Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match!

A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is for general discussion that doesn't specifically fit into one of the other CatholicMatch rooms. Topics should not be overly serious as this is to be more of a "cafe setting."

Saint Peter's Square was created so that more people could be in the presence of the Pope and was named after Saint Peter, one of Jesus's apostles.
Learn More: Saint Peter

Jun 21st 2014 new
(quote) Jerry-74383 said: Is this the statement you are referring to:

> dissenters are all still excommunicated, whatever their reasons for dissenting

While factually incorrect (many dissenters are not excommunicated, including those who are otherwise censured for their offense(s), even when excommunication is an available punishment), the forum policy you cite does not apply to one stating the ecclesiastical penalty for a certain offense.

I don't agree that I was factually incorrect. Perhaps a little more clarity in my language was in order since the category of the dissent which Jim and I were discussing was a dissent from "faith and morals," such as in a disbelief in the Real Presence of the Eucharist, which would entail automatic excommunication. Thus I didn't think any clarification was necessary.

The term "excommunication" has two meanings. One is an ecclesiastical penalty formally administered by the Church to public and obstinate sinners, and the other meaning is a metaphysical one. Being excommunicated is often limited to an ontological state of being (for many grave sins go unreported and thus are known only by God and the sinner) inasmuch as a person ceases by his actions to be a nonviolent person when he beats his wife. In like manner one ceases to be in communion with the Church when one's souls is blotted by the stain of grave sin, as long as that grave sin fulfills the three criteria of culpability designated by the Catechism.

Secondly, Jerry, I respect your confusion with respect to my appearing to place Jim in the category of disbelievers in the Real Presence, however, Jim has stated of his own admission in other contexts that he dissents from the magisterium in faith and morals, particularly the Church's moral teaching artificial contraception, thus making him a "dissenter." I wasn't questioning his catholicity. When I phrased the sentence "Dissenting Catholics like yourself..." I was referring only to another group of dissenters, and noting their similarity to Jim, by virtue of their all dissenting from the Church, albeit on different teachings.

So, respectfully, all three of you were mistaken.

Jun 21st 2014 new
(quote) Jerry-74383 said: Is this the statement you are referring to:

> dissenters are all still excommunicated, whatever their reasons for dissenting

While factually incorrect (many dissenters are not excommunicated, including those who are otherwise censured for their offense(s), even when excommunication is an available punishment), the forum policy you cite does not apply to one stating the ecclesiastical penalty for a certain offense.

I think this arose in a response of Devan to me where he said dissenters are still excommunicated. I didn't take that to mean "excommunicated" in the sense of being "kicked out" of the Catholic Church but a state of not being in communion because of a disbelief in Christ's presence in the Eucharist.
As far as application of CM policy, I believe CM ought to be more tolerant of non-Orthodox or, God forbid, dissenting, views. Who does it hurt? It's healthy to have spirited, spiritual discussion. I'm disappointed.

Jun 21st 2014 new
(quote) Jerry-74383 said: Do the churches collect any money directly from the parishioners? According to one of the comments in the article, the tax is 8% of the income tax paid, not 8% of total income, so it would be significantly less than the "standard" 10% tithe.
That is a good question. Her words were that the state collects atithe instead of parishioners tithing.I see that that is less than 10 percent of income, But my guess is that since every parishioner who is employed will pay the tax and maybe that equals out for I have read that Catholics as a whole tithe about 1.1% of their income.
Jun 21st 2014 new
(quote) Devan-877827 said:

I don't agree that I was factually incorrect. Perhaps a little more clarity in my language was in order since the category of the dissent which Jim and I were discussing was a dissent from "faith and morals," such as in a disbelief in the Real Presence of the Eucharist, which would entail automatic excommunication. Thus I didn't think any clarification was necessary.

The term "excommunication" has two meanings. One is an ecclesiastical penalty formally administered by the Church to public and obstinate sinners, and the other meaning is a metaphysical one. Being excommunicated is often limited to an ontological state of being (for many grave sins go unreported and thus are known only by God and the sinner) inasmuch as a person ceases by his actions to be a nonviolent person when he beats his wife. In like manner one ceases to be in communion with the Church when one's souls is blotted by the stain of grave sin, as long as that grave sin fulfills the three criteria of culpability designated by the Catechism.

Secondly, Jerry, I respect your confusion with respect to my appearing to place Jim in the category of disbelievers in the Real Presence, however, Jim has stated of his own admission in other contexts that he dissents from the magisterium in faith and morals, particularly the Church's moral teaching artificial contraception, thus making him a "dissenter." I wasn't questioning his catholicity. When I phrased the sentence "Dissenting Catholics like yourself..." I was referring only to another group of dissenters, and noting their similarity to Jim, by virtue of their all dissenting from the Church, albeit on different teachings.

So, respectfully, all three of you were mistaken.

