You must equate the two with respect to heresy. With the very commission of the crime the culprit incurs the penalty. The pumishment is written into the law itself. Read the CE section I quoted again.You are confusing guilt with judgment. I was speaking about judgment. Don’t equate the two.
No, cam, you just can’t seem to differentiate between the two types of excommunication.Now you’ve switched topics and are talking a Church tribunal, which is not, of course, what I was referring to when I spoke of judgments by an observer. I was talking about judgments by a private individual.
SFDExcommunication, especially a jure, is either latæ or ferendæ sententiæ. The first is incurred as soon as the offence is committed and by reason of the offence itself (eo ipso) without intervention of any ecclesiastical judge; it is recognized in the terms used by the legislator, for instance: “the culprit will be excommunicated at once, by the fact itself [statim, ipso facto]”.
The second is indeed foreseen by the law as a penalty, but is inflicted on the culprit only by a judicial sentence; in other words, the delinquent is rather threatened than visited with the penalty, and incurs it only when the judge has summoned him before his tribunal, declared him guilty, and punished him according to the terms of the law. It is recognized when the law contains these or similar words: “under pain of excommunication”; “the culprit will be excommunicated”.
The Catholic Encyclopedia quote doesn’t support what you’re saying. Where are you getting this?Originally Posted by **cam100 **
It seems to me you’re the one who is confusing the two. One type occurs automatically – it has nothing to with judgment by another person. Only guilt is required. The other type is dependent upon a judgment by the proper authorities. Thus judgment and guilt are separate concepts. Neither type has anything to with a judgment by one’s peers.No, cam, you just can’t seem to differentiate between the two types of excommunication.
SFD
What exactly are you insinuating? I shouldn’t need to have to explain this to you, but I will:Fascinating knowledge for one who had posted only one post prior to* Paul* Folbrecht being suspended this month. But then since that suspension the post count has blossomed.
Pam and I had a discussion about those old threads by private message yesterday. So much for not making public accusations about people.Fascinating knowledge for one who had posted only one post prior to* Paul* Folbrecht being suspended this month. But then since that suspension the post count has blossomed.
Fascinating knowledge for one who had posted only one post prior to* Paul* Folbrecht being suspended this month. But then since that suspension the post count has blossomed.