Author Topic: "Once Catholic always a Catholic" and the effect of Heresy on membership (Read 13821 times)

Stubborn · « **Reply #50 on:** January 18, 2016, 05:36:20 AM »

Quote from: Desmond

Quote from: Stubborn

One who is a heretic, is either ipso facto or formally excommunicated. The canonical status of a heretic is one of excommunication. This is clear, not vague.

Yes, but the category of "excommunicated" is larger than that of FORMAL heretics. While material heretics are not ipso facto excommunicated at all.
That is why you shouldn't equate the two.

As I said, it's not the excommunication that severs them, as excommunication doesn't mean that, you're just using a false equivalence to prop up your erroneous attempt at demonstration.

No I am not. It is you who are trying to differentiate into ambiguity the excom. In danger of death, even Luther could have gone to confession or administered it, use him for all examples if you want.

Quote from: Desmond

Quote

No formal declaration of excommunication upon a pope is possible, therefore the pope is said to be excommunicated ipso facto on account of his heresies.

Right, but, this needs to be qualified.

Qualified? How and by whom?

Quote from: Desmond

Quote

You keep adding provisos of "per se" and "at large" etc., which do nothing but add ambiguity.

I am obliged to do so in the face of your refusal to consider them.
Ambiguity, if anything, is in the Codex of canon law itself, as it does not directly enumerate and distinguish between various types of excommunications comprehensively and leaves at times provisions vague.

Have you let looked at the Eastern Catholic CICs?

No, I will not look at Eastern CIC, there is no reason to as we are not talking about different rites.

If ambiguity is in canon law, then you cannot rightfully argue that OCAC is false.

Quote from: Desmond

Quote
either the excom remains a Catholic and *on that account* can go to confession like all Catholics can, or the excom is not Catholic and *on that account* is not permitted to approach the sacrament, even when danger of death is imminent.

This is fallacious, because it equates licitness for undifferentiated "EXCOMUNICATI" with divine ontological status.

If serious, you should at least compare many Canon Codes from different times, and Latin with other Rites, to see if that is an universal practice, if they all permit the same, or if at one time/place it is deal with in a more explicit manner. At the very least.

You are the only one bringing licitness into this, the bottom line is that the excom can walk into confession, just like any Catholic and as she always has previous to her exom - and be forgiven. Non-Catholics cannot do this.

Quote from: Desmond

Quote
Quote from: Desmond

Also, you haven't answered my hypothetical question about Schismatic Orthodox.

I thought I did in the second from the top reply..........because the EO wrongfully do what Catholics do, we cannot use schismatics to prove Catholicity.

This is evasion, please think of the answer. If OCAC is true, then it still would not make sense, therefore the principle behind the licitness of some extraordinary case must be another one, not "certified Catholicity". Might be one of those I hypothesised or something else.

Forget about licitness, this is where you are stumbling. Because the Church teaches an excom can go to confession or absolve sins, it is both valid and licit - always.

Stubborn · « **Reply #51 on:** January 18, 2016, 05:43:28 AM »

Quote from: Desmond

Quote from: Stubborn

I am not excluding/including anyone, I am using only one example, that of an excom who can go to confession in an emergency - something only Catholics are permitted to ever do.

What I said above would be the inescapable consequence of OCAC.
Do not feign innocence.
You then would need to find a way to exclude them from membership, or accept the Catholic Church extends to all the validly baptised.

No, I would not have to and neither would you. The Church would have to as that is Her job, not anyone else's.

The Church teaches an excom can go to confession and an excom priest can absolve sins in an emergency, something only Catholics can do. If you want to investigate prot membership, then please start a different thread because it is an entirely different subject that has zero bearing on the particular teaching of the Church presently under discussion.

Quote from: Desmond

Quote
Again, we do not measure or compare what Catholics do based on what schismatics do. The Church condemns the schismatics. IOW, we say to the schismatics; "hey, you can't do that, you're in schism, valid priests or not!" We do not say; "if the schismatics can do it then so can we".

Exactly... Have you looked up what LICIT means?
And I would suggest the jurisprudential nature of the Canon Law:
which is both human law with transeunt/accidental norms, and reflection of Divine principles.

The question above is valid, but here's another:

Quote
What if the CIC were to be changed and make accession to all excommunicati to the Sacraments, under all circuмstances, ILLICIT?

Would that mean that is proof of their non Catholicity and Excommunicatus status coincide with membership?

I already answered this......Forget about licitness, this is where you are stumbling. Because the Church teaches an excom can go to confession or absolve sins, it is both valid and licit - always.

