Inquisition/Church teaching

  • Thread starter Thread starter TomD123
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TomD123

Guest
I was in a discussion recently about the infallibility of the Church and the authority of the Church teaching on morals. The inquisition was only briefly mentioned. However, I was wondering if it came up again, how to respond. The person I was talking too said Church teaching may change.
So, I was wondering how to respond. I know that the inquisition itself was not a matter of Church teaching but how should I respond about the Church approving of the inquisition? There were some bulls which allowed for different inquisition procedures, so how could I defend these?

Also, with reguards to the teachings of the Church, what is the Church teaching on the death penalty for heretics and has it changed? How should I understand the teaching of religious liberty in light of Vatican II and the previous teachings? How does the Church respond to the inquisition now? Was it intrinsically evil or just had many abuses?

This is a pretty long question, but any insights would be great! Thanks
 
TomD123 said:
I was in a discussion recently about the infallibility of the Church and the authority of the Church teaching on morals. The inquisition was only briefly mentioned. However, I was wondering if it came up again, how to respond. The person I was talking too said Church teaching may change.
So, I was wondering how to respond. I know that the inquisition itself was not a matter of Church teaching but how should I respond about the Church approving of the inquisition? There were some bulls which allowed for different inquisition procedures, so how could I defend these?

Also, with reguards to the teachings of the Church, what is the Church teaching on the death penalty for heretics and has it changed? How should I understand the teaching of religious liberty in light of Vatican II and the previous teachings? How does the Church respond to the inquisition now? Was it intrinsically evil or just had many abuses?

This is a pretty long question, but any insights would be great! Thanks
Click to expand...
The pope is infallible on matters of moral and faith. With that said even when he speaks during a homily it is not infallible even if on a matter of faith. It is only infallible in the cases where he invokes the holy spirit in such a specific manner. As such we have 20 infallible documents if you would from the Pope directly and 300 from the Pope presiding over ecumenical councils. Not every document from the ecumenical councils were invoked infallible. WHen the Pope invokes such a matter he speaks “ex conthedra”.

Specifically there are 7 levels of theological certainty:
  1. Opinio tolerata: Opinions tolerated within the Catholic Church
  2. Sententia probabilis: Teachers with low degree of certainty, but probably correct (51% or more)
  3. Sententia communis: Teachings which are popular but within free range of theological research
  4. Theologica certa: Church teachings without final approval but clearly deduced from revealation
  5. Sententia fidei: Church teachings, which are generally accepted as divine revelation but not defined by the magisterium
  6. Fides ecclesiastica: Church teachings, which have been definitively decided on the the Magisterium considered infallible revelation
  7. De fide: Divine revelations with the highest degree of certainty, considered infallible revelation
This only applies to the teaching, not the implementation! The teaching on our faith might lead a person in a position of power, like a King to send off an army to kill muslims in a neighboring nation and then claimed he was following Church teachings. Or a pro-life advocate might bomb a clinic and inadvertently kill a dozen children on a field trip to a nearby museum while passing by. These are not church teachings to kill but they are sometimes led or provoked by non-infallible opinions from the church leaders on how to address matters of faith.

In matters of implementation the Church is not infallible. Rather it is authoritative and non-errant.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top