To: Mad Dawg; YHAOS; wmfights; HarleyD; 1000 silverlings; the_conscience; RnMomof7; Gamecock; ...
Of course, in the extremer cases, it (excommunication) is done to protect the Church by making very clear that the behavior or teaching in question is a grave wrongAh, yes. Like in the case of, say, Roman Catholic Adolph Hitler.
Oh, wait. My bad. He wasn't excommunicated. Apparently the RCC didn't consider his "behaviour in question" to be "a grave wrong."
In that case "the church" didn't need "protecting." Only the Jews.
263 posted on
01/05/2010 9:21:08 AM PST by
Dr. Eckleburg
("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
To: Dr. Eckleburg
He wasn't excommunicated. False. He was excommunicated many times over latae sententiae.
And he was not a practicing Catholic anyway after his late teens. "Excommunicating" a non-communicant accomplishes nothing.
264 posted on
01/05/2010 9:25:32 AM PST by
Campion
("President Barack Obama" is an anagram for "An Arab-backed imposter")
To: Dr. Eckleburg; Mad Dawg; YHAOS; wmfights; HarleyD; 1000 silverlings; the_conscience; RnMomof7; ...
Oh, wait. My bad. He wasn't excommunicated. Apparently the RCC didn't consider his "behaviour in question" to be "a grave wrong." Certainly Hitler wasn't as bad as Tynsdale who translated the Bible into English and was excommunicated AND burned at the stake (after being strangled). That evil person.
Another great moment in Church history. ;O)
310 posted on
01/05/2010 4:08:11 PM PST by
HarleyD
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson