Pope and Death Penalty

  • Thread starter Thread starter eamonnroma
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
SonOfMan said:
  • It was once taught and declared by a pope to be heretical, immoral, and sinful to pray with people of other faiths. We can now pray with people of others faiths.
Click to expand...
Where was it taught and declared?
  • It was once taught that anyone who committed suicide would definitely go to hell. Now with modern understanding of modern psychology, that is no longer the case.
Click to expand...
This has not changed. The definition for mortal sin remains unchanged and suicide is grave matter. The scientific discoveries of mental illness and depression can mitigate the third requirement for mortal sin: full consent of the will. The Church understands that. That hardly constitutes a change in teaching. But one who commits suicide fully knowing and consenting is still hellbound.
  • It was once heretical and punishable to believe that the earth was round. That is no longer the case today. Although this is technically a matter of science, the Church at that time taught that it was a matter of Faith.
Click to expand...
Where was it taught and declared? A little Latin name would definitely help.

Again, the behaviour or mere opinions of churchmen does not constitute Magisterial teaching. Show me something from a Council, a Bull or something of a Magisterial nature.

IF, IF you can show that the Church reversed itself on a moral teaching (and not thin-air allegations such as these), then I will simply accept that the Church has no authority to teach anything, and that it’s pointless to be Catholic.

So go ahead. Make your case.
 
Popes have had various private opinions, we can’t just the pope on whether he’s in heresy. We can however judge that the Church affirms infallible that the Death Penalty can be morally permissable, and that it is not in principle evil.

If this is false, then there is no Catholic Church, because this comes out of the Council of Trent. No private opinion of any bishop, or any pope, trumps the infallible declarations put down in that council.

They bind on the consciences of all Catholics without exception.

Whether the death penalty is a good idea is a different discussion, we can agree and disagree, but we aren’t allowed to believe that the death penalty is an inherent evil.
 
porthos11 said:
Where was it taught and declared?
Click to expand...
Here:
“If any clergyman or laic shall go into the synagogue of the Jews, or the meetings of heretics, to join in prayer with them, let him be deposed, and deprived of communion”. (Can. 63)
Click to expand...
“None must either pray or sing psalms with heretics; and whosoever shall communicate with those who are cut off from the Communion of the Church, whether clergyman or laic, let him be excommunicated”. (Coun. Carth. iv. 72 and 73)
Click to expand...
“If anyone does not anathematize …all… heretics who have been condemned by the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church… let such a one be anathema.” (2nd Council of Constantinople, 553 A.D., Canon 11).
Click to expand...
“If any clergyman or layman shall go into the synagogue of the Jews or to the meetings of heretics to join in prayer with them, let them be deposed and deprived of Communion.”** III Council of Constantinople (Ecumenical)**
Click to expand...
“Is it permitted for Catholics to be present at, or take part in, conventions, gatherings, meetings, or societies of non-Catholics which aim to associate together under a single agreement all who in any way lay claim to the name of Christian? In the negative! It is clear, therefore, why this Apostolic See has NEVER allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics. There is only one way in which the unity of Christians may be fostered, and that is by furthering the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from her.” Pope Pius XI Mortalium Animos
Click to expand...
“No one shall pray in common with heretics or schismatics.” Council of Laodicea (Regional)
Click to expand...
porthos11 said:
This has not changed. The definition for mortal sin remains unchanged and suicide is grave matter. The scientific discoveries of mental illness and depression can mitigate the third requirement for mortal sin: full consent of the will. The Church understands that. That hardly constitutes a change in teaching**. But one who commits suicide fully knowing and consenting is still hellbound**.
Click to expand...
I agree with the bolded (although a person who chooses fully to commit suicide fully knowing and consenting is most likely not sane to begin with, so that further complicates judgement of whether they were sane or not), however, the Church used to generalize all suicides as being bound for hell. Only until recent psychological discoveries and their acknowledgement by the Church, have they changed their stance on the fate of those who’ve committed suicide.
porthos11 said:
Where was it taught and declared? A little Latin name would definitely help.

