Archbishop Fisichella, President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting the New Evangelization, has stirred controversy by suggesting that some criticisms of Pope Francis might result in automatic excommunication.
Archbishop Fisichella made his remarks while explaining how Pope Francis’s new “Missionaries of Mercy” will operate. The 800 “missionaries” will have the power to absolve from penalties previously reserved to the Holy See.
In reference to Canon 1370, which imposes automatic excommunication for “physical violence” against the Roman Pontiff, Archbishop Fisichella said:
“I would say that we need to understand well ‘physical violence,’ because sometimes words, too, are rocks and stones, and therefore I believe some of these sins, too, are far more widespread than we might think.”
Archbishop Fisichella’s comments will be interpreted by many as an attempt to silence faithful Catholics who are deeply concerned by the direction currently being taken by those who hold offices at the highest levels of the Church. Serious concerns have been raised over the last two and half years concerning:
- The alleged manipulation of the 2014 Extraordinary Synod and the 2015 Ordinary Synod
- The publication of a heterodox Relatio Synodi of the Extraordinary Synod
- The publication of a heterodox Instrumentum Laboris for the Ordinary Synod
- The publication of a heterodox Relazione Finale of the Ordinary Synod
- The radical reforms to the canonical procedures governing declaration of nullity of marriage
- The open collaboration between the Holy See and leading global advocates of population control
- The confusing remarks made by the Holy Father about who is able to receive Holy Communion
- The confusing remarks made by the Holy Father about the relationship between condoms and AIDS
- The confusing remarks and actions of the Holy Father on the subject of homosexuality
- The endorsement, by official bodies of the Holy See, of pro-abortion, pro-contraception UN Sustainable Development Goals
- The endorsement of the environmental agenda in the encyclical letter Laudato Si, without sufficient recognition of the profound connection between environmentalism and the population control movement
- The public association of Laudato Si with the most radical elements of the environmental/population control movement and dissent from the doctrine of Humanae Vitae
- The appointment, promotion or elevation to ecclesiastical offices or to positions of influence, by the Holy Father, of many openly heterodox prelates including, but not limited to: Bishop Franz-Josef Bode, Archbishop Blaise Cupich, Godfried Cardinal Danneels, John Cardinal Dew, Walter Cardinal Kasper, Bishop Heiner Koch, Reinhard Cardinal Marx, Vincent Cardinal Nichols, Christoph Cardinal Schönborn and Donald Cardinal Wuerl.
In the face of these and other scandals Catholics have not only the right but also the duty to offer respectful, but forceful, criticism. This grave duty is outlined in Canons 211 and 212 of the Code of Canon Law:
Can. 211 All the Christian faithful have the duty and right to work so that the divine message of salvation more and more reaches all people in every age and in every land.
Can. 212 §1. Conscious of their own responsibility, the Christian faithful are bound to follow with Christian obedience those things which the sacred pastors, inasmuch as they represent Christ, declare as teachers of the faith or establish as rulers of the Church.
§2. The Christian faithful are free to make known to the pastors of the Church their needs, especially spiritual ones, and their desires.
§3. According to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they possess, they have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful, without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to common advantage and the dignity of persons.
Voice of the Family is confident that Catholics at every level of the Church will continue to fulfil their duty of defending the Catholic faith throughout the “Year of Mercy” and during the years ahead.
Canonist to Vatican archbishop: No, Church law doesn’t excommunicate papal critics
December 7, 2015 (LifeSiteNews) – A controversy launched by Vatican Archbishop Rino Fisichella over the possibility of automatic excommunication for those who, the archbishop claims, use words as “physical violence” against the pope, has been answered by well-known canonist Edward Peters.
In a blog post today, Peters says Fisichella “was speaking in the context of faculties to absolve from automatic excommunications, and as there is an automatic excommunication against those who employ physical force against the pope (1983 CIC 1370 § 1), I am guessing that Fisichella might be thinking that ‘harsh language’ against the pope is a canonical crime that makes one liable to excommunication. If so, he is mistaken.”
Archbishop Fisichella made his remarks at a Vatican press briefing while explaining how Pope Francis’s new “Missionaries of Mercy” will have the power to forgive penalties previously reserved to the Holy See. In reference to Canon 1370, which imposes automatic excommunication for “physical violence” against the Roman Pontiff, Archbishop Fisichella said: “I would say that we need to understand well ‘physical violence,’ because sometimes words, too, are rocks and stones, and therefore I believe some of these sins, too, are far more widespread than we might think.”
Peters points out that Canon 18 “requires penal canons to be read strictly (i.e., as narrowly as reasonably possible).” He notes that Canon 1370 criminalizes ‘vim physicam’ against the pope, not ‘verba aspera’ or variants thereon, and I know of no canonical commentary that includes ‘words’ as a species of ‘physical force’ in this context.” Rather, Peters points to four canon law commentaries which all “expressly exclude ‘verbal violence’ from the range of actions penalized under Canon 1370.”
See Dr. Ed Peters' full blog post here or see below.
Most words are not crimes
I am not sure what Archbishop Rino Fisichella meant when he saidthat “we need to understand well ‘physical violence’ [against the pope] because sometimes words, too, are rocks and stones, and therefore I believe some of these sins, too, are far more widespread than we might think.” Yes, we do need to understand the terms of law well but, as the prelate was speaking in the context of faculties to absolve from automatic excommunications, and as there is an automatic excommunication against those who employ physical force against the pope (1983 CIC 1370 § 1), I am guessing that Fisichella might be thinking that ‘harsh language’ against the pope is a canonical crime that makes one liable to excommunication. If so, he is mistaken.
Besides Canon 17 that requires canons to be understood in accord with the proper meaning of their words, and Canon 18 that requires penal canons to be read strictly (i.e., as narrowly as reasonably possible), and Canon 221 § 3 that protects the faithful against canonical penalties notauthorized by law, the whole of Book Six of the 1983 Code is redolent with an emphasis (some might say, to an exaggerated degree) on benignity in the application of penalties in the Church.
Now, Canon 1370 criminalizes “vim physicam” against the pope, not “verba aspera” or variants thereon, and I know of no canonical commentary that includes “words” as a species of “physical force” in this context. Indeed, the CLSA New Commentary, the Exegetical Commentary, the Ancora Commentary, and the Urbaniana Commentary—at which point I stopped looking—expressly exclude‘verbal violence’ from the range of actions penalized under Canon 1370.
To be sure, hateful speech directed against any one is objectively sinful, and if directed against a man of God, let alone a pope, it is especially wrong. Occasionally, speech might rise to level of crime (see e.g., Canon 1369 on expressing insults against the Church or Canon 1373 on inciting animosity against the Apostolic See) but the penalties in such cases are not automatic and do not extend to excommunication. Usually, verbal hate is just a sin (if I may put it that way) not a crime.
Priests may be assured, then, that if penitents confess uttering hateful words against the Holy Father, they may reconcile such sinners in the normal course of the sacrament and need invoke no special faculties or powers to absolve of sin or (non-existent) crime.
Et poenae latae sententiae delendae sunt.
Source: Canon Law Blog
The Pope is only infallible when speaking on faith and morals, ex cathedra
Anyone who speaks critically of the Pope is not risking their immortal soul
Some years ago now, I used to sit in the aula of the Gregorian University and listen to the lectures of Don Rino Fisichella, a Roman priest, who lectured on the credibility of Revelation. He was a stimulating lecturer, though he sometimes got carried away, I seem to remember.
He is now an Archbishop and in charge of the New Evangelisation, and he seems to have got carried away again, suggesting that to criticise the Pope is the equivalent of a physical attack on him, which carries the penalty of automatic excommunication. In fact, a distinguished canon lawyer explains that this is simply not the case.
The Church has been here before. In the period of the Italian Risorgimento, the Piedmontese state made war on the Papal States, eventually driving the Pope out of Rome and making him the prisoner in the Vatican.
This act of unprovoked aggression (which was supported by Britain, sadly) led to a canonical debate: was this an assault on the person of the Holy Father, and if so, by whom, and who was excommunicated as a result? Minimalists thought that King Victor Emmanuel and Camillo Cavour, who had led the war on the Pope, were excommunicated; maximalists took the view that anyone who made common purpose with them, which included the common soldiers and most of the Italian population, were also excommunicated.
One thing is for sure: Cavour and Victor Emmanuel were both reconciled to the Church on their deathbeds. They both knew that to die excommunicated from the Catholic Church was to imperil their immortal souls, and so were taking no chances. It is said (at least Augustus Hare reports it in his Walks in Rome) that the Blessed Pius IX himself wished to rush to the deathbed of King Victor Emmanuel, to reconcile him personally, but was forcibly prevented by the Jesuits from doing so. It may not be true, but it is certainly a good story.
So, it is nice to know that anyone who speaks critically of the Pope is not risking their immortal soul and excommunication latae sententiae. But perhaps Archbishop Fisichella’s remarks are a defensive reaction to the rising tide of criticism directed at the Holy Father. If so, this anxiety is surely misdirected. The Pope has asked for bold speaking, or parrhesia. Moreover, the Pope is a Jesuit, that is a member of a religious order, in which fraternal correction is quite usual. It is surely in this light that matters like this open letter to the Holy Father should be read.
But how can someone who is infallible be subject to fraternal correction, you might well ask? But to ask that is to presuppose a maximalist position on Papal infallibility that many attribute to the Church, but which the Church has never held. The Pope is only infallible when speaking on faith and morals, ex cathedra. He is not infallible when speaking, for example, on economic matters, or scientific matters such as climate change.
It is perfectly acceptable for a good Catholic to interrogate the words of the Pope that are uttered in non-ex cathedra situations, whether it be mid-air press conferences, or unrecorded interviews published by nonagenarian journalists, as well as that now notorious Christmas address to the Roman Curia.
Source: Catholic Herald
No comments:
Post a Comment