Swiss Brethren?

Christian ethics and theology with an Anabaptist perspective
MaxPC
Posts: 9044
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 9:09 pm
Location: Former full time RVers
Affiliation: PlainRomanCatholic
Contact:

Re: Swiss Brethren?

Post by MaxPC »

Neto wrote: In which direction are you seeing changes in governance style?
Thank you, Neto. It helps in my understanding. To answer your question, the current Pope is decentralizing a number of functions with the Catholic Church. The most recent is the oversight of Liturgy being transferred to the Bishops: they still have to follow the GIRM but there is more leeway given regarding the negotiable elements. Interestingly, I'm finding the Anabaptist history of working out logistics helpful to seeing how the decentralization in the Catholic Church can progress in a more orderly fashion.
Wayne in Maine wrote: This is one of the important distinctions between the Territorial churches (Roman, Protestant, Reformed and Orthodox) and the Anabaptists. If a member of a Swiss Brethren congregation violated the church's agreed-to practices, such as committing violence, he would be removed from the church. But in a church where one is baptized into membership involuntarily, as an infant and where one's religion is determined by what country he was born in, putting someone under the ban is not really an option.

The point is, any Swiss Brethren who chose the path of violence would not longer be a Swiss Brethren, and his actions could not be blamed on a member of that church. The Swiss Brethren never committed violence against anyone.
Thank you, Wayne. That helps with my understanding. The Catholic Church excommunicates people in violation of the teachings as well. The most recent high profile excommunication was that of politicians who claim to be Catholic but who support abortion, euthanasia and homosexuality. Those politicians still claim to be Catholic but in fact, they are not, having been excommunicated and have been notified they are excommunicated. The human factor is never a simple one.
0 x
Max (Plain Catholic)
Mt 24:35
Proverbs 18:2 A fool does not delight in understanding but only in revealing his own mind.
1 Corinthians 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is folly with God
User avatar
Wayne in Maine
Posts: 1195
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 5:52 am
Location: Slightly above sea level, in the dear old State of Maine
Affiliation: Yielded

Re: Swiss Brethren?

Post by Wayne in Maine »

MaxPC wrote:
Wayne in Maine wrote: This is one of the important distinctions between the Territorial churches (Roman, Protestant, Reformed and Orthodox) and the Anabaptists.
Thank you, Wayne. That helps with my understanding. The Catholic Church excommunicates people in violation of the teachings as well. The most recent high profile excommunication was that of politicians who claim to be Catholic but who support abortion, euthanasia and homosexuality. Those politicians still claim to be Catholic but in fact, they are not, having been excommunicated and have been notified they are excommunicated. The human factor is never a simple one.
Would that were so. Excommunications in the Roman church are extremely rare. I am not familiar with any excommunication of a politician such as you describe.

If the Roman church excommunicated politicians who support abortion, euthanasia and homosexuality there would not be a single Roman Catholic Democrat in the house or senate.
0 x
MaxPC
Posts: 9044
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 9:09 pm
Location: Former full time RVers
Affiliation: PlainRomanCatholic
Contact:

Re: Swiss Brethren?

Post by MaxPC »

Wayne in Maine wrote:
MaxPC wrote:
Wayne in Maine wrote: This is one of the important distinctions between the Territorial churches (Roman, Protestant, Reformed and Orthodox) and the Anabaptists.
Thank you, Wayne. That helps with my understanding. The Catholic Church excommunicates people in violation of the teachings as well. The most recent high profile excommunication was that of politicians who claim to be Catholic but who support abortion, euthanasia and homosexuality. Those politicians still claim to be Catholic but in fact, they are not, having been excommunicated and have been notified they are excommunicated. The human factor is never a simple one.
Would that were so. Excommunications in the Roman church are extremely rare. I am not familiar with any excommunication of a politician such as you describe.

If the Roman church excommunicated politicians who support abortion, euthanasia and homosexuality there would not be a single Roman Catholic Democrat in the house or senate.
Now you're getting it. :mrgreen:
Yes, there have quite a few that were excommunicated, especially those (both Democrat and Republican) who touted their Catholic standing while pushing those issues. You just don't see it announced in the liberal media that supports those politicians. In Catholic inner circles it's well-known. There have also been de-frockings and excommunications too. As I said, the human factor is never a simple one.
0 x
Max (Plain Catholic)
Mt 24:35
Proverbs 18:2 A fool does not delight in understanding but only in revealing his own mind.
1 Corinthians 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is folly with God
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14442
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: Swiss Brethren?

