Is the bull ExSurge Domine still standing today?

[ViribusUnitis]

As some of you may now, the Exsurge Domine is a papal bull written in the times of the Reformation. It contains a number of condemned affirmations. One of those **condemned** proposition is number 33.

33. That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit.

Questions:
1.- Do you think the bull is still standing?
2.- Do you think that means that Church, at least, condones the burning of heretics?
3.- Do you think Inquisitors sinned when they following due process in law condemned people to be burned for heresy?

 

[Romans 13:3]

The bull «Exsurge domine» by Leo X with which he threatens to excommunicate Martin Luther

 

[Virgil the Roman]

.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Doesn't this come from the list of errors specified in the encyclical?

This statement before the list seems to say that these are errors;

In virtue of our pastoral office committed to us by the divine favor we can under no circumstances tolerate or overlook any longer the pernicious poison of the above errors without disgrace to the Christian religion and injury to orthodox faith. Some of these errors we have decided to include in the present document; their substance is as follows:

Jim

 

[ViribusUnitis]

Doesn't this come from the list of errors specified in the encyclical?

This statement before the list seems to say that these are errors;


Jim

Exactly

 

[Rhamiel]

being a heretic was agianst the the civil law at the time
the Church was supporting rights of the civil government

we can say that it is no longer needed, but we should not say that the Church made a mistake

 

[SolomonVII]

Doesn't this come from the list of errors specified in the encyclical?

This statement before the list seems to say that these are errors;

In virtue of our pastoral office committed to us by the divine favor we can under no circumstances tolerate or overlook any longer the pernicious poison of the above errors without disgrace to the Christian religion and injury to orthodox faith. Some of these errors we have decided to include in the present document; their substance is as follows:

Jim

I'm sorry. I am not sure exactly what you are quoting here.

 

[Colin]

The Church did make a mistake .
We should not be afraid to say so .
Think of the number of times Pope John Paul 2 made apologies for mistakes made by the Church in its history .

 

[Rhamiel]

The Church did make a mistake .
We should not be afraid to say so .
Think of the number of times Pope John Paul 2 made apologies for mistakes made by the Church in its history .

yes, the Church has made mistakes
I do not think burning heretics was one such mistake...

 

[Eucharisted]

 

[City Smurf]

Think of the number of times Pope John Paul 2 made apologies for mistakes made by the Church in its history .

Popes can make mistakes as well.

The Inquisitorial courts are nothing to be ashamed of. They were brought into being by Holy Mother Church to defend the One, True Faith of God. They brought amazing fruits to the world, they reconciled heretics with God. They gave the small people of the time their first real rights. Our Western justice system owes a lot to the Inquisitorial courts.

The Crusades should also be celebrated. Or at the least, the First Crusade. Men banded together, they bankrupted themselves, all in the name of defending their Christian brothers in the East against the terror of the Turk. The First Crusade was a very ecumenical affair in reality.

Would you have the Church apologise fordestroying the old Roman Empire? For opposing the Freemasonic French Revolution? Would you condemn the men whyo fought at Vienna under the patronage of the Blessed Virgin? Or the men who fought at Granada?

 

[ViribusUnitis]

yes, the Church has made mistakes
I do not think burning heretics was one such mistake...

You are kidding?

 

[LivingWordUnity]

2.- Do you think that means that Church, at least, condones the burning of heretics?

The document that you provided CONDEMNS burning of heretics.

As far as I know, it was not Church law but either state law or people acting independent of official Church teaching who were burning heretics. This includes Protestants such as Luther, the father of Protestantism, who condoned the burning of who he believed were heretics.

As far as the Pope's apologies, he never apologized for any official Church Magisterial teaching but for the errors of Christians (and sometimes Church clergy) who were not acting in accordance with official Magisterial Church teaching. We call this personal sin. If everyone in the world would always perfectly follow all of the official teachings of the Magisterium of the Catholic Church we would be living in a perfect world of saints.

So, before anyone can answer your question, you need to provide an official Catholic Church Magisterial document that condones burning of heretics. Otherwise, all you are doing is creating a straw man to get people to argue against.

 

[Rhamiel]

You are kidding?

no
they harmed the Church of Christ by teaching error, leading others to eternal death and were in treason agianst the lawful civil authority

 

[ViribusUnitis]

The document that you provided CONDEMNS burning of heretics.

Well, I don't think so.

Exsurge Domine

"In virtue of our pastoral office committed to us by the divine favor we can under no circumstances tolerate or overlook any longer the pernicious poison of the above errors without disgrace to the Christian religion and injury to orthodox faith. Some of these errors we have decided to include in the present document; their substance is as follows:

1. It is a heretical opinion, but a common one, that the sacraments of the New Law give pardoning grace to those who do not set up an obstacle.

[list of numbered and condemned propositions]

33. That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit."

============
Which means that proposition 33 is condemned as an error.

Hence

That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit = Error, according to this bull

 

[ViribusUnitis]

no
they harmed the Church of Christ by teaching error, leading others to eternal death and were in treason agianst the lawful civil authority

I believe we cannot be farther from each other in thought. The first time I read your opinion from a contemporary person I could not believe my eyes. Now, I just enjoy a bit of old East German rock.

du braver soldat.

YouTube - ‪PUHDYS Du Braver Soldat‬‎

 

[LivingWordUnity]

Well, I don't think so.

The document calls the burning of heretics an error. And it was Luther's error, by the way. Why would you ask if it condones what it calls an error?

 

[ViribusUnitis]

Try reading the document. It calls the burning of heretics an error. And it was Luther's error, by the way. Why would you ask if it condones what it calls an error?

I have read the document, a few times, and I believe you are wrong.

Identifying Infallible Statements (This Rock: September 2001)

Exsurge Domine-The Errors of Luther - Catholic Answers Forums

 

[Rhamiel]

I believe we cannot be farther from each other in thought. The first time I read your opinion from a contemporary person I could not believe my eyes. Now, I just enjoy a bit of old East German rock.

du braver soldat.

YouTube - ‪PUHDYS Du Braver Soldat‬‎

well now it would be horrible
but you have to remember, many of the heretics at the time were also political agitators, the cathers of france did not believe in swearing oaths, this was when all of society was based on oaths and alligance from pesants to minor lords to higher lords to kings ect ect ect

 

[Rhamiel]

The document calls the burning of heretics an error. And it was Luther's error, by the way. Why would you ask if it condones what it calls an error?

it is a list of his errors
like
33. That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit.
25. The Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter, is not the vicar of Christ over all the churches of the entire world, instituted by Christ Himself in blessed Peter