Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: murphE
I am not the SSPX, nor one of the bishops of the SSPX. Pope Benedict XVI can formally acknowledge it or not, the reality of the invalidity of the "excommunications" will not change.

The "reality?"

You're saying that it doesn't matter what Benedict XVI or the Church says on this matter? They're invalid, period?

Is this some sort of official proclamation?

This is the real question though, if this pope or a future pope does acknowledge that the "excommunications" were invalid are you going to accept it? Are you going to feel sorry for how you spoke about the SSPX bishops?

If this Pope or a future Pope decides such, I'll have absolutely no problem with that decision. If a Pope is humble enough to admit error, I'd certainly be prepared to do so.

I think this comment says more about you than it does about me. Admissions of error are only a problem for the proud.

Is this what happened at Campos?

Were the excommunications proclaimed invalid?

Or were the excommunicandi received back as returning penitents?

104 posted on 08/31/2005 2:11:53 PM PDT by marshmallow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies ]


To: marshmallow
The "reality?"

Yes.

You're saying that it doesn't matter what Benedict XVI or the Church says on this matter?

Oh no it does matter. As long as the pope allows this to go on these men suffer a grave injustice, like the falsely convicted man suffers every day he is imprisoned. As well as the injury to their good names, which may never be fully restored.

They're [the excommunications] are invalid, period?

Yes.

Is this some sort of official proclamation?

No, it's the correct application of canon law, much like the correct application of the Constitution in no way gives any woman the "right" to murder her unborn child. Does one have to be a member of the court to know that?

If this Pope or a future Pope decides such, I'll have absolutely no problem with that decision. If a Pope is humble enough to admit error, I'd certainly be prepared to do so.

I'm glad to hear that. Mostly I'm glad to hear that you acknowledge the possibility for a pope to be in error in this matter, (however remote you think that possibility.)

Is this what happened at Campos?

I'm not really sure. I'm not knowledgeable about all the details in Campos. I do remember reading that the specifics of the situation of the Campos bishop were not exactly the same. Perhaps Gerard knows more.

107 posted on 08/31/2005 6:35:47 PM PDT by murphE (These are days when the Christian is expected to praise every creed but his own. --G.K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies ]

To: marshmallow
If this Pope or a future Pope decides such, I'll have absolutely no problem with that decision. If a Pope is humble enough to admit error, I'd certainly be prepared to do so. I think this comment says more about you than it does about me. Admissions of error are only a problem for the proud.

I was going to ignore this, but I just can't. This is supposed to be some kind of dig at me. You implying that unlike you, I lack humility. Hey, you may possess many more virtues than I do. I freely admit to being lacking in many virtues, guilty as charged, but I'm working on it.

However Archbishop Lefebvre did not and the other SSPX bishops do not lack humility anymore than the falsely convicted man lacks humility by maintaining his innocence from withing his prison cell.

I think all of them show extreme patience while they endure this injustice, as well as the insults and calumny fostered by the "lay magisterium" and lay apologists.

113 posted on 08/31/2005 9:27:39 PM PDT by murphE (These are days when the Christian is expected to praise every creed but his own. --G.K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson