The Heresy of Pluralism
Richard Salbato 6-23-2007
In the documents of Vatican II under the Decree on Ecumenism we read, “Every effort to avoid expressions, judgments and actions which do not represent the condition of our separated brethren with truth and fairness and so make mutual relations with them more difficult. (should be avoided). … The results will be that, little by little, the obstacles to ecclesiastical communion are overcome, all Christians will be gathered, in a common celebration of the Eucharist, into the unity of the one and ONLY Church, which Christ bestowed on His Church from the beginning. This unity, be believe, subsists in the Catholic Church as something she can never lose, and we hope that it will continue to increase until the end of time.”
CATHOLIC PRINCIPLES OF ECUMENISM #4
It is the very change in language that has caused the ultra-Traditionalist to reject Vatican II, and the ultra-liberal to fall into indifferentism, or pluralism. Changing the language from heretic to separated brethren and from the rejection of essential truths to holding to some truths angered Traditionalists and confused liberals. Nothing changed except the language and this only to enter into a dialogue that could bring those who left back to the faith. I use the same method when evangelizing. I do not walk up and say you are a heretic and going to hell. I say you and I hold to some truths that are the same, and some that are different. The truth is that no doctrine has ever changed and doctrine cannot change, as is stated by Pope Benedict XV.
Canonici (1917) The year of
“Our Lord Jesus Christ entrusted the deposit of faith to the Church, that under the constant guidance and assistance of the Holy Spirit, she might sacredly guard and faithfully explain this divine revelation. (c. 1322).
“The Church guards and explains this deposit of faith. She does not add to it,
for it was completed and closed with the death of the last Apostle,
“All those truths must be believed fide divina et catholica, which are contained in the written word of God or in tradition and which the Church proposes for acceptance as revealed by God, either by solemn definition or through her ordinary and universal teaching. To pronounce a solemn definition is the part of an Ecumenical Council or of the Roman Pontiff speaking ex cathedra. No doctrine is to be considered as dogmatically defined unless this is evidently proved (c. 1323).
“It is not enough to avoid heresy, but one must also carefully shun all errors which more or less approach it; hence all must observe the constitutions and decrees by which the Holy See has proscribed and forbidden opinions of that sort (c. 1324).
who after baptism, while remaining nominally a Christian, pertinaciously (that is, with conscious
and intentional resistance to the authority of God and the Church) denies or
doubts any one of the truths which must be believed de fide divina et catholica,
is a heretic; if he falls away entirely from the Christian faith, he is
an apostate; finally if he rejects the authority of the Supreme Pontiff
or refuses communion with the members of the Church who are subject to him, he
is a schismatic (c. 1325, §2).” Pope Benedict XV Codex Iuris
Canonici (1917) The
Since, as I believe and the Church teaches, Vatican II could not change any doctrine of the Church, we must look at these old doctrines of the faith that we must believe in the light of Ecumentical language used to draw people into the church in a loving way but which do not take away from the deposit of faith that we must believe.
Pluralism is a Masonic and Charismatic belief that states all religions are the same in the eyes of God. Catholic Doctrine states that "except for invincible ignorance, there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church". Anyone who says that any other religion is not "against the word of God" is a heretic.
Fourth Lateran Council, 1215 AD (ex cathedra) "There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside of which no one can be saved."
Unam Sanciam 1302 (ex cathedra) "We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff."
Cantate Domino 1441 (ex cathedra) "The Most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes, and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels. Unless before death they are joined with her; and that so important is THE UNITY OF THIS ECCLESIASTICAL BODY that only those remaining within this UNITY can profit by the sacraments of the church unto salvation ... NO ONE, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, NO ONE, even if he pour out his blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the UNITY OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH."
The same has been expressed in Vatican II, and can be found in 1 Tim. 2:4, Acts 4:12, Gal. 1:8, Tit. 3:10, 2 John 10, St. Ireneaus, St. Cyprian, St. Jerome, St. Augustine, St. Fulgentius and St. John of the Cross. Nonetheless, Vatican II does express that non-Catholics (Protestants, Orthodox, Jews and Moslems) do have some truths and do have some good signs of charity. But Vatican II does not say that for that reason they will be saved or are roads to salvation. No where does Vatican II express salvation outside the Church except as she has always taught, through baptism or desire or blood. Consider what Pope Pius XI says about the outward signs of holiness and faith.
Pope Pius XI (1922-1939) On The Promotion of True Religious Unity [Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.]
