St. Thomas Aquinas, speaking of heresy, said: "Now, in matters of faith, the will assents to some truth, as to its proper good, as was shown above (4, 3): wherefore that which is the chief truth, has the character of last end, while those which are secondary truths, have the character of being directed to the end.
Now, whoever believes, assents to someone's words; so that, in every form of unbelief, the person to whose words assent is given seems to hold the chief place and to be the end as it were; while the things by holding which one assents to that person hold a secondary place. Consequently he that holds the Christian faith aright, assents, by his will, to Christ, in those things which truly belong to His doctrine." [1]
St. Thomas begins by defining that heresy and faith are acts of the will, when it [the will] assents to an article of the faith [the assent of the will to the doctrine of Christ, i.e. faith], de fide [of the faith, and article of or pertaining to the doctrine of the Christian religion], or fails to do so [heresy: the failure to willingly assent to one or more articles of the faith of the Christian religion, here a distinction can be made, of the first, what is being treated upon, is willful failure to assent to the truths of religion, "Formal" or "manifest" Heresy, the second, the unconcious failure to do so, termed "Material Heresy"].
St. Thomas goes on to make this distinction: "Accordingly there are two ways in which a man may deviate from the rectitude of the Christian faith. First, because he is unwilling to assent to Christ [formal and willful heresy]: and such a man has an evil will [what we today term as "bad will"], so to say, in respect of the very end. This belongs to the species of unbelief in pagans and Jews [therefore a kind of unbelief which is mortal and severs Christian communion by the failure to assent to its communion]. Secondly, because, though he intends to assent to Christ, yet he fails in his choice of those things wherein he assents to Christ, because he chooses not what Christ really taught, but the suggestions of his own mind.
Therefore heresy is a species of unbelief, belonging to those who profess the Christian faith, but corrupt its dogmas." [- The Definition of heresy] ... As Augustine says (Ep. xliii) and we find it stated in the Decretals (xxiv, qu. 3, can. Dixit Apostolus): "By no means should we accuse of heresy those who, however false and perverse their opinion may be, defend it without obstinate fervor, and seek the truth with careful anxiety, ready to mend their opinion, when they have found the truth," because, to wit, they do not make a choice in contradiction to the doctrine of the Church. Accordingly, certain doctors seem to have differed either in matters the holding of which in this or that way is of no consequence, so far as faith is concerned, or even in matters of faith, which were not as yet defined by the Church; although if anyone were obstinately to deny them after they had been defined by the authority of the universal Church, he would be deemed a heretic. This authority resides chiefly in the Sovereign Pontiff."[2]
Now, our discussion went somewhat like this:
My opponent cited Vatican II in referencing his belief that Protestants in current times could not be considered formal heretics, and thus outside the Church, whereas I argued that modern day Protestants do fit this definition and thus are formal heretics, separated from the Church, the Church of Christ, i.e. the Roman Catholic Church.
Vatican II: "For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect. The differences that exist in varying degrees between them and the Catholic Church-whether in doctrine and sometimes in discipline, or concerning the structure of the Church-do indeed create many obstacles, sometimes serious ones, to full ecclesiastical communion. The ecumenical movement is striving to overcome these obstacles. But even in spite of them it remains true that all who have been justified by faith in Baptism are members of Christ's body, and have a right to be called Christian, and so are correctly accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church."[3]And Josef Ratzinger, now Benedict XVI, continues in this belief:
“Ultimately it is due to the fact that there is no appropriate category in Catholic thought for the phenomenon of Protestantism today (one could say the same of the relationship to the separated churches of the East). It is obvious that the old category of ‘heresy’ is no longer of any value. Heresy, for Scripture and the early Church, includes the idea of a personal decision against the unity of the Church, and heresy’s characteristic is pertinacia, the obstinacy of him who persists in his own private way. This, however, cannot be regarded as an appropriate description of the spiritual situation of the Protestant Christian. In the course of a now centuries-old history, Protestantism has made an important contribution to the realization of Christian faith, fulfilling a positive function in the development of the Christian message and, above all, often giving rise to a sincere and profound faith in the individual non-Catholic Christian, whose separation from the Catholic affirmation has nothing to do with the pertinacia characteristic of heresy. Perhaps we may here invert a saying of St. Augustine’s: that an old schism becomes a heresy. The very passage of time alters the character of a division, so that an old division is something essentially different from a new one. Something that was once rightly condemned as heresy cannot later simply become true, but it can gradually develop its own positive ecclesial nature, with which the individual is presented as his church and in which he lives as a believer, not as a heretic. This organization of one group, however, ultimately has an effect on the whole. The conclusion is inescapable, then: Protestantism today is something different from heresy in the traditional sense, a phenomenon whose true theological place has not yet been determined.” [4]
Now, I'll get into this statement later (See this post), but it serves well enough to establish the objection which the opposition positioned.
