>> This means that anyone excommunicated from the Roman church whome a catholic in good standing chooses to murder is fair game and the charge of murder will not fall upon them.<<
Funny... That's not all how that reads to me. It says they must be doing so in defense of the Church.
>> It doesn't even bother to reach the extent of pronouncing them a heretic which is only done under Lateran IV after a year of thoughtful time to recant. <<
No actually, being excommunicated is far worse and far rarer than being termed a heretic... You're really talking out your butt, aren't you. The U.S. is 99% heretical, and there have only been a few excommunications in U.S. history. Methinks maybe you are confusing being denied communion with being excommunicated?
>>For those who don't know what I'm speaking of, try here<<
Oh, yeah... James Wylie... Now THERE'S an impartial, level-headed sort *eyeroll*
Um, excuse' but how impartial does one need to be to list the torture devices used by the inquisition? It isn't his partiality or impartiality that bugs you - its his clarity that gets straight to the gut which bothers you. I didn't quote him for anything other than the list of devices and how they were used. The guy happens to be accurate.
Funny... That's not all how that reads to me. It says they must be doing so in defense of the Church.
Ah, so murder in defense of the church isn't counted as a murder. Gee, I think that's pretty much the same thing I noted. If it isn't, the difference is not sufficient to bicker about. I definitely see no ground for picking knits. And it is still standing as an affront to what Christ him self told us on two seperate occasions.
No actually, being excommunicated is far worse and far rarer than being termed a heretic..
Really, That is not shown in Canon 3. It is not shown in civil law. Canon law demanded the death penalty for heresy. It only excommunicates people from your religious organization for listening to heretics. If they recanted, they could be brought back in - just as with the nobles; but, if after a year they had not recanted, then they were deemed heretics and their lives were then considered forfeit. Your story doesn't jibe with the conciliar documents or Papal bulls or the civil law in the larger picture. As with Dave, you seem to be mistating willfully what is there in effort to lessen the blow of what Rome ACTUALLY says behind the scenes. It is noteworthy that Lateran IV Canon 3 is still the Law of the Church and that it is still lawful in the church of Rome to murder heretics.. or should we qualify that and say "people whom Rome deems to be heretics". It is a relative term. Islam uses the term infadel.