D
Digitonomy
Guest
I don’t think that’s strictly true. But perhaps I’m wrong; if you could cite the canon(s) which support your claim, I’d be much obliged.
- Status
J
Jim_Dandy
Guest
Please clarity: Are you saying that you don’t think it’s strictly true that there are only two kinds of Catholics – orthodox and unorthodox? Or, is it that you think I’m mistaken about canon law? Well, my interpretations are not infallible
I also stated that a Catholic is one who believes what the Church teaches.
Canon. 1364 §1 An apostate from the faith, a heretic or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication, without prejudice to the provision of Can. 194 §1, n. 2; a cleric, moreover, may be punished with the penalties mentioned in Can. 1336 §1, nn. 1, 2 and 3.
Can. 227 To lay members of Christ’s faithful belongs the right to have acknowledged as theirs that freedom in secular affairs which is common to all citizens. In using this freedom, however, they are to ensure that their actions are permeated with the spirit of the Gospel, and they are to heed the teaching of the Church proposed by the Magisterium, but they must be on guard, in questions of opinion, against proposing their own view as the teaching of the Church.
Can. 749 . By virtue of his office, the Supreme Pontiff possesses infallibility in teaching when as the supreme pastor and teacher of all the Christian faithful, who strengthens his brothers and sisters in the faith, he proclaims by definitive act that a doctrine of faith or morals is to be held.
The college of bishops also possesses infallibility in teaching when the bishops gathered together in an ecumenical council exercise the magisterium as teachers and judges of faith and morals who declare for the universal Church that a doctrine of faith or morals is to be held definitively; or when dispersed throughout the world but preserving the bond of communion among themselves and with the successor of Peter and teaching authentically together with the Roman Pontiff matters of faith or morals, they agree that a particular proposition is to be held definitively. No doctrine is understood as defined infallibly unless this is manifestly evident.
Can. 750 . A person must believe with divine and Catholic faith all those things contained in the word of God, written or handed on, that is, in the one deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn magisterium of the Church or by its ordinary and universal magisterium which is manifested by the common adherence of the Christian faithful under the leadership of the sacred magisterium; therefore all are bound to avoid any doctrines whatsoever contrary to them. Each and every thing which is proposed definitively by the magisterium of the Church concerning the doctrine of faith and morals, that is, each and every thing which is required to safeguard reverently and to expound faithfully the same deposit of faith, is also to be firmly embraced and retained; therefore, one who rejects those propositions which are to be held definitively is opposed to the doctrine of the Catholic Church.
Can. 751 Heresy is the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.
Can. 752 Although not an assent of faith, a religious submission of the intellect and will must be given to a doctrine which the Supreme Pontiff or the college of bishops declares concerning faith or morals when they exercise the authentic magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim it by definitive act; therefore, the Christian faithful are to take care to avoid those things which do not agree with it.
Can. 753 Although the bishops who are in communion with the head and members of the college, whether individually or joined together in conferences of bishops or in particular councils, do not possess infallibility in teaching, they are authentic teachers and instructors of the faith for the Christian faithful entrusted to their care; the Christian faithful are bound to adhere with religious submission of mind to the authentic magisterium of their bishops.
Can. 754 All the Christian faithful are obliged to observe the constitutions and decrees which the legitimate authority of the Church issues in order to propose doctrine and to proscribe erroneous opinions, particularly those which the Roman Pontiff or the college of bishops puts forth.–end quote–
A latae sententiae status can be put right by Confession.
Where did I go wrong?
D
Digitonomy
Guest
No, that’s certainly defensible - you can divide Catholics into however many categories you want, and two is perfectly acceptable. Although your argument itself is a bit contradictory; it sounds like you are stating there is really only one kind of Catholic.
Jim Dandy:
Thank you for all of that, it was very thorough and I had forgotten the exact wording.Or, is it that you think I’m mistaken about canon law? Well, my interpretations are not infallible
I also stated that a Catholic is one who believes what the Church teaches.
…Where did I go wrong?
What I didn’t see there was the strict definition you use for Catholic. Your excerpts of canon law lay out how heretics are excommunicated. It does not, however, indicate that these excommunicated heretics are no longer to be considered Catholic.
