Vatican's Manner of Excommunication Is Rude :)

[trickster]

This is a question that we don’t have a right to ask and the pope has no moral obligation to answer any other way than to simply say that he has divine authority to bind and unbind, to forgive or to withhold forgiveness and he chooses to exercise it. Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition back him up on it.

Just because something has not been done does not mean that it may not be done, if that person (the pope) has a God-given right to do it.

Since this right comes from Christ himself, who are we to question, “Why?”

Hi JReduction…on the other hand who are we NOT to question? I know that you have a strong believe (backed up academically to the hilt) but I do think that a lot of that unquestioning of the pope really comes from the chuch’s development over the 2000 years where it picked up a lot of garbage around the “divine right to rule” of kings - do you believe Queen Elizabeth II has God’s personal approval that she can do what she wants, especially as the head of the Church of England…to me…and I am sure you will respond…this power that the pope has comes from that traditioin…very different than those who questioned Jesus in scripture.

Jesus knew when he was being asked a question out of love and eagerness to be closer to the truth and when he was asked a question for him to be set up…and he answered both, but he did answer with more love to those who authentically questioned him…Peter, I am sure was questioned…I think about the gentile-jewish debates between him and Paul.

So I think that there are reasonable ground to “question” the pope not in the sense of tricking or “setting up” but in the sense of trying to seek understanding…cause no one can forget how close - by necessity - the Holy Spirit is to the Holy Father…

Trickster
Bruce Ferguson

 

[trickster]

Sorry, Bruce. Came on too strong. I think that wise Franciscan brother said it all. (What a waste… should be a priest… probably too damn humble just to rub it in)

Petaro, no worries… it’s good to be passionate about life and thinking…and a strong defender of what is close to the heart…I enjoy your thinking and especially your disagreements with me cause it comes as no surprise, I ain’t the infallible guy I like ideas and I like respectful and meaningful debates on those ideas…constructive criticism I think the word was, so please take me on…trust me I learn a lot and evolve my thinking and understanding of the church by being in conversation with those who agree and disagree with me… I have an open door policy towards discussion…so do carry on…

Trickster
bruce ferguson

 

[trickster]

Well, the first sentence any of us read was your thread title saying: The Vatican’s Manner of Excommunicating is Rude. That seems fairly aggressive, no? Even with a smiley face, that was our first impression of your thoughts here.

Sometimes it’s better to put questions in the form of a question: Is the Vatican Being Rude… or I Don’t Understand Excommunication.

No worries, Petaro is a good brother (or sister) come to think of it not sure what gender the name “Petaro” is…think he is a brother…

I tend to be a bit of a drama queen with titles that capture attention…admittedly I was on a roll that day…point taken n

Bruce Ferguson
Trickster

 

[trickster]

It struck me as kind of odd that they don’t know why they were ‘kicked out’ but you do.

hey there 10gr8kids (interesting name by the way

The two quotes you highlighted were about two different subjects…the Australian priest and Rev. Dr. Matthew Fox indicated that out of nowhere he got a letter in the mail saying he was excommunicated…and inconsistent to government or business pratices no reason was given.

I have a lot of respect for Matthew Fox’s work on Creation Spirituality which the church wanted him to tone down…but Rev. Fox (now a Presbyterian minister) went on to develop some remarkable concepts outside the constraints of the discernment process of the Holy See that are challenging not so much doctrine or teaching BUT traditional paradigms of understanding…and that is the key to his work.

So, for him, it was kind of a blessing to be freed from the constraints of the Holy See, much like Gutierrez in the 60’s…

So not sure out of that how you got to the point of saying I knew what they were excommunicated for… the Australian priest I just heard about…but Matthew Fox I have read his books, talked to him by conference call and know his work very well…that was what I was referring to…

thanks for posting.

Bruce Ferguson
Trickster

 

[trickster]

Yes, this is true, but why? Because our society’s way of thinking has moved so far away from the Catholic way of thinking.

I think that this is related to the appeal that what you called experiential theologies hold for you.

Many of those who had never heard Revealed Truth did the best they could with limited information. Some did better with nothing but natural knowledge than others do who are raised Catholic! But when they learned the truth, they *gave up their errors. *

We do not think it is cultural imperialism or ethnocentric or anything like that when we teach aboriginal peoples something like higher math, do we? We don’t think we have to add in whatever they were thinking or using in order to make it more attractive to them, do we? No, we just put it out there as it is.

Catholicism is a set of truths the same way math is a set of truths, but Catholicism has been marginalized to the point we think of it as mere opinion, a decration in our lives rather than a foundation stone of reality.

I have been listening to 2 series of talks about philosophical thought over the last few centuries, and I like them because not onky can i see the dismantling of Catholic thinking, but i can see the philosophical errors popping up in everyday life.

Enlightenment --The two about philosophy were the first two by Prof. Wunsch. They have rearranged the site since then and I cannot guarantee that the first two listed are his. The other two are more about the history of the French Revolution, iirc.

Roots of Modernism --These are terrific, but the man’s style of speaking took some getting used to for me. Since he usually lectures college students, I imagine he’s had to develop attention-getting ways of speaking!

I have listened to these many times in order to get everything they say–there’s a lot there. Hope you like them

AWESOME! Thank you st.francis…you raise a number of things which brought my mind immediately to our people’s residential school experience…most aboriginal people I know would not disagree with you… it is not what was taught to our people that is objectionable, it was the accompanying assumptions of superiority and the flagrant mental and physical abuse of native children in the catholic residential (and other) schools that is objectionable… and most catholics would understand that and support that grievance…the Catholic Church in Canada and indeed the Pope has recognized that mishandling of the Catholic message historically.

I will definitely look into those videos or tapes as you are right , to understand where we are now, we need to know what influenced the changes and the development of things…so I will listen to them if I can find them and then I would hope you share your thoughts with my thoughts (Gawd sound like mind melding by star trek’s spock) as I would be very interested in how you see problems in a historical trend to minimize and devalue the teachings of our church.

thanks again St. Francis

Bruce Ferguson
Trickster (almost put St. Trickster…oops…

 

[trickster]

I may well be wrong but my recollection is that Matthew Fox wasn’t excommunicated by Rome but dismissed by the Dominican order. By this time he had already founded the Center for Creation Spirituality and chose to pursue that path over continued obedience to his superiors. He was a very popular author and speaker. He might have found that difficult to leave behind. However, still feeling that official clergy status was important (interesting given much of his anti-clerical sentiments) he opted for ordination in the Episcopal church. I think it’s noteworthy that Fox keeps talking and writing about the Catholic Church all these years later.

Here’s an entry from EWTN: ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/FOX.HTM

SurfingTheTiber - You are right! Now I remember he jumped ship before being thrown over Thanks for that clarification…now I have to recant my arguement…can i hit a 'replace all" button and subsititute matthew fox’s name with someone who was excommunicated

He still is a very popular author, I enjoy immensely his work, thoughts and initiatives… he is doing some remarkable work in inner city education now… and gawd do we need initiatives in that area of inner city youth… the man remains remarkable to me…

I will also check out the EWTN site too…thanks again.

Bruce Ferguson
Trickster

 

[JReducation]

Hi JReduction…on the other hand who are we NOT to question? I know that you have a strong believe (backed up academically to the hilt) but I do think that a lot of that unquestioning of the pope really comes from the chuch’s development over the 2000 years where it picked up a lot of garbage around the “divine right to rule” of kings - do you believe Queen Elizabeth II has God’s personal approval that she can do what she wants, especially as the head of the Church of England…to me…and I am sure you will respond…this power that the pope has comes from that traditioin…very different than those who questioned Jesus in scripture.

Jesus knew when he was being asked a question out of love and eagerness to be closer to the truth and when he was asked a question for him to be set up…and he answered both, but he did answer with more love to those who authentically questioned him…Peter, I am sure was questioned…I think about the gentile-jewish debates between him and Paul.

So I think that there are reasonable ground to “question” the pope not in the sense of tricking or “setting up” but in the sense of trying to seek understanding…cause no one can forget how close - by necessity - the Holy Spirit is to the Holy Father…

Trickster
Bruce Ferguson

I see what you’re saying. However the Church goes not get stuck in the first century with Peter and Paul.

We know that all revelation was closed with the death of John the Evangelist. However, our unpacking of revelation did not stop there. Our development of doctrine did not stop there. The development of ecclesiastical authority did not stop there. It is not realistic to say “Peter did it this way”. This only holds true for some things and not for others.

In this case, the right of the Pontiff to to govern without appeal and without question is part of ongoing development of Church discipline. It is not the product of some cultural phenomenon, but the product of faith.

As we unpack Jesus’ statement about Peter’s authority to bind and unbind, to forgive and to withhold forgiveness and we look at how this was exercised by the papacy from the time of Peter forward, we see how very quickly this particular point became part of Catholic law and tradition. Pope Clement, the 4th pope pulls rank on the Corinthians and offers them no explanation for his authority. He focuses on what they have to do and not do. He does not go into an explanation beyond telling them to submit to obedience.

