Aquinas on heresy

[batteddy]

I think that today it is not, because 1)there are often more of them then there are of us,

Obviously. In countries where we are the minority…the government is unlikely to be Catholic, and so the State would not execute heretics.

2)most heretics are material heretics only,

And that’s fine for them personally, and we’ll leave them alone, as long as they don’t try to SPREAD their heresy, at least not to Catholics. If they were never Catholic in the first place, we really have no authority over them as long as they don’t try to proselytize to Catholics

3)even if the conditions were right, we have better and more effective ways of dealing with heresy,

If you read, throughout this thread, I have ALWAYS advocated prison over death. I am only saying it could be justifiable IF at the time or place there was no good isolation system to protect people from the harmful ideas.

4)no need giving heretics a “martyr complex” and

I don’t really care what we “give them” as long as we protect our sheep from the wolves.

5)I think that you truly get more flies with honey than with vinegar, we can show our strength more effectively by ignoring the harangues and diatribes of heresy and by simply debating the more intellectual polemics and arguments.

Sure, “we” can show our strength, those of us who would like to think that we could ignore and not be convinced by the heretics arguments.

But we also have a duty to protect those too weak in mind and faith. Those who perhaps could not ignore it, who would be swayed easily.

How about we leave the judgments of people up to God?

Personally, I’m not judging anyone to hell. All we’d be doing is taking a dangerous idea out of circulation. Subjectively, their relationship with God in the internal forum…is between them and God.

 

[maggieodae]

And if THIS is what is being thought of by young people considering the priesthood, well, I devoutly hope and pray that the Church denies them ordination.

:yup: They would are pretty heritical to even think or posit such a thing. Definately not material for priesthood.:nope:

 

[LRThunder]

Obviously. In countries where we are the minority…the government is unlikely to be Catholic, and so the State would not execute heretics.

And that’s fine for them personally, and we’ll leave them alone, as long as they don’t try to SPREAD their heresy, at least not to Catholics. If they were never Catholic in the first place, we really have no authority over them as long as they don’t try to proselytize to Catholics

If you read, throughout this thread, I have ALWAYS advocated prison over death. I am only saying it could be justifiable IF at the time or place there was no good isolation system to protect people from the harmful ideas.

I don’t really care what we “give them” as long as we protect our sheep from the wolves.

Sure, “we” can show our strength, those of us who would like to think that we could ignore and not be convinced by the heretics arguments.

But we also have a duty to protect those too weak in mind and faith. Those who perhaps could not ignore it, who would be swayed easily.

Personally, I’m not judging anyone to hell. All we’d be doing is taking a dangerous idea out of circulation. Subjectively, their relationship with God in the internal forum…is between them and God.

But advocating prisons for heretics isn’t much better than advocating death.

My main point is what you’re advocating is not what Jesus and the apostles advocated.

I understand the need to stand firm against heresy, but we can’t and shouldn’t try to combat it like its terrorism or even run of the mill crimes.

 

[maggieodae]

This thread is very scary, especially for those like me who are considering joining the church.

How about we leave the judgments of people up to God? Aren’t we supposed to not judge people to hell? Isn’t that God’s job?

Jesus didn’t advocate putting the pharisees in jail, nor did any of the apostles.

Does this thread serve any useful purpose?

No, I don’t think it serves a purpose except for scandalizing others.

 

[batteddy]

The Syllabus of Errors (1864) particularly *condemns *the following propositions:§24)The Church has not the power of using force, nor has she any temporal power direct or indirect.§77) In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship.§79) It is false that the civil liberty of every form of worship, and the full power, given to all, of overtly and publicly manifesting any opinions and thoughts whatsoever, conduce more easily to corrupt the morals and minds of the people, and to propagate the plague of indifferentism.

Those are things that were CONDEMNED. Stated positively, they say: the Church does have the power of using force, and temporal power. It is expedient for the Catholic religion to be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship. And civil liberty to every form of worship and the freedom to manifest all opinions and thoughts IS more conducive to corrupting the morals and minds of the people.