Heretical bishops

[twf]

I have a hard time understanding the mindset of heretical bishops. They clearly can not accept the infallibility of the Church if they disagree with Her stance on issues such as homosexuality, abortion, ABC, the ordination of women, etc. If they do not accept the infallibility of the Church, how do they justify the Church’s, and thus their own, authority?

 

[DavidFilmer]

Some of these bishops might argue that nothing you’ve cited has been infallibly defined.

You say “homosexuality” but do not distinguish between orientation (which, of itself, is not sinful) and acts (which occur outside marriage, and thus are). Of course, in this regard, HETEROsexual acts outside of marriage are NO DIFFERENT than homosexual ones. Anyone who wishes to condemn homosexual acts must be equally ready to condemn HETEROsexual acts between unmarried men and women.

If, by ABC, you mean “Abstinence, Be Faithful, use Condoms,” I would hope that most bishops would at least agree with the first two of these conditions. As far as condoms go, Humanae Vitae is GREAT, but (last time I checked) it has not been designated as an Ex Cathedra proclamation.

And, as far as I know, the Church has never formally defined that women lack Sacramental capacity for Orders (I wish She would go ahead and define this and be done with it!).

Even abortion, the gravest of sins, is only weakly condemned in infallible doctrine. It is mentioned, almost in passing, in V2’s Gaudium et spes. I do not know of any infallible proclamation that defines that all abortions are sinful under any circumstances.

I’m not siding with liberal Bishops. But let’s be careful what we call dogma. I wish Mother Church would be more decisive in defining these things, but in the absence of such formal definition, theologians are at liberty to digress.

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

DavidFilmer:

And, as far as I know, the Church has never formally defined that women lack Sacramental capacity for Orders (I wish She would go ahead and define this and be done with it!).

The question has been addressed. It is not a question “that women lack Sacramental capacity.” Rather, it is that the Church lacks the capacity to administer the Sacrament of Holy Orders to women.

This is defined in “ORDINATIO SACERDOTALIS” Pope John Paul II’s
Apostolic Letter On Reserving Priestly Ordination To Men Alone.

Sure enough, some folks wondered whether or not the teaching in the letter was to be held definitively, as a part of the deposit of the faith. The CDF answered that as follows:

CONCERNING THE TEACHING CONTAINED IN ORDINATIO SACERDOTALIS RESPONSUM AD DUBIUM

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
October 28, 1995

Dubium: Whether the teaching that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women, which is presented in the Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis to be held definitively, is to be understood as belonging to the deposit of faith.

Responsum: In the affirmative.

This teaching requires definitive assent, since, founded on the written Word of God, and from the beginning constantly preserved and applied in the Tradition of the Church, it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium (cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium 25, 2). Thus, in the present circumstances, the Roman Pontiff, exercising his proper office of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32), has handed on this same teaching by a formal declaration, explicitly stating what is to be held always, everywhere, and by all, as belonging to the deposit of the faith.

The Sovereign Pontiff John Paul II, at the Audience granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect, approved this Reply, adopted in the ordinary session of this Congregation, and ordered it to be published.

Rome, from the offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, on the Feast of the Apostles SS. Simon and Jude, October 28, 1995.

Joseph Card. Ratzinger
Prefect

Tarcisio Bertone
Archbishop Emeritus of Vercelli

So yes, there is formal definition, of nine years standing, referencing teaching “from the beginning.”

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[Quo_Vadis]

If, by ABC, you mean “Abstinence, Be Faithful, use Condoms,”

ABC = artificial birth control

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Gerry - Now they will want a statement that the Congregation’s statement is infallible; and then one that that statement is infallible; and then . . .

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

Joe Kelley:

Gerry - Now they will want a statement that the Congregation’s statement is infallible; and then one that that statement is infallible; and then . . .

Well, they might, but the faithful know that when the Holy Father says “publish this,” that’s that.

Sadly, though, many could well use their energy to grasp at straws, rather than to configure themselves to obedience.

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[Exporter]

twf:

I have a hard time understanding the mindset of heretical bishops. They clearly can not accept the infallibility of the Church if they disagree with Her stance on issues such as homosexuality, abortion, ABC, the ordination of women, etc. If they do not accept the infallibility of the Church, how do they justify the Church’s, and thus their own, authority?

---

I have a hard time understanding the mindset of my 18 yearold daughter. And I see her quite often. She talks to me, I hear her.

twf, to understand your question would require great concentration. You could been more clear, don’t you think? You dont talk to any Bishops do you. Have you telephoned them? Just how much time have you spent talking to a Priest about Bishops.

After you do your homework, come back and tell us about it.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

The need to certify that infallible statements are infallible reminded me of my grandmother’s Birth Certificate.

I had occasion to order an official copy of it. It arrived complete with an attached statement by the Judge of Probate certifying it as a true copy;

and a statement from his Clerk certifying that he is the Judge;

and a statement from the Judge certifying that she is the Clerk.

