A new question on contraception

[noma]

A quick question:

I am assuming:

Anyone who knowingly rejects the Church’s teaching on contraception holds a heretical position.
Anyone holding a heretical position is a heretic.

I am concluding:

The Orthodox Church rejects the Church’s teaching on contraception.

Does this mean that the Orthodox Church is a bunch of heretics?
Or where did I go wrong?

 

[manualman]

Heresy is kinda like mortal sin. Its extremely important to know what constitutes it, but equally important to be extremely cautious in applying the label to anybody other than yourself.

Just like mortal sin requires knowledge and consent of the will, a person who believes a specific heretical concept may not actually be GUILTY of heresy (a heretic) if he is speaking the truth to the best of his own knowledge.

This is why the church rather frowns on self-appointed heresy hunters.

BTW, the mods frown on duplicate posts under the same title. Readers should respond to this one instead:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=124192

 

[Malcolm_McLean]

A quick question:

I am assuming:

Anyone who knowingly rejects the Church’s teaching on contraception holds a heretical position.
Anyone holding a heretical position is a heretic.

I am concluding:

The Orthodox Church rejects the Church’s teaching on contraception.

Does this mean that the Orthodox Church is a bunch of heretics?
Or where did I go wrong?

The teaching on contraception has not been formally promulgated as dogma. However the discipline is binding.

That means that a Catholic can say “I think the Pope should allow the pill” and remain a Catholic in good standing. However he cannot say “my wife and I use the pill despite what the Pope says” and remain in good standing.

So there is a subtle difference between someone who disobeys the Pope on contraception and a heretic. This becomes important when we are discussing churches rather than individuals, because an independent church can be expected to adopt its own disciplinary rules.

 

[ForeverAdam]

The Orthodox Church rejects the Church’s teaching on contraception.

Hold it there. The Orthodox Church has embraced contraception as much as the Roman Catholic Church has. We both have dissenters on this issue, but the Orthodox Church hasn’t fully caved on this issue. You can still find many priests, bishops, and lay people in the Orthodox Church who reject contraception. You’ll find a lot of dissenters too. Please don’t make the assumption that Orthodoxy has embraced contraception, because that is untrue.

Besides, the only way that Orthodoxy can “reject” a teaching is for it to be done solemnly in an Ecumenical Council. In Roman Catholicism, a teaching has to rejected in an Ecumenical Council, rejected unanimously by all bishops in union with the Pope, and/or a papal statement made, “ex cathedra” rejecting it. Beyond those avenues, neither Church can be said to “reject” a teaching. The Church will always struggle with society and seek to teach Holy Tradition clearly. The answer to the current dissent in Orthodoxy regarding contraception is to fight for the Tradition, not resort to papal encyclicals. Humane Vitae clarified the Roman Catholic stance on contraception in 1968. However, Orthodoxy, following the early Church, defends the Faith through an appeal to Holy Tradition, not an appeal to one man. Orthodox do want their bishops to speak out and write against contraception. However, they can do no more but teach Holy Tradition. Heresies must be fought not through infallible bishops, but by defense of the truth by faithful bishops, priests, and lay people alike.

For example, Arianism wasn’t resolved through a decree of the Pope. It was fought on the ground by those few bishops still faithful to Holy Tradition. It eventually was brought to an Ecumenical Council. The dissent on contraception will have to follow a similar route (although, hopefully not to the level of a Council). Ergo, it’s going to take longer for the battle to be won. This may be irritating to Orthodox and make Roman Catholics feel snug, but it’s the way of the early Church.

God bless,

Adam

P.S. This link will bring you to a recent conference by the Fr. Josiah Trenham, that I mentioned last night. In his speeches he really condemns the practice of contraception and shows the true position of the Holy Tradition of Orthodoxy on it. I encourage all (especially Roman Catholics) to listen and take note. And, yes, he does accept NFP as being acceptable, under the guidance of a spiritual father.

 

[manualman]

The teaching on contraception has not been formally promulgated as dogma. However the discipline is binding.

That means that a Catholic can say “I think the Pope should allow the pill” and remain a Catholic in good standing. However he cannot say “my wife and I use the pill despite what the Pope says” and remain in good standing.

Not quite. Disciplines are about things that are morally nuetral. 70 years ago, it would have been sinful for a catholic to willfully eat meat on a Friday. THAT was a discipline. The meat did not have any inherent property that made it sinful to eat on Fridays only. It was the disobedience that was the sin. Contraception, on the other hand, IS inherently sinful and destructive to the divine plan for human sexuality. Doing it is wrong not JUST because it is disobedient, but because it inherently is an offense against God, like lying, stealing, cheating, etc.

 

[thistle]

A quick question:

I am assuming:

Anyone who knowingly rejects the Church’s teaching on contraception holds a heretical position.
Anyone holding a heretical position is a heretic.

I am concluding:

The Orthodox Church rejects the Church’s teaching on contraception.
Does this mean that the Orthodox Church is a bunch of heretics?
Or where did I go wrong?

Please cite your source to back up this statement. My understanding is that the Orthodox Church does NOT reject the teaching on contraception.

 

[jbuck919]

There is a difference between moral culpability and heresy. Moral culpability is a thing between the individual and God; heresy rather a more public matter of espousing false beliefs or not consenting to teachings.

Personally, though I am not culpable in this particular matter (I certainly have been in others), I have a hard time believing that heaven is seriously underpopulated because people like my own parents who have otherwise lead exemplary lives have practiced birth control. I might as well be up front about that rather than dissemble. However, I do not think that makes me a heretic. By that standard, the majority of people on the commission appointed by Pope Paul VI to study the matter before he issued “Humanae Vitae” were heretics–even Montini would not have claimed that.

Stating and believing that Jesus never rose from the dead, now that would make me a heretic. Claiming that Mary Magdalene was Jesus’ mistress would be blasphemy. Turning my back on Christianity would be apostasy. But errors in personal morality, they are sin, a gray area even by the church’s own teachings (“venial” and “mortal” sin are so heavily qualified as to be satisfactory categories only to those who feel the need for childhood-level catechism definitions). They are not directly matters of heresy.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

I do not believe the rejection meets the criteria for Heretic. Rejection is probable the is of presumption.