KnightofChrist Posted January 12, 2006 Author Share Posted January 12, 2006 [quote name='Cam42' date='Jan 12 2006, 01:49 PM']I will respect the bishop's statement toward me regarding incredulity. However, I have never denied what he said about abortion. If I have would you please point to that for me? Considering that you didn't present the good bishop all of what I have presented, only "certain quotes," his statement is correct. However the totality of my statement is this: I notice that you left the red part of the quote out of what you sent to Bishop Gracida. That changes the scope of the conversation. And also notice that when you ask this: Gracida's response to you: Notice he says that you are wrong. I understand and accept what the bishop says about my statement, given the text he was provided. However, he is silent about the rest of my quotes. I see this to be acceptance of my position, for the rest of it. Again, I thank you for apologizing. I have never denied the truth of the evil of abortion. I have affirmed that it is a mortal sin numerous times and that it cannot be justified. God Bless you and I am glad you found the resolution that you sought. [right][snapback]854127[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Great! We are agreed we will both repect the good bishop's teaching. Cam my man I never said you denined the evils of abortion, never. I never thought you would do that, I knew you believed abortion to be evil forgive me for not pointing it out. However you did state that Lawmakers such as Ted Kennedy and John Kerry where not guilty of heresy but at best "guilty of incredulity". The Bishop teaches [color=red]"someone like Senator Ted Kennedy or Senator John Kerry who not only deny the truth of the magisterial teachings about the evil of abortion [b]are without a doubt formal heretics.[/b]"[/color] True I was wrong about many things , however I was not wrong in my main point and belief that a Catholic Lawmaker who denines the truth of the magisterial teaching about the evil of abortion is gulity of heresy. : Forgive me for not showing the good Bishop all your points, I tried to stick with my main point and I feared the Bishop would not have had the time to respond to everything we have been debating about. Maybe the good Bishop's silence on the rest of your quotes is acceptance of part of your position, maybe it is not. Who knows... Again you are greatly welcomed, Sir. I am glad, we agree that abortion is without a doubt a mortal sin and that it cannot ever be justified. God Bless you my friend! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam42 Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 [quote name='KnightofChrist' date='Jan 12 2006, 05:05 PM']Great! We are agreed we will both repect the good bishop's teaching. Cam my man I never said you denined the evils of abortion, never. I never thought you would do that, I knew you believed abortion to be evil forgive me for not pointing it out. However you did state that Lawmakers such as Ted Kennedy and John Kerry where not guilty of heresy but at best "guilty of incredulity". The Bishop teaches [color=red]"someone like Senator Ted Kennedy or Senator John Kerry who not only deny the truth of the magisterial teachings about the evil of abortion [b]are without a doubt formal heretics.[/b]"[/color] True I was wrong about many things , however I was not wrong in my main point and belief that a Catholic Lawmaker who denines the truth of the magisterial teaching about the evil of abortion is gulity of heresy. : Forgive me for not showing the good Bishop all your points, I tried to stick with my main point and I feared the Bishop would not have had the time to respond to everything we have been debating about. Maybe the good Bishop's silence on the rest of your quotes is acceptance of part of your position, maybe it is not. Who knows... Again you are greatly welcomed, Sir. I am glad, we agree that abortion is without a doubt a mortal sin and that it cannot ever be justified. God Bless you my friend! [right][snapback]854175[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Excuse me, did I say anything about Senators Kerry or Kennedy? Or are you projecting that? I didn't say anything about them. Nor did I ever include an absolute, I believe that I said "most" not "all." I believe that you have done the position of the bishop and me a great disservice and have projected something upon me that the good Bishop stated. If by this statement: [quote]However, you are calling for excommunication for those who simply support abortion laws. That is not so. That is why they are only guilty of incredulity.[/quote] you mean to assume that I include Senators Kerry and Kennedy; I stand by what the canonists provide. While I respect the OPINION of the bishop, I also respect the opinons of the canon lawyers that I have provided. I daresay that you will have a hard time trying to make stick what the bishop posits in his OPINION. Did he tell you that he would make public any statement of excommunication regarding Senators Kerry and Kennedy? How do you reconcile the statements of the various canon lawyers, professors, and Vatican officials provided with that of one retired bishop? Even if we assume that the good bishop is correct, so let's do, we cannot speak publicly about these excommunications (ie. "running about calling senators, etc. heretics) because they are not in the public forum. Excommunication [i]latae sententiae[/i] is part of the internal forum. Also we have to understand that if there is an excommunication it is [i]in latae[/i]. The onus is on the person who is excommunicated to obey the legislation. There is no attempt to make a list. If a person approaches Holy Communion, the priest must assume that the person has repented and made an attempt to rectify their situation. This is opposed to excommunication [i]ferendae sententiae[/i], which is in the external forum. An example of this would be Martin Luther's excommunication, or the excommunication of the bishops of the SSPX. This type is indeed foreseen by the law as a penalty, but is inflicted on the culprit only by a judicial sentence; in other words, the delinquent is rather threatened than visited with the penalty, and incurs it only when the judge has summoned him before his tribunal, declared him guilty, and punished him according to the terms of the law. This is what Edward Peters, Phil Gray, and David Carlin are getting at; they are saying that it would be very hard to substantially prove that one should be excommunicated [i]latae sententiae[/i]. I will support this statement and I will stand by it; the Catholic Church has not relaxed her strict prohibition of all abortion; but, she has made it more