1

I asked a very negatively received question, I was hoping to find answers to a hypothetical case of excommunication of a Pope. I wanted an answer in a general sense. Can a Pope be excommunicated? And if you can, how would you do it? As a basis for this possible excommunication, present the crime of heresy as a cause (of which I presented references and sources, so as not to make an unfounded accusation). I also expected an answer in a specific sense. Can this Pope be excommunicated?

The first comments (which I imagine were the first negative votes), were about the incontestability of the question, something without validity because I did my research and answered my own question. But then I began to register a greater influx of negative votes, without explaining the reason (I know it is not mandatory to do so, but it is courteous).

So how should I improve this question (and apply it in future ones, because I think that the ship is sailed in this one), to make them better received.

| |
  • 1
    You should consider applying Matt Gutting's comment: "it is certainly answerable for the general case - but if that is the approach to be taken, the examples are irrelevant and should be removed." – curiousdannii Sep 5 at 1:12
  • 1
    I may have got the wrong impression but it seemed to me that your questions (more than one) were designed to show your disagreement with the doctrine of certain users on the site. That is not the purpose of the site. And I think the down-votes have demonstrated it. – Nigel J Sep 6 at 22:23
  • 1
    @NigelJ Which doctrine I'm attacking? I'm not critiquing those who believe that it must need to be a Pope nor that he is the successor of Peter or the head of the church. I'm only saying. "Hey this remarks [not seem] are blasphemous and heretic (there is not doubt about it), there is a way for this Pope to be excommunicated?". I'm not asking to get rid of all the Popes or any other catholic doctrine. (I see the down votes as a sign of something else) – wildmangrove Sep 7 at 4:51
3

I'm glad to see that you've come here to discuss the question, rather than stomping off in a huff. Thanks for that!

If you are really interested iin the general question, the most important thing is to keep it general. Don't go to great lengths to provide examples - for the general case, exactly what has been said or done doesn't matter as much as the fact that something has been said or done which might be excommunicable. This way, you avoid the whole debate over "did he say this? Did he mean it? Is it that important?" You're even free to offer more egregious and obvious reasons to make the point quite clear.

Keep it short. Look at each sentence in the body of the question, and ask whether you can do without it. If you can, then leave it out. If you want to provide examples of a particular behavior, use one or two, not ten or twelve.

Keep it focused. Match your title to your body. Everything you say in the body should be about the question you ask in your title. This is related to keeping it short, because the shorter you keep your body, the less opportunity you'll have to focus on anything else but the question.

It sounds like you have some interesting ideas,and I'm glad to see you're interested in improvement. Good luck to you!

| |

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .