Public Excommunication Poll

[PoliSciProf]

Should persons who openly identify themselves as Catholics and who are in highly visible public positions be publicly excommunicated when they openly and clearly dissent from fundamental doctrine with all that this means for receiving the sacrements, etc.? This thread was prompted by the Bishops’ opposition to HHS’s insurance mandates for Catholic institutions and related issues such as public advocacy of abortion “rights,” etc. Please give your reasons for your position.

 

[Nec5]

Yes, they should be publicly excommunicated, but only after being warned in private. After a couple of warnings, that person is either a believer or he/she is not. Allowing them to spread untruths and evil without public admonishment comes across to all of us lost sheep out there as either an endorsement or “it doesn’t matter”. The church is to be the lighthouse of the world pointing to Christ. One clear light guiding us is necessary. You can’t have all these lights leading others astray and allow them to be considered Catholic.

By the way, this kind of applies to any religion.

 

[Swiss_Guy]

Depends, at least I think so. First, they need to be told and warned privately. If they reject the private “pep talk” then yes, they should be. They cause a scandal and might make people who aren’t Catholic misjudge Catholic teaching, ending up in a loss of a potential convert.

 

[John21652]

Should persons who openly identify themselves as Catholics and who are in highly visible public positions be publicly excommunicated when they openly and clearly dissent from fundamental doctrine with all that this means for receiving the sacrements, etc.? This thread was prompted by the Bishops’ opposition to HHS’s insurance mandates for Catholic institutions and related issues such as public advocacy of abortion “rights,” etc. Please give your reasons for your position.

If Catholics in public life “openly and clearly dissent from fundamental doctrine” then they should be admonished openly and clearly in public.

Amongst other things, politics is about the market place for human ideas. If a Catholic publicly and obviously promotes dissent from fundamental doctrine, then the Church should, without hesitation, make its fundamental doctrines public and tackle the dissenter head on. In the process, the Church can demonstrate that those Catholics who dissent from fundamental doctrine are not being true to the faith they profess to be a part of and then, the obvious inference the public can make is that those very same Catholics in public life cannot be trusted to be true to anything. In other words, show them up as the hypocrites they are.

If the dissenting Catholic still persists with their obvious and public dissent from fundamental doctrine, then the Church should, without hesitation, excommunicate them. That will show the public that the Catholic Church truly stands by what it believes in.

 

[TimothyH]

I will not presume to judge another and have all I can do to keep my head down and pray for my own sins and the sins of my children.

It is not a sin to point out someone’s behavior and call it what it is. Demanding that another be punished with a specific punishment however, to me, is cutting a little too close when it comes to Jesus’ admonishment that I am not to judge another.

I’m just not going there.

-Tim-

 

[jonbhorton]

Depends, at least I think so. First, they need to be told and warned privately. If they reject the private “pep talk” then yes, they should be. They cause a scandal and might make people who aren’t Catholic misjudge Catholic teaching, ending up in a loss of a potential convert.

I voted Yes on the basis of this circumstance.

I’d have suggested a choice in a step between public or private only, of which the private is given a chance first since that is actually more in line with the process of excommunication and the entire point of the practice.

The result might actually be the person being properly catechized or rejection of proper catechesis. Either way, the result is the result.

 

[Dirt]

Yes, for the salvation of their Souls, and the Souls of all who might be led to error.

From vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/homepage/the-vatican/detail/articolo/quaresima-papa-messaggio-12396/

"However, Benedict XVI points out, a Christian’s reproach “is never motivated by a spirit of condemnation or recrimination; it is always motivated by love and mercy, and springs from genuine concern for his brother’s welfare.”

 

[jwinch2]

I voted for public action, albeit with some reservations. Ordinarily, I would not be in favor of any sort of publicity at all as I feel that those things are between the person and their priest/bishop and certainly none of my business.

