Posted on 05/05/2009 9:02:29 PM PDT by ReformationFan
You nailed it.
Neither did Pontius Pilate or Harry Blackmun.
***There’s the problem, r! Heretics like Martino and those in communion with him who would drag the faithful into the spiritual shipwreck of the uncanonical practices.***
Looking at the Canon, one comes up with:
Can. 808 No university, even if it is in fact catholic, may bear the title ‘catholic university’ except by the consent of the competent ecclesiastical authority.
Can. 810 §1 In catholic universities it is the duty of the competent statutory authority to ensure that there be appointed teachers who are not only qualified in scientific and pedagogical expertise, but are also outstanding in their integrity of doctrine and uprightness of life. If these requirements are found to be lacking, it is also that authority’s duty to see to it that these teachers are removed from office, in accordance with the procedure determined in the statutes.
§2 The Episcopal Conference and the diocesan Bishops concerned have the duty and the right of seeing to it that, in these universities, the principles of catholic doctrine are faithfully observed.
These are canons that pertain to this. Who is the ecclesiastical authority? The bishop.
But what does this mean for schools not under diocesan control? Basically we have to put the responsibility upon the school’s order’s superior and not upon the bishop. The bishop can declare the school to be non Catholic, but that is a last resort. He can wrestle with the superior to remove an individual from his diocese but that can be a long wrestle.
Perhaps the Vatican will put the squeeze upon the Jesuits - one day we pray that they will be Catholic again - but I agree that really the bishop’s only bullet is the declaration of the school status, which is really only a statement about where they’ve moved to anyway.
No. I believe in a God with whom all things are possible. Apparently, it's not the same one you believe in.
Interesting. I guess the RCC has a looser standard of “scandal” than I had thought. The LCMS is still fighting over the inter religious service after 911.
But that is a dead horse that has been beat pretty hard.
Changing the subject, Alex. You wrote "Scandal is that he is honored as a lawyer, while being an avowed deathist." The subject is not lawyering but scandal by engaging in conduct unbecoming. He is honored as a pope while being an avowed fornicator. Do you think he was against fornication and do you believe, had he been in a favorable position to do so, he would not try to change the law? I think his actions speak louder than your word.
Which dogma states that? It seems to me that the Roman Catholic Church equates Ecumenical Councils (binding, infallible and inspired) on the same level as the Magisterium. If it is not a dogma then it is not binding. If it is a dogma, which Council made it a dogma necessary for salvation and equal to, if not higher than the belief in Trinity, Christology and Theotokos?
Participation in murder is a sin that cries out to heaven and damns the sinner for all eternity. The Orthodox do not think murder is sin?
But that's not what the Catechism says.
"2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable"
This is then patently false because, as mentioned earlier, the issue of ensoulment did not qualify all abortions as murder. Therefore every produced abortion could not have possibly been treated as murder. Even St. Augustine states that one cannot kill that which is not alive.
Pontius did nothing for the Church.
My apoologies, redgolum. My reply somehow ended up with your name. Please disregard #250.
The world God created is not magic and certainly nothing man's fancy could come up with. Talking donkeys, and Red Riding Hood are not from God. They are figments of man's imagination.
It is my opinion that inviting the babykiller in chief in any capacity and for any purpose is unwise; but there would be no scandal in exposing the students to his thoughts on, for example, economic policy or race relations.
Obama is about to receive an honorary law degree. That is a scandal given his deathist views and his ability to implement them in policy. I agree that electing Pope Alexander VI was unwise and possibly a scandal. I am sure it is an aberration that the Eastern Orthodox Churches elected a KGB colonel to lead them, to pick another and recent example of a scandal involving corrupt leadership.
What is necessary for salvation is to avoid sin. To hold deathist views, or to vote for someone with such views is a grave sin of participating in murder.
The doctrines of the Church, whether consiliar or magisterial, or matter of natural law, are all binding. Further, matters of natural law, such as abhorrence of abortion and moral inacceptability of voting for the proaborts, is binding on everyone, not just on Catholics.
While the Church, acting on incomplete scientific knowledge, held an incorrect theory of late ensoulment, she always held abortion to be a moral evil, even if the late ensoulment hypothesis stood in the way of technically equating it with murder.