“When the question of promoting unity among Christians is under consideration many are easily deceived by the semblance of good. ... Yet beneath the coaxing words there is concealed an error so great that it would destroy utterly the foundations of the Catholic Faith."
"They, therefore, who profess themselves Christians cannot, we think, but believe in Christ's establishment of one Church and only one. Yet when one asks what that Church by the will of its Founder ought to be, then not all agree. Indeed a great many deny, for example, that Christ's Church ought to be visible - at least in the sense that it should stand forth as one body of faithful united in one identical doctrine and under one authority and rule. On the contrary, by a visible Church they understand nothing but a society formed by various Christian communities, even though these adhere to different and even mutually contradictory doctrines.
"And here there is presented the opportunity to set forth and remove a falsity upon which, it seems, this whole question hinges, and from which is drawn the multiple effort of the non-Christians who strive, as We have said, for the confederation of the Christian churches.
”The authors of this plan are in the habit of quoting the words of Christ: That ye all may be one. . . . There shall be one fold and one shepherd, (John 17, 21; 10, 16), yet in the sense that these words express a desire and a prayer of Jesus Christ which thus far has lacked all effect. They contend that the unity of faith and governance which is the sign of the true and one Church of Christ, has almost never existed up to this time, and does not exist today; that it can be wished for and perhaps sometime be obtained through common submission of the will, but meanwhile it must be considered a fiction.
”They say, moreover, that the Church by its very nature is divided into parts; that it consists of many churches or particular communities which are separated among themselves and, although they have certain points of doctrine in common, differ in others; and that at most the Church was the one Church and only Church between the Apostolic Era and the first Ecumenical Councils.
“Therefore, they say, the controversies and old differences of opinion, which to this day divide the Christian name, should be put aside, and with the remaining doctrines there should be formulated and proposed a common rule of faith, in the profession of which all can know and feel themselves brothers. United by some sort of universal covenant, the multitude of churches or communities will then be in a position to oppose fruitfully and effectively the progress of unbelief. This, Venerable Brethren, is the more general opinion.
”There are, however, some among them who assume and grant that Protestantism, as they call it, has rejected very inadvisedly certain articles of faith and certain rites of external worship that are fully acceptable and useful, which the Roman Church still preserves. But they add immediately that the Church has corrupted the early religion by adding to it and proposing for belief certain doctrines that are not only foreign to, but are opposed to, the Gospel - among which they bring forth chiefly that of the primacy of jurisdiction assigned to Peter and his successors of the Roman See."
[Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.]
What the Holy Father was referencing above is movements in the world at the time (mostly by Masons) to create a world wide organization that would unite all Christian religions into one church void of absolute doctrine. This became the World Council of Churches. I have no problem with these being Cultural Pluralism, or freedom of religion, but not Doctrinal Pluralism.
Doctrinal Pluralism's difficulty (and contradiction of Catholic teaching) comes when it insists on the uniform equality of all religions, in common with cultures and ethnicities. This claim necessarily conflicts with the Church's claim to unique truth, that she and she alone possesses and passes on the whole truth given to man by his Creator.
This statement of pluralism's tenets clearly reveals its roots in another position which has been condemned by the Church. Indifferentism, the idea that all religions are equally capable of saving man (in other words, that God is indifferent to the way in which He is worshipped and, indeed, to whether or not the truth about Him is believed), bears a striking similarity to pluralist doctrine.
Pluralism also shares with indifferentism the tendency to destroy all real religion within their spheres. As the popes have declared, indifferentism results in the abandonment of all substantive religion4; after all, if the particular religion by which one worships God is irrelevant, then will not God be just as well pleased by an individual worship which is minimal to the point of non-existence?
Indifferentism thereby leads its followers into a religion which requires neither morals nor worship, a religion devoid of any substantive content. Pluralism extends this tendency of indifferentism into the public sphere. The state, immediately or gradually, reaches the point where the only religious tenets it supports or even acknowledges are completely banal, or at least deprived of all significant content.5
Thus, pluralism falls under the same condemnations as indifferentism,6 in addition to the many which have been levied against it in its own right.7 The Church has always reacted very strongly to these theories, which presume to sever the state from its true philosophical, and therefore necessarily religious, underpinnings. That is because indifferentism and pluralism necessarily involve yet another heresy, a sort of liberal quietism, by which faith is a personal and private matter which must never enter into one's public dealings.
