Are Orthodox Heretics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter LeoXIV
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Non_Serviam said:
True-heretics have it better than not being Christ’s sheep. Which is the category Boniface places them in.
Click to expand...
Maybe not. When I read it, it reads to me to pronounce them as Schismatic, and as such no longer part of the Church. I do not see where it says they are worse off then heretics, whose teachings put men in danger of hell.
 
ralphinal said:
Maybe not. When I read it, it reads to me to pronounce them as Schismatic, and as such no longer part of the Church. I do not see where it says they are worse off then heretics, whose teachings put men in danger of hell.
Click to expand...
He says::
UNUM SANCTAM:
Therefore, if the Greeks or others should say that they are not confided to Peter and to his successors, they must confess not being the sheep of Christ, since Our Lord says in John ‘there is one sheepfold and one shepherd.’
Click to expand...
Not being the sheep of Christ means not being part of the church-for those who had trouble following that he makes it clear in two later sections.

First:
UNUM SANCTAM:
This authority, however, (though it has been given to man and is exercised by man), is not human but rather divine, granted to Peter by a divine word and reaffirmed to him (Peter) and his successors by the One Whom Peter confessed, the Lord saying to Peter himself, ‘Whatsoever you shall bind on earth, shall be bound also in Heaven’ etc., [Mt 16:19]. Therefore whoever resists this power thus ordained by God, resists the ordinance of God
Click to expand...
Boniface then makes it completely clear with:
UNUM SANCTAM:
Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.
Click to expand...
All in all not a high view of the Orthodox believers on his part.
 
Peter_J said:
I agree. But I think it would be the height of presumption for any Catholic to say that the Orthodox are not Christ’s sheep.
Click to expand...
Fortunately, you can say Boniface was wrong and choose the Catechism’s take on things instead.
 
Non_Serviam said:
Fortunately, you can say Boniface was wrong and choose the Catechism’s take on things instead.
Click to expand...
First, one must determine if Boniface was speaking infallibly in this instance. No one has demonstrated that yet.
 
The two views are not as different as you think.

If one accepts as fact that to truly be a full member of the Body of Christ, one must be Catholic, then you must accept that to be Catholic is to be under the Pope. Should you choose to no longer be under the Pope, you are no longer Catholic. If you are no longer Catholic, you are no longer a full member of the Body of Christ.

Granted, the language is harsher than that, but it does not mean that they are heretics. Again, he does not say they are heretical.
 
ralphinal said:
The two views are not as different as you think.

If one accepts as fact that to truly be a full member of the Body of Christ, one must be Catholic, then you must accept that to be Catholic is to be under the Pope. Should you choose to no longer be under the Pope, you are no longer Catholic. If you are no longer Catholic, you are no longer a full member of the Body of Christ.

Granted, the language is harsher than that, but it does not mean that they are heretics. Again, he does not say they are heretical.
Click to expand...
It is harsher-he says they aren’t saved. I’m sure the fact that he didn’t call them heretics when he called them lost will be a comfort. :rolleyes:
 
SedesDomi said:
First, one must determine if Boniface was speaking infallibly in this instance. No one has demonstrated that yet.
Click to expand...
Peter_J said:
True. Perhaps no one can demostrate it because it isn’t true.👍
Click to expand...
Likewise, the *Catechism *hasn’t been declared infallible, so do we exclude it as well? A lot of bridges get burnt very quickly taking this approach to the question.
 
ralphinal said:
The two views are not as different as you think.

If one accepts as fact that to truly be a full member of the Body of Christ, one must be Catholic, then you must accept that to be Catholic is to be under the Pope. Should you choose to no longer be under the Pope, you are no longer Catholic. If you are no longer Catholic, you are no longer a full member of the Body of Christ.

Granted, the language is harsher than that, but it does not mean that they are heretics. Again, he does not say they are heretical.
Click to expand...
Could you explain what you mean by the term “Catholic”?

To me, “Catholic” (note the capital-C) means Roman Catholic, i.e. in full communion with Pope Benedict XVI. Hence I would say that the Eastern Orthodox are not “Catholic”.
 
Peter_J said:
Could you explain what you mean by the term “Catholic”?

