Do you believe that practicing ABC is morally permissible? Answer if your Catholic only please.

[LaSainte]

I think you know your wrong, but you like talking circles in order to confuse people.

Feel free to read the article I cited above. Feel free to ask your priest. Feel free to write your bishop.

The teaching on contraception is DOCTRINE, not DOGMA. To be a heretic, one MUST reject a dogma of the Church.

 

[Little_One0307]

Anyone read this yet?

ewtn.com/library/BISHOPS/FLAVIN.HTM

:yup:

 

[Bookcat]

Here is a very brief article on the misuse of the word “heresy” and it actually uses the example of the teaching on contraception as a teaching that is not subject to the term st all.

catholiccourier.com/commentary/father-mcbrien/the-word-heresy-is-often-misused/

Sorry articles by those who have had their book found problematic by the USCCB Doctrinal committee (including in regards to contraception) does not count as reliable sources.

It is by Father McBrien

catholic.com/thisrock/2005/0507fea4sb.asp

catholic.com/thisrock/2005/0507fea4.asp

 

[Corki]

Here is a very brief article on the misuse of the word “heresy” and it actually uses the example of the teaching on contraception as a teaching that is not subject to the term st all.

catholiccourier.com/commentary/father-mcbrien/the-word-heresy-is-often-misused/

I’m sorry. You can’t use Fr. McBrien as an equivalent authentic source. He has publically refused to get a mandatum affirming that his teaching (he’s a professor at Notre Dame) is according to the teaching of the Church. His book on Cathoicism was actually denied an imprimatur (a very rare action) because of his unorthodox teaching. I am sure he is a good man and a fine priest but his writings have been denounced many times. Specifically, his claim that “heresy” can only be applied to dogmas is not confirmed by any actual Church documentation or teaching. He doesn’t even reference any Church documents in his opinion piece.

I have given you actual Church documents. Bookcat has given you actual Church documents. Can you provide any Church documents to back up what you are saying? Can you provide any documents from the Church that state that the teaching on contraception is not definative?

 

[LaSainte]

Sorry articles by those who have had their book found problematic by the USCCB Doctrinal committee (including in regards to contraception) does not count as reliable sources.

It is by Father McBrien

catholic.com/thisrock/2005/0507fea4sb.asp

catholic.com/thisrock/2005/0507fea4.asp

Bookcat, you know very well that I am correct about this issue. Try to tear down my sources all you want, but the truth remains the same.

This forum has truly lost all credibility for me today. You people are just DYING to brand others as heretics when I am speaking the absolute truth according to the Church herself.

What you people are actually saying is that we MUST believe in this teaching WITH DIVINE AND CATHOLIC FAITH in the same way that we believe in the Trinity, in the divinity of Christ and in the Resurrection, or we cannot even take communion.

Anyone spreading this should be ashamed of themselves.

 

[Bookcat]

He is quote well known…just call in the CA show anytime and ask if he is a good source

 

[Bookcat]

Bookcat, you know very well that I am correct about this issue. Try to tear down my sources all you want, but the truth remains the same.

This forum has truly lost all credibility for me today. You people are just DYING to brand others as heretics when I am speaking the absolute truth according to the Church.

This teaching is NOT dogma, and dissenting from it doesn’t even come close to heresy.

Your source is simply what it is. McBrien is notorious…He is known for his mistaken views…(you just thought it was a normal article…such is understandable of course!)

By the way where have I branded you a heretic…I if anything have sought to bring light to the question of a anyone being a heretic…and have not branded anyone.

Please read the document from the CDF in full.

The assertion has been that it is something that falls by reason of the ordinary magisterium in the area in question…not that it has been solemnly proclaimed by the extraordinary magisterum…

I could say more there…but really I have to go for now…wife is calling got to go out…
but I shall return

You guys be play nice while I am away

 

[Corki]

Feel free to read the article I cited above. Feel free to ask your priest. Feel free to write your bishop.

About contraception? My pastor has frequently spoken on the matter and believes HV to be a restatement of the infallible teaching of the Church.