Your definition that a Catholic is one who believes what the Church teaches is problematic for other reasons. There are some who believe what the Church teaches, but have chosen not to enter the Church, or been prevented from doing so. And there are untold faithful who have severely flawed beliefs, which are contrary to those of the Church, but who remain actively involved and loyal for their own part, and are recognized by the Church as Catholics in good standing.
J
Jean_Anthony
Guest
aaa
1
1ke
Guest
Jim,
You write that heterodox Catholics “lose their Catholic status.” I think you need to clarify what you mean by that.
A heretic, schismatic, or apostate is latae sententiae excommunicated. Excommunication does not make one “not Catholic.” They do not “lose” their Catholic status. They are Catholic by virtue of their baptism and will be until the day they die and even beyond into eternity.
They are still Catholics. They are still bound by every Canon Law. They are still bound by the obligation to attend Mass on all Sundays and Holy Days.
They are Catholics in *mortal sin * (presuming they had full knowledge and free will) who are *not eligible to receive the Sacraments *until they repent and seek reconciliation with the Church in a formal way.
You write that heterodox Catholics “lose their Catholic status.” I think you need to clarify what you mean by that.
A heretic, schismatic, or apostate is latae sententiae excommunicated. Excommunication does not make one “not Catholic.” They do not “lose” their Catholic status. They are Catholic by virtue of their baptism and will be until the day they die and even beyond into eternity.
They are still Catholics. They are still bound by every Canon Law. They are still bound by the obligation to attend Mass on all Sundays and Holy Days.
They are Catholics in *mortal sin * (presuming they had full knowledge and free will) who are *not eligible to receive the Sacraments *until they repent and seek reconciliation with the Church in a formal way.
J
Jim_Dandy
Guest
Dear ke (or 1ke?)
That’s what I meant by putting “Catholic” in quotes in my original post as it applies to a dissenter. I should have clarified further, but you have given an excellent explanation. And, as I noted, Confession cures the excommunication. Thanks!
Jim Dandy
That’s what I meant by putting “Catholic” in quotes in my original post as it applies to a dissenter. I should have clarified further, but you have given an excellent explanation. And, as I noted, Confession cures the excommunication. Thanks!
Jim Dandy
L
LilyM
Guest
Aah - so by ‘lose their ‘Catholic’ status’ you meant they are no longer in communion with the Church, not that they are no longer Catholic.
Even the most arrant apostate or heretic or schismatic, if baptised in the Catholic Church, remains Catholic throughout the period of their excommunication. They just can’t receive the other sacraments - neither, for that matter, can children under the age of reason, but they are Catholic even so.
J
Jim_Dandy
Guest
The profession of faith that’s required of all new Catholics is presumed to be true of all Catholics in good standing: I believe and profess all that the holy Catholic Church believes, teaches, and proclaims to be revealed by God.
Please see 1ke’s post and my reply.
Such persons may be said to hold Catholic beliefs, but they are not Catholic and are not eligible to receive the Sacraments.
Anyone who holds beliefs that are contrary to those of the Church can pretend to be a faithful Catholic, but the canon laws apply to everyone. God knows their heart. The excommunication is automatic. The remedy is conversion, repentence, and Confession.
Peace be with you, Jim Dandy
D
didymus
Guest
First of all the whole “who’s a real Catholic” game is pretty useless. Once a Catholic, always a Catholic whether you’re a pewsitter, heretic or died and gone to your eternal reward or punishment.
As others have pointed out heresy has to be knowing and obstinate. When I first joined these forums I discovered I was a Pelagian
(mistakenly thinking we could make the first move toward God without His grace calling us).
Many are innocently heterodox because they were poorly catechised or because they are not equipped to deal with the finer points.
If you grabbed folks as they came out of and asked them what they received when they took Communion they’d probably say, “Jesus” or “The Body and Blood.” The more precision you demanded the more likely they would be to come up with heterodox or “heretical” answers.
As others have pointed out heresy has to be knowing and obstinate. When I first joined these forums I discovered I was a Pelagian
(mistakenly thinking we could make the first move toward God without His grace calling us).Many are innocently heterodox because they were poorly catechised or because they are not equipped to deal with the finer points.
If you grabbed folks as they came out of and asked them what they received when they took Communion they’d probably say, “Jesus” or “The Body and Blood.” The more precision you demanded the more likely they would be to come up with heterodox or “heretical” answers.
- Status