My Honest Attempt to Attain Clear Answers from John Salza on the Questions of Whether a Public Heretic is still a Member of the Church and Whether someone who has defected from the Church through Public Heresy can still be Head of the Church?
Update: Sorry dear readers I have been absolutely unable to get Salza and Siscoe to clarify their position and indicate how it is exactly applicable to the current situation in the Church. When I asked Atty. Salza to answer a few basic questions with a simple yes or no answer --- using their own terminology --- all that I received back were further questions DIRECTED TOWARDS ME! I could not get any where when attempting to clarify the situation. I have therefore decided to stop all personal communication with Siscoe and Salza. It is simply fruitless and just causes more adjectives to be added to the word "heretic" (e.g., notorious, public, private, according to private judgment, according to the Church's judgment, that which separates from the Body of the Church, that which separates from the Soul of the Church, by law, by fact.............). I am still very much interested in this question and will publish the interesting doctrinal articles that come my way.
Below was may last email attempt at clarification. No answers. Just questions to me......
Dear Mr. Salza,
Just two more follow-up questions:
Are the following men, according to our knowledge of them over the past decades, “public and notorious by fact or law HERETICS? Only YES or NO answers would be helpful here.
A) Hans Kung:
B) Scott Hahn:
C) Francis I:
Next question. Is a sede vacante situation, other than in the usual interregnum or a situation in which the “universally acclaimed” man is not the actual true pope but someone else is: POSSIBLE OR IMPOSSIBLE (Please, only a one word response here to help clarify my understanding of your own views.)
Dear Mr. Salza,
First question: Do you or do you not hold that public heresy of its very nature separates one from the Catholic Church without any declaration by Church authority?
Second question: Do you hold that a public heretic can retain office in the Church even though, through public heresy, he is no longer a member of the Church?
Please answer these simple and basic questions. Realize of course that I will publicize your answers. This will end whatever confusion you say exists and avoid any needless “hair-splitting.”
Yours, Peter Chojnowski
Well, as expected, here comes the hair-splitting:
Your questions require essential distinctions.
First question: Do you mean from the Soul of the Church or the Body of the Church?
Second question: Do you mean a public heretic according to private judgment or the Church's judgment?
Okay, I will take the bait, even though I wanted SISI or NONO.
Question #1: Is it the case that Public Heresy separates you from membership in the body of the Catholic Church?
Question #2: Can you objectively hold public office in the Catholic Church if you are guilty of the sin of Public Heresy and hence are no longer a member of the body of the Catholic Church?