The teaching on contraception is DOCTRINE, not DOGMA. To be a heretic, one MUST reject a dogma of the Church.

That is not what the Chuch teaches.

 

[LaSainte]

You all DO know that claiming that the Church teaches something that it does not IS HERESY, yes? If you are saying that the Church teaches that those who do not believe in the teaching on contraception with divine and Catholic faith are heretics, then YOU are the heretics if you persist after correction. I would be careful.

 

[LaSainte]

About contraception? My pastor has frequently spoken on the matter and believes HV to be a restatement of the infallible teaching of the Church.

That is not what the Chuch teaches.

Corki, it does not matter if it is an infallible teaching or not. Not all infallible teachings must be believed with divine and Catholic faith. It may still be an infallible teaching without rising to this level.

 

[LaSainte]

Your source is simply what it is. McBrien is notorious…He is known for his mistaken views…(you just thought it was a normal article…such is understandable of course!)

By the way where have I branded you a heretic…I if anything have sought to bring light to the question of a anyone being a heretic…and have not branded anyone.

Please read the document from the CDF in full.

I could say more there…but really I have to go for now…wife is calling got to go out…
but I shall return

You guys be play nice while I am away

Then answer a simple question Bookcat. Does dissenting publically from Church teaching on contraception constitute heresy? If one persists in this even after admonition from the Church, is one a heretic and subject to the requisite canonical penalties? Has anyone ever done this and been excommunicated as a heretic in the history of the Church?

Please be plain.

 

[Corki]

Corki, it does not matter if it is an infallible teaching or not. Not all infallible teachings must be believed with divine and Catholic faith. It may still be an infallible teaching without rising to this level.

All infallible teaching must be believed with full assent of faith. There is no higher degree of assent.

Does dissenting publically from Church teaching on contraception constitute heresy?

Yes.

If one persists in this even after admonition from the Church, is one a heretic and subject to the requisite canonical penalties?

Yes.

Has anyone ever done this and been excommunicated as a heretic in the history of the Church?

Yes. But excommunication is not the only penalty that can be imposed. For example Fr. Curran had his privalege to teach revoked; Fr. McBrien was denied an imprimatur. Others have been censured as well.

This forum has truly lost all credibility for me today.

That is unfortunate. A single thread that was started just a few days ago and which contains mostly posts by just three CAF members shouldn’t color your view of the entire CAF and all its members.

You people are just DYING to brand others as heretics when I am speaking the absolute truth according to the Church herself.

First of all, pointing out that a statement may be heretical is not the same a “branding others as heretics”.

Since we have the CCC and the Canon law definitions of heresy, I just thought I would round it out with the definition from the Catholic Encyclopedia, which has an imprimatur.

Degrees of heresy

Both matter and form of heresy admit of degrees which find expression in the following technical formula of theology and canon law. Pertinacious adhesion to a doctrine contradictory to a point of faith clearly defined by the Church is heresy pure and simple, heresy in the first degree. But if the doctrine in question has not been expressly “defined” or is not clearly proposed as an article of faith in the ordinary, authorized teaching of the Church, an opinion opposed to it is styled sententia haeresi proxima, that is, an opinion approaching heresy. Next, a doctrinal proposition, without directly contradicting a received dogma, may yet involve logical consequences at variance with revealed truth. Such a proposition is not heretical, it is a propositio theologice erronea, that is, erroneous in theology. Further, the opposition to an article of faith may not be strictly demonstrable, but only reach a certain degree of probability. In that case the doctrine is termed sententia de haeresi suspecta, haeresim sapiens; that is, an opinion suspected, or savouring, of heresy (see THEOLOGICAL CENSURES).

Denial of dogma is first degree heresy. But there are more distintions of heresy.

 

[Pug]

That’s not what I meant to say. Put more clearly, there is no knowledgeable priest, theologian or pope who believes that contraception falls into the first category of things which require “divine and catholic faith”. Ask any priest. It is simply not possible to disagree with this teaching and be branded a heretic.

