The Catholic Message Board
http://forums.avemariaradio.net/

Wisconsin bishop threatens denial of sacraments...
http://forums.avemariaradio.net/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=143741
Page 2 of 3

Author:  Doom [ Thu May 03, 2012 8:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Wisconsin bishop threatens denial of sacraments...

ExsurgeDomine wrote:
If the story is correct and one of the priests high-fived a young child after the child said that non-Catholics go to hell, because they aren't Catholic, then that is certainly not in the spirit of the Second Vatican Council.


It's not in the spirit of ANY council, not even the Council of Trent...

Author:  gherkin [ Thu May 03, 2012 8:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Wisconsin bishop threatens denial of sacraments...

Doom is correct. Traditionally, the priest would have said: Preach it, brother!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
:fyi:

Author:  Peregrinator [ Thu May 03, 2012 9:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Wisconsin bishop threatens denial of sacraments...

Obi-Wan Kenobi wrote:
ExsurgeDomine wrote:
What did I miss? How are we restoring our traditional practices? The parish I attend still permits altar helpers to be both men and women. Are there changes coming?

There is no mandatory change coming in the foreseeable future.

That is true. I am simply pointing out that when it does happen (which it inevitably will), there will be a lot of hurt feelings. Maybe not so many as in the 1960s, but bad enough.

Author:  Obi-Wan Kenobi [ Thu May 03, 2012 9:35 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Wisconsin bishop threatens denial of sacraments...

ellietrish wrote:
That issue of how "gravely sinful" are the spreading of "rumor and gossip" though is a good reminder to us in situations like this. Maybe they've undermined their ability to talk openly and charitably to the priest about their grievances because of it?

Very very good point.

Author:  Doom [ Thu May 03, 2012 9:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Wisconsin bishop threatens denial of sacraments...

gherkin wrote:
Doom is correct. Traditionally, the priest would have said: Preach it, brother!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
:fyi:


High fives are Modernist....

Author:  Obi-Wan Kenobi [ Thu May 03, 2012 9:41 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Wisconsin bishop threatens denial of sacraments...

"Preach it, brother!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1" is gherkinist. :fyi:

Author:  ExsurgeDomine [ Thu May 03, 2012 10:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Wisconsin bishop threatens denial of sacraments...

I still wrestle with the salvation outside of the Church topic. Anyways, the comments made by the priests sound as though they were explaining and articulating sound Catholic teaching, but in an age where everyone is a 'winner' and 'we don't want to hurt someone's feelings' they were going to see people disapprove and leave.

Author:  Doom [ Thu May 03, 2012 10:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Wisconsin bishop threatens denial of sacraments...

ExsurgeDomine wrote:
I still wrestle with the salvation outside of the Church topic. Anyways, the comments made by the priests sound as though they were explaining and articulating sound Catholic teaching, but in an age where everyone is a 'winner' and 'we don't want to hurt someone's feelings' they were going to see people disapprove and leave.


The Church has never taught that all non-Catholics are automatically damned....

Author:  Ordo Praedicatorum [ Thu May 03, 2012 10:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Wisconsin bishop threatens denial of sacraments...

What "No Salvation Outside the Church" Means

http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articl ... urch-means

Author:  ExsurgeDomine [ Thu May 03, 2012 10:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Wisconsin bishop threatens denial of sacraments...

Doom wrote:
The Church has never taught that all non-Catholics are automatically damned....


But the link just posted contains this quote, "Outside the Church there is no salvation" This is hard to explain to your Protestant friends and family.

Author:  Doom [ Thu May 03, 2012 10:31 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Wisconsin bishop threatens denial of sacraments...

ExsurgeDomine wrote:
Doom wrote:
The Church has never taught that all non-Catholics are automatically damned....


But the link just posted contains this quote, "Outside the Church there is no salvation" This is hard to explain to your Protestant friends and family.



