Were Medieval Pope's temporal rulers over most Christian Nations,and excommunicate politically

Your absolutely correct mate,but i am not looking for people to agree or disagree ,i want to know the facts about the theology,dogma doctrine discipline and history i dont know about Catholic Church,simple as that.

St John Ogilvie ,Martyr For The Faith,protect us…Faith of our Fathers living still,In spite of dungeon fire and sword

And by the way.Its not just Catholics who give charitable donations to Scottish International Aid Fund ,to send to India,it is also Hindus Muslims Jews Protestants Atheists ,so do you not want to accept their kind donations??? You refer to Protestants Hindus Muslims as if they were trash,when Pope Francis wants peace friendship among all religions .We are all ,The People Of God- Blessed Pope John Paul 11

So what? As I said, excommunication is a judicial act (an act of law), and not a doctrinal act.

Why do you insist that excommunication have a doctrinal basis?

A person is automatically excommunicated if he attempts to assassinate a Pope. But there is no such provision for one guy that tries to kill another guy. The doctrine is the same (thou shalt not kill), but the penalty is different. Why? Because the Pope says so. As he is both a political and religious leader, he can (and must) act in both a political and religious context.

It is the same reason that attempting to kill a US President is a federal crime with a greater penalty than the attempted murder of “some guy” (which is a state-level crime, and the killer can serve a reduced sentence).

In the US, the Federal Government issues ONLY secular laws. In the case of Pope Francis, he issues BOTH religious and secular laws. But he has no obligation to establish all secular laws in Catholic Doctrine (because that would mean that he could really issue only religious laws).

Canon Law is LAW - it is NOT doctrine. It can be changed at any time, and it can be completely abolished (the current Code of Canon Law completely abolished its predecessor). LAWS can be both secular and religious.

MOST of Canon Law has no doctrinal correlation. It is stuff like where the Baptismal Font should be located in new parish churches, and how many witnesses a marriage needs, and when a Bishop may consecrate another Bishop (not at night - under “power of darkness”), and what material the Chalice should be made of. Canon Law is sometimes informed by doctrine, but it is NOT doctrine.

Where did I say that? You’re the one who brought up the Aid Fund. :slight_smile:

You refer to Protestants Hindus Muslims as if they were trash,when Pope Francis wants peace friendship among all religions .We are all ,The People Of God- Blessed Pope John Paul 11

All right, this is getting weird. I simply pointed out that Protestantism, Hinduism and Islam do not have a tradition of priestly celibacy. (For example, one of my wife’s friends is the daughter of a temple priest.)

As for my own life, some of my best friends are Hindus. 98% of the patients I treat are Hindus. The student whose dissertation I am supervising is a Muslim. You might want to look at what I really say and do, instead of seeing things. :confused:

If my comment (speculation?) on nationalism offended you, I apologize. But to characterize me as racist and misrepresent my posts isn’t right.

The peace of Christ be with you. :slight_smile:

May St., John Ogilvie,and St.,Margaret pray for you.:thumbsup:

Thanks! :thumbsup: And may St. Thomas and St. Alphonsa pray for you. :slight_smile:

I dont think you are interpreting my post correctlyYes i know most of what you say above,and i know that excommunication is disciplinary,but i’m still not aware as to how the Papacy became supreme in most Christian countries as temporal rulers in temporal matters that were nothing to do with religion ,and could excommunicate for solely temporal matters

For example,and hypothetical In present times it would be similar circumstances ,if the Pope declared that Italian President and Italy should leave European Union,for solely political reasons,nothing to do with faith or morals,and if hey didn’t leave they would be excommunicated.The Pope has no say here because he is not temporal leader of Italy,so to my reasoning ,he cant excommunicate,for faith morals are not involved.

I am well aware he could excommunicate in temporal and political decisions if religion was involved,like Abortion Euthanasia,etc

The Vatican States were different as the Papacy were temporal rulers over them,and donated by Christian temporal leaders,

I’m not certain how you define “political” reasons as opposed to “moral” reasons, or how you could in principle ever determine when they are mutually exclusive. King Robert was originally excommunicated because he murdered John Comyn. Was this a purely “political” reason then?

Let’s just assume for argument’s sake that the Pope did excommunicate someone for purely political reasons. Your question is: does the Pope have the authority to do this? And the answer is - sure. I mean, if he invokes excommunication and forbids the offender from entering Church property and receiving the sacraments, then that’s what’s going to happen.

I think what you are really asking is whether a Pope could unjustly excommunicate someone. That is certainly possible, whether the excommunication was for “moral” reasons or “political” reasons. That person would still be cut off from the visible Church (unjustly) and not allowed to participate. There is the attendant question of whether the alleged offender would be morally bound to follow the penal precepts imposed against him. I can imagine circumstances where it could be argued he wouldn’t be, but that’s speculative on my part.

