I recently read this article about excommunication at Salon. It’s not necessary to read, the general thrust of it is that bishops & popes threatening excommunication to people who support abortion (either by voting for politicians who support it or by being politicians who support it) are hoping that the threat of excommunication is sufficient to change people’s minds about abortion but are unwilling to actually excommunicate anyone. Some of the comments on the article, however, are very interesting.
There are nine technical grounds for “automatic” excommunication:
Incidentally, Benedict has added violating the secrecy of the papal ballot.
It’s actually pretty hard to “automatically” excommunicate yourself. But then there are loopholes. If you don’t believe what you are doing is wrong (even if you procure an abortion), it doesn’t count. And, of course, excommunication simply means that you are no longer in “communion” with the Church. That just means that you need to reconcile yourself. It was originally come up with as a way to help sinners stop being sinners. If people were denied the great things about the Faith (like going to church, going to confession, receiving communion), they would realize how wrong they were to sin and try to come back. Of course, if you got burned at the stake if you didn’t come back, that was an even better incentive to stop being a sinner.
These days, I think the people doing the kinds of things that excommunicate them (either as relates to abortion or as relates to ordaining female priests) really believe that what they’re doing is correct. They’re willing to be excommunicated by a church that they believe is on the wrong side of god in order to be on the right one.
What are your thoughts on excommunication, either in your church or someone else’s?
8 responses so far ↓
1 Elise // Jun 19, 2007 at 7:15 pm
Very interesting topic. I don’t have a problem with excommunication, generally speaking. If I was a member of an anti-fur group and I insisted selling animal skins, I’d expect to get kicked out. If I had a job that required keeping a license up to date and I failed to do so, I’d expect to get fired. So, if I’m a member of a religious group that believes a certain way about God and follows a certain set of rules, I’d expect to get excommunicated if I didn’t conform. I think it’s sad that organizations can’t always find it in themselves to be a little more lenient, but hey, it’s a voluntary group, and I think it is fair for it to have expectations.
Two things I really despise about excommunication is the bitter connotation it often carries because of the feelings of betrayal and animosity, and, the patriarchal nature it has in the faith I was raised in (Mormonism). I don’t know how it works in the Catholic church, but in Mormonism, 6 men are assigned to represent the defendent and 6 men are assigned to debate in favor of excommincation. Imagine, if you will, a young woman entering a room of 12 middle-aged men and feeling her “sin” and/or her very personal thoughts and beliefs being scrutinized and displayed. Or imagine a middle-aged man being put on trial in front of his peers. I’m sure it can be done in a positive way with an attitude of love and wanting what is best for the individual, but too often I fear it is something hostile and negative and suffocating for the one at risk for being excommunicated.
I like the idea of giving one an opportunity to either leave voluntarily or be given the opportunity to defend his/herself before excommunication occurs. And I think it is horrible that it is taught that the person excommunicated loses the “right” to the sacrament (can that right really be lost or taken away by another?), to pray publicly, and to serve (aren’t there areas one can serve in if desired that don’t involve doctrine or teaching?).
2 John // Jun 19, 2007 at 8:12 pm
Elise, I’m not sure I agree with your categorization of Mormonism as a “voluntary” group, because it cries against my experience of it (sorry!). The Oxford English Dictionary defines voluntary as Performed or done of one’s own free will, impulse, or choice; not constrained, prompted, or suggested by another. I agree that it’s fair for religions to have expectations, but when you include the indoctrination of children, the social/emotional pressure to conform and believe, and harsh punishments built into the world view (e.g., hell), it moves out of the realm of the voluntary.
3 Elise // Jun 20, 2007 at 6:45 am
Hmmm….good point, John. When I wrote that, I was comparing a few things in my mind. I was thinking about the difference between my nationality - which I was born into - and my childhood religion - which I was also born into. At this moment, religion seems much, much, much more voluntary than nationality.
Looking back and reflecting on my decisions 5 years ago, though, I can remember that it didn’t seem so simple back then. If I transport myself back into the struggles I had with leaving that religion, I remember better the things you mention - childhood indoctrination, social/emotional pressure to conform and believe, and harsh punishments built into my worldview. You’re right, it’s not quite as voluntary as I originally expressed.
That said, I do still think excommunication can be a fair way to respond to dissenters…though it is unfortunate when carried out poorly or when used too often and too extremely.
Wondering out loud - does anyone know, for any religion, any studies that have been done on how many excommunicated members end up returning and re-joining the organized faith and how many do not?
4 John // Jun 20, 2007 at 9:33 am
You’re right, Elise–things like race and gender are much less voluntary than religion (though one could argue that nationality is voluntary as well). When you were thinking of these things, I had social clubs in mind.
5 Miko // Jun 21, 2007 at 8:34 am
I like this exploration of excommunication-as-emotional-violence. As you said, if I was in a professional association and allowed by accreditation to lapse, I would expect that I would no longer be allowed to practice until I regained said accreditation. But in the sense of a religion which, as John pointed out, is voluntary in some senses but not in many others, if it was simply the sort of thing where you know that if you allow your religious accreditation to lapse, you would have to stop going, there might be fewer emotions attached to it. But since it often seems that the people who get castigated are not the only people with lapsed credentials, it turns into a very charged procedure.
6 Miko // Jun 21, 2007 at 3:23 pm
an amusing take on how & why to get excommunicated; remember, blasphemy is a victimless crime!
7 Elise // Jun 21, 2007 at 6:33 pm
Very interesting link, Miko! I had no idea it was so hard to get your “name removed” from the Catholic church.
Have you tried any of the things mentioned in the article?
8 Miko // Jun 21, 2007 at 6:47 pm
Well, I’m an apostate/heretic. But no, I’ve no need to call my local abbot (I was baptized & confirmed by a Franciscan abbot in Germany) to ask him nicely to remove me from his records. To some extent, it seems to me like an annulment: it’s not that I was never part of the church (canonically, my parents spoke with my authority when I was baptized) even if my confirmation is invalid. Plus, I really liked my priest there. I might still go to masses if he was a little closer. It also kinda seems antagonizing. Like, going into St. Finbar (who needs to find out how Fionnbharr is spelled) and saying, “hi, you don’t know me, I live down the street & just want to say I’m not catholic!” Although I would like to draw and quarter the Christian spammers I get junkmail from weekly.
Leave a Comment