7 thoughts on “Meditate on the thoughts of St. Joan of Arc as she was burned at the stake by the Church.”
Doesn’t this mean the local ordinary can judge some private revelation to be false that is true or condemn a true message from God as false and dangerous?
Serious question: Guisseppe Savoranola was excommunicated for criticizing the pope (apparently rightly so). This is NOT the same as Martin Luther, who was excommunicated for heresy. Heresy and schism separate you from the Church, without the need for any official declaration.
I would assume then that excommunication is 1) not infallible, and 2) not necessarily related to the state of one’s soul. Am I correct in this? Because ecclesiastical authorities, apart from the Church as a whole, can act erroneously.
An interesting topic, and I also appreciate the clarification in the comment above.
So, “binding and loosing” is in reference to personal sin in the context of the Sacrament of Penance.
Excommunication is a personal and also public statement of pre-existing ontological fact, the accuracy of which statement/penalty/sentence is determined by the sources, footnotes and cross-references of the authority imposing the excommunication from the Body of Christ.
Two other examples:
Pope Liberius excommunicated Bp Athanasius – who was subsequently, like St Joan, declared a Saint by the same Church.
Pope JP II excommunicated Arbp LeFebvre – “for what (?!) … sources, footnotes and cross-references please”. Arbp LeFebvre, after his excommunication serenely observed “How can I be excommunicated for following that which was Dogma just a few short years ago” (paraphrase).
Excommunication is a penalty, true, but it is also a public statement against known sin, and (importantly) a corrective and a spiritual work of mercy, in that its aim is to encourage return of the public sinner from ontologically pre-existing excommunication to healthy, restored union once again with Christ in a state of grace.
The sentence of the “Court” is only as good as the spiritual strength of its members and their faithfulness to Christ and Christ’s Bride.
Doesn’t this mean the local ordinary can judge some private revelation to be false that is true or condemn a true message from God as false and dangerous?
If they were legitimate authorities, they misused their authority and with what a cruel result.
Serious question: Guisseppe Savoranola was excommunicated for criticizing the pope (apparently rightly so). This is NOT the same as Martin Luther, who was excommunicated for heresy. Heresy and schism separate you from the Church, without the need for any official declaration.
I would assume then that excommunication is 1) not infallible, and 2) not necessarily related to the state of one’s soul. Am I correct in this? Because ecclesiastical authorities, apart from the Church as a whole, can act erroneously.
Excommunication is not infallible is proved by the sainthood of Joan. That was the whole point of the post.
Since Bergoglio is manifestly a heretic, that’s another reason we don’t have a pope (in addition to the erroneous resignation of Benedict XVI).
Excommunication forbids you from the sacraments, it doesn’t theoretically mean you are going to hell but it practically does.
An interesting topic, and I also appreciate the clarification in the comment above.
So, “binding and loosing” is in reference to personal sin in the context of the Sacrament of Penance.
Excommunication is a personal and also public statement of pre-existing ontological fact, the accuracy of which statement/penalty/sentence is determined by the sources, footnotes and cross-references of the authority imposing the excommunication from the Body of Christ.
Two other examples:
Pope Liberius excommunicated Bp Athanasius – who was subsequently, like St Joan, declared a Saint by the same Church.
Pope JP II excommunicated Arbp LeFebvre – “for what (?!) … sources, footnotes and cross-references please”. Arbp LeFebvre, after his excommunication serenely observed “How can I be excommunicated for following that which was Dogma just a few short years ago” (paraphrase).
Excommunication is a penalty, true, but it is also a public statement against known sin, and (importantly) a corrective and a spiritual work of mercy, in that its aim is to encourage return of the public sinner from ontologically pre-existing excommunication to healthy, restored union once again with Christ in a state of grace.
The sentence of the “Court” is only as good as the spiritual strength of its members and their faithfulness to Christ and Christ’s Bride.