Faith, however, must be lived out in action, as Our Lord Himself9 and St. James10 have told us. This means that faith must be lived out both by individual Catholics, by Catholic families, and by the state.11
Catholics must shun pluralism just as they would any other heresy as harmful to the soul and contrary to the social teachings of the Church.
2 The extreme, to which modernity regularly takes
this otherwise reasonable proposition, is insisting that all cultures
are necessarily of entirely equal value, regardless of the objective
evils which that culture encourages or even requires. Catholic teaching, on the
other hand, would argue that some cultures must necessarily be purified of
these fundamentally immoral elements. Excellent examples are ancient
Carthaginian society, which regularly
performed mass infant sacrifices; Canaanite society, which performed human
sacrifices to Ba'al; and Aztec society, which
sacrificed enormous numbers of people to their dark gods. Generally, however,
conversion to the one true religion will rectify these faults, as is
demonstrated by Spanish
This tendency of even Catholics accepting Pluralism has led Catholic theologians to accept the premise that the conscience is the ultimate arbitrator of good and evil, and that is why Pope John Paul II wrote “The Splendor of Truth”, to dispel this heresy. This is also why 80% of Catholics practice illegal birth control, and many have abortions.
4 See, e.g., Pius XI, Mortalium Animos no. 2 (arguing that those who fall into indifferentism "in distorting the the idea of true religion . . . reject it, and little by little, turn aside to naturalism and atheism").
6 See, e.g., Pius XI, Mortalium Animos no. 2 (declaring that the idea "which considers all religions to be more or less good and praiseworthy . . . and by which we are led to God" is a "false opinion") and no. 9 (referring to indifferentists as "unhappily infected with these errors"). See also Pius IX, The Syllabus of Errors nos. 16-17, 79.
Soufanieh and Medjugorje
It cannot be denied that Medjugorje messages have the heresy of Pluralism, also called Indifferentism, as I will show below. However, it also cannot be denied that Our Lady of Soufanieh supports true unity and a true ecumenical unity, at least in the messages.
As I have demonstrated in “Our Lady Defends Truth” http://www.unitypublishing.com/Newsletter/OurLadyTruth.htm Our Lady of Soufanieh not only stated that all Christian divisions are sins, but She also pointed out all the reasons for divisions and took sides in these theological arguments, because truth is important. The very words, “Those who divided it have sinned and those who are happy with these divisions are also sinning,” means that God only established one Church and all others are sinning and sinners.
On the other hand, Medjugorje works against true unity because the Gospa’s statements eliminate all reason for unity. This point cannot be overlooked since one of the great promoters of these apparitions is Wayne Weible, a Protestant, who had no desire to change his religion until many years later, for as he said, "She accepts us all as we are." Why did he say this? He said it because after 3000 apparitions the main theme is Pluralism.
The words of Mirjana:
"She also frequently said that ... there is only one God and that it is the people who are separated. YOU DO NOT BELIEVE IF YOU DO NOT RESPECT THE OTHER RELIGIONS, MUSLIM AND SERBIAN, AND YOU ARE NOT CHRISTIANS IF YOU DO NOT RESPECT THEM."
Mohammed claimed to be the son of God, and Christ only a prophet. He said that any Muslim who killed a Christian did not sin any more than if he killed a dog. We must love the Muslim, but never respect his religion. We must respect truth but never lies. The person - yes; the religion - no, never. But she did not say the person, who we should all love, but she said the faith, the religion. Religion means a type of faith, and we must not respect a false faith. Remember that these statements were taped and the tapes are still in the hands of the bishop.
In a taped interview with Ivanka, another of the seers, we hear:
Question: "It is important that people of good faith, regardless of denomination, not be turned against each other. [I agree with this.] But tell me more about this. What did the Madonna say about this?"
Ivanka: "The Madonna said that religions are separated on the earth, but THE PEOPLE OF ALL RELIGIONS ARE ACCEPTED BY HER SON."
Question: "So that means that all people go to Heaven?"
Ivanka: "It depends on what they deserve."
Question: "Yes, but many have never heard about Jesus."
Ivanka: "Jesus knows all about that; I don't. The Madonna said, 'BASICALLY, RELIGIONS ARE SIMILAR."
Now what did the Gospa really say? From the diaries of the seers and the first books we read:
THE VIRGIN’S OWN WORDS
"Tell the priest and everyone, that it is you who have divided yourselves on earth. THE MUSLIMS AND THE ORTHODOX AS WELL AS THE CATHOLICS ARE ALL EQUAL BEFORE MY SON AND BEFORE ME ..."