My argument went somewhat like this:
The Catholic Church is one Church of the faithful, not of heretics; heretics are outside the Church:
St. Robert Bellarmine, De Romano Pontifice, lib. II, cap. 30: “Finally, the Holy Fathers teach unanimously not only that heretics are outside of the Church..."That all members of the Church must obey the Holy See:
Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943: "Therefore they are in dangerous error who think that they can attach themselves to Christ the Head of the Church, without adhering faithfully to his Vicar on earth."Heretics do not profess properly and truthfully all that the Church has taught in every last detail, word and intention.
I Lateran Council: "If ANYONE does not profess properly and truthfully all that has been handed down and taught publicly to the Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church of God, to the last detail in word and intention: let him be anathema."Heretics are not members of the Catholic Church.
St. Cyprian: "He is no Christian who is not in Christ's Church." (Epistle to Antonianus," 52)
St. Augustine - If anyone holds to a single heresy, he is not a Catholic. ("On Heresies," no.88; PL 42)
St. Peter Canisius: "Who is to be called a Christian? He who confesses the doctrine of Christ and His Church. " (St. Canisius Catholic Cate-chism, Dillingen, 1560, Question no. 1)
Fr. Michael Müller, C.SS.R., "The Catholic Dogma," 1888: "What Protestant Belief In Christ is - .(Protestants) never had any divine faith in Christ. 'He who does not believe all that Christ has taught,' says St. Ambrose, 'denies Christ himself.' (In Luc. c. 9.) 'It is absurd for a heretic,' says St. Thomas Aquinas, 'to assert that he believes in Jesus Christ. To believe in a man is to give our full assent to his word and to all he teaches. True faith, therefore, is absolute belief in Jesus Christ and in all he has taught. Hence he who does not adhere to all that Jesus Christ has prescribed for our salvation has no more the doc-trine of Jesus Christ and of his Church, than the Pagans, Jews and Turk's have.' 'He is' says Jesus Christ, 'a heathen and publican.'"
Tertullian: "...Heretics, however, have no fellowship in our discipline, whom the mere fact of their excommunication testifies to be outsiders. I am not bound to recognize in them a thing which is enjoined on me, because they and we have not the same God, nor one—that is, the same—Christ."
Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 9), June 29, 1896: “The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of Doctrine proposed by Her authoritative Magisterium.”
That the view of Vatican II and Josef Ratzinger is a novelty.
Pius IX, Letter from the Holy Office, September 16, 1864: "It [this novelty] can be summed up in this proposition, that the true Church Jesus Christ is made up of one part Roman Church, established and propagated throughout the world, and one part the schism of Photius, and the Anglican heresy, both of which have, with the Church of Rome, one same Lord, one same faith, one same baptism."
Leo XIII, Officio sanctissimo, December 22, 1887: "But he who in his manner of thinking and acting would separate himself from his shepherd and from his Sovereign Pastor, the Roman Pontiff, has no further bond with Christ: “He that heareth you, heareth me, he that despiseth you, despiseth me” (Luke X: 16). Whoever is estranged from Christ does not reap; he scatters."
Schismatic and heretical sects, then, do not communicate in the unity of the Church, are not in the Church, because they hold to false doctrine and are not in union with Rome. They are not “united to the Catholic Church by very close bonds.”
Therefore schismatic sects and heretical sects have no further bond with Christ. They are not in “partial communion” with the Catholic Church, and which are part of the Church of Christ. In fact, they scatter against Christ in their activities.
Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943: "Consequently, as in the real assembly of the faithful there can be only one Body, one Spirit, one Lord, and one Baptism, so there can be only one faith: and he who refuses to hear the Church must be considered, by the order of the Lord, as a heathen and a publican. And they who are divided by reasons of faith or of government cannot live in this one Body, and in its one Divine Spirit."The opposition returned that Protestants were not removed from the Church by virtue of the notion that they were merely material heretics and thus did not fall under the sentence of excommunication imposed by the Apostolic See.