Again, the behaviour or mere opinions of churchmen does not constitute Magisterial teaching. Show me something from a Council, a Bull or something of a Magisterial nature.
Click to expand...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei
He was tried by the Holy Office, then found “vehemently suspect of heresy”, was forced to recant, and spent the last nine years of his life under house arrest.
Click to expand...
It appear he wasn’t just tried by the mere opinions of ordinary churchmen, but by Pope Urban VIII himself.
porthos11 said:
IF, IF you can show that the Church reversed itself on a moral teaching (and not thin-air allegations such as these)
Click to expand...
Anyone who is being intellectually honest would see these as pretty heavy pieces of evidence that the Church has changed its stance several times throughout history. It takes some serious relativism to attempt to explain that the Church has never changed its mind.
 
porthos11 said:
IF, IF you can show that the Church reversed itself on a moral teaching (and not thin-air allegations such as these), then I will simply accept that the Church has no authority to teach anything, and that it’s pointless to be Catholic.

So go ahead. Make your case.
Click to expand...
Torture was allowed at one time. Now it is not.
 
The Church not allowing Catholics to pray with Jews in a synagogue in the past, for example, falls under the category of pastoral discipline. It does pertain to doctrine unless the Catholic who joins the Jews in prayer is doing so with a prayer that somehow denies the Catholic faith.
 
SonOfMan said:
Here:
Click to expand...
Okay lets go through it.
“If any clergyman or laic shall go into the synagogue of the Jews, or the meetings of heretics, to join in prayer with them, let him be deposed, and deprived of communion”. (Can. 63)
Click to expand...
“None must either pray or sing psalms with heretics; and whosoever shall communicate with those who are cut off from the Communion of the Church, whether clergyman or laic, let him be excommunicated”. (Coun. Carth. iv. 72 and 73)
Click to expand...
Has not effectively changed. We’re not allowed say to walk into a Catholic congregation that’s been excommunicated because they simulated priestly ordination of women. And we cannot walk into a mosque or a synagoge and pray with them, thinking we’re all in communion with God, nor can I who live in a protestant country walk into a protestant Church and participate.

To do so is definitely grave sin. Though whether the legal sanctioning of excommunication still applies I don’t know.
“If anyone does not anathematize …all… heretics who have been condemned by the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church… let such a one be anathema.” (2nd Council of Constantinople, 553 A.D., Canon 11).
Click to expand...
Where has this changed. The Church teaches that those who are in error, are in error, and therefore on this or that issue against the teaching on the Church. Furthermore we’re not free to say that someone who’s been excommunicated by the Church is in good standing with the Church, until that person has been declared in good standing by the Church, like with Archbishop Lefebvre.

The Church has not changed any of these doctrines.
 
Tomdstone said:
Torture was allowed at one time. Now it is not.
Click to expand...
Did the Magisterium of the Church ever declare that torture is something that must be accepted as part of the deposit of faith? Or was it just that it was allowed to happen in the past?
 
Tomdstone said:
See Pope Innocent IV Ad Extirpandum as it applied to the Inquisition.
Click to expand...
It happened during the Inquisition, everyone knows this. But was it declared by the Magisterium that torture must be universally and definitively accepted as part of the deposit of faith?
 
Tomdstone said:
See Pope Innocent IV Ad Extirpandum as it applied to the Inquisition.
Click to expand...
There’s a difference between authorizing this kind of interrogation for the inquisition, and teaching infallible that it is okay. I’m reading the document though, so far I haven’t found anything yet.

There’s no ex cathedra statement here from the pope.
 
Leonhard said:
The Church has not changed any of these doctrines.
Click to expand...
The doctrines aren’t simply saying that you can’t go to a schismatic mass and have it count as fulfilling your Sunday mass obligation lest you be anathematized. They say you cannot pray Jews or heretics. Period.

So if the Church has not changed any of these doctrines, that means when my Jewish friend comes to my house to join me for Thanksgiving dinner and we say grace and pray before the meal we’re about to eat, technically I am excommunicated.
 
livingwordunity said:
It happened during the Inquisition, everyone knows this. But was it declared by the Magisterium that torture must be universally and definitively accepted as part of the deposit of faith?
Click to expand...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dum_Diversas
To confirm the Portuguese trade rights, King Afonso V appealed to Pope Nicholas V for support, seeking the moral authority of the Church for his monopoly.[11] The bull of 1452 was addressed to Afonso V and conceded Portugal’s right to attack, conquer and subjugate Saracens and pagans.[12]
Click to expand...
We grant you [Kings of Spain and Portugal] by these present documents, with our Apostolic Authority, full and free permission to invade, search out, capture, and subjugate the Saracens and pagans and any other unbelievers and enemies of Christ wherever they may be, as well as their kingdoms, duchies, counties, principalities, and other property …] and to reduce their persons into perpetual servitude.
Click to expand...
Do special dispensations to enslave heretics still exist today in the Catholic Church? If not, would you say that they have changed how it views dispensations regarding slavery?
 