However, the scandal that these politicians, etc. are providing is of a public nature. Their standing up side by side with priest and bishops in the past is in the public forum. The damage that is done to the faith and the faithful as a result of their actions is of a public nature. Because of this, and the deliberately public nature of a politician’s life, I believe that a public statement of excommunication may be in order if the person in question does not amend their ways after private alternatives have been explored.

 

[michelleds]

If Catholics in public life “openly and clearly dissent from fundamental doctrine” then they should be admonished openly and clearly in public.

Amongst other things, politics is about the market place for human ideas. If a Catholic publicly and obviously promotes dissent from fundamental doctrine, then the Church should, without hesitation, make its fundamental doctrines public and tackle the dissenter head on. In the process, the Church can demonstrate that those Catholics who dissent from fundamental doctrine are not being true to the faith they profess to be a part of and then, the obvious inference the public can make is that those very same Catholics in public life cannot be trusted to be true to anything. In other words, show them up as the hypocrites they are.

If the dissenting Catholic still persists with their obvious and public dissent from fundamental doctrine, then the Church should, without hesitation, excommunicate them. That will show the public that the Catholic Church truly stands by what it believes in.

ditto

 

[Chaplain777]

I voted that they should be admonished in private, however, should they continue this behavior, then making it public seems appropriate. This would emphasize the Church’s position rather than have the faith twisted buy a self-appointed spokesperson.

 

[perro_sarnoso]

Levels of excommunication begin with us,

We excommunicate ourselves when we know that a teaching is against catholic teaching and we decide to do it anyway.

That is the first and most unnoticed excommunication. It’s disguised as righteousness. Pride and Lust follow closely.

When our priest or our bishop tell us that we are wrong and that we are incurring in excommunication…we become pridefule and lustful…we know better…and we continue the slippery slide down to the fires of hell.

 

[jwinch2]

Someone like Kathleen Sebelius has been outside of the faith for so long now that it is hard to imagine that she would care about excommunication one way or the other. Her support of the infamous abortionist George Tiller while she was Governor of Kansas and her continued actions against the faith seem to indicate otherwise.

I saw this quote earlier, but I don’t know where to credit it to.

The biggest threat to the Church today is not anti-Catholics–the biggest threat is anti-Catholic Catholics.

 

[ryecroft]

Personally, before the politicians and others in office are gone after, I really believe that those that have taken ‘the cloth’ should be gone after - Priests, Bishops etc. There are so many out there and I wonder how we can talk about excommunicating the ‘sheep’ when many of the ‘shepherds’ haven’t been really dealt with. I have been at parishes before where it was obvious that the Priest didn’t agree with certain teachings - why are we holding these Catholics who are supposed to have taken vows and are supposed to be an example to a different level than those who are not of the cloth but in the public eye? Before the Church goes after these, they need to deal with their own -
God Bless
Rye

 

[John21652]

Personally, before the politicians and others in office are gone after, I really believe that those that have taken ‘the cloth’ should be gone after - Priests, Bishops etc. There are so many out there and I wonder how we can talk about excommunicating the ‘sheep’ when many of the ‘shepherds’ haven’t been really dealt with. I have been at parishes before where it was obvious that the Priest didn’t agree with certain teachings - why are we holding these Catholics who are supposed to have taken vows and are supposed to be an example to a different level than those who are not of the cloth but in the public eye? Before the Church goes after these, they need to deal with their own -
God Bless
Rye

That would take too long. Besides, any “damage” being done is local. Contrast that with the 'damage" public figures wreak on a national scale. If the Church heirarchy goes after and makes a public excommunication of a high profile public figure, you bet the rank and file of the cloth will shake in their boots. A public excommunication of a high profile public figure will also put some steel in the spines of those who might speak out against the dissident rank and file of the cloth if a good example is set higher up. It will snowball.

 

[ryecroft]

That would take too long. Besides, any “damage” being done is local. Contrast that with the 'damage" public figures wreak on a national scale. If the Church heirarchy goes after and makes a public excommunication of a high profile public figure, you bet the rank and file of the cloth will shake in their boots. A public excommunication of a high profile public figure will also put some steel in the spines of those who might speak out against the dissident rank and file of the cloth if a good example is set higher up. It will snowball.