 

[DavidFilmer]

The OP was talking about infallable doctrine. Papal letters do not meet that level of authority. A billion papal letters do not equal one single infallable proclimation.

 

[twf]

David: Most, if not all, of the points I raised are matters of Faith infallibly condemned by the ordinary magisterium for centuries. (Heck…abortion is specifically condemned in the Didache…1900 years ago!) Need more be said? Am I not correct to assert that the ordinary magisterium is also infallible? (Not to mention that homosexual acts are clearly condemned by Sacred Scripture). In the case of the ordination of women, the Holy Father and the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith have made it clear that the constant teaching of the ordinary magisterium does not allow for this. The matter is settled, as far as the Holy Father is concerned. We can not fall into this trap of thinking that only the extraordinary magisterium is infallible.

Exporter: Yes, sorry, my original post was a bit vague…I probably wrote it late at night and wanted to get to bed. .

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

DavidFilmer:

The OP was talking about infallable doctrine. Papal letters do not meet that level of authority. A billion papal letters do not equal one single infallable proclimation.

A given papal letter may, or may not, refer to an infallable doctrine. Ordination Sacerdotalis, it has been confirmed, did.

We must recall that the Deposit of the Faith cannot be added to or subtracted from. Most authoritative pronouncement in history have been made to confirm that something is part of the Deposit of the Faith when it has been denied or disputed. A pronouncement does not add to the Deposit of the Faith; it points to something that has always been there.

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[Exporter]

twf,

Your profile says your religion is : “seeking full communion”

Your thread, “Heretical Bishops” reveals that you are not seeking the Catholic Church.

Are you some type of Fundamentalist Anti-Catholic? You should do your homework before you start anti-Catholic threads. You can do better. Do your homework first. These questions are elementary.

Your homework can start by reading these posts. Go to Catholic Encyclopedia at this link.newadvent.org/cathen/12495a.htm it is alphabetical.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Exporter:

twf,

Your profile says your religion is : “seeking full communion”

Your thread, “Heretical Bishops” reveals that you are not seeking the Catholic Church.

Are you some type of Fundamentalist Anti-Catholic? You should do your homework before you start anti-Catholic threads. You can do better. Do your homework first. These questions are elementary.

Your homework can start by reading these posts. Go to Catholic Encyclopedia at this link.newadvent.org/cathen/12495a.htm it is alphabetical.

I would say a better place to go would be the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

The Catholic Encyclopedia is not a work of the Magisterium and has its limitations and biases as have been pointed out else where at this forum.

 

[New_Heart]

Here you will find a list of not only the heretical popes but those who are duplicates. The reason there are duplicates of popes is because some of them who are still recognized today bought their popehood, or were put in place by someone who assissinated one or who outright usurped the so-called throne…

If anyone wants to truly understand how popery came to be there are many history books that tell the true story. The catholic library is full of documented proof of the forgeries and lies of the so-called papacy.

Check out the Isadorian Decretals (spelling); The Constantine letters etc, etc, etc. Check out how many so-called convents or nunneries were actually houses of ill repute. Check out how many illegitimate children were actually children of popes. It is all there if you choose to look. That is the catholic church history in a nutshell. The only reason they are not made common knowledge is that they may lose their wealth.

As an ex-dedicated, wanted to be a nun catholic I can tell you the truth really does devastate, but only for a time. Jesus heals all wounds. Believe me!

I know I will probably be banned for this post, but that will not surprise me, in light of Jesus words: ** Matthew 5:11-12 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you. John 15:20-21 Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also. But all these things will they do unto you for my name’s sake, because they know not him that sent me.**

 

[DavidFilmer]

twf:

David: Most, if not all, of the points I raised are matters of Faith infallibly condemned by the ordinary Magisterium for centuries. (Heck…abortion is specifically condemned in the Didache…1900 years ago!) Need more be said?

The Didache is not an infallible document. It’s not even close.

twf:

Am I not correct to assert that the ordinary Magisterium is also infallible?

You are correct, but only under EXTREMELY LIMITED and clearly defined circumstances. You might be able to document that EVERY SINGLE BISHOP AND POPE WHO EVER LIVED believed this, but this alone would NOT satsify the criteria for infallibility. See CCC 888-892.

(Not to mention that homosexual acts are clearly condemned by Sacred Scripture).

I never said they weren’t. I only pointed out that your original question was ambiguous. I agree that homosexual acts are sinful, but every bit as sinful as heterosexual acts outside of marriage. The fact that you said “homosexuality” instead of “sex outside marriage” confused me, as the former is a subset of the latter, which is a FAR more prevalent sin in our society.

twf:

In the case of the ordination of women, the Holy Father and the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith have made it clear that the constant teaching of the ordinary Magisterium does not allow for this. The matter is settled, as far as the Holy Father is concerned.