The important thing is that it doesn't mean that all non-Catholics automatically go to hell....and indeed, this opinion can be found in the Early Church...as early as St. Augustine the Fathers noted that people who are born into heretical sects bear less guilt and responsibility than those who founded the sect....

Author:  Peregrinator [ Thu May 03, 2012 10:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Wisconsin bishop threatens denial of sacraments...

Ordo Praedicatorum wrote:
What "No Salvation Outside the Church" Means

http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articl ... urch-means

Only a fool would refuse to enter the Church if he knew that she was the True Church and that membership was necessary for salvation. So the formula must mean something stronger than that; the Church's admonitions are not only for fools.

Author:  Peregrinator [ Thu May 03, 2012 10:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Wisconsin bishop threatens denial of sacraments...

Doom wrote:
as early as St. Augustine the Fathers noted that people who are born into heretical sects bear less guilt and responsibility than those who founded the sect....

Where can one find this in St. Augustine?

Author:  beng [ Fri May 04, 2012 12:12 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Wisconsin bishop threatens denial of sacraments...

Doom wrote:
ExsurgeDomine wrote:
I still wrestle with the salvation outside of the Church topic. Anyways, the comments made by the priests sound as though they were explaining and articulating sound Catholic teaching, but in an age where everyone is a 'winner' and 'we don't want to hurt someone's feelings' they were going to see people disapprove and leave.


The Church has never taught that all non-Catholics are automatically damned....


You need to define what a "non-Catholics" is.

Author:  beng [ Fri May 04, 2012 12:16 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Wisconsin bishop threatens denial of sacraments...

Bagheera wrote:
Doom wrote:
as early as St. Augustine the Fathers noted that people who are born into heretical sects bear less guilt and responsibility than those who founded the sect....

Where can one find this in St. Augustine?


Well, I've heard of this:

    Catholic Encyclopedia: Heresy

    Towards material heretics her conduct is ruled by the saying of St. Augustine: "Those are by no means to be accounted heretics who do not defend their false and perverse opinions with pertinacious zeal (animositas), especially when their error is not the fruit of audacious presumption but has been communicated to them by seduced and lapsed parents, and when they are seeking the truth with cautious solicitude and ready to be corrected" (P.L., XXXIII, ep. xliii, 160).

Author:  Pro Ecclesia Dei [ Fri May 04, 2012 4:01 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Wisconsin bishop threatens denial of sacraments...

Aquinas makes the same distinction, as did then Cardinal Ratzinger. The main change with the Church praxis is a pedagogical shift from presumption of formality in heresy, to a "benefit of the doubt" regarding those born into error. Hence there is no longer a formal renuciation of heresy demanded when a protestant converts, etc. It is a change in presumptions, not doctrine.

As far as the Catholic Answers piece, I don't like it because it glosses over two major things, and overstates a third. The overstatement is that God does not condemn those invincibly ignorant of the Catholic faith. No. Rather, one is not condemned for any act done out of invincible ignorance and with a good will. One who is invincibly ignorant of the necessity of baptism does not sin by not being baptised. That doesn't mean he can get away with murder, and it doesn't mean he is somehow not laboring under original sin. If I am invincibly ignorant of the fact that it is wrong to contracept, I do not sin there, but that doesn't necessarily mean I do not sin by premarital sex.

In connection with this, I see no mention of original sin. Baptism, e.g., is necessary both a precept and means. Invincible ignorance excuses from a sin in not being baptised (precept), it does not itself supply for the necessity of means. I also see, as so often is missing, any statement about God's providence in the matter. Those whom God has predestined from before time will infallibly be saved, those He has not will certainly not be saved. And as Aquinas remarked, in teaching that it was not only necessary to have explicit faith in God and providence (according to one's ability to understand) at all times and for all people to be saved, but that after Christ explicit faith in the Incarnation, Trinity, etc were necessary, God will give such faith to anyone who does what he can according to the natural law and the grace given him, whether through interior illumination or through the preaching of another.

