tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36762711.post420204789364785029..comments2023-11-03T06:14:58.449-04:00Comments on Drug and Device Law: Friday Frivolity - Are We All Excommunicated?Rachel B. Weilhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02251124525069607080noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36762711.post-18490227865517165442015-07-02T10:22:07.311-04:002015-07-02T10:22:07.311-04:00This post was from 2009 but it popped up while I a...This post was from 2009 but it popped up while I am researching this very question.<br /><br />Pull Public Law 88-244, which follows Public Law 88-243 - the institution of the lawmerchants Uniform Commercial Code. The Pope is listed in this Public Law.<br /><br />The 1783 Treaty did say in the opening statement quoted exactly as it appears in olde English; "It having pleafed the Divine Providence to difpofe the hearts of the Moft Serene and Moft Porent Prince, George the Third, by the grace of God, King of the Great Britain, France and Ireland, Defender, of the Faith , Duke of Brunfwick and Laurenberg, Arch-Treafurer and PRINCE ELECTOR OF THE HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE, & C. AND OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, . . .."<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36762711.post-51598098974274089342009-08-19T06:23:53.932-04:002009-08-19T06:23:53.932-04:00See the account under "Magna Carta" at t...See the account under "Magna Carta" at the Catholic Encyclopedia (newadvent.org). Includes an explanation of the pope's reasoning as well as a claim that subsequent editions of the charter received approval by the papal legate.Kevinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09794515821393167065noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36762711.post-43431945344079415072009-08-11T11:51:06.212-04:002009-08-11T11:51:06.212-04:00Ken--
I would disagree on this point. Innocent II...Ken--<br /><br />I would disagree on this point. Innocent III brought this Bull into existence. I seriously doubt that he knew of Archbishop Langton's involvement against King John. That Pope Innocent was not supportive of King John's temporal rule is most obvious in that Innocent did not ask for the king's recommendation of a cleric to succeed to See of Canterbury. Innocent appointed Stephen Langton as Archbishop of Canterbury, and therefore, made Langton Primate of England at that time. Pope's don't like countermanding their decisions with hasty actions. Innocent's Bull disavowing the Magna Carta seems more directed at the nobles of his own Papal Estates. At the time of this action, Peter's Pence was in full operation. English fishermen contributed heavily with the tax on their catches. Excommunication of the people of England would have cut significantly into that revenue stream.<br /><br />The quiet diplomacy of Archbishop Langton after Runnymede and the subsequent actions of King Henry III in seeking three different affirmations of the Magna Carta by different Parliaments for the period of 1215 - 1227 Anno Domini militates against a Papal Bull still being in effect. That Pope Innocent's successors to the See of Peter ignored the Bull thereby voiding and vacating it is clear from the action of the pope who gave Henry VIII, a Tudor and supplanter of the Plantagenet Royal House, the title "Defender of the Faith," rather meaningless but an honor accorded by the Papal House to a sitting monarch, at the time in good standing with the See of Peter. In brief, Popes of that period did not, and would not, have granted a papal honor, papal title, letter patent to any person or persons under the ban of exommunication.<br /><br />It is quite clear that by the time of the succession of Crown Prince Henry III to the throne of England that the ban of excommunication had been dropped for all practical purposes. Its non-enforcement vacated it.Robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17085763539036187430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36762711.post-41433807251911028032009-08-11T09:31:51.989-04:002009-08-11T09:31:51.989-04:00All of the above considered, the Papal Bull regard...All of the above considered, the Papal Bull regarding the Magna Carta has never been rescinded, according to several sources I have read. Later versions of the document did not change the effect of the excommunication order and it may never be rescinded.<br /><br />Popes in that time period had control over armies and ruled over kings and countries. They excommunicated people at will and it had force of law, taking away people's rights and causing punishment.<br /><br />If the Vatican were to do any public review of all of the old documents, it would be an embarrassment, because many of the documents have nothing to do with church and faith, but instead they are all about money, power and greed.<br /><br />I am a 'cradle' Catholic and I now recognize that I have been excommunicated by Innocent III, even before I was born.KenCnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36762711.post-63798644203774280252009-08-02T15:51:45.100-04:002009-08-02T15:51:45.100-04:00Gentlemen--
As a seminarian on the path to the li...Gentlemen--<br /><br />As a seminarian on the path to the licientiate and doctorate in Sacred Theology, I must point out that you forget the simple history, namely, of Lords Spiritual and Lords Temporal--the hierarchy of the Church and its priests forming the spiritual while the monarchs (annointed) and nobility forming the temporal. The pope is both a spiritual and a temporal lord as Vicar Apostolic of Christ and the Servant of the Servants of God and sovereign of the then existing Papal Estates and Vatican City.<br /><br />The primate of Catholic England, in King John's day, was the Archbishop of Canterbury, Stephen Langton, who was elevated and consecrated for the See of Canterbury by Pope Innocent without consulting King John who would not allow Langton to ascend to his see, a point not to be overlooked. Archbishop Langton, a canon lawyer, was a Lord Spiritual who supported the Barons pressuring King John for his usurpation of royal power against the rights and perogatives of the English Barons and did actively partake in the revolt against the king. <br /><br />Pope Innocent, for his part, seems to have been protecting his rights as a temporal ruler and sending a message to the nobles of the Papal States--Don't revolt against my temporal authority.<br /><br />One of the reasons this bull was vacated was the reaction of the successor to King John, his son Henry III. From circa 1215 to 1227, Henry III caused three clarifying versions of the Magna Carta to come before Parliament. All of those versions were ratified. Archbishop Langton's unqualified support seems to have caused the pope to allow the excommunication ban to lapse. Moreover, Archbishop Stephen and the Lord Chancellor had seen to it that copies, by hand, were delivered and published in every shire and cathedral chapter in England. At least four good copies of the Magna Carta survive. One is a copy in the Tower of London; two more are archived in the British Museum; the fourth resides in a cathedral.<br /><br />The Magna Carta has its importance as being the basis of the rights of British subjects though the original clearly states that it applies to the barons of England and freeman of the realm.Robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17085763539036187430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36762711.post-69497065620407033762009-07-28T07:19:33.486-04:002009-07-28T07:19:33.486-04:00Mea culpa. The quotation from my earlier comment ...Mea culpa. The quotation from my earlier comment appears to have come from a book called "English Constitution," by a gentleman named Taylor, not from Cardinal Manning's monograph on the subject ("The Pope and Magna Carta"), which can be found here:<br />http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Littell%27s_Living_Age/Volume_128/Issue_1658/The_Pope_and_Magna_ChartaBrian Perrymannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36762711.post-1715099719702094832009-07-28T07:05:12.312-04:002009-07-28T07:05:12.312-04:00According to the "Magna Carta" entry on ...According to the "Magna Carta" entry on Wikipedia, and other sources on the Internet, the charter was re-issued on several different occasions, most notably in 1217, 1225 and 1297, the latter occasion being in a statute called "Confirmatio cartarum," which reconfirmed the principles of the earlier versions. I'd argue that the 1215 papal bull notwithstanding, the reissuance of the Magna Carta on these occasions -- with no additional avoidances by the Pope -- means that Scalia, Alito, and the rest of observing Catholic lawyers can probably rest easy.<br /><br />A more intriguing argument I ran across was Cardinal Manning's explanation of the papal bull as a purely personal act outside Pope Innocent III's eccelsiastical jurisdiction. "He had no right to interfere in temporal concerns; the control of ecclesiastical matters only had been entrusted by Christ to Peter and Peter's successors."Brian Perrymannoreply@blogger.com