[sinkspur]

It's not about kicking people out of the church -- it's about holding them accountable and giving them the choice to leave or comply.

That's tantamount to kicking people out of the Church.

That's a pre-Vatican II concept, and is simply not part of current Catholicism.

[MarylandPines]

Vatican II was never given the title of 'infallible'.

[1stFreedom]

>>That's a pre-Vatican II concept, and is simply not part of current Catholicism.

Untrue, IMO. Here is my opinion on this. Please enlighten me if I'm incorrect.

For example, throughout history Catholics who married twice were denied sacraments, but rarely, if at all, excommunicated. Vatican II never changed this practice...

This action, which occurs today, is "tantamount to kicking people out of the church" as you put it.

And Vatican II does not prevent kicking people out of the Church either. There is no "pre/post" Vatican II delination here. It's why Bishop Bruskewicz's excommunications were upheld by Rome....

The reason you don't think it's not part of "current catholicsm" is that we have a bunch of leaders who take a pastoral approach to things. You saw what that did with the sexual molestation scandal -- hideous results...

Kicking people out of the Church is an integral part of Catholicsim -- VII didn't change it. It meets the spirit and letter of VII. But the reasn for doing so is to save the soul of someone, not to simply damn them to hell.

It's used to bring people in line -- a work of mercy..

Finally, don't try the old "Vatican II" trick. Vatican II is a great work and I'm not a "pre-vII" person... But so many things are claimed about VII which simply are not true..

[Alberta's Child]

I agree that there's no need to "kick people out of the Church." People who would have been candidates for such treatment in previous eras have pretty much marginalized themselves already, and maintain an appearance of faith simply for expediency.

I mean, is there anyone here who thinks John Kerry was really a Catholic?

[Schwaeky]

I wouldn't mind seeing Ratzinger or the Governor General of Vatican City, Cardinal Edmund Skoza (I think is his name) former Archbishop of Detroit (yeah I know he's American by birth but he's not currently directly over American Catholics, and moreover, he's a Polish-American, and quite conservative (not sure how so in relation to JP2, though eastern european prelates tend to be more conservative). Ratzinger is seen as more hardline than John Paul II was, and yes given the long pontificate of John Paul II, might be a good option (plus he's still in good health at this age with no sign of slowing down--(still an avid jogger and a boxer before his time in the seminary), while John Paul II was officially diagnosed with Parkinsons in 1993, when he was 72 years old. With Ratzinger we could likely see at least a ten-twelve year papacy in that case, which could cement the college of cardinals in a more conservative light further down the road. After all, for the church what is important is not so much the past as the future.

As for holding persons accountable, Pope John Paul II did excommunicate DeMello, a French Jesuit priest and theologian who spouted heretical ideas on the mystery of the Eucharist (he later recanted and was accepted back into the Church), and that was in 1998. Its not a shut door in the modern day and age, more a bargaining chip for self-examination of what one believes and whether it is more important to think "you're right" than it is to be in communion with the Holy See. Pope John Paul II has been quite revolutionary in tolerance for questioning and dialogue on various areas of theological study, opening the doors for many questions on what many used to take as 1000% gospel truth. Its just when it directly contravenes church teaching that they are called out.

Behavioral excommunications, while some might want to see (myself included in Kerry's case at times) are not likely anymore simply because the Church assumes, whatever the sin the person may be carrying, when they come up to recieve communion, they are doing so in good faith. so that is not likely, unless we get an arch radical conservative successor to John Paul II (ie the type that would call a modern crusade against Islam, etc...).

[Dominick]

I like Cardinal Arinze, I don't think thats a bad choice, but, I will watch and pray for the Holy Spirit's choice. No matter our preference, God is going to have his choice in place.

[nickcarraway]

On several threads you have advocated the next pope kicking people out.