All equal? The very word, Muslim, means that Mohamed claimed to have the truth faith and that faith accuses Christ of being only a man and not God. This is blasphemy against the Son of God and His Mother.
Now how do Medjugorje promoters spin this to protect their pet apparition? Simple, they change history. In spite of the fact that the above statements are recorded on tape and in the hands of the bishop, the promoters of the apparitions changed the statement of the Gospa to read:
“All religions are dear to my son. It is you on earth who are divided. We are all children of God. The Moslems and the Orthodox for the same reason as Catholics are equal before my son and me. All religions are not equal. All men are equal before God. It does not suffice to belong to the Catholic Church to be saved. It is necessary to respect and obey the commandants of God in following one’s conscience. Those who are not Catholics are no less creatures made in the image of God and destined ultimately to live in the house of God. Salvation is available to everyone without exception. Only those who refuse God deliberately are condemned by their own choice.”
This re-statement of the Gospa was well planed out by someone who knows theology in order to take what was said truthfully and add things to it that would conform to the teachings of the Church. Take for example “All religions are not equal.” That never appeared in any book or web site until after I published my first document pointing out this message. The added comment: “It is necessary to respect and obey the commandments of God in following one’s conscience,” only was added after Pope John Paul II’s document, THE SPLENDOR OF TRUTH. However, the following added words are a reflection of the same re-writing theologians prejudice for the mis-interpretation of Vatican II: “Those who are not Catholics … are destined ultimately to live in the house of God.” This is the Origin Heresy of “All shall be saved.” Of course the Gospa never said this either. Salvation is available to everyone without exception but there are few who make it.
Now, Paul Baylis, who runs a Medjugorje web site really believes all the lies that come out of Medjugorje, so I am not attaching his honest belief that the above message is the true one, since he has no trust that the bishop holds the true messages as given from the beginning. However, he does accept the mis-interpretation of Vatican II and believes that doctrine can change and even change to an exact opposite of what was held as true for 2000 years.
Paul Baylis goes on to say:
needed a set of rules to keep him generally on a good path. However, the
Pharisees took this too far and Jesus had to come and take it to the next level
– LOVE. That is why Our Lady could say the apparently outrageous thing
she said to the visionaries, when she told them that there was a Muslim woman
close to sainthood in the town of
“I honestly believe that Vatican II is a step in a learning curve – an acceptance of correction from previous apparitions, and it will evolve even more through Medjugorje. People may not like it and will fall out into schisms, forgetting, as Martin Luther did, that whatever the Church binds on earth is bound in heaven and whatever it looses on earth is loosed in Heaven, thus in effect, God overlooking minor detail, focusing rather on the love that exists in the big picture among peoples of the earth. I think Jesus literally handed the keys of heaven to Peter and left him to it, with apparitions and private revelations coming every so often to provide necessary correction.”
In case you did not get it, Paul Paylis is saying that Medjugorje corrects Vatican II and corrects Popes. That makes apparitions the judge of councils and of Popes.
Friday was the feast of St. Thomas More who lost his head to defend the doctrine of the faith.
Sunday is the feast of St. John, the Baptist who lost his head to defend the doctrine of the faith.
Thousands of Catholics lost their lives defending the Church against Protestantism.
Hundreds of priests and nuns lost their lives in Mexico to Masons.
Millions lost their lives to Communists defending faith.
Millions of Catholics have lost their lives to Moslems and continue today.
Pluralism is the theory that a Catholic may legitimately hold a doctrinal position that is in contradiction to what the Church reaches, either as defined or by her ordinary universal magisterium. This would mean that contradictory doctrines in faith or morals could be professed by different persons, all equally in good standing in the Catholic Church. Doctrinal pluralism was condemned by the First Vatican Council, 1869-70 (Denzinger 3042, 3043).
Obedience is the moral virtue that inclines the will to comply with the will of another who has the right to command. Material obedience is merely to carry out the physical action commanded; formal obedience is to perform an action precisely because it is commanded by a legitimate superior. The extent of obedience is as wide as the authority of the person who commands. Thus obedience to God is without limit, whereas obedience to human beings is limited by higher laws that must not be transgressed, and by the competency or authority of the one who gives the orders. As a virtue, it is pleasing to God because it means the sacrifice of one's will out of love for God. (Etym. Latin obedientia, obedience.)
Only One Church is The Road to Salvation
Leave the Church - No Salvation
Response to this Newsletter by Paul Baylis:
If there is an ounce of objectivity left in you regarding Medjugorje, would you kindly answer my final question:
The Gospa made her so-called “heretical” statements very early on. Why has the Vatican not censured Medjugorje after 25 years, understanding that the Vatican would have more theological muscle than your good self to discern this so-called heresy? Surely, it would not tolerate it, especially as you seem convinced that there is no new pending investigation which would possibly decree the condemnation you are so looking for. That means Catholics shall indefinitely be allowed to travel to Medjugorje and receive full pastoral support there. Why, oh why, knowing this situation, would you dare to persist in condemning Medjugorje to anyone who will listen to you?
My final warning: Please stop condemning Medjugorje, Garabandal and any other apparition that the Church has not concluded its investigations on. Nothing good can come of it. You will have to answer for it, whether you are right or wrong about heresy and everything else. Why? Because it was not your place to pronounce judgement and promote those judgements to the entire world. It creates confusion and snatches fruits from the hands of God.
This is my final email to you. Thank you for your time and may God be with you.
Why do you ask for something from the Vatican and then support Garabandal? The only two apparitions I know of in history that the Vatican condemned are Vassula and Garabandal, and yet they continue as though nothing happened. Will that be the same for Medjugorje? People are allowed to go to Medjugorje providing they are not promoting the apparitions and yet all the tours are promoted by Medjugorje web sites and openly promote the apparitions. Is this truth?? Is this obedience to Rome?
I have been involved in Medjugorje from the second year of the apparitions so I know the entire story very well. One of my best friends and someone who agrees with me was engaged to one of the seers for two years and he used to do tours to Medj. Another of my good friends was a priest their in the first year and wrote the first book against it. Another priest spent 11 years in Medjugorje hearing confessions and seeing everything the first years of the apparitions. He is against Medjugorje and even testified in Rome 4 years ago. I also communicate with Bishop Peric. One of my helpers took 22 tours to Medjugorje even against the wishes of his wife and almost a divorce. Now he spends all his time writing and speaking against it.
THE SYLLABUS OF ERRORS CONDEMNED BY PIUS IX
III. INDIFFERENTISM, LATITUDINARIANISM
15. Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true. -- Allocution "Maxima quidem," June 9, 1862; Damnatio "Multiplices inter," June 10, 1851.
16. Man may, in the observance of any religion whatever, find the way of eternal salvation, and arrive at eternal salvation. -- Encyclical "Qui pluribus," Nov. 9, 1846.
17. Good hope
at least is to be entertained of the eternal salvation of all those who are
not at all in the true
18. Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion, in which form it is given to please God equally as in the Catholic Church. -- Encyclical "Noscitis," Dec. 8, 1849.
21. The Church has not the power of defining dogmatically that the religion of the Catholic Church is the only true religion. -- Damnatio "Multiplices inter," June 10, 1851.
55. The Church ought to be separated from the .State, and the State from the Church. -- Allocution "Acerbissimum," Sept. 27, 1852.
77. In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship. -- Allocution "Nemo vestrum," July 26, 1855.
Venerable Brothers, it is surprising that in our time such a great war is being waged against the Catholic Church. But anyone who knows the nature, desires and intentions of the sects, whether they be called Masonic or bear another name, and compares them with the nature the systems and the vastness of the obstacles by which the Church has been assailed almost everywhere, cannot doubt that the present misfortune must mainly be imputed to the frauds and machinations of these sects.
It is from them that the synagogue of Satan, which
gathers its troops against the
Things being thus, Venerable Brothers, make every
effort to defend the faithful which are entrusted to you against the
insidious contagion of these sects and to save from perdition those who
unfortunately have inscribed themselves in such sects. Make known and attack
those who, whether suffering from, or planning, deception, are not afraid to
affirm that these shady congregations aim only at the profit of society, at
progress and mutual benefit. Explain to them often and impress deeply on
their souls the Papal constitutions on this subject and teach, them that the
Masonic associations are anathematized by them not only in Europe but also in
Our Lord did not put the mighty of this century in charge, but Saint Peter, whom he entrusted not only with feeding his sheep, but also the goats; therefore no power in the world, however great it may be, can deprive of the pastoral office those whom the Holy Ghost has made Bishops in order to feed the Church of God.