You will not find ONE PERSON among every theologian, priest, etc. Who has come out in public and obstinate dissent against this teaching who has ever been branded a heretic and excommunicated for doing so. Simple as that.

Thanks for clarifying what you meant. You are saying that you believe that contraception does not fall into the first category (and you weren’t trying to say anything about other moral things and the first category). I understand now.

Do you think the ban on contraception is in the second category or the third, or are you not sure of that?

Regarding someone formally charged with heresy or formally excommunicated, they are few and far between. Someone is likely to try talking with the person, etc. before doing something official.

 

[thistle]

I saved this from a thread a long time ago but cannot remember who the poster was.

Dogmas and Doctrines

Doctrine - any truth taught by the Church as necessary for acceptance by the faithful.

The truth may be either formally revealed (as the Real Presence), or a theological conclusion (as the canonization of a saint), or part of the natural law (as the sinfulness of contraception). In any case, what makes it doctrine is that the Church authority teaches that it is to be believed. This teaching may be done either solemnly in ex cathedra pronouncements or decision of an ecumenical council, or this teaching may be taught ordinarily in the exercise of the Church’s magisterium or teaching authority.

Dogmas are those doctrines which the Church proposes for belief as formally revealed by God.

The difference in Dogmas and Doctrines is the level of certainty with which the magisterium teaches. Dogmas are taught with absolute certainty (beyond all doubt whatsoever), whereas doctrines are taught with moral certainty (similar to beyond reasonable doubt).

Dogmas require the assent of faith, meaning that obstinate doubt or denial of the truth of the dogma is the sin of heresy–a sin against the virtue of faith.

Doctrines require religious submission of intellect and will. Refusal to submit to doctrines of the Church is not a heresy, not a sin against faith, but a sin against charity. We are called to “obey our leaders and submit to them” (Heb 13:17). To dissent with doctrine is incompatible with humility, loyalty, and charity. It is a matter of placing one’s own fallible intellect and will above that of the mind of the Holy Catholic Church.

 

[LaSainte]

Thanks for clarifying what you meant. You are saying that you believe that contraception does not fall into the first category (and you weren’t trying to say anything about other moral things and the first category). I understand now.

Do you think the ban on contraception is in the second category or the third, or are you not sure of that?

Regarding someone formally charged with heresy or formally excommunicated, they are few and far between. Someone is likely to try talking with the person, etc. before doing something official.

Well, Father (Dr) Marcellino d’Ambrosio’s book classifies this teaching in the third category of magisterial teachings, “ordinary teachings on faith and morals” to which we owe religious submission of the mind and will. Until this thread, I have NEVER heard anyone even attempt to place this teaching in the first category. I think it’s really strange that so many here are so keen to put this teaching on a level with dogmas such as the divinity of Christ when the Church itself has never done so.

brotherandre.stblogs.com/2008/01/03/the-four-kinds-of-magisterial-statement-and-the-various-responses-catholics-owe-to-each/

 

[LaSainte]

I saved this from a thread a long time ago but cannot remember who the poster was.

Dogmas and Doctrines

Doctrine - any truth taught by the Church as necessary for acceptance by the faithful.

The truth may be either formally revealed (as the Real Presence), or a theological conclusion (as the canonization of a saint), or part of the natural law (as the sinfulness of contraception). In any case, what makes it doctrine is that the Church authority teaches that it is to be believed. This teaching may be done either solemnly in ex cathedra pronouncements or decision of an ecumenical council, or this teaching may be taught ordinarily in the exercise of the Church’s magisterium or teaching authority.

Dogmas are those doctrines which the Church proposes for belief as formally revealed by God.

The difference in Dogmas and Doctrines is the level of certainty with which the magisterium teaches. Dogmas are taught with absolute certainty (beyond all doubt whatsoever), whereas doctrines are taught with moral certainty (similar to beyond reasonable doubt).

Dogmas require the assent of faith, meaning that obstinate doubt or denial of the truth of the dogma is the sin of heresy–a sin against the virtue of faith.