... As Augustine says (Ep. xliii) and we find it stated in the Decretals (xxiv, qu. 3, can. Dixit Apostolus): "By no means should we accuse of heresy those who, however false and perverse their opinion may be, defend it without obstinate fervor, and seek the truth with careful anxiety, ready to mend their opinion, when they have found the truth," because, to wit, they do not make a choice in contradiction to the doctrine of the Church. Accordingly, certain doctors seem to have differed either in matters the holding of which in this or that way is of no consequence, so far as faith is concerned, or even in matters of faith, which were not as yet defined by the Church; although if anyone were obstinately to deny them after they had been defined by the authority of the universal Church, he would be deemed a heretic. This authority resides chiefly in the Sovereign Pontiff."I proceeded to point out the fact that most Protestants obstinately defend their error and seek to undermine, distort, ignore, or attack the truth of the Catholic religion rather than seek the truth about it with a willingness to mend their opinion, and thus fall under the category which Aquinas lays forth:
"...because he is unwilling to assent to Christ [formal and willful heresy]: and such a man has an evil will [what we today term as "bad will"], so to say, in respect of the very end. This belongs to the species of unbelief in pagans and Jews [therefore a kind of unbelief which is mortal and severs Christian communion by the failure to assent to its communion]. Secondly, because, though he intends to assent to Christ, yet he fails in his choice of those things wherein he assents to Christ, because he chooses not what Christ really taught, but the suggestions of his own mind. Therefore heresy is a species of unbelief, belonging to those who profess the Christian faith, but corrupt its dogmas."The opposition simply denied this:
I simply deny that most Protestants "refuse" to be informed. ...they just are not opposed to learning the truth, no matter what you may think about it.But then goes on to contradict himself, agreeing with me in an attempt to disagree with me:
...because of their errors, they do not believe that the Catholic Church has something to say to them about their salvation. And from their perspective, based in sola scriptura, there is no reason for them even to suspect that the Church has something to say to them that they need to hear. If they argue with you on the Internet and refuse to listen to what you say, it's not because they are not interested in the truth. It's because they think that they already have it, and that you are going to be contradicting it, and consequently they see no reason to listen to you. I think that they are mistaken of course, but that's not the point. They don't.
If their refusal to assent to the truth does not constitute obstinacy, then what does? This person says that no matter what, no one who believes that they are right can be truly called a heretic, which means that there is no such thing, for we are all excused of it [heresy] if we believe that we are right (See Also) [which is error, for all heretics think they are right, that's why there are heretics, yet who does not know that those heretics in the past have been condemned as such, and excommunicated, and expelled from the Church either by solemn declaration or by process of Divine or ecclesiastical law?]. It is that they trust not God and His truth, but themselves.
"though he intends to assent to Christ, yet he fails in his choice of those things wherein he assents to Christ, because he chooses not what Christ really taught, but the suggestions of his own mind. " - Aquinas on Heresy
"But he who dissents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all faith, since he thereby refuses to honour God as the supreme (truth and the formal motive of faith. "In many things they are with me, in a few things not with me; but in those few things in which they are not with me the many things in which they are will not profit them" (S. Augustinus in Psal. liv., n. 19). And this indeed most deservedly; for they, who take from Christian doctrine what they please, lean on their own judgments, not on faith; and not "bringing into captivity every understanding unto the obedience of Christ" (2 Cor. x., 5), they more truly obey themselves than God. "You, who believe what you like, believe yourselves rather than the gospel" (S. Augustinus, lib. xvii., Contra Faustum Manichaeum, cap. 3). [5]
Thus, for this reason, modern day Protestants, who reject Catholic truth and refuse to assent to it, can truly be called heretics and thus not Christian nor members of the Catholic Church (See also).
But this is not the only leg which my argument stood on. The second pin was that Protestants were not Christian and were outside the Church because they were divided from the Church in both faith and government, that not only were Protestants heretics, but even if the heresy were cut from the equation, they would still be schismatics in one sense in that they reject the authority of the Roman Pontiff, involving heresy, and refuse communion with him.
Schism: Schismatics, says St. Thomas, in the strict sense, are they who of their own will and intention separate themselves from the unity of the Church. The unity of the Church consists in the connection of its members with each other and of all the members with the head. Now this head is Christ whose representative in the Church is the supreme pontiff. And therefore the name of schismatics is given to those who will not submit to the supreme pontiff nor communicate with the members of the Church subject to him. Since the definition of Papal Infallibility, schism usually implies the heresy of denying this dogma. [6]
Pius IX, Letter from the Holy Office, September 16, 1864: “they are separated from the communion of the Church who are not in agreement with the Apostolic See.”According to Pope Pius IX and the teaching of the Church those who are not in agreement with the Apostolic See are not in communion with the Church. They are cut off, severed, excommunicated for being schismatics by operation of Divine Law. Therefore, for this reason Protestants are not fellow Christians or members of Christ's Church, which is the Catholic Church. Therefore, those PRotestants who were baptized, thus made members of the Catholic Church, are separated from the Catholic Church by refusing to acknowledge and accept the authority and power of the Apostolic See.
Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928: "No one is in the Church of Christ, and no one remains in it, unless he acknowledges and accepts with obedience the authority and power of Peter and his legitimate successors."Now, so far we've covered the fact that Protestants are severed from the Church by
Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943: "Therefore they are in dangerous error who think that they can attach themselves to Christ the Head of the Church, without adhering faithfully to his Vicar on earth."
