Excommunication for harsh criticism of Pontiff?
December 07, 2015
The president of the Pontifical Council for the New Evangelization has suggested that strident criticism of Pope Francis might fall under the provisions of canon law that impose a penalty of excommunication for "physical violence" against the Roman Pontiff.
"I think we need to understand 'physical violence' well," said Archbishop Rino Fisichella at a briefing on plans for the Year of Mercy, "because sometimes words, too, are rocks and stones-- and therefore I believe that some of these sins, too, are far more common than we might think."
Responding quickly to the archbishop, the American canon lawyer Edward Peters pointed out that the Code of Canon Law stipulates that all canons must be narrowly interpreted, and since the relevant canon (1370) refers clearly to physical violence, it would not apply. "To be sure, hateful speech directed against anyone is objectively sinful, and if directed against a man of God, let alone a Pope, it is especially wrong," Peters wrote. But it could not be a canonical crime punishable by excommunication.
For all current news, visit our News home page.
Further information:
- Papal critics threatened with excommunication as Year of Mercy begins (LifeSiteNews)
- Most words are not crimes (In the Light of the Law)
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a current donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!
-
Posted by: AgnesDay -
Dec. 09, 2015 6:08 PM ET USA
So Vatican lifers are now proposing to eliminate microaggressions?
-
Posted by: jalsardl5053 -
Dec. 07, 2015 10:42 PM ET USA
And Obamaists (i.e. phony scientists) say "climate deniers" should be prosecuted. (Now we get to argue over what's "strident".) The striking parallels continue and it's a real history lesson on letting certain genies out of the bottle.
-
Posted by: rbole0745 -
Dec. 07, 2015 9:27 PM ET USA
To a progressive truth is how ever they define it. Words only matter if they are manipulated to their satisfaction. Any other definition is false even if it is factual. Thanks be to God for a narrow interpretation without it I may be condemned to hell because I believe man caused climate change to be a political problem that does not exist in the real world.