To me, “Catholic” (note the capital-C) means Roman Catholic, i.e. in full communion with Pope Benedict XVI. Hence I would say that the Eastern Orthodox are not “Catholic”.
Click to expand...
That is more or less how I meant the term.

Basically, I am arguing from the RCC position. I did not want to get into the catholic vs. CAtholic discussion
 
Non_Serviam said:
Likewise, the *Catechism *hasn’t been declared infallible, so do we exclude it as well? A lot of bridges get burnt very quickly taking this approach to the question.
Click to expand...
Just because something is not infallible, doesn’t mean it isn’t Church teaching.👍

So, we can ask: is Boniface’s teaching actually the teaching of the Church?
 
Non_Serviam said:
This document might shed some light on that topic.
Click to expand...
Key part:
The same in its own degree must be asserted of the Church, in as far
as she is the general help to salvation. Therefore, that one may
obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be
incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is
necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.
Click to expand...
However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in
catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance
God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included
in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his will to
be conformed to the will of God.
Click to expand...
So, it seems to me, that Pope Boniface was neither speaking infallibly, nor in concert with Church Teaching.
 
SedesDomi said:
Key part:

So, it seems to me, that Pope Boniface was neither speaking infallibly, nor in concert with Church Teaching.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you missed this part of the document:
Therefore, no one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the
Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of
Christ on earth.
Click to expand...
Sounds a good deal like Boniface to me.
 
Non_Serviam said:
Sounds a good deal like Boniface to me.
Click to expand...
Actually, Boniface is much more exclusive:
Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.
Click to expand...
Now, if we just take this statement by Boniface, and interpret it as it is written, then we would come to the conclusion that such a statement diverges from the Church Teaching. That is, it is not absolutely necessary for salvation that every human be subject to the Roman Pontiff. If one says otherwise, one is arguing Feeneyite theology.

If you want to say that Boniface actually meant something else other than what is actually written, one could do that. But the statement as written is divergent from Church Teaching.
 
SedesDomi said:
Actually, Boniface is much more exclusive:

Now, if we just take this statement by Boniface, and interpret it as it is written, then we would come to the conclusion that such a statement diverges from the Church Teaching. That is, it is not absolutely necessary for salvation that every human be subject to the Roman Pontiff. If one says otherwise, one is arguing Feeneyite theology.

If you want to say that Boniface actually meant something else other than what is actually written, one could do that. But the statement as written is divergent from Church Teaching.
Click to expand...
Is it? Let’s see what Pius XII had to say about it in this encyclical?
MYSTICI CORPORIS CHRISTI:
  1. But we must not think that He rules only in a hidden [59] or extraordinary manner. On the contrary, our Redeemer also governs His Mystical Body in a visible and normal way through His Vicar on earth. You know, Venerable Brethren, that after He had ruled the “little flock” [60] Himself during His mortal pilgrimage, Christ our Lord, when about to leave this world and return to the Father, entrusted to the Chief of the Apostles the visible government of the entire community He had founded. Since He was all wise He could not leave the body of the Church He had founded as a human society without a visible head. Nor against this may one argue that the primacy of jurisdiction established in the Church gives such a Mystical Body two heads. For Peter in view of his primacy is only Christ’s Vicar; so that there is only one chief Head of this Body, namely Christ, who never ceases Himself to guide the Church invisibly, though at the same time He rules it visibly, through him who is His representative on earth. After His glorious Ascension into Heaven this Church rested not on Him alone, but on Peter, too, its visible foundation stone. That Christ and His Vicar constitute one only Head is the solemn teaching of Our predecessor of immortal memory Boniface VIII in the Apostolic Letter Unam Sanctam; [61] and his successors have never ceased to repeat the same.
  2. They, therefore, walk in the path of dangerous error who believe that they can accept Christ as the Head of the Church, while not adhering loyally to His Vicar on earth. They have taken away the visible head, broken the visible bonds of unity and left the Mystical Body of the Redeemer so obscured and so maimed, that those who are seeking the haven of eternal salvation can neither see it nor find it.
Click to expand...
Can neither see nor find eternal salvation-so did we have 2 mistaken Popes?
 
Just to be clear-I personally am NOT saying the Orthodox are heretical or not saved-I’m simply pointing out that Catholicism has two contradictory descriptions of its relationship with them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top