Has the Catholic Church ever been "Morally wrong"?

[AbsolutionBliss]

I know there have been some bad popes, bishops, priests, ect in the church (just as any other religion), but has there ever been a wrong teaching/dogma that the Church made?

Separate question:
And has any dogma/teaching ever been changed/edited?

This will help me a lot, because I recently said to someone (A non-christian) that “the Church has never been morally wrong.” & I don’t know if this is completely true or not.

Thank you, God bless!

 

[RCIA4]

The Church is perfect because it is ordained by God and Christ himself… But the men who run it are full of sin like us… So the institution is perfect… But the men who run it aren’t…

 

[ringil]

The Church is both human and divine. The human side of the Church has made mistakes. The Mystical Body of Christ is perfect.

I believe that the earthly institution of the Church has certainly made mistakes.

 

[KenChute]

That is up to opinion and interpretation, but I would like to think the CC is correct.

 

[pilots13]

So if the Church is run by humans and it’s laws and rules set and declared by humans, and humans are imperfect, then how can the Church be perfect? I understand God is perfect, and God is talking to the Church leaders, but those same Church leaders are still human and still have free will.

I’m also curious about the, has any dogma/teaching ever been changed/edited question.

 

[puzzleannie]

I know there have been some bad popes, bishops, priests, ect in the church (just as any other religion), but has there ever been a wrong teaching/dogma that the Church made?

you changed the question, that is not what your title asks.

have members of the church, even her leadership, done morally wrong actions? Certainly they are all human and hence prone to sin. Has the Church speaking through the popes and bishops in her magesterial teaching role, in which as Christ promises she is protected from error by the Holy Spirit, ever taught wrong dogma on a matter of faith or morals? No. Never. Nada.

Separate question:
And has any dogma/teaching ever been changed/edited?

don’t know what you mean by “edited.” Please elaborate your meaning.

Certainly our understanding of fundamental doctrine has grown in 2000 years and theologians are ever new in coming up with ways to explain and teach it as the audience for that teaching changes, but no the fundamental doctrines as expressed in the Creed do not change. Do bear in mind that language changes and develops, so as those teachings are translated into various vernacular languages for the purpose of teaching and evangelization, yes the meaning of the language might change and have to be corrected so the understanding remains the same. That is not the same as changing or editing the doctrine.

Google John Henry Newman’s writing on “Development of Doctrine”. Also every aspect and implication of fundamental doctrine was not necessarily spelled out in writing in a “summa” from the beginning, because those definitions were not necessary until some aspects of those doctrines were challenged by heretics, and required formal definition.

So if the Church is run by humans and it’s laws and rules set and declared by humans, and humans are imperfect, then how can the Church be perfect? I .

The Church is Holy and Perfect because she is the Mystical Body of Christ, and Christ her Lord and head is holy and perfect. Even if every bishop, priest and lay Catholic were without sin–which is not going to happen this side of heaven–that alone would not make the Church holy and perfect. She has those attributes because she is the bride of Christ, who is holy and perfect, and exhibits those traits to the extent she, her leaders, and her members conform themselves to Christ.

 

[Bookcat]

Read Catechism 823 and following

 

[Link0126]

The only doctrinal issue that I feel may have changed and sometimes struggle with is the dogma of No Salvation Outside the Church. On the surface, at least, it seems as if this one has changed…

 

[thistle]

The only doctrinal issue that I feel may have changed and sometimes struggle with is the dogma of No Salvation Outside the Church. On the surface, at least, it seems as if this one has changed…

Doctrines don’t change. They may be explained in a clearer way but the truth does not change.
The Church teaching is clear. There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Its simply a matter of what that means.

 

[pilots13]

The only doctrinal issue that I feel may have changed and sometimes struggle with is the dogma of No Salvation Outside the Church. On the surface, at least, it seems as if this one has changed…

From Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino (1441)
"“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the “eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matthew 25:41), unless before death they are joined with Her”

From Second Vatican Council, Lumen Gentium, 16
“Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience — those too may achieve eternal salvation”

So one Pope (as was what all Popes said at that time) says no salvation at all unless you become a member of the Church before death. Then Vatican II comes out and says the same thing, but… If you didn’t know the story of Christ at no fault of your own, then you can be saved. To me this is more of a shift in doctrine than a clarification.

 

[AbsolutionBliss]

I love all your replies! Thank you so much!
This will really help me.

So, just to clarify this, would this reply seem right:
“If the Catholic Church has never put out a dogma that was ‘morally wrong’, then why do people not look to the dogma on homosexuality for the right answer(s)?”

 

[Buck_Crosswhite]

I love all your replies! Thank you so much!
This will really help me.

So, just to clarify this, would this reply seem right:
“If the Catholic Church has never put out a dogma that was ‘morally wrong’, then why do people not look to the dogma on homosexuality for the right answer(s)?”

They don’t want right answers. They want answers that make them feel good.