Perhaps, but the matter has yet to be defined in a manner that meets the criteria for infallibility. In other words, it has never been defined in a manner which would prohibit the Church from reversing Her position at some later date. Nobody has ever used the “magic words” that make this doctrine stick (ie, a clearly explicit statement that this is “for belief as being divinely revealed” and it “must be adhered to with the obedience of faith.”)

twf:

We can not fall into this trap of thinking that only the extraordinary Magisterium is infallible.

But we cannot fall into the trap of being the interpreters of what the ordinary Magisterium teaches. Only the Church can formally define a teaching to come from either the ordinary or extraordinary Magisterium. It is NOT up to us to decide.

As Catholics, we are constantly challenged by protestants who want to throw up every (wacky) thing that a Pope or an Early Father or a Congregation or a bishop ever said. We say over and over again that these DO NOT represent official Church teaching. And now I hear this same thing from Catholics! Let’s be VERY CAREFUL what doctrines we label “infallible.”

 

[DavidFilmer]

New Heart:

… Anti-Papal Rant …

The problem is that your reply is off-topic for this thread. If you want to throw out a bunch of stuff from Chick comic books about the Pope, you would be better advised to open a brand-new thread in this forum on this topic. But you may wish to use the board’s “search” capabilities to see prior postings, as your points have already been discredited in prior threads.

 

[aridite]

DavidFilmer:

Perhaps, but the matter has yet to be defined in a manner that meets the criteria for infallibility. In other words, it has never been defined in a manner which would prohibit the Church from reversing Her position at some later date. Nobody has ever used the “magic words” that make this doctrine stick (ie, a clearly explicit statement that this is “for belief as being divinely revealed” and it “must be adhered to with the obedience of faith.”)

Magic words?!? :bigyikes: This is a pretty simplistic characterization of infallibility. It just is not the case that ONLY ex cathedra statements are infallible. In fact, ex cathedra statements are an exercise of the EXTRA-ordinary magisterium. But, there really is such a thing as the ordinary magisterium and it really is infallible even without ex cathedra statements that it is infallible. I fully expect that there will not be an ex cathedra statement that the Church has no authority to ordain women simply because it has already been determined to be true, infallibly, by the OM (of which Ordinatio Sacerdotalis and the CDF Responsum ad dubium are parts). For the pope to issue a ex cathedra statement of what the OM has already determined to be true, would undercut the authority of the OM. By only looking to ex cathedra statements as infallible, you are turning what is supposed to be exta-ordinary into ordinary.

DavidFilmer:

But we cannot fall into the trap of being the interpreters of what the ordinary Magisterium teaches. Only the Church can formally define a teaching to come from either the ordinary or extraordinary Magisterium. It is NOT up to us to decide.

But it can’t require an ex cathedra statement to decide between ordinary and extraordinary, either. Then, everything is extraordinary.

DavidFilmer:

As Catholics, we are constantly challenged by protestants who want to throw up every (wacky) thing that a Pope or an Early Father or a Congregation or a bishop ever said. We say over and over again that these DO NOT represent official Church teaching. And now I hear this same thing from Catholics! Let’s be VERY CAREFUL what doctrines we label “infallible.”

The original list contains things that hardly fall under “wacky” things popes, etc. have said, so your objection is really a red herring.

I have a question, though. Which (living) bishops have said said anything heretical? I know I’m probably asking for a deluge of questionable statements by bishops, so I would ask for something that clearly and explicitly denies some truth of the Catholic Church. I’m not saying that there have not been any such statements, just that I don’t know about them. It is my experience that priests who get named bishop are already pretty orthodox and loyal to the pope. I suppose their views may not have been fully known, or they may have gone off the deep end later, but I would be surprised if there were many.

If there are any, I agree with twf that by breaking communion with the rest of the College of Bishops and the pope, such bishops are really undermining their own authority. Theirs becomes just another voice in the marketplace of ideas, and so should not be given any special weight.

 

[New_Heart]

DavidFilmer:

The problem is that your reply is off-topic for this thread. If you want to throw out a bunch of stuff from Chick comic books about the Pope, you would be better advised to open a brand-new thread in this forum on this topic. But you may wish to use the board’s “search” capabilities to see prior postings, as your points have already been discredited in prior threads.

I am sorry, what is chick comics? You kind of lost me here.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

twf:

I have a hard time understanding the mindset of heretical bishops. They clearly can not accept the infallibility of the Church if they disagree with Her stance on issues such as homosexuality, abortion, ABC, the ordination of women, etc. If they do not accept the infallibility of the Church, how do they justify the Church’s, and thus their own, authority?

== “Heresy” is frequently not heresy at all, but nothing worse than evidence that the accused person has a better grasp of the Catholic faith than his accusers.

It is a reasonable assumption, that, since no one in particular is being accused, there is no case whatever to answer. ==

 

[Des]

New Heart:

I am sorry, what is chick comics? You kind of lost me here.

Hateful comics made up by a fellow named jack chick who says the worst possible things about the Catholic Church. These bigots actually believe they are doing the will of God and evangelizing. chick.com/reading/tracts/1019/1019_01.asp