The Catholic Undertow

Mary Ann Collins, A Former Catholic Nun

Chapter 19

Curses and Coercion

From the Middle Ages until modern times, popes have used curses and coercion to control individuals, groups, and entire nations. Some of the laws in the modern Code of Canon Law indicate that the Catholic Church still believes that it has the right to coerce and control people. (These laws are discussed at the end of this chapter.)

ANATHEMAS

According to the 1914 edition of The Catholic Encyclopedia, there is a solemn, written ritual that enables the Pope to put ecclesiastical curses (anathemas) on people. The article in The Catholic Encyclopedia describes the ritual in detail, including extensive quotations from it. (You can read this article online.)[1]

In pronouncing the anathema, the Pope wears special vestments. He is assisted by twelve priests who hold lighted candles. Calling on the name of God, the Pope pronounces a solemn, ecclesiastical curse. He ends by pronouncing the “sentence” and declaring that the anathematized person is condemned to Hell with Satan. The priests reply: “Fiat!” (Let it be done!) and throw down their candles.

As we will see later in this chapter, the Catholic Church considers heresy (disagreement with Catholic doctrine) to be a crime. The Council of Trent declared that any person who disagrees with even one of its doctrinal statements is thereby automatically anathematized. (See the chapter, “The Council of Trent and Ecumenism.”)

When the Pope pronounces an anathema, he is said to be passing sentence on a criminal.

The Catholic Encyclopedia says that the anathema ritual is deliberately calculated to terrify the “criminal” and cause him to “repent” (in other words, to unconditionally submit to the Catholic Church).

For those whose crime is heresy, repentance means renouncing everything that they have said or done that conflicts with Catholic doctrine. In other words, they have to renounce their own conscience and discernment, and the conclusions that they reached in their best efforts to understand Biblical principles. They are required to submit their minds and wills unconditionally to every official doctrinal declaration of the Catholic Church.

As we will see later in this chapter, modern Canon Law says that this unquestioning submission of the mind and will is still required.

The Catholic Encyclopedia states that a person’s religious beliefs should not be subject to his or her “free private judgment.” Because religious beliefs are important, and individuals can make mistakes, Rome says that religious beliefs should be determined by the Catholic Church, rather than by individuals.[2] This attitude is consistent with the spirit behind anathematizing people.

The new Code of Canon Law was published by the authority of Pope John Paul II in 1983. It claims to be inspired by the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) and to put its reforms into concrete form. According to Canon 752, whenever the Pope or the college of bishops makes a declaration concerning faith or morals, “the Christian faithful” are required to submit their intellect and will to it. Furthermore, they are required to avoid anything that disagrees with it. (The new Code of Canon Law is online. You can read this law for yourself.)[3]

So it is against Roman Catholic Canon Law for “the Christian faithful” to doubt or deny or dispute any Catholic doctrine. If something is against the law, then any person who does it commits a crime. In other words, he or she is a criminal.

Canon Law has punishments for such criminals. It refers to these punishments as “a just penalty.” This is a broad term that gives immense discretion to the person passing judgment. During the Inquisition and the Protestant Reformation, “just penalties” for disagreeing with Catholic doctrine included imprisonment, torture, confiscation of property, and being burned at the stake.

ENFORCEMENT

According to Canon 1311, the Catholic Church has the right to coerce “the Christian faithful” who do things contrary to Canon Law. Canon 1312 says that penal sanctions can include depriving people of spiritual goods (such as the sacraments) and temporal goods (things that people need for life on this earth). During the Protestant Reformation, the Catholic Church penalized Protestants by depriving them of their property, their freedom, and their life.[4]

In the case of John Hus, the Catholic Church did more than that. Hus was a Catholic priest who lived in the fifteenth century. He was burned at the stake for “heresy” because he believed the Bible more than he believed the Pope. Before Hus was burned, an archbishop and six bishops subjected him to a “ceremony of degradation.” He was dressed in priest’s vestments, and a chalice (wine goblet) was put in his hands. He was taken to the high altar, as if he was going to say Mass. Then the bishops took the chalice from him, and stripped him of his vestments, one piece at a time. Each time that they removed something, they pronounced a solemn curse over him. Then they placed an imitation of a bishop’s miter on his head. It had three demons painted on it.

When the the archbishop and the bishops placed the mock miter on Hus’ head, they said: “We commit your soul to the devil.” Hus looked up to Heaven and said: “And I commit it to the most merciful Lord Jesus Christ.” Hus began singing to the Lord. As the flames started to burn him, he kept on singing. You would expect that a man who was being burned alive would be screaming because of the pain. But Hus died singing.[5]

The Catholic Church has never renounced its past practice of killing people that it considers to be heretics. On the contrary, the Office of the Inquisition still exists. It is part of the Roman Curia (the group of men who govern the Catholic Church). In 1965, its name was changed to The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. It is headed by Cardinal Ratzinger.[6]

On December 8, 1854, Pope Pius IX declared the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of Mary. This says that Mary was conceived without the influence of original sin (the sin resulting from the disobedience of Adam and Eve).

After defining the dogma, the Pope said that if any person “dares” to disagree with his declaration, then that person shipwrecks his or her faith, and is cut off from the Catholic Church. The Pope declared that such people are “condemned.” He said that if any person says, or writes, or in any other way outwardly expresses the “errors” in his or her heart, then that person becomes subject to punishment.[7] The Pope’s reference to punishment is significant, because a man had been executed for heresy 28 years before this papal bull was issued.[8]

On November 1, 1950, Pope Pius XII issued a papal bull defining the dogma of the Assumption of Mary. This says that Mary was taken bodily up into Heaven.

The Pope ended by saying that it is forbidden for any person to oppose his declaration, or to say anything contrary to it. He said that any person who attempts to do so will incur the wrath of God, and the wrath of the Apostles Peter and Paul.[9]

Although this papal bull doesn’t openly threaten punishment, it still implies the possibility of some form of punishment. The difference in tone between the encyclicals of 1854 and 1950 reflects the decrease in power of the Catholic Church. In 1854, a man had recently been executed for heresy. In 1950, the political power of the Catholic Church had decreased. By 1950, the kind of language that was used in the 1854 encyclical would not have created a good image.

ECCLESIASTICAL CURSES

The Roman Catholic Church believes that the Pope has the power and the authority to damn people to Hell. The anathema ritual demonstrates this belief.

Many Catholics deny this, saying that only God can condemn people to Hell. But look at the ritual of the anathema, as described in The Catholic Encyclopedia. And look at the following solemn declaration of excommunication, which was pronounced by Pope Innocent III:

“We excommunicate, anathematize, curse and damn him...”[10]

The anathema ritual and its wording are a demonstration that popes believed that they could consign people to Hell. The fear that the anathema produced is a demonstration that other people also believed it. So is the power that anathemas gave the popes over civil rulers.

The anathema ritual is still on the books, so we must assume that modern popes still believe that they can do this. The ritual was formulated by Pope Zachary, who reigned from 741 to 752. He is a canonized saint.[11]

According to Scripture, we are not supposed to curse anybody--not even our enemies. The Bible says:

“But I [Jesus] say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.” (Matthew 5:44-45; also see Luke 6:28)

“Bless them which persecute you: bless, and curse not.” (Romans 12:14)

“Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God. Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be.” (James 3:9-10)

SPIRITUAL COERCION

Pope Innocent III reigned from 1198 to 1216. He excommunicated Markward of Anweiler. In passing the sentence of excommunication, Innocent declared that he anathematized Markward, cursed him, and damned him to Hell.[12]

Innocent and other popes ruled over kings, emperors, and noblemen by using the “spiritual weapons” of excommunication and interdict. Excommunicated people are cut off from the Catholic Church and from the sacraments. Catholics who are placed under interdict remain members of the Catholic Church, but most of the sacraments are denied to them.[13]

These “weapons” were effective, because Roman Catholics believed that the Pope had the power to deprive them of the grace that they needed in order to get to Heaven. Catholics believed that the Catholic Church and the sacraments were necessary for salvation. Therefore, a sentence of excommunication was seen as being a sentence to Hell. It had a powerful impact on individuals and on entire nations.

I live in America. In our modern, western society, we are used to thinking independently. It is not unusual for Catholics to believe some Catholic doctrines, but to disbelieve (or just ignore) others. (According to Catholic doctrine, this approach is heretical--but most “cafeteria Catholics” probably don’t realize that.) Therefore, it may be difficult for us to understand the terror caused by excommunication, and the power that this “spiritual weapon” gave to the popes.

In 1014, Pope Leo IX excommunicated the entire Orthodox Church. This means that, according to Catholic theology, every single Orthodox priest, nun, layman, and laywoman was damned to Hell unless he or she repented and submitted to the Catholic Pope. “Infallible” popes and “infallible” Catholic Church councils have declared that there is no salvation apart from the Roman Catholic Church.[14]

In 1965, Pope Paul VI removed that excommunication. I’m grateful that he removed it. However, that does not change the fact that, for 951 years, every single Orthodox Christian lived and died under that curse.

Interdicts are applied to large groups of people, including entire nations. Baptism and the “last rites” (extreme unction) are allowed, but all other sacraments are forbidden. Church services and Christian burial are also forbidden. If the Pope is in conflict with a secular ruler, then he can put the ruler’s subjects under interdict, in order to get them to put pressure on their ruler. It works. The ruler’s Catholic subjects become desperate to get the interdict removed. They put pressure on their ruler, to get him to submit to the Pope, so that the Pope will remove the interdict.[15]

It works. But at what price? What happens to the innocent people who had nothing to do with the conflict between their ruler and the Pope? They are allowed to receive the “last rites,” but that only works for people who know that they are dying. What about people who die suddenly and unexpectedly? Because of the interdict, they were not able to have a priest absolve them of their sins. According to Catholic doctrine, if they have committed a mortal sin, and they have not had that sin be absolved by a priest, then they will go to Hell.