1. Refusal to assent to the truth, constituting obstinate heresy.
2. Refusal to acknowledge the authority and primacy of the Apostolic See.
However, there is still one more reason why modern day Protestants are separated from the true Church of Christ, a second kind of Schism, that of refusing communion with other Christians, which Protestants do every day.
Schismatics... are they who of their own will and intention separate themselves from the unity of the Church. The unity of the Church consists in the connection of its members with each other and of all the members... therefore the name of schismatics is given to those who will not... communicate with the members of the Church subject to him [the Roman Pontiff]. [7]Therefore, Protestants are severed from the Catholic Church in a three-fold manner, Schism from the Apostolic See, Schism with other Christians, and obstinate heresy, then there can be no doubt that modern day Protestants are indeed not Christians and are separated from the Church, falling under the sentence of excommunication, and/or anathema.
St. Augustine notes that other heresies may spring up, to a single one of which, should any one give his assent, he is by the very fact cut off from Catholic unity. "No one who merely disbelieves in all (these heresies) can for that reason regard himself as a Catholic or call himself one. For there may be or may arise some other heresies, which are not set out in this work of ours, and, if any one holds to one single one of these he is not a Catholic" (S. Augustinus, De Haeresibus, n. 88).
"...can it be lawful for anyone to reject any one of those truths without by the very fact falling into heresy? without separating himself from the Church? - without repudiating in one sweeping act the whole of Christian teaching? For such is the nature of faith that nothing can be more absurd than to accept some things and reject others. Faith, as the Church teaches, is "that supernatural virtue by which, through the help of God and through the assistance of His grace, we believe what he has revealed to be true, not on account of the intrinsic truth perceived by the natural light of reason, but because of the authority of God Himself, the Revealer, who can neither deceive nor be deceived" (Conc. Vat., Sess. iii., cap. 3). If then it be certain that anything is revealed by God, and this is not believed, then nothing whatever is believed by divine Faith: for what the Apostle St. James judges to be the effect of a moral delinquency, the same is to be said of an erroneous opinion in the matter of faith. ...But he who dissents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all faith, since he thereby refuses to honour God as the supreme truth and the formal motive of faith. "In many things they are with me, in a few things not with me; but in those few things in which they are not with me the many things in which they are will not profit them" (S. Augustinus in Psal. liv., n. 19). And this indeed most deservedly; for they, who take from Christian doctrine what they please, lean on their own judgments, not on faith; and not "bringing into captivity every understanding unto the obedience of Christ" (2 Cor. x., 5), they more truly obey themselves than God. "You, who believe what you like, believe yourselves rather than the gospel" (S. Augustinus, lib. xvii., Contra Faustum Manichaeum, cap. 3).
"For this reason, as the unity of the faith is of necessity required for the unity of the church, inasmuch as it is the body of the faithful, so also for this same unity, inasmuch as the Church is a divinely constituted society, unity of government, which effects and involves unity of communion, is necessary jure divino. "The unity of the Church is manifested in the mutual connection or communication of its members, and likewise in the relation of all the members of the Church to one head" (St. Thomas, 2a 2ae, 9, xxxix., a. I). From this it is easy to see that men can fall away from the unity of the Church by schism, as well as by heresy. "We think that this difference exists between heresy and schism" (writes St. Jerome): "heresy has no perfect dogmatic teaching, whereas schism, through some Episcopal dissent, also separates from the Church" (S. Hieronymus, Comment. in Epist. ad Titum, cap. iii., v. 1011). In which judgment St. John Chrysostom concurs: "I say and protest (he writes) that it is as wrong to divide the Church as to fall into heresy" (Hom. xi., in Epist. ad Ephes., n. 5)
Hence the teaching of Cyprian, that heresy and schism arise and are begotten from the fact that due obedience is refused to the supreme authority. "Heresies and schisms have no other origin than that obedience is refused to the priest of God, and that men lose sight of the fact that there is one judge in the place of Christ in this world" (Epist. xii. ad Cornelium, n. 5). - Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, #9, June 29, 1896.
______________
Endnotes:
[1] Summa Theologica, Secunda Secundae Partis Q. 11, A. 1
[2] Ibid.
[3] Vatican II, Unitatis Redintegratio, Decree on Ecumenism, # 3
[4] The Meaning of Christian Brotherhood, pp. 87-88
[5] Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, #9, June 29, 1896.
[6] Catholic Encyclopedia, Article "Heresy", sec. II, Vol. VII. Published 1910. New York: Robert Appleton Company, - Newadvent.org/cathen/07256b.htm
[7] Ibid.
No comments:
Post a Comment