The
following is taken from True or False Pope? pp. 183-185
In
his commentary on the 1917 Code of Canon Law, Fr. Augustine explains the
canonical process and penalties for those who are suspect of heresy:
We now proceed
to the penalties the Code inflicts on those suspected of heresy.
a) They must,
first, be warned, according to
canon 2307, to remove the cause of suspicion. A reasonable time should be
granted for this purpose in the canonical warning.
b) If the
warning proves fruitless, the
suspected person must be forbidden to perform any ecclesiastical legal acts,
according to can. 2256. If he is a cleric, he must be suspended a divinis after a second warning has
been left unheeded.
c) If, after the
lapse of six months, to be reckoned from the moment the penalty has been
contracted, the person suspected of heresy has not amended, he must be regarded
as a heretic, amenable to the penalties set forth in canon 2314. Whilst the
penalties enumerated under (b) are ferendae
sententiae, to be inflicted according to can. 2223, 3, the penalties stated
under (c) are a iure and latae sententiae.
Note that, since
the ferendae sententiae penalties
require a canonical warning and a clear statement of the time granted, the
moment from which the penalty is contracted can be almost mathematically
determined.[1]
As we can see,
under the Church’s positive law, if one commits an act that renders him suspect
of heresy (e.g., externally professing heretical errors, worshiping with
pagans, profaning the Eucharist, etc.), he is not considered a heretic until
the above procedures have been followed. In his commentary on the 1917 Code,
Fr. Henry Ayrinhac notes that a person’s actions may render him suspect of
heresy de facto, yet “the suspicion
has no canonical effect until the
warning has been given.” He then goes on to explain the procedures and
penalties:
If a person who
is suspected of heresy does not, after being duly warned, remove the cause of
the suspicion, supposing that it is morally possible to do so, he should be debarred
from the legitimate acts. A cleric should receive a second warning, and if this
too remained fruitless he should be suspended a divinis. After inflicting these punishments, six months more may
be allowed, and if at the end of this time the party suspected of heresy has
shown no signs of amendment, he is to
be considered as a heretic and punished accordingly.[2]
We can see the
prudence and patience of Holy Mother Church with regard to such people. Under
the Church’s law, a prelate is not considered a heretic for engaging in any of the
aforementioned activities until he has been duly warned by legitimate authority, and may not even be suspended from
his official duties until he fails to heed a second warning. Further, the prelate must be given six months more to remove the cause for
suspicion, and after that he is only considered a heretic by the Church if he
shows no signs of amendment. Finally, even after the six month period in which
amendment is to take place, if the suspect is a cleric, he is not immediately
suspended or forbidden from performing ecclesiastical legal acts. Such penalties are not automatic, but must be
imposed, ferendae sententiae, by the
proper ecclesiastical authorities, who may have reason to refrain from putting them
into effect.
