A New Dilemma/Update

  • Thread starter Thread starter ChristinaAH
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The earlier canons may be outdated, but throughout history since the early church, shunning apostates was seen as right…

It’s a consistent viewpoint.
 
So please tell me how I was allowed to be ordained, since I dated a Protestant. Were my Diocese, Bishop, and seminary all wrong to admit me, advance me through formation, and approve me for ordination? I didn’t shun her, and I have several close friends, not Catholic, even still. Am I wrong? Are all of the above wrong? Or is there a principle in play in those ancient canons that isn’t applied today?
 
It’s not about Protestants, or even just non-believers.

I’m friends with many unbelievers, and Protestants as well.

However, the way the church has always treated apostates has been more strict than just the general “unbelievers.”
 
Someone who used to have the faith, but has since left it for whatever reason.
 
Many of these documents are related to the Sacraments and Eucharist. Apostates, until they repent, cannot be admitted to the Sacraments.

We are commanded by Christ to love our enemies and to do good to those who do bad things.
 
I’m no Canon Lawyer so I’m not entirely sure but I feel like this statement:

“reserved speciali modo to the Sovereign Pontiff“

means that the excommunication power is reserved to the Pope. So he can excommunicate you based on those grounds but he does not have to.

It’s probably for anyone that would be a prominent public figure that is going against the faith or a very bad movement going on at the time of that bull.

Plus there might be more context and even still, it might be something that’s repealed in Law.
 
ChristinaAH said:
receive, protect, or befriend them
Click to expand...
I think we need to look at the context as to when this was written (in the 1800s) the wordage implies a person that is supporting and encouraging their apostacy in a very active manner. Back then, who you socialized or were seen with mattered a great deal and people took those things very seriously, much like it was scandalous for any woman to be seen alone with a man that wasn’t her husband. Nowadays these kinds of social activities don’t generate the kind of talk and scandal that they did then. You can befriend an apostate without giving approval.
 
Last edited:
In the early Church there was a huge debate over whether those who’d left the faith, especially under threat of martyrdom, could be readmitted to communion with the Church. There was a worry that if someone associated with apostates, it would lead them to fall away as well. Eventually it was realized that one could return to communion, and there isn’t the worry about the influence of apostates inducing others to do so.

Times change, law changes, circumstances change.
 
ChristinaAH said:
Also, I’m not Catholic (yet :crossed_fingers: ), so I don’t really have any priests I could talk to…
Click to expand...
If you aren’t Catholic, you aren’t bound by any rules regarding how Catholics might or might not be allowed or forbidden to associate with apostates.
 
you sound very scrupulous. edward george is a priest, listen to him

you are going to stop talking to someone because they are turned away from God. Thats not what Jesus taught.
 
Last edited:
ChristinaAH said:
This post is kind of an update to my last, about the girl I met who I found out was an apostate. Many of you have said that it’s not sinful to continue being friends with her, but “Apostates, with all who receive, protect, or befriend them, incur excommunication, reserved speciali modo to the Sovereign Pontiff (Constitution [Apostolicæ Sedis] No.1)”, so I’ve decided that I’m going to stop talking to her.

…
Click to expand...
The canon laws changed on this matter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top