Post by Bootstrap »

MaxPC wrote:
Wayne in Maine wrote:If the Roman church excommunicated politicians who support abortion, euthanasia and homosexuality there would not be a single Roman Catholic Democrat in the house or senate.
Now you're getting it. :mrgreen:
Yes, there have quite a few that were excommunicated, especially those (both Democrat and Republican) who touted their Catholic standing while pushing those issues. You just don't see it announced in the liberal media that supports those politicians. In Catholic inner circles it's well-known. There have also been de-frockings and excommunications too. As I said, the human factor is never a simple one.
The Catholic Church has been excommunicating Senators and members of the House because of their stance on abortion, and this hasn't been reported in the media?

Who has it excommunicated over this issue? A list would be helpful for evaluating this claim. I am aware of only a small handful, which have been widely reported.

I think Wayne is pointing out that the plain Mennonite churches have generally been much more careful about membership than the larger State churches. I think he is correct.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
ken_sylvania
Posts: 3971
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 12:46 pm
Affiliation: CM

Re: Swiss Brethren?

Post by ken_sylvania »

Bootstrap wrote:
MaxPC wrote:
Wayne in Maine wrote:If the Roman church excommunicated politicians who support abortion, euthanasia and homosexuality there would not be a single Roman Catholic Democrat in the house or senate.
Now you're getting it. :mrgreen:
Yes, there have quite a few that were excommunicated, especially those (both Democrat and Republican) who touted their Catholic standing while pushing those issues. You just don't see it announced in the liberal media that supports those politicians. In Catholic inner circles it's well-known. There have also been de-frockings and excommunications too. As I said, the human factor is never a simple one.
The Catholic Church has been excommunicating Senators and members of the House because of their stance on abortion, and this hasn't been reported in the media?

Who has it excommunicated over this issue? A list would be helpful for evaluating this claim. I am aware of only a small handful, which have been widely reported.

I think Wayne is pointing out that the plain Mennonite churches have generally been much more careful about membership than the larger State churches. I think he is correct.
According to one source,
On one hand, the penalty of excommunication can be imposed by a proper authority (ferendae sententiae) or incurred automatically (latae sententiae). A bishop may directly impose the penalty of excommunication, but only for the most serious offenses and after giving due warning (#1318). Following the same rationale of the early Church, this severe penalty intends to correct the individual and to foster better church discipline (#1317). As the shepherd of his diocese, a bishop must protect both the souls of the faithful from the infection of error and sin, and of those who are jeopardizing their salvation. The bishop or his delegate may remit the penalty when the sinner has repented and has sought reconciliation.

On the other hand, a person can also incur automatic excommunication. A person who is an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic (#1364); or one who procures a successful abortion (#1398) is automatically excommunicated. In these cases, the local ordinary or a delegated priest can remit the penalty.
Max, is this correct? Are the excommunications you referred to earlier in this thread simply "automatic excommunications."

I would say the concept of "automatic excommunication" is rather foreign to Anabaptist theology.

I suppose that if "automatic excommunication" is really a Roman Catholic thing, then nobody can really know for sure if another individual is a member of the RC church (that other person might have been automatically excommunicated and nobody but the excommunicated person would even know it).
0 x
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14442
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: Swiss Brethren?

Post by Bootstrap »

There is such a thing as "automatic excommunication" in the Catholic Church, but that doesn't mean it applies to any politician who votes for pro-abortion legislation.

There's a post in Canon Law Made Easy on this very topic.
First, it is indeed possible to excommunicate oneself; under certain circumstances church authorities do not need to make any declaration whatsoever. Second, asserting that politicians who promote abortion are excommunicated is not clear-cut under the Code of Canon Law, although an argument can certainly be made that they have in so doing obstinately denied a truth which constitutes a key component of the Catholic faith, and have thus fallen into heresy. It would certainly be helpful to all of us Catholics in the US for our bishops to provide us, publicly and repeatedly, with consistent, authoritative teaching on this matter. Next, for any penalty to apply, the politician would have to fully understand that holding his pro-abortion position constitutes a rejection of Catholic teaching that is heretical, and that this is an excommunicable offense. And finally, nobody should ever gleefully rejoice that a Catholic has been excommunicated; we should save that joy for the moment when that Catholic makes the prayerful decision that he needs to change his ways -- and come home.
So I don't think there is a clear teaching along the lines of what Max suggests.

Back to Swiss Brethren?
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
User avatar
Wayne in Maine
Posts: 1195
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 5:52 am
Location: Slightly above sea level, in the dear old State of Maine
Affiliation: Yielded

Re: Swiss Brethren?

Post by Wayne in Maine »

Bootstrap wrote:There is such a thing as "automatic excommunication" in the Catholic Church, but that doesn't mean it applies to any politician who votes for pro-abortion legislation.

