B
BluegrassJimmie
Guest
Am I correct in the thinking that excommunication is the act of the Pope basically permanently kicking someone out of the Catholic church?
- Status
R
Roche42
Guest
An excommunication is not permanent and can be lifted by the Holy See, the Bishop which issued it, or a priest with proper permission from either.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=65354
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=65354
L
Lazerlike42
Guest
No. Excommunication is a fancy word the Church uses to describe what St. Paul is talking about in 1 Corinthians 5.
St. Paul tells us that when a Christian is sinning badly and is really not listening the corrective statements of others, that person should be shunned and not accepted into the community. The idea is twofold. Obviously, its important to get the person away from other believers so his behavior doesn’t rub off on them. The other reason is that the idea is to shun hte person into repentence. In other words, when they are being shunned by everybody, the will realize their wrong and come back to the truth. (This may not always work so well in modern society but in the past, really up until the last few hundred years, it worked very well).
This is what excommunication is. It’s saying to a person that they are sinning so badly that they will no longe be allowed to have communion at Church, or be related to other Christians in any way. Excommunications are always reversable when the person repents and confesses. The point of an excommunication is only to make the person repent, just like St. Paul tells us.
In fact, the man that he tells people to put out from among them in 1 Corinthians 5, he later tells (in 2 Corinthians I forget where anybody want to help?) the people to let him back in because he repented.
C
cameron_lansing
Guest
Already two good answers above, and here’s just a little filler.
Excommunication is a medicinal penalty, also called a censure, that deprives someone of certain spiritual and/or temporal goods consistent with the spiritual purpose of the Church (canon 1312). It is a response of the Church to certain violations of Church law or precept that are external and gravely imputably by reason of malice or culpable negligence. (canon 1321).
The purpose of a censure is medicinal, so that the penalty is removed when the offender has reformed. The Church wishes the person to be restored to full communion.
In general, a penalty does not bind the person until declared or imposed, but sometimes it is automatic (canon 1314). Generally the Church authority which imposes a penalty can remit it. Sometimes removing this penalty is reserved to the Holy See because of the gravity of the offense. The power to lift certain censures can be delegated.
There are three kinds of censures: excommunication, interdict, and for clergy only, suspension.
canon 1331: “§1. An excommunicated person is forbidden: 1º to have any ministerial participation in celebrating the sacrifice of the Eucharist or any other ceremonies of worship whatsoever; 2º to celebrate the sacraments or sacramentals and to receive the sacraments; 3º to exercise any ecclesiastical offices, ministries, or functions whatsoever or to place acts of governance. §2. If the excommunication has been imposed or declared, the offender: 1º who wishes to act against the prescript of §1, 1º must be prevented from doing so, or the liturgical action must be stopped unless a grave cause precludes this; 2º invalidly places acts of governance which are illicit according to the norm of §1, 3º; 3º is forbidden to benefit from privileges previously granted; 4º cannot acquire validly a dignity, office or other function in the Church; 5º does not appropriate the benefits of a dignity, office any function, or pension, which the offender has in the Church.”
Interdict in canon 1332 is closely akin to excommunication: “The prohibitions mentioned in canon 1331, §1, 1º and 2º bind an interdicted person. If the interdict has been imposed or declared, however, the prescript of canon 1331, §2, 1º must be observed.”
Suspension is treated in canon 1333: “§1. Suspension, which can affect only clerics, prohibits: 1º either all or some acts of power of orders; 2º either all or some acts of power of governance; 3º the exercise of either all or some of the rights or functions attached to an office. §2. A law or precept can establish that a suspended person cannot place acts of governance validly after a condemnatory or declaratory sentence. §3. A prohibition never affects: 1º the offices or the power of governance which are not under the power of the superior who establishes the penalty; 2º the right of residence which the offender may have by reason of office; 3º the right to administer goods which may pertain to the office of the person suspended if the penalty is latae sententiae; §4. A suspension prohibiting a person from receiving benefits, a stipend, pensions, or any other such thing entails the obligation of making restitution for whatever has been received illegitimately, even if in good faith.”
Excommunication is a medicinal penalty, also called a censure, that deprives someone of certain spiritual and/or temporal goods consistent with the spiritual purpose of the Church (canon 1312). It is a response of the Church to certain violations of Church law or precept that are external and gravely imputably by reason of malice or culpable negligence. (canon 1321).
The purpose of a censure is medicinal, so that the penalty is removed when the offender has reformed. The Church wishes the person to be restored to full communion.
In general, a penalty does not bind the person until declared or imposed, but sometimes it is automatic (canon 1314). Generally the Church authority which imposes a penalty can remit it. Sometimes removing this penalty is reserved to the Holy See because of the gravity of the offense. The power to lift certain censures can be delegated.
There are three kinds of censures: excommunication, interdict, and for clergy only, suspension.
canon 1331: “§1. An excommunicated person is forbidden: 1º to have any ministerial participation in celebrating the sacrifice of the Eucharist or any other ceremonies of worship whatsoever; 2º to celebrate the sacraments or sacramentals and to receive the sacraments; 3º to exercise any ecclesiastical offices, ministries, or functions whatsoever or to place acts of governance. §2. If the excommunication has been imposed or declared, the offender: 1º who wishes to act against the prescript of §1, 1º must be prevented from doing so, or the liturgical action must be stopped unless a grave cause precludes this; 2º invalidly places acts of governance which are illicit according to the norm of §1, 3º; 3º is forbidden to benefit from privileges previously granted; 4º cannot acquire validly a dignity, office or other function in the Church; 5º does not appropriate the benefits of a dignity, office any function, or pension, which the offender has in the Church.”
Interdict in canon 1332 is closely akin to excommunication: “The prohibitions mentioned in canon 1331, §1, 1º and 2º bind an interdicted person. If the interdict has been imposed or declared, however, the prescript of canon 1331, §2, 1º must be observed.”
Suspension is treated in canon 1333: “§1. Suspension, which can affect only clerics, prohibits: 1º either all or some acts of power of orders; 2º either all or some acts of power of governance; 3º the exercise of either all or some of the rights or functions attached to an office. §2. A law or precept can establish that a suspended person cannot place acts of governance validly after a condemnatory or declaratory sentence. §3. A prohibition never affects: 1º the offices or the power of governance which are not under the power of the superior who establishes the penalty; 2º the right of residence which the offender may have by reason of office; 3º the right to administer goods which may pertain to the office of the person suspended if the penalty is latae sententiae; §4. A suspension prohibiting a person from receiving benefits, a stipend, pensions, or any other such thing entails the obligation of making restitution for whatever has been received illegitimately, even if in good faith.”
J
jimmy
Guest
No, that is a misunderstanding. Excommunication is a disciplinary process that removes a person from the Church untill they change there ways and repent.
There are two types of Excommunication. First is Latae Sententae, which is the automatic excommunication of a person when they do something that would merit it. The pope does not need to proclaim it inorder for it to be. An example would be if someone desecrated the Eucharist, or if someone had an abortion. The pope does not need to pronounce it, they have excommunicated themselves. In order to get this excommunication lifted, you must go to a preist for confession, some cases may require that you go to the bishop.
The second type is ferendae excommunication. This type is when the pope makes a public excommunication of a person. Only a big name person will recieve this. A person in the general public will never recieve this.
A person who is excommunicated can not recieve the sacraments.
C
cameron_lansing
Guest
It could involve the pope and it could be a big name, and generally that would describe most of the ones that receive attention. But those aspects aren’t necessary.
Ferendae sententiae means imposed by an administrative decree or declared by a judicial sentence in contrast to latae sententiae which means automatically incurred. A ferendae sententiae penalty need not involve an action of the pope.
The Roman Pontiff may impose excommunication, but also others as the law provides. These include certain dicasteries of the Roman curia, such as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), the diocesan bishop, and certain superiors of institutes of religious life.
Although a latae sententiae penalty is automatically incurred by an operation of the law itself, sometime it must also be declared by competent authority for the penalty to take effect. This means verifying that the conditions existed for the law itself to have imposed the penalty in a particular case.
The Congregation for Bishops declared such in the case of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in 1988. So Cardinal Gantin, its prefect, decreed in part “Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre, Archbishop-Bishop Emeritus of Tulle, notwithstanding the formal canonical warning of 17 June last and the repeated appeals to desist from his intention, has performed a schismatical act by the episcopal consecration of four priests, without pontifical mandate and contrary to the will of the Supreme Pontiff, and has therefore incurred the penalty envisaged by Canon 1364, paragraph 1, and canon 1382 of the Code of Canon Law. Having taken account of all the juridical effects, I declare that the above-mentioned Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre, and Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta have incurred ipso facto excommunication latae sententiae reserved to the Apostolic See.”
I
itsjustdave1988
Guest
No. It’s a censure. An excommunicant is still a member of the Catholic Church.
B
BioCatholic
Guest
what about in the case where jesus himself says an unforgivable sin in “blasphemeing the holy spirit”? i do not understand that at all. i thought christ died for all sins. so if one were to blaspheme the holy spirit, then they are done, finished, and gone?
I
itsjustdave1988
Guest
“St. Augustine frequently explains blasphemy against the Holy Ghost to be final impenitence, perseverance till death in mortal sin. This impenitence is against the Holy Ghost, in the sense that it frustrates and is absolutely opposed to the remission of sins” (Catholic Encyclopedia - Holy Ghost, newadvent.org/cathen/07409a.htm )
As for Christ’s redemption for all men, this is to be understood as true of the objective redemption, but not all will be redeemed subjectively (attain the fruits of redemption).
“Paul again proclaimed with energy that Christ on the Cross definitively redeemed the whole world, in that he “by His own Blood, entered once into the holier having obtained eternal redemption” (Heb., ix 12). This does not mean that mankind is suddenly and without the action of its own will brought back to the state of innocence in Paradise and set above the necessity of working to secure for itself the fruits of redemption. Otherwise children would be in no need of baptism nor adults of justifying faith … The “completion” spoken of by Paul can therefore refer only to the objective side of redemption, which does not dispense with, but on the contrary requires, the proper subjective disposition. The sacrifice once offered on the Cross filled the infinite reservoirs to overflowing with healing waters but those who thirst after justice must come with their chalices and draw out what they need to quench their thirst. In this important distinction between objective and subjective redemption” (Catholic Encyclopedia - Sacrifice of the Mass, newadvent.org/cathen/10006a.htm )
- Status