Actually, the real Covington scandal was that Catholic boys were wearing MAGA hats

You can't be excommunicated for following a non-Christian leader. You are just making **** up because you can. The thing is Catholics in the last election had a choice between a non-Christian Trump and an abortion loving Clinton. Not sure which was worse, but I do know that voting for either one won't lead to excommunication. (just for the record, I'm a NeverTrump Republican, and voted for Johnson in the Presidential election (my version of none of the above))

 

The hats don't mention Trump it says one to Make America Great Again but its always been great so seems odd to have such a hat.

 

Well then, what are you waiting for. Come get us.

 

That is the most disingenuous post I've seen in days.

I recall when conservatives railed about kids having impressionable young minds.........

"Many conservative parents aren't buying it. They're convinced the president is going to use the opportunity to press a partisan political agenda on impressionable young minds."

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/09/04/obama.schools/

 

Don't you folks ever tire of trying to perpetuate the fantasy that you aren't the brown shirts here?

 

Stop the press, the real scandal is that these kids aren't Catholic enough for Golem! But seriously, that's not a scandal to anyone who isn't Catholic, even if OP is 100% correct. It's about as scandalous as a Muslim eating bacon; some fundy loons might get their panties in a knot, but society at large doesn't care AT ALL.

"Did you hear about the Jonestown scandal? Some of the cultists thought that Jim Jones was a charlatan and started questioning his Kool aid recipe! So scandalous!"

 

Or kidnappers...

 

Great question! They are considered "Tolerati". People who are excommunicated after having been Catholic in the past. They are still separated from the Church, but are not to be shunned. Whereas somebody like Trump who is excommunicated never having ever been a Catholic plus the fact that excommunication was public make hiim "vitandi". Meaning that all Christians (according to Catholic Canon Law) must shun him, lest they themselves become excommunicated "ad jure".

 

A poster has refuted your claim and has provided documentation to back it up.

Please provide proof that Trump has been ex-communicated

 

I see. So your "contribution' to the discussion is that you don't believe it, you don't understand it, and you are unaware of the History of Catholicism.

The "link supposedly explaining it" are not to just any random web page. That's the official Catholic Encyclopedia.

Perhaps they could. I have participated in discussions about Theology with Catholic Priests and Theologians since I was in High School Often not successfully, but none of them will tell you that I can't hold my ground.

 

I have a tip for you: if you have nothing to say about a topic, the worst you can do is say it in the thread itself. Kinda makes you look a bit foolish.

 

Excommunicated by choice???? What in the world would that mean?

Do you know what the word "excommunicated" means?

 

The left is now saying wear the wrong hat and you get what you asked for. LOL, imagine the right telling women what they cannot wear or they are asking for it.

 

When did the pope excommunicate Trump?

 

Of course. You are excommunicated (a jure) for not following Catholic Canon Law.

 

Really? Cool! Point me to it! I'm sure that "poster" wasn't you, of course.

 

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...aring-maga-hats.549747/page-3#post-1070141751

 

Keep trying. None of that is the issue either. At least not as far as this thread is concerned. What rally they attended.... if they harassed (or were harassed by) an elderly Native American.... none of that has anything to do with this thread.

You might want to read over...

 

OK, so the kids aren't Catholic enough for you. As a professed Atheist, how do you see a scandal in that? If they didn't drink every last drop of Catholic Kool Aid, how is that a bad thing?

 

That's it? You have a very .... "loose" concept about what the word "refuted" means.

Keep reading...

To avoid my response from bringing the wrath of the mods, let's just say it does not make you look wise when you don't read your own reference. You say"...every person" (that, in of itself, would have risen a red flag in the mind of any reasonable person),. Your reference clearly says that it does not include people who were excommunicated Latae sententiae, as Trump was.

Excommunication, especially a jure, is either latæ or ferendæ sententiæ. The first [NB: the one that applies to Trump] is incurred as soon as the offence is committed and by reason of the offence itself (eo ipso) without intervention of any ecclesiastical judge;...The second [NB: does not apply to Trump] is indeed foreseen by the law as a penalty, but is inflicted on the culprit only by a judicial sentence
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05678a.htm​

The way to recognize the first is because the authority (the Pope, in this case) will say something like ""the culprit will be excommunicated, by the fact itself [statim, ipso facto]" or "a person who thinks about building walls, and not bridges.... is not a Christian" also "statim ipso facto"

Unlike you, I do not claim to know what is a big deal or not to every individual on matters of their personal religious beliefs. I am simply pointing out what Catholics are required to do according to their Canon Law. And a Catholic Institution (their school) tolerating that a papal decree be mocked is really noteworthy in this case.

Any questions?

You guys, much to your detriment, keep failing to heed the alert included in my signature. Thus your intellectual demise.

 

"Any questions?"

Yes.

Where, in my post, did I use the words: "every" and "person"?

 

It doesn't matter if they're "Catholic enough" for me. It matters if they're "Catholic enough" for their school. Which they claim to be doing. They didn't drink the kool aid about heeding the words of the leader of their church. But they drank the kool-aid about aspersing the decision of women regarding their own body. That is the very definition of "hypocrisy".

 

Nope.

 

Wow! You don't pay much attention, do you?

Try again. Start here

http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?goto/post&id=1070145489#post-1070145489

Focus!

 

i have plenty to say, starting with calling your argument horseshit would be an insult to horseshit.