It does get kind of hard to take seriously clergy ‘dealing’ with someone who votes pro choice when there are many clergy out there who don’t necessarily disagree. Also, I thought the point of this censure was to bring these people back to the faith, hoping that taking the sacraments away from them would make them rethink their position - not to say 'if you’re not good, this could happen to the rest of you too…" making this seem more like dealing with children then with grown men and women. Also where does the line get drawn for this? If every Catholic person in the public eye who says their not in favor of stopping abortions 100% of the time, you’re going to loose a large amount of Catholics - (and you’re going to loose some priests and bishops as well-)- it isn’t fair to hold those who are in the public eye as politicians to a different level of upholding Catholic teachings than you would the shepherds of the flocks who ‘vowed’ to uphold the Catholic Church’s teachings. It makes the Catholic church look very much like a parent who says “do as I say not do as I do…”
God Bless

 

[Mark1970]

I voted Yes, but with reservations. I don’t like the idea of making such action public. But I’m concerned that if someone openly dissents and the Church does nothing, many will see this as tacitly approving of that the person is saying.

 

[anp1215]

Yes, if the person refuses to listen to private admonishments, publicly excommunicate them. They cause SEVERE damage to the body of Christ.

 

[John21652]

It does get kind of hard to take seriously clergy ‘dealing’ with someone who votes pro choice when there are many clergy out there who don’t necessarily disagree. Also, I thought the point of this censure was to bring these people back to the faith, hoping that taking the sacraments away from them would make them rethink their position - not to say 'if you’re not good, this could happen to the rest of you too…" making this seem more like dealing with children then with grown men and women. Also where does the line get drawn for this? If every Catholic person in the public eye who says their not in favor of stopping abortions 100% of the time, you’re going to loose a large amount of Catholics - (and you’re going to loose some priests and bishops as well-)- it isn’t fair to hold those who are in the public eye as politicians to a different level of upholding Catholic teachings than you would the shepherds of the flocks who ‘vowed’ to uphold the Catholic Church’s teachings. It makes the Catholic church look very much like a parent who says “do as I say not do as I do…”
God Bless

Perhaps that’s the approach that let the sex scandal get out of hand. Being afraid of losing a few priests, bishops or even lay people who hold public office causes the standard of representation to fall. The Church has pretend catholics in high public office who are effectively white-anting Catholicism and the poor voter is getting representaives who cannot hold true to the principles they supposedly stood for.

I think the bar should be set a lot higher and force people to stand by what it is they are supposed to be. If someone wants to stand for office, let them declare whether they are catholic-but-not-really, staunchly catholic, guided by a strong moral conviction, or whether hey are open to the arts of political compromise and expediency on matters pertaining to morality and social policy. In fact, constituents should know this of all those who seek public office.

 

[Geist]

These are very dark and strange times, have you considered the publicly excommunicated would not wear it as a badge of pride? And sadder still, be cheered on all the more for it by the increasingly amoral masses?

I suspect the intentions are good, but the results would be bad.

 

[sshek]

I assume that after 3 years of public attack on the Catholic Church, the local parish priest should have ample time to inform these politicians that their position is against Catholic teaching and should not receive communion. The Bishop also would have ample time to inform them of their position. One thing that I have not seen is a public statement from the Bishop why they have asked these to not receive communion ie their prosecution of the Church. It would be a scandal for them to receive the Eucharist while still prosecuting the Church. It is also time to publicly inform the Catholic community such politicians that are supporting the Obama Care and HHS mandate have in effect excommunicated themselves from the church and that their speech, position etc. does not stand for Catholic teaching and that Catholics should look at them as non-Catholics.

The massive media coverage of these politicians is confusing Catholics on what is true teaching. Every parish priest should take a few minutes at the end of Mass before dismissal to inform parishioners of such a decision.