 

[Godfollower]

From Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino (1441)
"“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the “eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matthew 25:41), unless before death they are joined with Her”

From Second Vatican Council, Lumen Gentium, 16
“Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience — those too may achieve eternal salvation”

So one Pope (as was what all Popes said at that time) says no salvation at all unless you become a member of the Church before death. Then Vatican II comes out and says the same thing, but… If you didn’t know the story of Christ at no fault of your own, then you can be saved. To me this is more of a shift in doctrine than a clarification.

Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus is an incredibly rich doctrine, but one that is easily misunderstood or – more commonly the case – subjected to unfortunate shorthand. The Church has always had a much fuller understanding of this doctrine than many think, and it’s dangerous to assume that one sentence from any document can automatically mean that certain people are doomed to hell.

After all, one Catholic document – the Bible – mentions that the Israelites can still be saved:

[11] I say then, have they so stumbled, that they should fall? God forbid. But by their offence, salvation is come to the Gentiles, that they may be emulous of them. [12] Now if the offence of them be the riches of the world, and the diminution of them, the riches of the Gentiles; how much more the fulness of them? [13] For I say to you, Gentiles: as long indeed as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I will honour my ministry, [14] If, by any means, I may provoke to emulation them who are my flesh, and may save some of them. [15] For if the loss of them be the reconciliation of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?

Romans 11:11-15.

As Justin Martyr taught:

But lest some should, without reason, and for the perversion of what we teach, maintain that we say that Christ was born one hundred and fifty years ago under Cyrenius, and subsequently, in the time of Pontius Pilate, taught what we say He taught; and should cry out against us as though all men who were born before Him were irresponsible — let us anticipate and solve the difficulty. We have been taught that Christ is the first-born of God, and we have declared above that He is the Word of whom every race of men were partakers; and those who lived reasonably are Christians, even though they have been thought atheists; as, among the Greeks, Socrates and Heraclitus, and men like them; and among the barbarians, Abraham, and Ananias, and Azarias, and Misael, and Elias, and many others whose actions and names we now decline to recount, because we know it would be tedious.

First Apology 46 (A.D. 151).

St. Augustine also wrote:

The Apostle Paul has said: “A man that is an heretic after the first and second admonition reject, knowing that he that is such is subverted and sins, being condemned of himself.” Titus 3:10-11 But though the doctrine which men hold be false and perverse, if they do not maintain it with passionate obstinacy, especially when they have not devised it by the rashness of their own presumption, but have accepted it from parents who had been misguided and had fallen into error, and if they are with anxiety seeking the truth, and are prepared to be set right when they have found it, such men are not to be counted heretics.

Letter 43 para. 1 (A.D. 397).

Keep in mind the doctrines of baptism of desire and salvation through martyrdom prior to baptism; as well as the doctrine of invincible ignorance. The Church has always taught that the doctrine Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus is true; but it’s a LOT richer than a simple formulaic recitation would allow. So the quotations given above are not contradictory.

 

[AbsolutionBliss]

Wow I am learning a lot from asking 1 question, thanks again everyone

So… i just noticed i said:
“Why do non-Christians bring up all these Bible verses before actually looking into them, researching them, or even finding what Catholics in the past have already said about them?”

And someone replied a while later:
“because Christians never show where God said his rules could change and conforme to mankinds convenience.”

What in the world does this mean? And how should I answer it?

 

[Bezant]

I know there have been some bad popes, bishops, priests, ect in the church (just as any other religion), but has there ever been a wrong teaching/dogma that the Church made?

Separate question:
And has any dogma/teaching ever been changed/edited?

This will help me a lot, because I recently said to someone (A non-christian) that “the Church has never been morally wrong.” & I don’t know if this is completely true or not.

Thank you, God bless!

This is a question I’m prodding. A problem I’ve recognised in past threads is the Church teaching ability and lay education; so while Church leaders may teach correctly, they might still be bad teachers, especially if lay people don’t have a proper background.

 

[LovePatience]

No and Yes.

No, nothing that has been declared “infalliable” is morally wrong.

Yes, there are things that have been taught or practiced by the Church, i.e. the Popes, that have not officially been declared infalliable that turned out to be morally wrong. In fact, many people who are saints, i.e. St. Francis of Assisi, St. Catherine of Siena, and St. Joan of Arc are saints because they spent their life in faithful obedience to the church but STILL pointed out its wrongdoing. It is good to recognize this because wrongdoing by Catholics creates scandal and leads to breaks from the Church, i.e. the Protestant Reformation or even the rise in atheism in Western Europe today.

There were Popes for slavery.