Your statement was "dissenters are all still excommunicated" If this was an imprecise expression of what you intended to say, I wont' fault you for that -- but the statement as written was incorrect.

With regard to latae sententiae excommunication: there are a number of factors, including lack of knowledge of the penalty, that either exempt from or diminish the penalty (can. 1321-1326). Since many laity are unaware of the penalty, that alone renders your statement over-reaching even when applied to the more restricted subset of offenses.

Jun 21st 2014 new
(quote) Jim-875732 said: I think this arose in a response of Devan to me where he said dissenters are still excommunicated. I didn't take that to mean "excommunicated" in the sense of being "kicked out" of the Catholic Church but a state of not being in communion because of a disbelief in Christ's presence in the Eucharist.
As far as application of CM policy, I believe CM ought to be more tolerant of non-Orthodox or, God forbid, dissenting, views. Who does it hurt? It's healthy to have spirited, spiritual discussion. I'm disappointed.

Those who obstinately reject the Church teachings are not in communion with the Church; this is not the same as excommunication, which is a formal penalty. Even those who are formally excommunicated are still members of the Church, though they are not permitted to receive the sacraments, except for Last Rites, until the excommunication is remitted (which in some cases is done in the context of the sacrament of Penance.

CM does permit discussion of dissenting opinions in a respectful manner. There is no harm, and potentially a lot of good, from a discussion where one who dissents from a teaching is honestly attempting to understand the Church's teaching. However, when their intention is only to obtain validation of their erroneous position there is potential for grave damage to those readers who may be led astray.



Jun 21st 2014 new
(quote) Jerry-74383 said: Your statement was "dissenters are all still excommunicated" If this was an imprecise expression of what you intended to say, I wont' fault you for that -- but the statement as written was incorrect.

With regard to latae sententiae excommunication: there are a number of factors, including lack of knowledge of the penalty, that either exempt from or diminish the penalty (can. 1321-1326). Since many laity are unaware of the penalty, that alone renders your statement over-reaching even when applied to the more restricted subset of offenses.

The sentence was so phrased because my point to Jim was that there may be considerably greater doubt in the minds of dissenters with regard to certainty of their dissenting beliefs, but that window of doubt doesn't necessarily mitigate their guilt if their dissent is overt and/or obstinate, that is, continues to occur in spite of correction from ecclesiastical authorities. The dissenters I was referring to are nevertheless excommunicated, their doubts notwithstanding.

In their proper context, my words weren't incorrect. I'm very cognizant of the phraseology I use to phrase my arguments and that was deliberately worded the way it was because Jim would correctly interpret my statement.

Jun 21st 2014 new
That said I might concede to you the point that because our conversation didn't occur solely between Jim and I, but in a forum for third parties to view, it might have been wise for me to use less ambiguous language.
Jun 21st 2014 new
(quote) Devan-877827 said:

They couldn't have quoted a more ironic and blessed authority to signal this blasphemous edict than St. Paul. Everybody loves parts of Paul's teaching, while junking other parts. The modern world is madly in love with 1 Corinthians 13: 4-8, (Love is kind, love is patient...) but it can't stand some parts of the same epistle, namely 1 Corinthians 6: 9-11:

"Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of God. And such some of you were; but you are washed, but you are sanctified, but you are justified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Spirit of our God."

Sooner or later, in a more uncivilized time in the future, some expedient, relativistic thinker in the same vein is going to come along who says, "well, as long as we're junking parts of Paul, about charity, chastity, sacrifice, conversion and self-denial, why don't we just get the process over with and do away with all that love and brotherhood, and mercy stuff while we're at it?"

You mean I'm not the only one who hates it when people misuse Paul's words? People always use the shellfish argument when trying to discredit Paul in order to defend gay marriage. I really don't know why Paul told people to refrain from shellfish, but even if say, he was wrong about not eating shellfish, that is not even close to the same playing field as marrying of the opposite gender. He is one of the most intriguing people in the Bible, but his words get twisted depending on whether people agree with them or not.
Jun 21st 2014 new
(quote) Marita-847688 said: You mean I'm not the only one who hates it when people misuse Paul's words? People always use the shellfish argument when trying to discredit Paul in order to defend gay marriage. I really don't know why Paul told people to refrain from shellfish, but even if say, he was wrong about not eating shellfish, that is not even close to the same playing field as marrying of the opposite gender. He is one of the most intriguing people in the Bible, but his words get twisted depending on whether people agree with them or not.
I meant when people marry someone who is of the same gender.
Jun 21st 2014 new
Devan, I think you are right to stand your ground. When folks know what is taught by the Church, and still won't relinquish their opinions against it and do so publicly, it appears they have excommunicated themselves. On another note, yes, it is good to have these public forums including dissenting opinions, because it causes others to question and seek truth. Hopefully your words reach someone who needs to see them and causes the full conversion. God reward you brother!
Posts 41 - 50 of 69