Reply #9: voting pro-choice is not grounds for excommunicaiton... [View All]

I am catholic and along w/the majority of american catholics I am pro-choice.

Procurring, having, or performing an abortion is grounds for ex-communication is grounds for excommunication but even then there are loopholes..

Can. 1323 -- The following are not subject to penalties when they have violated a law or precept:

1° a person who has not yet completed the sixteenth year of age;

2° a person who without any fault was unaware of violating a law or precept; however, inadvertence and error are equivalent to ignorance;

3° a person who acted out of physical force or in virtue of a mere accident which could neither be foreseen nor prevented when foreseen;

4° a person who acted out of grave fear, even if only relatively grave, or out of necessity or out of serious inconvenience unless the act is intrinsically evil or verges on harm to souls;

5° a person who for the sake of legitimate self-defense or defense of another acted against an unjust aggressor with due moderation;

6° a person who lacked the use of reason with due regard for the prescriptions of can 1324, §1, n. 2 and 1325;

7° a person who without any fault felt that the circumstances in nn. 4 or 5 were verified.

Can. 1324 -- §1. One who violates a law or precept is not exempt from a penalty but the penalty set by law or precept must be tempered or a penance substituted in its place if the offense was committed:

1° by a person with only the imperfect use of reason;

2° by a person who lacked the use of reason due to drunkenness or another similar mental disturbance which was culpable;

3° in the serious heat of passion which did not precede and impede all deliberation of mind and consent of will as long as the passion itself had not been voluntarily stirred up or fostered;

4° by a minor who has completed sixteen years of age;

5° by a person who was forced through grave fear, even if only relatively grave, or out of necessity or out of serious inconvenience if the offense was intrinsically evil or verged on harm to souls;

6° a person who for the sake of legitimate self-defense or defense of another acted against an unjust aggressor but without due moderation;

7° against one gravely and unjustly provoking it;

8° by one who erroneously yet culpably thought one of the circumstances in nn. 4 or 5 was verified;

9° by one who without any fault was unaware that a penalty was attached to the law or precept;

10° by one who acted without full imputability provided there was grave imputability.

§2. A judge can act in the same manner if any other circumstances exist that would lessen the seriousness of the offense.

§3. An accused is not bound by an automatic penalty (latae sententiae) in the presence of any of the circumstances enumerated in §1.

Can. 1325 -- Crass, supine or affected ignorance can never be considered in applying the prescriptions of cann. 1323 and 1324; the same is true for drunkenness and other mental disturbances deliberately induced to commit or excuse the offense; this is also true for passion which is deliberately aroused or fostered.