Cardinal Breaks the Oath of Secrecy, Conclave

  • Thread starter Thread starter ressourcement
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think this is a hoax. All of the Cardinals took a vow of secrecy so none of them can come forward and make any comment about whether or not the tallies are true or false because then *they *would be breaking the oath of silence. It just seems fake to me. The person who originally wrote the article in an Italian newspaper seems to be intending to undermine Pope Benedict VI’s authority. I’m guessing this was made up by someone who also supports female priests and contraception use. Just my :twocents: . If it is real, I hope they identify the Cardinal who broke the vow of silence and excommunicate him.
 
The article read in part “Brunelli says he couldn’t identify the author because of the vow of secrecy each cardinal took before entering the conclave. Punishment for violating the vow is excommunication.” (emphasis mine) If and its a BIG IF, a cardinal actually released the info but does not want to say who is he, he may be hiding from the Church for fear of excommunication, but he knows in his heart he is already excommunicated. He may have hid from the whole world, but he didnt hide from God and it is to Him who he ill be accountable to. What does he think? That because he told some journalist, “Pssst, don’t tell anybody otherwise I will be excommunicated” that God won’t know? How foolish would that be?
 
I just can’t believe any cardinal would turn over his diary like that to the press.

period.
 
40.png
YinYangMom:
I just can’t believe any cardinal would turn over his diary like that to the press.

period.
Click to expand...
Does seem a bit far fetched.
 
40.png
TobyLue:
TIf and its a BIG IF, a cardinal actually released the info but does not want to say who is he, he may be hiding from the Church for fear of excommunication, but he knows in his heart he is already excommunicated.
Click to expand...
Canon lawyer, J. Peters addresses that issue:

"…I write only to correct a comment on the canon law that appeared in this unfortunate story, namely: “Brunelli says he couldn’t identify the author [of the diary] because of the vow of secrecy each cardinal took before entering the conclave. Punishment for violating the vow is excommunication.” The first sentence is painfully imprecise. The second is simply wrong.
  1. The refusal to identify someone who breaks an oath of secrecy does not protect the latter from culpability for having broken the oath. If the oath was broken, responsibility for the deed attaches in accord with the usual rules of morality and, if applicable, law.
  2. According to ecclesiastical law, however, no penalty is specified for cardinals who break their solemn oath. The small number of support staff who are permitted into conclave precincts are bound by oath to observe secrecy and their oath is enforceable by penalty, but even there the penalty is not excommunication. Rather, it is that “which the future Supreme Pontiff will see fit to adopt, in accordance with Canon 1399 of the Code of Canon Law” (UDG ¶ 48).The sanction enabled by 1983 CIC 1399 is “a just penalty” which might or might not extend all the way to excommunication. There is also ¶ 55 that threatens “grave penalties according to the judgment of the future Pope” for those who violate secrecy, but the context of ¶ 55 is electronic eavesdropping, and in any case, the penalty need not be excommunication. Per ¶ 71, elector notes are to be burned, but again, no specific penalty (excommunication or otherwise) is attached to the violation of this norm.
In brief, if this sad story is true and if the offending cardinal is identified, Pope Benedict XVI may deal with the situation any way he sees fit, for no specific response to this particular offense is dictated by the words of Church law."

mywebpages.comcast.net/enpeters/blog.htm
 
I guess my reaction was who cares? True or false, B16 is still Pope. The margin of his election is really imaterial, just ask George Bush.

What is the scandal? That there is something fishy about the election of B16 or that a Cardianl broke his oath? It is quite aparent that clergy break oaths at all levels in the RCC, that is to be expected of humans. If you ask me, this is far less of an issue than the oaths broken in the sex abuse scandal.

I wouldn’t hold your breath for an official reaction from Rome, this story will die on the vine faster than the dancing nun at WYD.

Nohome
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top