Desmond · « **Reply #52 on:** January 18, 2016, 05:52:02 AM »

Quote

No, I would not have to and neither would you. The Church would have to as that is Her job, not anyone else's.

What farce. The Church has solemnly decreed that heretics, schismatics and apostates are outside of her, more than once.
You, on your own device, are trying to confute this.

But somehow, you have to fall short of pondering what it is you're trying to do, your mini revolution, would entail.

Quote

The Church teaches an excom can go to confession and an excom priest can absolve sins in an emergency, something only Catholics can do. If you want to investigate prot membership, then please start a different thread because it is an entirely different subject that has zero bearing on the particular teaching of the Church presently under discussion.

You must be joking right? A protestant, according to OCAC IS a Catholic.

Quote

Quote from: Desmond

Exactly... Have you looked up what LICIT means?
And I would suggest the jurisprudential nature of the Canon Law:
which is both human law with transeunt/accidental norms, and reflection of Divine principles.

The question above is valid, but here's another:

What if the CIC were to be changed and make accession to all excommunicati to the Sacraments, under all circuмstances, ILLICIT?

Would that mean that is proof of their non Catholicity and Excommunicatus status coincide with membership?

I already answered this......Forget about licitness, this is where you are stumbling. Because the Church teaches an excom can go to confession or absolve sins, it is both valid and licit - always.

I asked what if that provision were to be changed? HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION.
Please answer.

Did you even do any research on past provisions?

For instance, here's what the Fourth Lateran decreed about the matter of heresy.

http://www.aloha.net/~mikesch/heretics.htm

Sounds a bit different.

Desmond · « **Reply #53 on:** January 18, 2016, 06:01:03 AM »

Quote from: Stubborn

No I am not. It is you who are trying to differentiate into ambiguity the excom. In danger of death, even Luther could have gone to confession or administered it, use him for all examples if you want.

Excommunication is a Canonical PENALTY covering different crimes.
Heresy is a crime but also a sin.

Are you sure Catholics at the time of Luther were even permitted to (licitly) do that?

Quote

Qualified? How and by whom?

By making a few basic distinction and proper user of canonical terms and the english language, for starters. By whosoever wants to engage in the debate.

Quote

No, I will not look at Eastern CIC, there is no reason to as we are not talking about different rites.

Why? Are they not valid Law? What if they have a different way of dealing with the issue? Are they somehow less Catholic?

Quote

If ambiguity is in canon law, then you cannot rightfully argue that OCAC is false.

Yes I can. In fact there is nothing to argue. We KNOW Ocac is false per magisterial decrees. In the face of those, you are using Canon Law of the Latin Rite, of the 20th century, which now you postulate might even be ambiguous, to OPPOSE them.

If you drop the Canon Law (as specified above) OCAC can't be even be argued from any angle no more.

Quote

You are the only one bringing licitness into this, the bottom line is that the excom can walk into confession, just like any Catholic and as she always has previous to her exom - and be forgiven. Non-Catholics cannot do this.

Are you serious? The whole OCAC argument as you pose it rest solely on LICITNESS. If you want to use VALIDITY, it's a non argument as EVERYBODY can do that.

Quote

Forget about licitness, this is where you are stumbling. Because the Church teaches an excom can go to confession or absolve sins, it is both valid and licit - always.

LICITNESS IS ALL YOU CAN USE!
Everybody can VALIDLY do that.

Stubborn · « **Reply #54 on:** January 18, 2016, 07:34:35 AM »

Quote from: Desmond

Quote
No, I would not have to and neither would you. The Church would have to as that is Her job, not anyone else's.

What farce. The Church has solemnly decreed that heretics, schismatics and apostates are outside of her, more than once.
You, on your own device, are trying to confute this.

But somehow, you have to fall short of pondering what it is you're trying to do, your mini revolution, would entail.

Why do you accuse me when I am repeating Catholic Church teaching that an excom can validly and licitly be forgiven as well as absolve sins in the sacrament of confession. What is it that you dislike about this clear teaching that makes you need to ambiguate it with YOUR OWN exceptions consisting of varying levels of excom? Accept the teaching of the Church, do not label it a farce.

Quote from: Desmond

Quote

The Church teaches an excom can go to confession and an excom priest can absolve sins in an emergency, something only Catholics can do. If you want to investigate prot membership, then please start a different thread because it is an entirely different subject that has zero bearing on the particular teaching of the Church presently under discussion.

You must be joking right? A protestant, according to OCAC IS a Catholic.

Here you bring in the prot - why? We are discussing an ipso facto excom, not a prot. You make yourself more confused when you do not remain on topic.