“We weighing all and singular the premises with due meditation, and noting that since we had formerly by other letters of ours granted among other things free and ample faculty to the aforesaid King Alfonso – to invade, search out, capture, vanquish, and subdue all Saracens and pagans whatsoever, and other enemies of Christ wheresoever placed, and the kingdoms, dukedoms, principalities, dominions, possessions, and all movable and immovable goods whatsoever held and possessed by them and to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery, and to apply and appropriate to himself and his successors the kingdoms, dukedoms, counties, principalities, dominions, possessions, and goods, and to convert them to his and their use and profit – by having secured the said faculty, the said King Alfonso, or, by his authority, the aforesaid infante, justly and lawfully has acquired and possessed, and doth possess, these islands, lands, harbors, and seas, and they do of right belong and pertain to the said King Alfonso and his successors”.

romancatholicism.org/popes-slavery.htm

However, St. Bridget of Sweden (one of the six patron saints of Europe) received Revelations directly from Jesus that this was wrong.

** Book 1: Chapter 129: **“The righteous person, whoever he or she may be, should also consider the material sustenance of the infidels converted to the faith so that they do not have to beg or be oppressed in slavery or be deprived of their corresponding rights. He should also take diligent care that such a convert should be continually instructed in the holy Catholic faith and in holy examples of virtue. It is indeed pleasing to me that pagan converts should see habits of holiness and hear words of charity. Many Christians come to the pagans undisciplined and in a state of moral disorder, boasting that they kill the pagans’ bodies and gain their temporal possessions. This pleases me about as much as those who sacrificed to the molten calf in the desert. Therefore, anyone who desires to please me by going to the pagans, let him first pluck out his eye of avarice and worldly fear. But he should keep his eye of compassion open along with his understanding so as to win their souls, desiring nothing but to die for God’s sake and to live for God.”

**Book 7: Chapter 28 **Now, however, know that in the Neapolitan citizenry many different horrible and secret sins are being committed which I am not relating to you. But instead I am speaking to you now about two kinds of open sins that greatly displease my Son and me and all the heavenly court.
The first sin is the fact that in this said city many buy pagans and infidels to be their slaves and that some masters of those slaves do not bother to baptize them and do not want to convert them to the Christian faith. And even if some of them are baptized, their masters bother no more, after the slaves’ baptism, to have them instructed and trained in the Christian faith or to train them in the reception of the Church’s sacraments than they did before the slaves’ baptism and conversion. And so it results that the said convert slaves, after accepting the faith, commit many sins and do not know how to return to the sacraments of penance and communion or how to be restored in the state of salvation and of reconciliation with God and of grace.
Moreover, some keep their female servants and slaves in extreme abjection and ignominy, as if they were dogs - selling them and, what is worse, frequently exposing them in a brothel to earn money that is a disgrace and an abomination. Others, in fact, keep them in their own houses as prostitutes both for themselves and for others; and this is extremely abominable and hateful to God and to me and also to the whole heavenly court.
Some other masters so grieve and exasperate these said servants of theirs with abusive words and blows that some of the said servants come to a state of despair and want to kill themselves. Indeed these sins and acts of negligence much displease God and all the heavenly court.
For God himself loves them because he created them; and to save all, he came into the world, taking flesh from me, and endured suffering and death on the cross. Know too that if anyone buys such pagans and infidels with the intention of making them Christians and wants to instruct and train them in the Christian faith and virtues and intends, during his life or at his death, to set these slaves at liberty so that the said slaves may not pass to his heirs, such a master of slaves merits much by this and is acceptable in the sight of God. But know for very certain that those who do the contrary will be heavily punished by God.

 

[LovePatience]

And Jesus judges the Popes who did wrong.

**Book 1: Chapter 41 ** I now complain over you, o head of my Church, who sit on my seat which I gave to Peter and his successors to sit on with a threefold dignity and power: First, so that they would have the power of binding and loosing souls from their sins. Second, so that they would open Heaven for the penitent. Third, so that that they would close Heaven to the damned and to those who despise my Law. But you, who should be healing souls and presenting them to me, you are in truth a murderer of souls. I appointed Peter as shepherd and guardian of my sheep. But you, however, scatter and wound them. You are worse than Lucifer. For he was envious of me and desired to kill none but me so that he could rule in my place. But you are so much worse, for you do not only kill me by driving me off from yourself by your bad deeds, but you also kill souls by your bad example. I redeemed the souls with my blood and entrusted them to you as to a faithful friend, but you deliver them back again to the enemy from whom I redeemed them. You are more unrighteous than Pilate. He judged no one else but me to death, but you not only judge me as if I were a powerless lord and worthy of no good thing, no, you also judge and condemn the souls of the innocent and let the guilty go free without any rebuke. You are more cruel than Judas who only sold me, but you not only sell me, but also the souls of my chosen men for your own shameful profit and vain name’s sake. You are more despicable than the Jews, for they only crucified my body, but you crucify and torture the souls of my chosen men for whom your malice and your sins are more bitter than from any wound from a sword. And so, since you are like Lucifer and more unrighteous than Pilate and more cruel than Judas and more despicable than the Jews, I complain over you with justice.