definite. As to the penalties she inflicts upon the guilty parties, her present legislation was fixed by the Bull of Pius IX "Apostolicae Sedis". It decrees excommunication -- that is, deprivation of the Sacraments and of the Prayers of the Church in the case of any of her members, and other privations besides in the case of clergymen -- against all who seek to procure abortion, if their action produces the effect. Penalties must always be strictly interpreted. Therefore, while anyone who voluntarily aids in procuring abortion, in any way whatever, does morally wrong, only those incur the excommunication who themselves actually and efficaciously procure the abortion. And the abortion here meant is that which is strictly so called, namely, that performed before the child is viable. For no one but the lawgiver has the right to extend the law beyond the terms in which it is expressed. On the other hand, no one can restrict its meaning by private authority, so as to make it less than the received terms of Church language really signify. Now Gregory XIV had enacted the penalty of excommunication for abortion of a "quickened" child but the present law makes no such distinction, and therefore it must be differently understood. Again, I respect the bishop's statemtent, however, if you are going to say that he admonishes me by public statement, then his silence cannot be admonition but rather [u]tacit approval[/u]. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cow of Shame Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 (edited) .. Edited January 13, 2006 by Cow of Shame Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akalyte Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 the liberal part of the church is lucky im not pope.lol There would be thousands of exxcomunications just for thinking outside the box. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vivacristorey Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 Excommunication is a BIG THING and anyone to be excommunicated needs to be researched by the Vatican. HOWEVER... I think that you cannot be prochoice and Catholic. You can SAY you're Catholic, but anyone can say their Catholic. Those who only go to Mass on Christmas can SAY they're Catholic. If he wanted to, Saddaam Hussein can SAY he's Catholic. But he's not and his words don't change that. People who supported Hitler, who support Sadaam Hussein, and Roe vs. Wade are all the same. They support the mass killings of the innocent. ~*sarah*~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 excommunicate them! then give them over to the authoroties to be burned at the stake! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam42 Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 [quote name='StThomasMore' date='Jan 15 2006, 10:45 AM']excommunicate them! then give them over to the authoroties to be burned at the stake! [right][snapback]856587[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Did we just transport back to 1640? Burned at the stake? Can anyone spell A-N-T-A-G-O-N-I-S-T? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 If you are in France, Germany, or Spain, than heresy is a crime against the crown. If you are in the Papal States, then it is a crime against the Surpreme Pontiff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam42 Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 [quote name='StThomasMore' date='Jan 15 2006, 04:08 PM']If you are in France, Germany, or Spain, than heresy is a crime against the crown. If you are in the Papal States, then it is a crime against the Surpreme Pontiff. [right][snapback]856786[/snapback][/right] [/quote] This may be the case, but you cannot declare someone to be a heretic. And most heresy is defined [i]in latae[/i]. It is part of the [i]forum internum[/i]. With this being the case, one must assume that the person has repented, if he approaches any Sacrament. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 I dont speak Latin fluently. I'm 12. I do have some prayers in Latin memorized tho, which help to learning it. And if you speak really slowly I could probably translate a sentance like: "The Catholic Church is God's Church". or "Jesus is in the host" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam42 Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 [quote name='StThomasMore' date='Jan 15 2006, 04:21 PM']I dont speak Latin fluently. I'm 12. I do have some prayers in Latin memorized tho, which help to learning it. And if you speak really slowly I could probably translate a sentance like: "The Catholic Church is God's Church". or "Jesus is in the host" [right][snapback]856806[/snapback][/right] [/quote] I see....well, let me fill you in......I have degrees in theology, philosophy and Catholic Studies. I have done graduate work in Theology, so it is fair to say that I know what I am talking about. Take my word for it. And incidentally, I speak fluent Latin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 [quote name='Cam42' date='Jan 15 2006, 02:18 PM']This may be the case, but you cannot declare someone to be a heretic. And most heresy is defined [i]in latae[/i]. It is part of the [i]forum internum[/i]. With this being the case, one must assume that the person has repented, if he approaches any Sacrament. [right][snapback]856802[/snapback][/right] [/quote] so... um.... what do in latae and forum internum mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vivacristorey Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 wow.... i think that wisdom comes from the youth (aka the twelve year old) as well as adults (the one with the degree) and we shouldnt put people down because of their age ("i think i know what i'm talking about") but we also shouldnt burn people at the stake ("thou shalt not kill") because being prolife and burning someone at the stake is pretty hypocritical... and life is sacred which is why we're prolife... and true prolifers are against the death penalty... so no burning at the stake and no putting down, ok? ~*sarah*~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extra ecclesiam nulla salus Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 i agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkwright Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 [quote name='StThomasMore' date='Jan 15 2006, 03:08 PM']If you are in France, Germany, or Spain, than heresy is a crime against the crown. If you are in the Papal States, then it is a crime against the Surpreme Pontiff. [right][snapback]856786[/snapback][/right] [/quote] what is going on here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.3578d4578768b8f5be5d7af6172f9b23.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now