Many, perhaps, see the Catechism more as an ideal goal than a dogma to faultlessly live by. That is made manifest also by the fact that many Catholic girls/women/boys/men practice extramarital sex, use contraceptives/condoms and some girls/women, obviously, abort.
I am sure that Pelosi and the rest would be excommunicated and worse without fail if they professed Christ to be a a lesser God, denied the Holy Trinity, or openly professed that Theotokos is Chritotokos. I imagine even the all-embracing Catholic Church with its cultural sensitivity would have no choice but tho declare these people non-Cahtolics and non-Christians. Obviously, the same is not true when it comes to abortion.
The consequence of embracing heresy is anathema, which naturally includes excommunication. Those Catholics who profess pro-abortion views are not even excommunicated across the board, let alone anathematized.
That in itself shows that anti-abortionism is not a dogma, and therefore cannot be the most important aspect of the faith needed for salvation; rather, it is merely a principle teaching of Christianity applied to a specific morally aberrant social issue.
As such, anti-abortionism cannot be the most important aspect of Catholic beliefs necessary for salvation, i.e. dogma, as the bishop in question suggested
Anathema means you are no longer part of the Church and therefore your salvation is in peril. Excommunication means the Church will not provide life-giving Mysteries to an unrepentant sinner, but does not anathematize that person, who remains within the Church.
If the Catholic Church truly believes, as you seem to think, that anti-abortionism is the most important belief required of all Catholics for salvation, then the Church should not only automatically excommunicate (deny communion), but anathematize across the board all publicly avowed pro-abortionists Catholics as if they were publicly denying the Holy Trinity and other dogmas of the Church.
The fact that this is nowhere even close to reality only proves Kolo's argument correct.
anti-abortionism is the most important belief required of all Catholics for salvation
It is not a belief at all, dogmatic or otherwise. I do not have a belief in the Ten Commandments; I have knowledge of natural law and hence obey them. Hence, I abhor abortion, euthanasia, etc. and despise people who work in the interest of death, like our president.
I agree that the pro-abort politicians have incurred an automatic excommunication and that their bishops should withhold communion form them for their own good.
What Kolokotronis argues is based on deliberate misrepresentation of the Catholic Pro-life teaching. The teaching is that among matters of social policy, pro-life issues are non-negotiable and so allow only one way to vote. He twists this into some imaginary comparision between dogmas. He is wrong on the facts of what is taught.
What is necessary for salvation, Alex, is God's mercy. Without it, even the saintliest among us is lost.
I agree with the rest of your reply. The Council of Trullo actually called abortion a murder. That seals the issue of abortion in the East. Unfortunately, the Catholic Church does not recognize that Council, so abortion cannot be considered equal to dogma.
The real problem, Alex, is in what the Church preaches and what she practices. When those who openly profess abortion are summarily excommunicated/anathematized then pro-abortionist Catholic politicians may think twice. You can't preach abortion as grave sin and allow public officials who support it to receive communion and remain in the Church.
If Pelosi and the gang can receive communion, why shouldn't Catholic voters vote for the pro-abortionist Obama? You can't have it both ways. You can't have a bunch of bishops cackling against abortion, yet allow communion in their diocese.
The Pope can always call a Council which would make the issue binding to all. But the Church choose to talk and do nothing. Talk is cheap, Alex.
Remember that Christ says in the Gospels that he came not to bring peace but a sword (to divide the sheep form the goats). Overturning money changers' tables was not politically correct. Christ did not follow the Church's luke-warm non-confrontational policy of appeasement with everyone and all.
Yes.
Sure oyu do. You have no way of knowing if God really said that. You choose to believe it.
I agree that the pro-abort politicians have incurred an automatic excommunication and that their bishops should withhold communion from them for their own good
For their own good? What about the Church skirting her own responsibility? If you teach your children that teaching is wrong and one of children admits stealing and you do nothing about it, what message are you giving and how hypocritical is that?
What Kolokotronis argues is based on deliberate misrepresentation of the Catholic Pro-life teaching
He used the exact words of the bishop in question stating that abortion is the most important belief necessary for salvation. Perhaps the correct thing would be to say that perhaps his Eminence misspoke rather than to say that Kolo deliberately misrepresents what the Church teaches?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.