Strip video chats for nonmember Free private mobile sex cam no sign up

Instead, he takes it upon himself to explain and expound the Church’s alleged position.

How does one know whether self-expulsion for pre-election heresy has occurred?

” (John Salza, “The Errors of Sedevacantism and Ecclesiastical Law,” p.

It is owing to the Savior’s infinite mercy that place is allowed in His Mystical Body here below for those whom, of old, He did not exclude from the banquet.

Men may lose charity and divine grace through sin, thus becoming incapable of supernatural merit, and yet not be deprived of all life if they hold fast to faith and Christian hope, and if, illumined from above, they are spurred on by the interior promptings of the Holy Spirit to salutary fear and are moved to prayer and penance for their sins.

As they stand, every single one of these claims is .

It is my intention to deal with Salza’s arguments accurately and fairly.) Before proceeding to refute and comment on Salza’s erroneous arguments, it will be useful to point out that Salza does not quote a single Catholic theological manual or commentary on the Code of Canon Law in his first piece.

This is true even for the 1983 Code of Canon Law of the Modernist Church, as an official Novus Ordo commentary makes clear: Because of the historical interrelationship of ecclesiastical and civil law, one might easily yield to the temptation to equate civil and canonical concepts. Alesandro, “General Introduction”, in A proper attitude toward canon law is not an easy task for those who find themselves with one foot in the world of civil law and the other in the world of canon law. 14) Perhaps this is one reason for the errors in Mr. With this in mind, let us now take a detailed look at Salza’s arguments: From the very start, Salza reduces the issue of sedevacantism to a problem of alleged public heresy in individual claimants to the papacy, as though the whole issue were one of certain individuals having publicly defected from the Faith, and nothing more than that.

Similarities, however, often conceal significant differences. (Sedevacantism does not just assert that certain individual claimants to the papacy are charlatans, but that the entire Novus Ordo Church is a false church and not the Mystical Body of Christ.) Conceding that heresy, by divine law, results in automatic self-expulsion from the Catholic Church, Salza asks: “How does one determine whether a Cardinal was a heretic prior to his election to the papacy?

This is easily apparent when we consider, for example, that there is no ecclesiastical law against entertaining impure thoughts.

Are we, then, to conclude that it is not an offense against divine law?

(He concede a distinction between the two but not sufficiently so and not clearly enough, as will become apparent in what follows.) Taking his clue from the fact that heresy as a crime against church law does not result in immediate excommunication, even if the individual is certainly a true and proper heretic (i.e., a baptized person who willfully and against better knowledge denies or doubts a dogma of the Catholic Church), it should have occurred to Salza that the same is not true for heresy as a crime against divine law, because the very, at least inasmuch as this sin is publicly divulged and not secret.

Comments are closed.