So in effect, popes were willing to send people to Hell, in order to get political power over secular rulers. Whether or not they actually had the power to send people to Hell is beside the point. They thought that they had the power, and they were willing to use it.

Interdicts were used primarily during the Middle Ages. However, as we will see, the interdict was used as recently as 1962.

Pope Innocent III (1198-1216) used interdicts, and the threat of interdicts, 85 times, in order to force secular rulers to submit to him. He put entire nations unter interdict. He was so successful that kings declared that the Pope was their feudal lord. For example, King John of England became the vassal of the Pope and paid him an annual tribute.[16]

Excommunication and interdicts are not ancient history. The authority, and the procedure for exercising it, exist today. Pope John Paul II issued a new edition of Roman Catholic Canon Law in 1983. (Canon Law is a collection of laws that govern the Catholic Church.) Canons 1331 and 1332 deal with punishments for people who have been excommunicated or placed under interdict. Canons 1364 to 1399 deal with penalties for “delicts” (offenses against Canon Law). These penalties include being excommunicated or placed under interdict.[17]

COERCING VOTERS IN 1962

A modern example of spiritual coercion is the 1962 election in Malta (a small island in the Mediterranean Sea, near Sicily).

Dr. Mark F. Montebello is a Catholic priest from the Island of Malta. He wrote a series of three articles called, “Civil Rights in Malta’s Post-Colonial Age.” The third article describes how the Archbishop of Malta required Malta’s Catholic priests to help him prevent Catholics from voting for Mintoff (the Labor Party candidate) in Malta’s 1962 election.

According to Dr. Montebello, the Archbishop instructed the priests to use the sacrament of confession to coerce the consciences of Catholic voters. He ordered the priests to threaten people with eternal damnation.[18]

The Catholic Church officially declared that it was a mortal sin to vote for Mintoff. Priests who failed to cooperate were silenced. Some of them were forced to leave Malta and become missionaries in foreign countries.[19]

Malta is about 94% Catholic. Therefore, this attempt to control Catholic voters was really an attempt to control the entire country. In a democratic election, the votes of the other 6% of the people would not have much impact.

Maltese Catholics who voted for Mintoff were placed under interdict. It became a mortal sin to vote for Mintoff. Catholics who voted for Mintoff were banned from church life and from the sacraments. They were denied a Christian burial. Instead, they were buried in a section of the cemetery that was called “the rubbish dump,” implying that the soul of the dead person was damned. A citizen of Malta recounts:

“The Catholic Church used the pulpit, the confessional, the media and even public meetings in its vigorous campaign. I asked my father about his experience. When he went to confession, the priest asked him how he intended to vote in the general election and refused to give him absolution.”[20]

MODERN CANON LAW

Canon Law provides the legal basis for everything that the Roman Catholic Church does. The Code of Canon Law was thoroughly revised in 1983. The English translation was published in 1988. These are contemporary laws that demonstrate the spirit behind Roman Catholicism. (These laws are all contained in one 751-page book that costs $45. If you want to buy it, information is in the Notes.)[21]

The new Code of Canon Law was published by the authority of Pope John Paul II. It claims to be inspired by the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) and to put its reforms into concrete form. It increases the power and authority of the Pope.[22]

The Catholic Church no longer has the kind of power that it used to have. As a result, it can only enforce these laws within the Catholic Church. Even there, its ability to enforce them is somewhat limited, because it does not want to have unfavorable international publicity.

Some provisions of the 1983 Code of Canon Law are written in terms that could be interpreted to apply to Protestants as well as to Catholics.

The Pope could easily resolve these issues. He could give directives to have some laws reworded, or new laws added. The Pope could also publish an encyclical to clarify these issues. That could be an interim step, while the legal changes are being made. (A reassuring statement by itself would not solve the problem, because it would not have the weight of law.)

Canon 1311 says that the Catholic Church has the right to coerce the “Christian faithful” if they fail to comply with Canon Law. (You can read these laws online. The Notes give information.)[23]

Canon 752 says that “the Christian faithful” are required to submit their minds and wills to all doctrines declared by the Pope, or the college of bishops, and to be careful to avoid anything that disagrees with those doctrines.

Does the term “the Christian faithful” in these laws refer to Protestants? Or only to Roman Catholics?

Canon 754 says that the bishops are to direct “Catholics” to participate in ecumenism. So when Canon Law wants to specifically refer to Catholics, it does so clearly and directly.