The moderns gets so concerned about salvation as a checklist game and then, worrying over some isolated unbelievers, bend and twist to water down anything that needs to be believed, etc. They constantly forget that God exercises a providence here. Those who cooperate with His grace, by His grace, will be given every grace and faith necessary for salvation, even if only at the end of the lives.

And since the ordinary means for that is the Church and her preaching, we must regard it as a duty to evangelise and to regard every heresy, even if only material, as an obstacle and a hinderance, while still trusting in God's providence and mercy. It certainly is no sign of predestination to be a protestant.

Author:  beng [ Fri May 04, 2012 4:31 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Wisconsin bishop threatens denial of sacraments...

Malleus Haereticorum wrote:
The main change with the Church praxis is a pedagogical shift from presumption of formality in heresy, to a "benefit of the doubt" regarding those born into error. ... It is a change in presumptions, not doctrine.


Someone call VatCanonist commented on First Thing:


    Nonetheless -- and this is where all too many canonists and faithful are continuously led into error by badly formed practitioners of Canon Law -- the previous canon 2200-2 CIC 1917, encapsulating both a) a presumption of generic imputability regarding volition and b) a specific presumption of malice aforethought or "dolus" on the part of the accused whose external commission of the violation of the law has been demonstrated, has not disappeared altogether from the Code of 1983 in substance and juridical effect: it simply has become bifurcated into two separate canons, they now being: 1) can. 15-2 CIC 1983 regarding a presumption knowledge of the law and penalty, knowledge of a fact concerning one's own actions, and knowledge of a notorious fact concerning another; and 2) can. 1321-3 CIC 1983 concerning the presumption of imputability regarding the mere volitional element of the crime externally proven to have been committed -- instead of one all encompassing canon like can. 2200-2 CIC 1917.

So here they are from the new Canon Law of 1983

    15 §2. Ignorance or error about a law, a penalty, a fact concerning oneself, or a notorious fact concerning another is not presumed; it is presumed about a fact concerning another which is not notorious until the contrary is proven.


    1321 §3. When an external violation has occurred, imputability is presumed unless it is otherwise apparent.


Therefore a Protestant is still assumed by the Church, juridically, to be a formal heretic even under the new Code of Canon Law (1983) just as they were since the 16th century.



PS
    Can 2200 (CIC 1917)
    §2
    Posita externa legis violatione, dolus in foro externo praesumitur, donec contrarium probetur.


    Can 2200 (CIC 1917)
    §2
    When there is the external violation of a law of the Church, malice is presumed in the external forum until its absence has been proved

Author:  beng [ Fri May 04, 2012 4:44 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Wisconsin bishop threatens denial of sacraments...

Even the modernist heretical New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law By John P. Beal, James A. Coriden, Thomas J. Green, commenting on canon 1321, said:

    How does one assess penal imputability in particular cases, since various complex factors may influence a given legal violation? If there is an external violation of the law, imputability is presumed ([1321] §3). This seems to involve dolus, or criminal intent: yet since culpa, or negligence, at times grounds imputability, this factor must also be considered. Presumably one violating the law acts in a human fashion with a certain freedom and knowledge. However, since penal law is to be interpreted benignly, the judge or ordinary should not too easily attribute criminal intent to the alleged offender. By contrast, the former code simply presumed criminal intent (dolus) if the law were broken (CIC 2200, §2)

So, the presumption of malice [ie. dolus] is still in force. Protestant, having broken the law externally, is presumed to have malice (thus, formal heretic).

But still the Commentary said that the judge should not be to harsh on that presumption (even though the Commentary admit that the presumption is right there in the new canon).

Author:  Obi-Wan Kenobi [ Fri May 04, 2012 6:30 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Wisconsin bishop threatens denial of sacraments...

The former code presumed dolus; the current does not.

Author:  beng [ Fri May 04, 2012 6:48 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Wisconsin bishop threatens denial of sacraments...

Obi-Wan Kenobi wrote:
The former code presumed dolus; the current does not.


Source?

Page 2 of 3 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/