There's a post in Canon Law Made Easy on this very topic.
First, it is indeed possible to excommunicate oneself; under certain circumstances church authorities do not need to make any declaration whatsoever. Second, asserting that politicians who promote abortion are excommunicated is not clear-cut under the Code of Canon Law, although an argument can certainly be made that they have in so doing obstinately denied a truth which constitutes a key component of the Catholic faith, and have thus fallen into heresy. It would certainly be helpful to all of us Catholics in the US for our bishops to provide us, publicly and repeatedly, with consistent, authoritative teaching on this matter. Next, for any penalty to apply, the politician would have to fully understand that holding his pro-abortion position constitutes a rejection of Catholic teaching that is heretical, and that this is an excommunicable offense. And finally, nobody should ever gleefully rejoice that a Catholic has been excommunicated; we should save that joy for the moment when that Catholic makes the prayerful decision that he needs to change his ways -- and come home.
So I don't think there is a clear teaching along the lines of what Max suggests.
When I repudiated the Roman religion and received beliver's baptism, I demanded that my bishop excommunicate me (our local monsignor had already declared me dead to my family). The bishop would not excommunicate me.
0 x
Sudsy
Posts: 5856
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 3:32 pm
Affiliation: .

Re: Swiss Brethren?

Post by Sudsy »

Bootstrap wrote:There is such a thing as "automatic excommunication" in the Catholic Church, but that doesn't mean it applies to any politician who votes for pro-abortion legislation.

There's a post in Canon Law Made Easy on this very topic.
First, it is indeed possible to excommunicate oneself; under certain circumstances church authorities do not need to make any declaration whatsoever. Second, asserting that politicians who promote abortion are excommunicated is not clear-cut under the Code of Canon Law, although an argument can certainly be made that they have in so doing obstinately denied a truth which constitutes a key component of the Catholic faith, and have thus fallen into heresy. It would certainly be helpful to all of us Catholics in the US for our bishops to provide us, publicly and repeatedly, with consistent, authoritative teaching on this matter. Next, for any penalty to apply, the politician would have to fully understand that holding his pro-abortion position constitutes a rejection of Catholic teaching that is heretical, and that this is an excommunicable offense. And finally, nobody should ever gleefully rejoice that a Catholic has been excommunicated; we should save that joy for the moment when that Catholic makes the prayerful decision that he needs to change his ways -- and come home.
So I don't think there is a clear teaching along the lines of what Max suggests.

Back to Swiss Brethren?
Curious Boot, when was the last time Max responded to any of your posts ? It seems you often point out where he is incorrect and Max has decided to never refer to any of your input. Do you think this war will ever end ? Do I have this observation correct or no ?
0 x
Pursuing a Kingdom life in the Spirit
temporal1
Posts: 16277
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 12:09 pm
Location: U.S. midwest and PNW
Affiliation: Christian other

Re: Swiss Brethren?

Post by temporal1 »

Sudsy wrote: .. Curious Boot, when was the last time Max responded to any of your posts ? It seems you often point out where he is incorrect and Max has decided to never refer to any of your input. Do you think this war will ever end ? Do I have this observation correct or no ?
not that you asked me. :P
but, this is an interesting phenomena. i don't think of it as a war.
max doesn't read boot's posts (at least, not as a regular thing) .. boot doesn't read others' posts (to generalize+paraphrase, as Robert recently noted, but others have noticed) .. so, it's a circular thing.

as i presume both are mortal, so, indeed, one day, it will end. :mrgreen:
carry on. :blah:
0 x
Most or all of this drama, humiliation, wasted taxpayer money could be spared -
with even modest attempt at presenting balanced facts from the start.


”We’re all just walking each other home.”
UNKNOWN
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14442
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: Swiss Brethren?

Post by Bootstrap »

Sudsy wrote:Curious Boot, when was the last time Max responded to any of your posts ? It seems you often point out where he is incorrect and Max has decided to never refer to any of your input. Do you think this war will ever end ? Do I have this observation correct or no ?
You're right, he doesn't respond to my posts, or to anyone who corrects things he says. But I think it's important that many of the things he says be corrected, even if he does not believe he should be accountable to anyone. It's not just me, he gets belligerent when anyone corrects things he says.

From my side, I don't think I am engaging in warfare. Most of us correct each other and respond appropriately here, we admit mistakes when we get facts wrong, we apologize from time to time. If we want to have any chance of discussing things that are true, that's important. But I do think that I'm carefully pointing out falsehoods so that they do not become "established truth" through repetition.

And if I'm wrong about any of these things, I hope Max will correct me with some evidence.
temporal1 wrote:max doesn't read boot's posts (at least, not as a regular thing) .. boot doesn't read others' posts
I don't think either of those things are true. In fact, I think that my responses to people's posts usually show that I have read them, and am responding very specifically to what they said. And it's obvious from Max's posts that he is often responding to things I have said, though he refuses to acknowledge that I exist.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
Post Reply