Canon 204 defines “the Christian faithful” in terms of baptism. Since Protestants are baptized, the definition could include them. It could also include Orthodox Christians.

Canon 205 gives requirements that “the Christian faithful” must fulfill in order to be members of the Catholic Church. Therefore, the term, “the Christian faithful,” is not limited to Catholics.

Section 2 of Canon 825 refers to Catholics who are numbered among “the Christian faithful.” This implies that there are “Christian faithful” who are not Catholics.

Canon 750 says that “a person” is required to believe all Catholic doctrines. Canon 1371 says that “a person” who “obstinately rejects” any Catholic doctrine is to be punished. Does this apply to Protestants and Orthodox Christians? They are people.

Canon 1371 says that “a person” who teaches a doctrine that has been condemned by a Catholic Church council is to be punished. The Council of Trent condemned every single doctrine that was proposed by the Protestant Reformers. It also condemned Protestant objections to Catholic doctrines. Does this law apply to Protestants? If it does, then they could be punished for their beliefs.

Canon 1366 says that “parents” are to be punished if they allow their children to be educated or baptized in “a non-Catholic religion.” The reference to baptism shows that this means Christians. However, the law says “parents,” not “Catholic parents.” The wording could refer to Protestants and Orthodox Christians as well as to Catholics.

Canon 825 (Section 1) forbids the publication of any Bible that has not been approved by the papacy (Apostolic See) or the conference of bishops. The Catholic Church seems to be claiming the right to control the publication of all Bibles (not just Catholic ones).

These laws are worded in such a broad way that they could be interpreted as applying to Protestants or Orthodox Christians. But could Catholic Canon Law actually be applied to people who are not Catholics? It happened during the Protestant Reformation.

If a time ever comes when the Catholic Church interprets and applies these laws as not being limited to Catholics, then the Catholic Church would consider it to be a crime (an act contrary to law) for Protestants or Orthodox Christians to preach or teach or write anything that is contrary to Catholicism. That includes teaching their own children.

These laws say that offenders are to be punished with a “just penalty.” The term is so broad that it can be interpreted to mean almost anything. It gives immense discretionary power to whoever is in authority.

During the Protestant Reformation, the Catholic Church considered it to be a crime to be a Protestant. Being burned alive was considered to be a just penalty for the crime of disagreeing with Catholic doctrine. (See the chapter, “Hunting ‘Heretics.’”)

It would also be considered a crime for Catholics to convert to Protestantism, and then share their new faith with other people (including their own children). Sharing can be considered to be a form of teaching; and their new faith would include things that are contrary to Catholic doctrine.

Most Catholics were baptized when they were babies. In other words, they were made Catholics without their consent. To forbid them to leave the Catholic Church is to treat them like Church property.

It would also be considered a crime to publish Protestant Bibles. That could easily be interpreted to mean that it would be a crime to possess a Protestant Bible. There are historical precedents for this. During the Protestant Reformation, many men and women were burned at the stake for possessing Protestant Bibles.

During the Protestant Reformation, many monks and nuns left their monasteries and convents, and became Protestants. Under modern Canon Law, they would not be allowed to do this. According to Canon 665 (Section 2), monks and nuns who leave their religious community without permission, desiring to get away from the power of their superiors, are to be “sought out” in order to “help” them return and “persevere” in their vocation. In other words, they are to be hunted down, forced to return, and forced to remain.

The Second Vatican Council seemed to approve of freedom of conscience and freedom of religion. However, these laws show a rather different picture.

PRACTICAL APPLICATION

Jesus said: “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefuly use you, and persecute you.” (Matthew 5:45) He also said: “In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world.” (John 16:33)

Our modern American culture does not prepare us to endure and overcome hardship. But the Bible does. God really will make everything work out for our good if we love Him. (Romans 8:28) If you want to see that in action, read books by persecuted Christians. You can get them from a ministry called Open Doors. Their website is:

http://www.OpenDoorsUSA.org

Jesus promised that He will always be with us. (Matthew 28:20) He told us not to be afraid of people who can kill us. (Matthew 10:28) God’s strength is made perfect in our weakness, and His grace is sufficient for us. (2 Corinthians 12:9) The Apostle Paul urged us to seek eternal things. (Colossians 3:1-4) The perspective of eternity will strengthen us to endure the trials and tribulations of daily life.

According to the Bible, Jesus Christ “hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ.” (Ephesians 1:3) If Jesus Christ Himself has blessed us, then who can “unbless” us by cursing us? The name of Jesus is above all names. (Philippians 2:9) Nobody--including the Catholic Church--has the power to prevent God from blessing us.

Nobody has the power or the authority to cut us off from God. Nobody can keep his love away from us. (Romans 8:35-39) Almighty God does not need the permission of the Catholic Church in order to bless us.