From the early Fathers, we see an understanding of the authority of Peter. This understanding has developed over the centuries.

We have seen this in our own times in other areas. About a week or two ago, in an interview, the Holy Father said that he had been called to task for not speaking enough on abortion, contraception and same-sex marriage. However, if we observe his tone, he’s simply sharing with the reporter that someone or some people had called him to task. He’s very casual about it. His tone and body language send a clear message that he has no intention of responding to those who call him to task.

Pope Paul did the same thing when he proclaimed Humanae Vitae. People wanted him to explain and justify himself. I remember. I was a young adult. There was an outcry, “Who do you think you are?” Pope Paul’s response was, “The pope.” He would not engage in such questions.

If the person asking the question had the right to ask it, then the pope would have a moral obligation to answer it. Rights always come with duties. One person’s rights are another person’s duty. The fact that popes have not felt duty bound to explain themselves, would suggest that one does not have the right to ask.

We must not confuse this with freedom. We certainly have to the freedom to do what is appropriate and inappropriate. Hopefully, we will use our freedom for that which is appropriate.

 

[trickster]

I’m assuming your name is Bruce?

You can’t get “kicked out.” You can be excluded from the sacraments. All the excommunicants have to do in order for the excommunication to be lifted is to recant their views.

Also, you don’t get excommunicated without knowing why. Normally, you don’t get excommunicated without receiving countless warnings. That Australian priest didn’t need an explanation. He knows why he is excommunicated. He has probably received countless warnings, but chose not to listen to them. As a result, he is excommunicated.

Yes I understand now BBEN… that was the point of my original posting…as this seemed very strange to me… that the Vatican would be so rude as to just dump a catholic without explaining why…this thread has been very instructive for me…thank you.

Bruce Ferguson (yes that’s my name0

I chose “trickster” as I am aboriginal canadian and in many north american tribes, the “coyote” , “raven”, owls etc. are tricksters and they change forms…which reminds me of conversion of consistently transforming from our finite form as human beings to our full form as spiritual beings in our walk with christ…

 

[trickster]

It’s not a question of throwing the book (or in this case an easy http link) but a question of the Church enforcing one of her more important canons: that which safeguards against sacrilege of the Holy Eucharist. There are not too many American bishops willing to wield this authority over sinners - even pre-Franciscan pontificate - and I am beginning to doubt if they will ever see the light now.

I was just teasing…I understand your point very well…

Take care

Bruce Feguson
Trickster

 

[trickster]

I see what you’re saying. However the Church goes not get stuck in the first century with Peter and Paul.

We know that all revelation was closed with the death of John the Evangelist. However, our unpacking of revelation did not stop there. Our development of doctrine did not stop there. The development of ecclesiastical authority did not stop there. It is not realistic to say “Peter did it this way”. This only holds true for some things and not for others.

In this case, the right of the Pontiff to to govern without appeal and without question is part of ongoing development of Church discipline. It is not the product of some cultural phenomenon, but the product of faith.

As we unpack Jesus’ statement about Peter’s authority to bind and unbind, to forgive and to withhold forgiveness and we look at how this was exercised by the papacy from the time of Peter forward, we see how very quickly this particular point became part of Catholic law and tradition. Pope Clement, the 4th pope pulls rank on the Corinthians and offers them no explanation for his authority. He focuses on what they have to do and not do. He does not go into an explanation beyond telling them to submit to obedience.

From the early Fathers, we see an understanding of the authority of Peter. This understanding has developed over the centuries.

We have seen this in our own times in other areas. About a week or two ago, in an interview, the Holy Father said that he had been called to task for not speaking enough on abortion, contraception and same-sex marriage. However, if we observe his tone, he’s simply sharing with the reporter that someone or some people had called him to task. He’s very casual about it. His tone and body language send a clear message that he has no intention of responding to those who call him to task.

Pope Paul did the same thing when he proclaimed Humanae Vitae. People wanted him to explain and justify himself. I remember. I was a young adult. There was an outcry, “Who do you think you are?” Pope Paul’s response was, “The pope.” He would not engage in such questions.

If the person asking the question had the right to ask it, then the pope would have a moral obligation to answer it. Rights always come with duties. One person’s rights are another person’s duty. The fact that popes have not felt duty bound to explain themselves, would suggest that one does not have the right to ask.

We must not confuse this with freedom. We certainly have to the freedom to do what is appropriate and inappropriate. Hopefully, we will use our freedom for that which is appropriate.

You raise very interesting points; (1) I was told in our church that the Spirit progressively reveals revelation…but I misunderstood that point in the sense that revelation happens, you just said it stopped at Peter, which brings a number of concept into play which help me in my understanding - the deposit of faith - being one…so when Christ died and went to heaven and sent his Holy Spirit down…ALL THE WORK OF SALVATION WAS COMPLETE.

(2) Would you say I am correct in assuming that ok if everything was done, then it is up to us to unpack (I like that word) the full meaning of what was done… and this full unpacking is a job that is revealed as we meet the newest strategies from Satan?

I just wanted to respond to you first before signing off for the day , it is almost lunch time in BC and I need to get some stuff done… but I look forward to your thoughts…as usual…

Take care

Bruce Ferguson
Trickster

 

[JReducation]

You raise very interesting points; (1) I was told in our church that the Spirit progressively reveals revelation…but I misunderstood that point in the sense that revelation happens, you just said it stopped at Peter, which brings a number of concept into play which help me in my understanding - the deposit of faith - being one…so when Christ died and went to heaven and sent his Holy Spirit down…ALL THE WORK OF SALVATION WAS COMPLETE.

(2) Would you say I am correct in assuming that ok if everything was done, then it is up to us to unpack (I like that word) the full meaning of what was done…

Bruce Ferguson
Trickster

Bring me back a sandwich of Canadian bacon from lunch.

It is the role of the bishop to unpack. The rest of us cannot do anything without the bishop. Those of us who teach be it CCD, theology or preach, do so under the authority of the bishop and our unpacking must reflect that of the bishop. The bishop has to unpack in communion with Peter.

 

[St_Francis]

Sorry it took so long for me to respond

AWESOME! Thank you st.francis…you raise a number of things which brought my mind immediately to our people’s residential school experience…most aboriginal people I know would not disagree with you… it is not what was taught to our people that is objectionable, it was the accompanying assumptions of superiority and the flagrant mental and physical abuse of native children in the catholic residential (and other) schools that is objectionable… and most catholics would understand that and support that grievance…the Catholic Church in Canada and indeed the Pope has recognized that mishandling of the Catholic message historically.

If I had all the time in the world to study things, this is one of the things I would investigate. From what little I know, there was a combination of things…

First, this occurred not only with aboriginal peoples but in many places, like Ireland. A smaller version can be seen in complaints from older Catholics about the harshness of the nuns in school.

Second, this was not limited to Catholic institutions but also involved Protestant institutions as well, and insofar as secular (meaning non-religious) institutions were involved, they too had the same problems.

I think part of the problem was something I heard about referring to something else. The Church in France was quite affected by the Jansenist heresy, which was (extrmely briefly) like the Catholic version of Puritanism, and apparently, because of the Anglican split from the Church, a lot of English and Irish priests were trained in France and were affected by this. This tendency spread through the English-speaking Catholic Church as a result

So I think there was a certain amount of “beat the badness out of them” through the English-speaking Church at the time. And of course that idea existed in the former UK colonies as a result of Puritanism and Calvinism.

And at the same time, evolution and its evil offsprings (Social Darwinsim and eugenics) were coming into mainstream thought, which meant there was an atmosphere of fear caused by the fatalism inherent in those ways of thinking.

Mix all this with the effects of Original Sin which always exists and you have a complete mess.

I will definitely look into those videos or tapes as you are right , to understand where we are now, we need to know what influenced the changes and the development of things…so I will listen to them if I can find them and then I would hope you share your thoughts with my thoughts (Gawd sound like mind melding by star trek’s spock) as I would be very interested in how you see problems in a historical trend to minimize and devalue the teachings of our church.

I am totally a dilletante when it comes to these things, but I do love exploring

The links are to MP3s, so they are just audio. I download them onto a player and listen to them when I am doing things like ironing or driving.

thanks again St. Francis

Bruce Ferguson
Trickster (almost put St. Trickster…oops…

You have some interesting ideas! I like the way you are interested in different ways of thinking but still want to stick to Church teaching

 

[Brandon_Cal]

Are official excommunications the sole prerogative of the Pope, or can any Bishop excommunicate a member of his diocese?

 

[YoungTradCath]

or can any Bishop excommunicate a member of his diocese?

yes

 

[Elizium23]

Ecclesiastical penalties are the perogative of the ordinary and may be arrived at by a judicial process or an extra-judicial decree, as outlined in CIC cann. 1717ff. Application of penalties is covered in cann. 1341ff. In the case of appeals, these can be made to Rome, where is found the court of final recourse. It is likely in the Australian case that such processes were followed locally before making an appeal to Rome.