Category: Canonical

Ironically, I’m listening to GNR’s Sweet Child of Mine as I blog this response to fellow canonist Dr. Ed Peters. Just for the record, Dr. Peters was one of the individuals who inspired me to take up canon law. Thus I hold him in the highest esteem — both in his capacity as an individual Catholic and in his professional capacity as a canonist. So my following response should be understood in this context.
With regards to the controversy surrounding the response to Marc Balestrieri, Dr. Peters writes:
Cole’s theological analysis does, however, move us closer to the central canonical question raised in this matter, namely: whether advocacy of abortion, by a knowledgeable Catholic, in and of itself, is heresy. Now, for the reasons ably outlined by Cole, obstinate doubt or denial of Church teaching on abortion may well be regarded as heresy. But our concern is different: is disregard of Church teaching on abortion, perhaps even chronic contempt for it, necessarily heretical? Consider: If I deny the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, I commit heresy. But if I throw the Eucharist in the gutter, I commit the crime of sacrilege (1983 CIC 1367), not heresy (1983 CIC 1364).
So, a Catholic politician might say, “I believe that human life begins at conception and that abortion kills an innocent baby. But I want to be elected to office, and that means I support abortion.” Such reprehensible words/deeds would be gravely sinful and would place the politician in peril of his soul. But it is not clear that his sin would be heresy. At least, it is not clear how this scenario would be held as heresy, and we not be required to hold virtually every other deliberate violation of grave moral law as heretical.
As Dr. Peters points out, this situation involves a number of very fine nuances. I think Dr. Peters may have missed one, and consequently I think he misunderstands Marc’s position. Dr. Peters enjoys a reputation in the canon law world as one of the most honest individuals you will come across, so I know he would not deliberately misrepresent Marc’s position. But Marc employed a nuance in his argument that took me a while to grasp as well.
Here’s the situation. To borrow Dr. Peter’s analogy to the Real Presence, we’re not strictly talking about heresy vs. sacrilege. To my knowledge, Kerry has never directly procured an abortion, which, using Dr. Peters’ analogy, is the equivalent to throwing the Eucharist in gutter. Rather, Kerry has asserted that abortion is a private matter and thus the individual has a right to procure an abortion.
Thus a more accurate analogy would be if John Kerry stated: “I believe in the Real Presence and I believe that throwing the Eucharist in the gutter is a sacrilege, but I also believe that this is a personal matter between a satanist and his or her priest. Therefore, I will defend the constitutional right of satanists to desecrate the Eucharist.”
Does one possess the right to descrate the Eucharist?
Similarly, the question with Kerry is whether or not the Church can ever recognize abortion as a right.
I agree with Dr. Peters that participation in an ecclesiastical crime is not necessarily the same thing as heresy. One can procure an abortion while believing abortion is wrong. Nevertheless, the debate would be moot if Kerry had directly participated in an abortion, since canon 1398 already provides for the automatic excommunication of those who directly procure an abortion, while canon 1329 accounts for accomplices without whom the criminal act would not have been possible.
So at issue here is the public dimension of abortion. Does abortion merely concern private morality, or is there a public dimension to this issue as well? According to Kerry, it is a matter of private morality. Hence his claim, “I’m pro-choice, not pro-abortion.” Whereas the Church recognizes the public moral dimension surrounding abortion, in that abortion entails the slaughter of an innocent human being.
Thus Kerry, in my opinion, is a heretic not because he procured an abortion (to my knowledge, he hasn’t) but because he disagrees on the Church’s teaching that abortion concerns the public morality and thus for him one ought to be free to carry out partial birth infanticide.

Note to future readers: this post had been my initial reaction to the meltdown with Marc Balestrieri’s canonical action against John Kerry. Having been fraternally corrected by my colleague Dr. Ed Peters, a canonist whom I admire for his orthodoxy and balanced perspective, I have since retracted and modified my initial reaction. -PJV

Prof. Ed Peters gives his analysis of recent developments, including a statement from Fr. Cole about his letter to Marc Balestrieri on advocacy of legal abortion as heresy.

Surprised by Canon Law!
150 Questions Catholics Ask about Canon Law
by Pete Vere & Michael Trueman
Forward by Patrick Madrid
For centuries, canon law has been for most Catholics a mysterious and esoteric aspect of Catholicism, […] Not anymore. – Patrick Madrid, Envoy Magazine
Vere and Trueman have made canon law accessible to the average Catholic for the first time. – Karl Keating, Catholic Answers
From time to time, all Catholics have them: nagging questions about church life, often prompted by some personal encounter or challenging situation:
Is a layperson allowed to preach a homily?
Is a pastor required to report to someone regarding parish finances, or is he on his own?
It seems like the parish council is running your parish. Does it have the authority to do so?
Must a child be baptized in a church, or may the baptism take place at home?
Surprised by Canon Law tackles these and many other questions, all of which have been formally addressed by the Roman Catholic Church’s Code of Canon Law. The Code-the internal legal system that governs the church’s day-to-day workings-deals with far-flung concerns of interest to the person-in-the-pew. This practical guide to the Code provides answers to a range of questions, from “Can the pope resign?” to the more sensitive query “Do you have the right to tell your bishop what the diocese needs?”
In straightforward language the authors discuss the nuts-and-bolts of church life, making canon law accessible to the everyday Catholic.
This volume is readable, interesting, pastoral and completely faithful to Church teaching and discipline. – Fr. Peter Stravinskas, The Catholic Response
I recommend it as a valuable starting point for anyone interested in becoming familiar with canon law. + Adam Cardinal Maida, Archbishop of Detroit
To order your copy today, please visit SurprisedbyCanonLaw.com or call 1-800-488-0488.

Okay folks! Answers to all those canon law questions you keep asking me are now available in book format. Just call Saint Anthony Messenger Press at 1-800-488-0488 and for $9.95 plus shipping and handling, you can get yourself a copy of Surprised by Canon Law.