Enter your email address to receive updates by email:

subscribe in a reader like my facebook page follow me on twitter Image Map
Podcast Message Line: 512-222-3389
Logos Catholic Bible Software

« An Unexpected Candidate For 2008? | Main | Uh . . . Mr. Protestant Bishop Sir? »

August 14, 2006

Comments

hmmm

does this mean kids pretending to say Mass at home are excommunicated (if they are aware of the canon)?

Ed Peters

Yes it does, hmmmm, and if they die, they straight to Hell forever and ever and ever.

Tim J.

Thanks, Jimmy. As one of those who actually thought that these women had excommunicated themselves, I appreciate the clarification, though the ladies seem to be confused, themselves.

One of them remarked that she didn't think she could be excommunicated until SHE said so.

hmmm

Ed, thanks for your candid response. That's what it sounded like to me, but I wanted to make sure.

Maureen

I certainly hope that was a joke.

Simulation is different from pretend games. The kids know it's not Mass, you know it's not Mass, and nobody is claiming transubstantiation occurs. What I've always heard is that simulation means you're trying to make other people believe it's really the Mass that's going on, and maybe you believe it yourself.

If "simulation" included kids playing, it would also include actors in plays. And Tosca almost always includes scenes of Mass, but nobody's ever said anything about excommunicating all those Catholic Italian opera singers that I've ever heard. So some canon lawyers better get on the stick.

StubbleSpark

I like the solution posited by Curt Jester:

Tell them you felt a calling of the Spirit to become their bishop, ordain yourself bishop over them, and excommunicate them yourself.

Dino

Harking back to your post on titles, are the "priestesses" called Father?

Dino

Oops! Sorry about the multilple posts...too much help from tiny hands.

El S.

No, hmmm, because the children do not have the actual intention of performing Mass. They are just pretending.
And they probably arent over the age of reason.
-El S.

Ed Peters

El S: why get into the problematic area of "actual intention", or raise the irrelevant point on "age of reason", when 1983 CIC 1323-1324 are on the books all along?

David B.

Ed,

Are you really saying that Joe and Jane Catholic have to bring little Johnny before the local Bishop before he can receive first Holy Communion?

MenTaLguY

Relax. For reference, here's the CIC 1323-1324 to which Ed is referring: http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P4W.HTM.

David B.

I am relaxed, as I wasn't the one in danger of being excommunicated. ;-)

Ed Peters

Thx mentalguy. this whole line of posts is surreal.

Some Day

Excommunication isn't even neccesary. They are heretics. And apart from that their actions bring in a couple moral sins against God. And since they where public acts, we are certain they are still in sin, because they have not publicly repented. But maybe, just maybe, they are off the hook because they are absoulutly mentally incapicitated.

David B.

Mostly justly admonished, Ed. Though it was because I take your opinion seriously that I wasn't completely sure you were joking in your second post, and not because I'm some kind of..idiot.

David B.

BTW, I would not have ask you if you were serious if I owned the 1800+ page Code of Canon Law.

SteveV

Ed,

I busted out laughing when I saw your post. And I thought canon lawyers had no sense of humor.

David B.

Ed,

I think you were under the impression that I was being snide in my first remark. I'm a young Catholic who is always learning things about his faith. Thus, after a Canon Lawyer mentions some obscure Canon, I wondered if you weren't joking about the possibility of a child being excommunicated (although it was obviously silly upon further thought). I don't see what's "surreal" about that.

The comments to this entry are closed.

January 2012

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31