SonOfMan said:
The doctrines aren’t simply saying that you can’t go to a schismatic mass and have it count as fulfilling your Sunday mass obligation lest you be anathematized.
Click to expand...
Oh I agree, to participate voluntarily in a heretical religious practice, as a participant, would definitely be anathema according to these rules. You aren’t allowed to do it.
They say you cannot pray Jews or heretics. Period.
Click to expand...
If I met a Jew, could I pray for him? Yes. Could we pray side by side? Yes. Could we pray for each other? Yes. Could I participate in a jewish ritual he knew of? No.
So if the Church has not changed any of these doctrines, that means when my Jewish friend comes to my house to join me for Thanksgiving dinner and we say grace and pray before the meal we’re about to eat, technically I am excommunicated.
Click to expand...
Where does the canons say this? Are you allowing one of them to lead the thanksgiving, and are you responding along with them in it? Or are you saying grace, and they’re doing whatever? Or are you each individually doing your own thing?
 
SonOfMan said:
Here:

I agree with the bolded (although a person who chooses fully to commit suicide fully knowing and consenting is most likely not sane to begin with, so that further complicates judgement of whether they were sane or not), however, the Church used to generalize all suicides as being bound for hell. Only until recent psychological discoveries and their acknowledgement by the Church, have they changed their stance on the fate of those who’ve committed suicide.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei

It appear he wasn’t just tried by the mere opinions of ordinary churchmen, but by Pope Urban VIII himself.

Anyone who is being intellectually honest would see these as pretty heavy pieces of evidence that the Church has changed its stance several times throughout history. It takes some serious relativism to attempt to explain that the Church has never changed its mind.
Click to expand...
Yes, the Church may have changed its stances on various matters. But you have still failed to provide proof that the Church has changed any teaching on faith or morals.

All those quotes about prayer with the heathen? We’ve seen them all and are of a disciplinary force. From a moral standpoint, it remains forbidden to attend the worship of other denominations without a serious reason, and it can be gravely sinful to attend other services where one’s faith is in danger. Even now, we are not to waltz into a mosque, synagogue, or schismatic church on our own accord.

None of those are proof that the Church has changed a moral teaching. It did relax its stand from a legal and disciplinary standpoint, but those things change all the time. There is a difference between doctrine and discipline. Now had those canons been phrased “If any man should say that…let him be anathema”, in an ecumenical council or papal Bull, that’s a completely different story.

Galileo was not tried for heresy solely for claiming that the earth revolves around the sun, which at the time was merely theory, despite having been permitted to discuss it as such, not as incontrovertible fact, and most definitely not to attack the truth of the Bible with it. Even today, it would still be morally wrong to call the Bible false because we’re now “certain” that heliocentrism is true. This was Galileo’s error, not the holding of the scientific theory. Even the opinion of a Pope, like the opinions Pope Francis fires off-the-cuff today, have no Magisterial value unless it is explicitly made clear, like when Pope John Paul II declared that the Church can have no female priests.

You may not want to insist that the Catholic Church has changed a single dot or tittle of faith and morals, because if this is true, then the Catholic Church is not worth anything.
 
SonOfMan said:
Do special dispensations to enslave heretics still exist today in the Catholic Church? If not, would you say that they have changed how it views dispensations regarding slavery?
Click to expand...
Still doesn’t count, is this an ex cathedra statement? The answer is that it isn’t.

A pope has only spoken ex cathedra on five seperate occasions in human history. The rest are edicts, orders, opinions, subject to human error.
 
Disciplines, authorizations, and prohibitions change. Catholic doctrines and dogmas don’t change.
 
Leonhard said:
Still doesn’t count, is this an ex cathedra statement? The answer is that it isn’t.
Click to expand...
This seems to be a tricky subject around here. There are no hard and fast rules on when something becomes ex cathedra; all that is required is that the current acting Pope binds the universal Church to it when on the subject of faith and morals. Though some will claim that the Pope has to sort of enter into a “pope mode” when making an ex cathedra statement, saying something to the effect of “I hereby declare ex cathedra” so that there isn’t any misunderstanding. However, some will claim that he doesn’t have to specify.
Leonhard said:
A pope has only spoken ex cathedra on five seperate occasions in human history. The rest are edicts, orders, opinions, subject to human error.
Click to expand...
I thought canonizations were exercises in papal infallibility?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top