Of course the Pope can unjustly excommunicate,if i remember right the alleged offender must carry out penal precepts,during collecting evidence to prove his innocence.See Newadvent Encyclopedia,Excommunication.Listen to Jimmy Aikin Video ,Wrong Excommunication on Catholic.com

While I don’t know all of the historical details, the second excommunication was applied after Robert attacked English troops. Again, whether the motivation of the Pope was political and/or moral cannot be deduced from the act of excommunication itself. I am unaware of a third excommunication by Rome after this, although it appears King Edward of England did publish a bill of excommunication.

This is what i’m trying to find out ,if a Pope can excommunicate for a solely political reason,when it does’nt involve faith religious faith and morals
I dont think he can

An excommunication is defined as a penalty that deprives the offender from communion with the Church. Generally the offender is not allowed to receive the sacraments, attend the Mass, enter Church property or hold ecclesiastical office. If a Pope excommunicates somebody, they are cut off from communion with the Church, whether it is for a just reason or an unjust reason. They aren’t allowed to participate in the society of the Church.

Asking if the Pope could excommunicate Robert is an academic question: he did excommunicate Robert. As the ultimate juridical figure in the Church, he could and did order the rest of Catholic Christendom to exclude Robert from participating in the life of the Church. Now you can ask whether the clergy were morally bound to obey the Pope on this. You can ask whether it would be sinful for Robert to secretly attend Mass and receive the sacraments. You can even ask if the Pope’s action was so manifestly unjust that the excommunication was invalid, and thus, was a nullity at the outset. Nevertheless, the penalties were applied and carried out, depriving Robert of participation in the Church. That’s what an excommunication is.

I agree. In the eyes of the Church the accused is bound by the penalty. Whether or not he is morally bound in the sight of God is the question I was addressing.

If the excommunication was unjust ,and offender dies the excommunication would not stand in the eyes of God.

All this still doesn’t answer the question if the Pope could excommunicate purely for a persons political views,like he seemingly did in middle ages,it is nothing to do with faith morals religion ,and no sin was committed…So possibly there was religious element present
Another Scottish King ,(long before Bruce)before he was crowned,supported English Nobles against English King John,purely political ,he was excommunicated.I have read in history several more times it happened purely for political matters.

Pope’s Innocent111,and 1V,claimed full temporal supremacy over Emperors and Kings in temporal matters

If the Catholic King of Spain,was told by the Pope ,not to support the Catholic President of Italy,on a purely political issue,or he would be excommunicated,he would be wrong in my opinion,faith morals dont apply here

Why not?

Sovereign nations exercise such authority all the time. They don’t call it “excommunication,” but prefer the term “sever diplomatic ties.”

Suppose we use the term “sever diplomatic ties” instead of “excommunication” (despite the fact that the terms, when applied to international diplomacy, mean the same thing). Are you saying that the Vatican State (a sovereign nation) cannot sever diplomatic ties with Italy or any other nation, unless there was some doctrinal basis?

Any nation may excommunicate any other nation. The United States has excommunicated Cuba (on purely political grounds). The EU is on the verge of excommunicating Russia (on purely political grounds).

Why should the Vatican State abide by different rules?

Your away off the mark once again,in your interpretation of my thread.
Of course Vatican can break diplomatic ties with any country,it could have done so when USA and UK illegally invaded Iraq,and Vatican were opposed to invasion,if so,it would have been for solely politiacal reasons,‘note SOLELYpolitical’ it would be unjust and not of faith and morals,invalid to excommunicate Catholics taking part unless there were some grave sin of faith and morals.

Another example.The Scottish Nation will vote in September,Yes or No ,to stay in or pull out of UK,it is SOLELY totally political vote,no issue of religion faith morals.Assuming Vatican and the Pope declared Scotland must stay in UK and vote No,or vote Yes and pull out,he would be unjust and wrong to excommunicate or interdict and expect Catholics to repent in confession to get interdict lifted,when no sin was committed,and nothing to do with religion,to the best of my knowledge,this happened to Scots Nation in 14th century and elsewhere like i have already quoted

Certainly in middle ages,and recently Popes were also arbitrators between Nations,so had to decide for one or other in political decisions,but i dont see how they could excommunicate if the other nation didn’t agree with decision,on SOLELY political grounds,that would mean a Catholic Catechism of politics,which could never apply to Popes Spiritual Authority in Faith and Morals

The Pope can only justly excommunicate as spiritual leader when the issue is in faith morals Church discipline,not Solely political matters.There are similarities to the Pope being infallible in Faith Morals dogmas ,but not in politics,sport etc etc

Furthermore,the Pope can unjustly excommunicate,Hear Jimmy Aikin Video in Catholic.com

St Mungo,Pray For Us

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.