Pope Excommunicates Mafiosi
#11
I think it's courageous for Pope Francis to do this, but at the same time, I fear for his safety, since he refuses to ride in the bullet-proof vehicle.  The mafia can be a very vengeful bunch.
Reply
#12
(06-22-2014, 01:39 PM)Crusading Philologist Wrote: Is the mafia still big in southern Italy? It seems like kind of a random thing to suddenly focus on.
Yes they are still there. They are big. and they are evil.
Reply
#13
(06-22-2014, 10:16 PM)AllSeasons Wrote: I think it's courageous for Pope Francis to do this, but at the same time, I fear for his safety, since he refuses to ride in the bullet-proof vehicle.  The mafia can be a very vengeful bunch.

I don't think they'd be gutsy enough to do him in. They can apply pressure in other ways though.....financially.
Reply
#14
Somehow, I don't think that they've been formally excommunicated.  ???
Reply
#15
(06-22-2014, 09:34 PM)NorthernTrad Wrote:
(06-22-2014, 10:54 AM)Renatus Frater Wrote: This is neat.
But anyone knows if mafiosi consider themselves Catholics?

Many mafiosi consider themselves deeply religious and victims against a corrupt state.

Some may say that mafiosa are remnant of feudalism.  Others say they originate in post-unification Italy where the Northern Italians essentially plundered the South (prior to Unification, the Bourbon Kingdom of the Two Silicies possessed the most advanced shipyards in the Mediterrean, held nearly 2/3 of the hard currency on the Italian Peninsula, Naples was the third largest city in Europe with gas-lit streets and the first railroad in Italy).  Cities like Naples and Palermo probably wouldn't be able to function properly if it wasn't for the mafia, not that they are heroes by any stretch of the imagination because they create the demand for their own services. 
Reply
#16
(06-23-2014, 09:11 AM)Deidre Wrote: Somehow, I don't think that they've been formally excommunicated.  ???

Why not?
Reply
#17
(06-23-2014, 01:01 PM)J Michael Wrote:
(06-23-2014, 09:11 AM)Deidre Wrote: Somehow, I don't think that they've been formally excommunicated.  ???

Why not?

Because formal excommunication (latae ferendae) requires that the guilty party be warned of the seriousness of his crime, including the fact that he can be excommunicated for it, and be given the chance to repent. Then, if the criminal doesn't repent, there's a trial and the sentence is formally imposed, with written notification being sent to the criminal himself and his diocese. It's not something that the Pope imposes in "off-the-cuff comments" before an audience of pilgrims. Given the Pope's other remarks that were quoted, it seems asthough he was using "excommunicated" to illustrate a point, rather than in its formal, legal sense.

Source: The Catholic Encyclopedia
Reply
#18
(06-23-2014, 01:59 PM)Deidre Wrote:
(06-23-2014, 01:01 PM)J Michael Wrote:
(06-23-2014, 09:11 AM)Deidre Wrote: Somehow, I don't think that they've been formally excommunicated.  ???

Why not?

Because formal excommunication (latae ferendae) requires that the guilty party be warned of the seriousness of his crime, including the fact that he can be excommunicated for it, and be given the chance to repent. Then, if the criminal doesn't repent, there's a trial and the sentence is formally imposed, with written notification being sent to the criminal himself and his diocese. It's not something that the Pope imposes in "off-the-cuff comments" before an audience of pilgrims. Given the Pope's other remarks that were quoted, it seems asthough he was using "excommunicated" to illustrate a point, rather than in its formal, legal sense.

Source: The Catholic Encyclopedia

Got it.  Thanks!  So....more empty words and confusion?  Wonderful. :eyeroll: ??? :eyeroll:  May he retire soon.  Very, very soon.
Reply
#19
(06-23-2014, 01:59 PM)Deidre Wrote:
(06-23-2014, 01:01 PM)J Michael Wrote:
(06-23-2014, 09:11 AM)Deidre Wrote: Somehow, I don't think that they've been formally excommunicated.  ???

Why not?

Because formal excommunication (latae ferendae) requires that the guilty party be warned of the seriousness of his crime, including the fact that he can be excommunicated for it, and be given the chance to repent. Then, if the criminal doesn't repent, there's a trial and the sentence is formally imposed, with written notification being sent to the criminal himself and his diocese. It's not something that the Pope imposes in "off-the-cuff comments" before an audience of pilgrims. Given the Pope's other remarks that were quoted, it seems asthough he was using "excommunicated" to illustrate a point, rather than in its formal, legal sense.

Source: The Catholic Encyclopedia

In the new canon law, if I'm not mistaken, there are excommunications latae setentiae, that is, made by the force of the act themselves and not by an action of the bishop. I believe the only requirement is that the sinner knows it is an act that causes by its very force excommunication, and this (inform them) everyone can do.

Also, from the text of the talk I think if the Pope was not issuing a sentence he was at least playing with the etymology of excommunication.

By the way, if the Pope comes to your city and says that a very specific group you are part of is excommunicated, wouldn't you worry, relying just on some technicality?
Reply
#20
(06-23-2014, 02:39 PM)Renatus Frater Wrote:
(06-23-2014, 01:59 PM)Deidre Wrote:
(06-23-2014, 01:01 PM)J Michael Wrote:
(06-23-2014, 09:11 AM)Deidre Wrote: Somehow, I don't think that they've been formally excommunicated.  ???

Why not?

Because formal excommunication (latae ferendae) requires that the guilty party be warned of the seriousness of his crime, including the fact that he can be excommunicated for it, and be given the chance to repent. Then, if the criminal doesn't repent, there's a trial and the sentence is formally imposed, with written notification being sent to the criminal himself and his diocese. It's not something that the Pope imposes in "off-the-cuff comments" before an audience of pilgrims. Given the Pope's other remarks that were quoted, it seems asthough he was using "excommunicated" to illustrate a point, rather than in its formal, legal sense.

Source: The Catholic Encyclopedia

In the new canon law, if I'm not mistaken, there are excommunications latae setentiae, that is, made by the force of the act themselves and not by an action of the bishop. I believe the only requirement is that the sinner knows it is an act that causes by its very force excommunication, and this (inform them) everyone can do.

This is true. The acts incurring latae sententiae excommunication can be found here:  http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/Q1.HTM

They include:
  apostasy, heresy, or schism
  throwing away the consecrated species, or taking or obtaining them for a sacreligious purpose
  using physical force against the Pope
  a priest absolving his accomplice from sins against the 6th Commandment, except in danger of death
  a bishop consecrating someone a bishop without permission from the Pope
  the person(s) so consecrated
  a confessor who directly violates the Seal of Confession
  a person who procures a completed abortion

Suffice it to say that not all grave sins incur latae sententiae excommunication, although they do banish sanctifying grace from the soul and thus destroy the soul's friendship with God.

And if the Pope were to say that a group that I happen to be a member of is "excommunicated," in the same way as he said it in the article quoted, I wouldn't worry about the actual penalty being imposed on me. I'd look at whether anything in my life would give the impression that I was "not in communion with God," but I wouldn't feel that I couldn't participate in public worship or receive the Sacraments (except Holy Communion, of course, if I happened to be in a state of mortal sin).
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)