I misunderstood nothing, The Ipso Facto takes place on an internal level which will prevent him from salvation, but the external cannot be declared without a superior to determine it. That is how the law of the church has always proceeded. You a layman cannot declare a Priest to be a heretic, you can report your suspicions to the Bishop who can try him according to the processes that have always been in determining and judging him to be so.

Juridically, a layman cannot declare it so as to bind other consciences, but a Catholic can certainly recognize a heretic when they see one.

Quote from: LordPhan

I misunderstood nothing, The Ipso Facto takes place on an internal level which will prevent him from salvation, but the external cannot be declared without a superior to determine it. That is how the law of the church has always proceeded. You a layman cannot declare a Priest to be a heretic, you can report your suspicions to the Bishop who can try him according to the processes that have always been in determining and judging him to be so.

Now you based on your suspicions may decide he is a threat to your salvation, or that he has doubtful sacrement, epikea can be invoked whenever there is a threat to your salvation or a threat to the faith as that is what all the laws are meant for. The spirit of the law takes precedent in the Catholic Church as opposed to the letter in the secular realm. Also a doubful sacrement is not to be taken. It can't be doubtful on a 'what if' scenario, it has to be doubtful based on facts you know. In that case you must refuse the doubtful sacrements and may seek them elsewhere where you know they are valid.

No, because the Church does not punish the purely internal. You guys are just wrong here.

You are not understanding, God Punishes the Internal. In order for it to be declared external it must be declared through a trial and authority. You may recognize and resist.

trad, you seem to be relegating authority to a mere secondary function at best.  You make the claim that "any Catholic" can determine such things, when Canonists insist that laity have neither the canonical or moral right or competency to determine heresy, much less if a penalty has been in fact incurred.  Negligence on the part of the hierarchy does not negate this necessary function of authority.  It is authority alone who can determine a legal fact (whether a penalty has been incurred ipso facto) and if the Bishops fail in their divine responsibilities the Church suffers immense harm.  Even moreso when they are themselves suspected of heresy.  You and others reference the penalties of the unchanging Divine Law which is a theoretical truth indeed, but as has been mentioned, this is a matter of the internal forum; there must be a concrete determination if the Divine Law has even been engaged in a particular circuмstance.  The Church judges according to the external forum alone.  This is similiar to the notion that one must deduce conclusions from the Natural Law in the practical order, even though all the principles and conclusions are implicitly contained therein.  

If we take your position, the laws of the Church and the actions of Rome in the past with regard to heretical clerics are rendered superfluous at best.  It is in fact through canonical admonition that pertinacity is manifested in the external forum, thus these are an integral part of the Catholic system.  It may help to understand the matter if you would view the Church in its principle aspect as a Body or Society, rather than the invisible aspect of the Church.  I think there is a tendency among some to "spiritualize" the Church, rather than recognizing it first as a concrete, tangible, external society.          

It just clicked on me, apologies.

Canonists insist that laity have neither the canonical or moral right or competency to determine heresy

Could you please cite that?

Quote from: SJB

Quote from: LordPhan

I misunderstood nothing, The Ipso Facto takes place on an internal level which will prevent him from salvation, but the external cannot be declared without a superior to determine it. That is how the law of the church has always proceeded. You a layman cannot declare a Priest to be a heretic, you can report your suspicions to the Bishop who can try him according to the processes that have always been in determining and judging him to be so.

Now you based on your suspicions may decide he is a threat to your salvation, or that he has doubtful sacrement, epikea can be invoked whenever there is a threat to your salvation or a threat to the faith as that is what all the laws are meant for. The spirit of the law takes precedent in the Catholic Church as opposed to the letter in the secular realm. Also a doubful sacrement is not to be taken. It can't be doubtful on a 'what if' scenario, it has to be doubtful based on facts you know. In that case you must refuse the doubtful sacrements and may seek them elsewhere where you know they are valid.

No, because the Church does not punish the purely internal. You guys are just wrong here.

You are not understanding, God Punishes the Internal. In order for it to be declared external it must be declared through a trial and authority. You may recognize and resist.

We aren't talking about what God punishes, we are concerned with sins manifested that become crimes. External means manifest or public.

1481. An offence is called:

1. Public, if it actually has been divulged or circuмstances are such that it easily can and must become public ;

2. Notorious, by notoriety of the law, after the sentence of a competent judge has become a res judicata, that is to say, a sentence from which there is no appeal, or after a confession made in court in presence of the judge ;

3. Notorious by notoriety of fact, if the offence is publicly known and has been committed under such circuмstances that it cannot be kept secret by any artifice, nor can be excused by any subterfuge of law;

4. Occult, which is not public; occult materialiter, if the crime itself is not known; occult formaliter, if the person to whom it is to be imputed is not known. (Canon 2197.)

The above quoted forom Woywod should be enough. It should be obvious that a public offense (crime) needn't be only by by sentence from a judge.

I'm not sure I understand the difference between public and notoriety of fact.

The difference would be between public and notorious by notoriety of fact. Public needn't be notorious. It could mean just a few people. If nobody knows it, it is occult.

IF the heresy were private.

NOT When it is public and manifest.