Heresy in the Roman Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter YoungApologist3
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Y

YoungApologist3

Guest
I have seen people talking about defecting if the Roman Church falls into heresy, which caused me to wonder: is it even possible for the Roman Church to fall into heresy? What exactly causes a Church (as in “Church sui iuris”) to fall into heresy? Is it the patriarch? Surely, if there’s one bad patriarch that changes the church sui iuris’s doctrine, the entire following doesn’t also fall into heresy, right?
I have always been under the impression that it is impossible for the Roman Church to fall into heresy because of Matthew 16:18, and the fact that the Roman patriarch is the successor of Peter. Am I mistaken?
 
Last edited:
I don’t it is possible for the Church to fall into heresy. Maybe heresy would be practiced by a majority of members but it wouldn’t be official Church teaching.
 
You are not mistaken, God has only one Church. What is speculated upon (presumptively, in my opinion) is whether the Pope will try to reform that Church to teach heresy, and what would happen in that case. I say that nothing will happen to Church, except some changes to the body, and there will simply be a Schism with the former Pope on one side and the true Church on the other. This has never happened, however, and I don’t think it will happen any time soon.
 
But how could that even happen? How does a Pope go about changing (or at least trying) the Church’s doctrine without doing so infallibly? Would not anything short of an infallible teaching just warrant a reaction like, “He’s crazy. Don’t listen to him. This is what the Church actually says.”
(And of course, an infallible teaching is… Infallible.)
 
Last edited:
Well, like I said it never has happened, and this is pure speculation. I don’t know if it is possible for a Pope to teach heresy, but since he too has free will I’m guessing it is. Teaching heresy ex Cathedra, however, is certainly impossible, as it is a bit of an oxymoron. Talking ex Cathedra means that the Pope is definitively speaking on behalf of the Church, and if he speaks heresy then he cannot possibly speak on behalf of the Church. Claiming to do so when he isn’t is just a lie, and has no authority over the Church.
 
Theban said:
I say that nothing will happen to Church, except some changes to the body, and there will simply be a Schism with the former Pope on one side and the true Church on the other. This has never happened, however, and I don’t think it will happen any time soon.
Click to expand...
It has. It’s known as the Reformation.

Yes, that was tongue-in-cheek and flippant, but any schism has two sides. And one side’s heresy is the other side’s True Church, in principle in any schism.
 
What I mean is the Pope has never taught heresy, not that heresies has never happened. Of course as Lutheran you’re going to disagree that the Popes have a clear record, and I won’t argue about that here, but even the Reformation was not about a specific new teaching from the Pope that caused controversy, like the other thread was talking about.
 
Heresy is the least of the concerns for the RCC to fall into, the Church has too many issues with bad clergy / religious ranging on a varity of levels that will always need to be addressed before having to worry about falling into a global wide heresy.
 
Sadly what you say is true.

If one doesn’t know the teaching of the church how will you defend it right? its like defending a fish from water.
 
The Church is referred to as the “pillar and ground of truth” in Scripture, and the dogma of infallibility of the Church guarantees that the Church cannot fall into heresy. However, as we saw with the Arian heresy, the majority of the members of the Church CAN fall into heresy.

When St. Athanasius noticed the Arian’s heresy had spread to the majority of the Church, he was quoted as saying:
“Thus, the more violently they try to occupy the places of worship, the more they separate themselves from the Church. They claim that they represent the Church; but in reality, they are the ones who are expelling themselves from it and going astray. Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ.” He was also quoted as saying, “They have the buildings, but we have the faith”
 
I’m not talking about the whole Catholic Church. I’m talking about the Roman church within the Catholic Church. For example, the Byzantine church has gone into heresy in the past (edit: I just remembered that Byzantine is a rite, not a church sui iuris. For the sake of example, think “Greek church” instead of “Byzantine church.”); they ceased to be Catholic during that time. Can the same happen in the Roman church?
 
Last edited:
The lowest point for the papacy was probably during the Renaissance, which was followed by spiritual reform of the Church. So no worries.
 
The Church has always taught that even a Pope in Rome can become a heretic. Many quotes exist confirming this.
 
YoungApologist3 said:
I have always been under the impression that it is impossible for the Roman Church to fall into heresy because of Matthew 16:18, and the fact that the Roman patriarch is the successor of Peter. Am I mistaken?
Click to expand...
Correct .

The magisterium of the Catholic Church is the church’s authority or office to establish teachings. That authority is vested uniquely in the Pope and the bishops .

The bishops in union with each other and always in union with the Pope , the Bishop of Rome , cannot teach heresy .

For me to believe otherwise would be to look upon Jesus as a liar .

At the 21st Ecumenical Council of the Church the Fathers of that sacred Council declared in their document Lumen Gentium , “Bishops, teaching in communion with the Roman Pontiff, are to be respected by all as witnesses to divine and Catholic truth. In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent. This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will. His mind and will in the matter may be known either from the character of the documents, from his frequent repetition of the same doctrine, or from his manner of speaking.”
 
There have been some 20+ councils in the history of the Church where a lot of things that popes, bishops, priests, deacons and lay people disagreed with one another was settled. From the Trinity and if Jesus was God but then became only human at the incarnation to the salvation of people with other religious backgrounds than Catholic/Christian. My guess would be that most issues have already been settled in a council.

“The pope is under the council and the council is under the pope.”
 
The Church is indefectible and so She cannot fall into heresy, nor can She lead the faithful away from the path of salvation. The teaching that the Church is indefectible is a dogma, under the ordinary and universal magisterium. So it is not at all possible for the Church to fall into heresy.
 
The Catholic Church fall into heresy? Who would anathematize us? The EO? Lutherans? Quakers? 🤣
 
The great schism in 1054.

Edit: I know that many Byzantines are presently in communion with Rome. However, they weren’t always. It is commonly thought that the only Eastern church that has never fallen into heresy is the Maronite church (I think that’s the right one…)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top