Doctrines require religious submission of intellect and will. Refusal to submit to doctrines of the Church is not a heresy, not a sin against faith, but a sin against charity. We are called to “obey our leaders and submit to them” (Heb 13:17). To dissent with doctrine is incompatible with humility, loyalty, and charity. It is a matter of placing one’s own fallible intellect and will above that of the mind of the Holy Catholic Church.

According to the introduction of Ott’s “Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma”,
§ 8. The Theological Grades of Certainty

1. • • • *The highest degree of certainty appertains to the immediately revealed truths. The belief due to them is based on the authority of God Revealing (fides divina), and if the Church, through its teaching, vouches for the fact that a truth is contained in Revelation, one’s certainty is then also based on the authority of the Infallible Teaching Authority of the Church (fides catholica). If Truths are defined by a solemn judgment of faith (definition) of the Pope or of a General Council, they are “de fide definita.”

5.) Common Teachings (Sententia Communis) is doctrine, which in itself belongs to the field of free opinions, but is accepted by theologians generally.

trosch.org/the/ottintro.htm

Wow Thistle thank you!!! This is excellent.

If you all will look at the link I posted earlier from EWTN, you will see where in this hierarchy the teaching on artificial contraception falls.

It states that contraception falls under the third category of theological opinions.

DE FIDE is the highest level of theological/doctrinal truth. They are INFALLIBLE statements by their very nature, like the Holy Trinity, The Real Presence, etc.

Next, are VERITATES CATHOLICAE (catholic truths) like the existence of God which can be known through reason alone.

Finally, there are four types of THEOLOGICAL OPINIONS:

1. SENTENTIA FIDEI PROXIMA (proximate to the Faith) like the Trinity can be known only through Revelation.
2. SENTENTIA CERTA (theologically certain) like Monogenism, i.e., that the human race came from one set of parents.

3.) SENTENTIA COMMUNIA (common teaching) like the Church’s prohibition & proscription of artificial contraception.

1. SENTENTIA PROBABILIS (probable teaching) like the premise that the Virgin Mary died before being Assumed into Heaven.

ewtn.com/library/DOCTRINE/TRIGINFL.HTM

 

[LaSainte]

As you can see from the above texts from Ott and EWTN, no heresy can be involved with dissent from Church teaching on contraception because t simply does not rise to that level of theological certainty which requires divine and Catholic faith, as it is not a DE FIDE teaching formally revealed by God, but a theological opinion.

Please can we be done with this?

 

[Corki]

ewtn.com/library/DOCTRINE/TRIGINFL.HTM

but don’t stop there. Copy the whole thing which includes this statement.

While not requiring the ASSENT OF FAITH, they CANNOT be disputed nor rejected publicly and the benefit of the doubt must be given to the one possessing the fullness of teaching authority.

(caps in the original, not mine)

So, you don’t want to call it heresy. I disagree. But either way, it is clear, even from your own sources, that you cannot reject or deny the teaching.

 

[LaSainte]

but don’t stop there. Copy the whole thing which includes this statement.

(caps in the original, not mine)

So, you don’t want to call it heresy. I disagree. But either way, it is clear, even from your own sources, that you cannot reject or deny the teaching.

I never said you could reject this teaching. It must be given the religious submission of the will and intellect, even if you disagree with it. For example, I disagree with this teaching, but I do not practice contraception in my marriage and I admit that I may absolutely be wrong in my disagreement and that the Church may be right and that I am just not understanding the teaching the way God does. Therefore, I am still in communion with the Church.

However, even if I went to the Vatican and shouted “This teaching sucks!” at the top of my lungs while practicing contraception and tried to get others to follow suite, I would not be a heretic because the teaching is in the category of theological opinion, which as we know, cannot rise to the level of heresy. I would of course not be in communion with the Church, but I would not be excommunicated and branded a heretic.

 

[Bookcat]

Corki, it does not matter if it is an infallible teaching or not. Not all infallible teachings must be believed with divine and Catholic faith. It may still be an infallible teaching without rising to this level.

Correct …