bam <mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> wrote:

"thomas p" <thomasagain@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
Alberich wrote:

On Mon, 10 Apr 2006 22:23:16 -0400, Josef Balluch
<josef.balluch@sympatico.can> wrote:

In a message sent 'round the world, Alberich poured fuel on the fire
with the following:

On Mon, 10 Apr 2006 19:39:22 -0400, Josef Balluch
<josef.balluch@sympatico.can> wrote:

In a message sent 'round the world, Alberich poured fuel on the fire
with the following:

On Mon, 10 Apr 2006 15:05:23 -0400, Josef Balluch
<josef.balluch@sympatico.can> wrote:

Excommunication following a formal trial is Ferendæ Sententiæ.

Exactly...and some of the offences which carry a sentence of
excommunication latae sententiae are apostasy and heresy. (Can.
1364
ß1 An apostate from the faith, a heretic or a schismatic incurs a
latae sententiae excommunication.) Those Germans that were active
in
the Nazi Party to an extent beyond that of a common soldier were,
by
their very set of beliefs, at best heretics, at worst apostates.

I see you play the pipes. Do you take requests?

If you have trouble with the argument, please explain what the
disagreement is. If not, no need to flippantly send forth a
non-response.

< chuckle! >

It went right over your head. Sorry 'bout that!

So you suggest that these Nazis incurred automatic excommunication. Did
the Vatican state this as it's official view?

The Code of Canon Law is an official Church document--how much more
official do you want it to get? Or do you mean to suggest that an
excommunication latae sententiae isn't "official" unless there is a
formal proclamation thereof? Doesn't that sort of fly in the face of
the idea?

Stating that such acts as were being committed by the Nazis resulted in
automatic excommunication would not be a formal proclamation of
excommunication. It would be a general statement of the Church's
teaching. Since many of the Nazis involved in the killing were
Catholics and many more of the officers in the German military were
active Catholics, such a statement could have had a powerful effect.
The Church chose to be silent. There really is no way to excuse this
moral failure.

Shutup. You don't know what you're talking about. The Catholic Church
saved
more people than any organization.

Propaganda.

In a message sent 'round the world, Alberich poured fuel on the fire
with the following:

On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 11:29:14 -0400, Josef Balluch
<josef.balluch@sympatico.can> wrote:

In a message sent 'round the world, Alberich poured fuel on the fire
with the following:

On Mon, 10 Apr 2006 22:23:16 -0400, Josef Balluch
<josef.balluch@sympatico.can> wrote:

So you suggest that these Nazis incurred automatic excommunication. Did
the Vatican state this as it's official view?

The Code of Canon Law is an official Church document--how much more
official do you want it to get?

Translation: No.

Care to tell me why the official document putting forth standards for
ELS is not the official view of the Vatican?

That is not my claim. The point being made is that a statement was not
made specifically in connection with the Nazis.

Or do you mean to suggest that an
excommunication latae sententiae isn't "official" unless there is a
formal proclamation thereof? Doesn't that sort of fly in the face of
the idea?

Not at all. Such a statement would simply be an acknowledgement of the
fact, which would dispel any lingering doubts.

Catholics have no lingering doubts on the matter.

So you speak for all Catholics?

Does the Vatican approve of your doing so?

As for any
lingering doubt about the Catholic Church's stance on the National
Socialist Party, please read Pope Piux XI's encyclical Mit Brennender
Sorge, issued Passion Sunday, March 14, 1937. As this encyclical was
said by Pope Pius XI to be written by Eugenio Pacelli, it is clearly
also the position of Pope Pius XII, also.

There is no mention of excommunication in this document.

http://tinyurl.com/cr0f

For example, regarding the matter of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre:

"In 1988, the Holy See declared him automatically excommunicated for
consecrating four bishops despite a papal prohibition."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcel_Lefebvre


So, to recap: The Vatican did not formally excommunicate Nazis, and did
not make an official statement regarding their supposed excommunication.

So for going "above and beyond" in one case, ...

< chuckle! > It is interesting that you see this as going "above and
beyond".

... the Church must now
always do as much?

Why not? There certainly is no shortage of verbiage issuing from the
Vatican. Why would such clarification be a burden?

Given that the case of Marcel Lefebvre in a case
that was certainly much more intricate than any involving genocide or
mass murder, ...

Intricate?

"3. In itself, this act was one of disobedience to the Roman Pontiff in
a very grave matter and of supreme importance for the unity of the
church, such as is the ordination of bishops whereby the apostolic
succession is sacramentally perpetuated. Hence such disobedience - which
implies in practice the rejection of the Roman primacy - constitutes a
schismatic act.(3) In performing such an act, notwithstanding the formal
canonical warning sent to them by the Cardinal Prefect of the
Congregation for Bishops on 17 June last, Mons. Lefebvre and the priests
Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and
Alfonso de Galarreta, have incurred the grave penalty of excommunication
envisaged by ecclesiastical law.(4)"

http://tinyurl.com/22nhc

... the Catholic Church was correct to issue a formal
declaration of schism and excomunnication in the matter of Lefebvre,
if only as an explanation to its flock. Genocide requires no such
nuanced explanation.

Nuanced? See the quote above.

Of course, this (1) leaves some with the opinion
that the Church never excommunicated those involved with genocide or
war crimes, ...

Their lack of a specific action is fact.

... and (2) leaves others with the misleading claim that the
Church never formally excommunicated the Nazis.

Baloney. There is nothing misleading in the claim.