apparently, as was I.

This seems to run contrary to the notion of EVERYTHING being forgivable, assuming one comes to God with a contrite heart and receives Reconciliation.

Can anyone elaborate?

You seem to be under the impression that excommunication is meant to be permanent and the sin it is imposed for is unforgivable. It is not. It is a disciplinary action for the purpose of recalling the sinner to true repentence. It takes a special effort to have it lifted no doubt, but that is appropriate considering the heinousness of the sin. Re-read the last sentence of my quote: *The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society. *

I go to confession weekly worst case, sometimes, twice a week.
Is everyone guilty of mortal sins automatically excommunicated? If so, confession must undo the excommunication. If so, I have been excommunicated in the past and not even know it.

Only certain sins carry excommunication. Regular confession does not remove excommunication except in extreme circumstances:

1463 Certain particularly grave sins incur excommunication, the most severe ecclesiastical penalty, which impedes the reception of the sacraments and the exercise of certain ecclesiastical acts, and for which absolution consequently cannot be granted, according to canon law, except by the Pope, the bishop of the place or priests authorized by them. In danger of death any priest, even if deprived of faculties for hearing confessions, can absolve from every sin and excommunication.69

Scott

Scott

 

[StPeterRules]

Can you tell me 1) what are the sins that merit automatic excommunication (if the list continues, I have a feeling there are a lot of Catholics walking around as excommuniees) and 2) what are the circumstances that are required (i.e., mortal requires full knowledge and consent of the grave nature).

Seems that there are a lot of women (and men) who have been part of abortions and received confession, but doesn’t excommunication require the Pope getting involved for restoration? I don’t see that happenning very often.

It also seems that cognizence is required for the excommuniction to occur, which would imply that unless the guilty party is aware of the law, they cannot be rightfully excommunicated, as per the following:

• Hence arise various extenuating reasons (causæ excusantes), based on lack of guilt, which prevent the incurring of excommunication: *
• (1) Lack of the full use of reason. This excuses children, also those who have not attained the age of puberty, and, a fortiori, the demented. Inadvertence, however, is not presumed; while it may affect moral responsibility and excommunication in foro externo, it is no obstacle to juridical guilt.
  (2) Lack of liberty resulting from grave fear. Such fear impairs the freedom of the will, and while it exists contumacy or rebellion against the laws of the Church cannot be presumed. Evidently, a proper estimation of this extenuating reason depends on the circumstances of each particular case and will be more readily accepted as an excuse for violating a positive law than in palliation of an offence against the natural or Divine law.
  (3) Ignorance. The general principle is, that whosoever is ignorant of the law is not responsible for transgressing it; and whosoever is ignorant of the penalty does not incur it. But the application of this principle is often complicated and delicate. The following considerations, generally admitted, may serve as a guide *

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

jlac001:

If you know the catholic churches stance on contraception and you use it are you really catholic?

If you know the catholic stance on abortion but are for pro-choice are you really catholic?

These are just a few question I often wonder when I’ve been watching the news since the Pope passed away.

Short answer to both questions - yes.​

Using contraception, however objectionable it may be, is not the utterance of and contumacious persistence in
heresy. An *action *cannot be a heresy - it may be evidence of unorthodox or heretical beliefs; but it is not the holding of a belief which one knows perfectly well is opposed to the truth as revealed by God; let alone obstinacy in holding such a belief. What is heresy in appearance, may be materially a heresy - but without obstinacy in holding it, without explicit knowledge that it is contrary to a truth revealed by God, without subjective guilt as well as objective guilt, there is no sin of heresy; one cannot sin by mistake or in ignorance. Sin is a voluntary, deliberate, free, knowing act - and unless one’s morally bad action is all of these, one cannot be a real heretic. That is why the sin itself is mortal - because one knows perfectly well what one is doing, and does it nevertheless. The same goes for schism and apostasy: one needs to be as inexcusable as possible to do these things.

If Catholics are as poorly instructed as some believe they are, those poorly-instructed Catholics are unlikely to be heretics.

Nor is contraception a schismatic act - because it does not imply any intention to leave the CC; let alone break the unity of the CC. So it is neither apostasy nor schism.

The same goes for abortion. And, indeed, for terrorism - Catholics who blow up abortion clinics are criminals, and often murderers; just like the Catholic members of the Lebanese Phalange who carried out the massacres at Sabra & Chatila in 1982; or like those Catholics who were involved in the Rwandan massacres; but they are still Catholics. Even if abortion is murder, murder is no longer an act which automatically incurs excommunication - it used to be, but is no longer.

For a Catholic to cease to be a Catholic, one must be subjectively and objectively guilty of heresy or schism: one must not only do something to incur the penalty for one or or other or both of these sins; one must also realise that what one is doing is wrong;and gravely wrong at that. And one must do this wrong in public - holding to something which one recognises in conscience is sinful as heresy, however wrong as a sin, is not the crime of heresy if one keeps it to oneself. A Catholic might be a fervent adorer of satan - but if he keeps his satanolatry to himself, and tells no one else, he may be guilty of the sin of heresy, but not of the ecclesiastical crime of heresy. The Church does not, and cannot, judge the thoughts of Catholics - we can be told what to think, but cannnot be blamed (or praised) for the unspoken contents of our souls. ##

 

[Scott_Waddell]

StPeterRules:

Can you tell me 1) what are the sins that merit automatic excommunication (if the list continues, I have a feeling there are a lot of Catholics walking around as excommuniees) and 2) what are the circumstances that are required (i.e., mortal requires full knowledge and consent of the grave nature).

The only other one I am certain of is deliberate desecration of the Eucharist. I know because on another forum, a girl asked for help because she snuck a host out of church and gave it to a witch for an occult practice. I think assaulting priests is one as well.

Seems that there are a lot of women (and men) who have been part of abortions and received confession, but doesn’t excommunication require the Pope getting involved for restoration? I don’t see that happenning very often.

It also seems that cognizence is required for the excommuniction to occur, which would imply that unless the guilty party is aware of the law, they cannot be rightfully excommunicated, as per the following:

• Hence arise various extenuating reasons (causæ excusantes), based on lack of guilt, which prevent the incurring of excommunication: *
• (1) Lack of the full use of reason. This excuses children, also those who have not attained the age of puberty, and, a fortiori, the demented. Inadvertence, however, is not presumed; while it may affect moral responsibility and excommunication in foro externo, it is no obstacle to juridical guilt.
  (2) Lack of liberty resulting from grave fear. Such fear impairs the freedom of the will, and while it exists contumacy or rebellion against the laws of the Church cannot be presumed. Evidently, a proper estimation of this extenuating reason depends on the circumstances of each particular case and will be more readily accepted as an excuse for violating a positive law than in palliation of an offence against the natural or Divine law.
  (3) Ignorance. The general principle is, that whosoever is ignorant of the law is not responsible for transgressing it; and whosoever is ignorant of the penalty does not incur it. But the application of this principle is often complicated and delicate. The following considerations, generally admitted, may serve as a guide *

This gets into a bunch of canon law, of which I’m no expert. In the girl’s case above, there was some rule that allowed the excom to be removed without much difficulty. I have to assume that a priest who hears a confession of abortion is supposed to go through some procedure of which I am unaware.

Scott

 

[Fashina86]

Well, those who disagree with the Church on some things and then use the Church as a means to get out of others are called “Cafeteria Catholics” They pick and choose what they want. They need our prayers and our help… IT IS THE CATHOLICS JOB TO ACCEPT AND LIVE THE FAITH ALL OF IT… some may not be easy, but that is part of it… and that is when prayer and Grace is so important and plays such a critical role

 

[StPeterRules]

Thanks Scott for the info. I guess I have spoken to a number of Priests who have heard the confession of people who’ve had abortions, but never raised it to the excommunication level. I just wondered how mnay mortal sins are also worthy of said punishment. Since I am ignorant thereto, I suppose I would not be a candidate, but it’d still be nice if this stuff was publicized a bit more. Keeping the masses ignorant is not a way around these sins.

Highlights the importance and weight our Priests must bear on their shoulders.

 

[Tazgurl21]

Yes i am really catholic. I am agianst abortion cuz I see it as murdering the baby. I for one didn’t know using birth control pills was a sin for Catholics wow just lern new thing everyday.

 

[Genesis315]

If a couple knows contraception is wrong and still uses it, they are sinning, but still Catholic. If they reject the Church’s teaching that it is wrong and decide to believe that it is not wrong, then they are not in full communion with the Church (according to Cardinal Ratzinger at least.)
catholic.com/thisrock/2001/0105fea1.asp

In May of 1998 Pope John Paul II issued a short apostolic letter, Ad Tuendam Fidem. The letter added to the codes of canon law of the Roman Catholic Church and of the Eastern Catholic Churches clear statements of the obligation to uphold the Church’s teaching. Penalties were specified for those who dissent from the Church’s official teaching. In a commentary on the apostolic letter, speaking for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger made this point: “Whoever denies these truths would be in a position of **rejecting **a truth of Catholic doctrine and would therefore no longer be in full communion with the Catholic Church” (section 6).

 

[Kevin_Walker]

I truly believe in the separation of church and state. And I truly believe in the infallibility of the Vatican and the Magesterium in all things dealing with Catholic theology. But politics and management are a different matter. I will openly disagree with Church management decisions and politics without worrying about my Roman Catholicism being jeopordized.

While I will openly argue with a Catholic Priest regarding the Red Sox, the Democrats, Church design, the Novus Ordo, police brutality, inept lawyers, city ordanances and the like, I would never raise my voice to any Priest regarding Catholic theology and eschatology.

So yes, I really am a (Roman) Catholic.