Author Topic: The Problem with 1917 Code of Canon Law (Read 4362 times)

Raoul76 · « **Reply #20 on:** March 08, 2011, 12:30:23 PM »

Caminus said:

Quote

One thing is certain, the product of the 1917 Code certainly gave the audacious reformers precident and impetus. Such was an unintended evil that the original legislators could never foresee.

That has nothing to do with the 1917 Code being good or bad in itself.

You could say the same for the dogma of papal infallibility, that it played into the hands of the revolutionaries ( not reformers ) because it made more people afraid to question the Pope about anything. Actually, I vaguely remember hearing this being said by someone... Yet it's still a dogma.

Your logic, if followed, could stretch back to infinity. You could complain that St. Peter establishing the Church in Rome made it an easy target for the revolutionaries of Vatican II.
You could say, as I once did, and as Jehanne still does, that the concept of implicit faith opened the door for ecuмenism bordering on the philosophy of implicit universal salvation, etc., etc.

Cristian · « **Reply #21 on:** March 08, 2011, 12:30:49 PM »

Quote from: Caminus

Quote
Ok, so according to you the codification of Canon Law had the (supossed) same "philosophy" than the Code of Napoleon? If yes, prove it, if not what is the matter then?

It's the author's contention that such an effort was born of the same mentality or that it was the Church beginning to imitate in some measure the secular world. I can't prove what is materially evident, because it's evident, whether or not the same philosophy was adopted is an historical question which probably cannot be answered. One thing is certain, the product of the 1917 Code certainly gave the audacious reformers precident and impetus. Such was an unintended evil that the original legislators could never foresee.

Ok we have both said what we think on this, I prefer to follow several Popes (who cannot be labeled as "liberal") as well as all the Bishops and eminent canonists who knew much more than the unknown author!

It is obvious the author just wanted to put the pre vat. reforms at the same level as the post vat... but he didn´t succeeded, good luck for the next one! :cheers:

Raoul76 · « **Reply #22 on:** March 08, 2011, 12:33:46 PM »

TKGS said:

Quote

Really? I'm curious as to what group it is. Do they unambiguously declare that many popes were heretics or do they merely imply it?

This made me laugh out loud. I thought I was being the very opposite of subtle.

The answer to your question is -- "A group that I try not to talk about as much since being banished from the site, founded by a slender French man who once worked in Africa." :dancing:

Caminus · « **Reply #23 on:** March 08, 2011, 12:53:45 PM »

Quote from: Raoul76

Caminus said:
Quote
One thing is certain, the product of the 1917 Code certainly gave the audacious reformers precident and impetus. Such was an unintended evil that the original legislators could never foresee.

That has nothing to do with the 1917 Code being good or bad in itself.

You could say the same for the dogma of papal infallibility, that it played into the hands of the revolutionaries ( not reformers ) because it made more people afraid to question the Pope about anything. Actually, I vaguely remember hearing this being said by someone... Yet it's still a dogma.

Your logic, if followed, could stretch back to infinity. You could complain that St. Peter establishing the Church in Rome made it an easy target for the revolutionaries of Vatican II.
You could say, as I once did, and as Jehanne still does, that the concept of implicit faith opened the door for ecuмenism bordering on the philosophy of implicit universal salvation, etc., etc.

The 1917 Code is good in itself. Your infinite analogies are irrelevant because none of them involve the Church adopting a principle of action of the secular world. It was precisely this mentality which helped, i.e. was possibly one of the various causes, of the massive reforms within the Church in the 1960's. A small error in principle can lead to large errors in consequence. Your scenarios amount to positing a series of negative reasons for doubting something which is an essentially irrational approach to reality. In moral theology, such a method is reprehensible. But nothing prevents a thing intrinsically good to have evil effects per accidens in consequence.

Caminus · « **Reply #24 on:** March 08, 2011, 12:56:33 PM »

Quote from: Cristian

Quote from: Caminus
Quote
Ok, so according to you the codification of Canon Law had the (supossed) same "philosophy" than the Code of Napoleon? If yes, prove it, if not what is the matter then?

It's the author's contention that such an effort was born of the same mentality or that it was the Church beginning to imitate in some measure the secular world. I can't prove what is materially evident, because it's evident, whether or not the same philosophy was adopted is an historical question which probably cannot be answered. One thing is certain, the product of the 1917 Code certainly gave the audacious reformers precident and impetus. Such was an unintended evil that the original legislators could never foresee.

Ok we have both said what we think on this, I prefer to follow several Popes (who cannot be labeled as "liberal") as well as all the Bishops and eminent canonists who knew much more than the unknown author!

It is obvious the author just wanted to put the pre vat. reforms at the same level as the post vat... but he didn´t succeeded, good luck for the next one! :cheers:

Not really, I don't think you've succeeded in even addressing his point.