Pope Benedict XV (1914-1922)
power of jurisdiction or government which is in the Church by divine
institution, is divided into that of the external forum and that of the
internal forum, or the forum of conscience; and the latter is either
sacramental or extra-sacramental (c. 196).
In common error or in positive and probable doubt of law or fact, the Church supplies jurisdiction for both the external and internal forum (c. 209).
The commission of certain very grave crimes has the effect of expelling the culpable religious ipso facto, that is, the religious is dismissed by the law itself. The terms of this canon are to be interpreted strictly, that is, all the conditions laid down must be actually present before such a grave penalty can be said to be incurred. A crime of this type would be A religious who has publically apostized from the Catholic faith (c. 646, §1, 1°): Apostasy is defined in canon 1325, §2, as the complete abandonment of the Christian faith. The apostasy from the Catholic faith must be public, which means according to canon 2197, 1°, that either the fact is already known by a large number of people, or that the circumstances of the apostasy are such that one must prudently judge that it will easily become known.
It is illicit for Catholics in any way to assist actively or take part in sacred worship of non-Catholics (c. 1258, §1). Passive or merely material presence, for the sake of civil courtesy, duty, or respect, for a grave reason which in case of doubt should have the approval of the Bishop may be tolerated, at the funerals, weddings, and other such celebrations of non-Catholics, provided there is no danger of perversion or of scandal (c. 1258, §2).
Malice here means the deliberate will to violate the law; opposed to it on the part of the mind is want of knowledge, on the part of the will, want of freedom (c. 2200, §1). When an external violation of the law has been committed, malice is presumed in the external forum until the contrary is proved (c. 2200, §2).
Excommunication is a censure by which one is excluded from the communion of the faithful, with the consequences which are enumerated in the following canons, and which cannot be separated (c. 2257, §1). It is also called anathema, especially if it is inflicted with the solemnities described in the Roman Pontifical (c. 2257, §2).
Some excommunicated persons are vitandi, others tolerati (c. 2258, §1). No one is vitandus unless he has been excommunicated by name by the Holy See, and the excommunication has been publicly announced, and it is expressly stated in the decree or sentence that he is to be avoided, without prejudice to canon 2343, §1, 1° (c. 2258, §2). The canon cited declares anyone who lays violent hands on the Supreme Pontiff ipso facto vitandus.
An excommunicated person who still holds an office to which ordinary jurisdiction is attached, acts illicitly but validly until a condemnatory or declaratory judgment has been passed upon him; thereafter he acts invalidly (c. 2264).
person who is suspended from jurisdiction similiarly, acts illicitly but validly before, and
invalidly after a condemnatory or declaratory judgment. (c.
All apostates from the Christian faith, and all heretics and schismatics: (1) are ipso facto excommunicated; (2) if after due warning they fail to amend, they are to be deprived of any benefice, dignity, pension, office, or other position which they may have in the Church, they are to be declared imfamous, and clerics after a reception of the warning are to be deposed; (3) if they have joined a non-Catholic sect or publically adhered to it, they are ipso facto infamous, and clerics, in addition to being considered to have tacitly renounced any office they may hold, according to canon 188, 4°, are, if previous warning proves fruitless, to be degraded (c. 2314, §1). The abjuration [from crimes] is regarded as legally made when it is made before the Ordinary of the place or his delegate and at least two witnesses (c. 2314, §2).
One who is suspected of heresy, and who after warning fails to remove the cause of suspecion, shall be barred from legitimate acts, and if he is a cleric he shall moreover, after a repetition of the warning has proved fruitless, be suspended a divinis; if one who is suspected of heresy does not amend his life within six full months from the time when the penalty was incured, he shall be considered a heretic and be subject to the penalties for heresy (c. 2315).
One who spontaneously and with full knowledge helps in any way in the propagation of heresy, or who co-operates in divinis with heretics contrary to the provision of canon 1258, is suspected of heresy (c. 2316).
Those who obstinately teach or defend, either publicaly or privately, a doctrine which has been condemned, though not as formally heretical, by the Holy See or by a General Council, are to be excluded from the ministry of preaching the word of God or of hearing sacramental confessions, and from teaching in any capacity, in addition to any other penalties which the condemnatory sentence may inflict or which the Ordinary, after due warning, may deem necessary to repair the scandal (c. 2317).
Those who join a Masonic sect or other societies of the same sort, which plot against the Church or legitimate civil authority, incur ipso facto an excommunication simply reserved to the Holy See (c. 2335).