Struggling with hatred of heretical teachings

[bben15]

Anger is a sin. So no, I do not hate Protestantism, Orthodoxy, Islam, Judaism, or any teaching that contradict the Catholic Faith. Actually, in order for something to be a heresy, it must practice valid baptism. So, Mormonism, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Islam, etc. are not heresies. Plus, I don’t know if we should hate Judaism. Under the Old Covenant, Jews were the chosen people of God.

However, what I do is pray for non-Catholics to join the Church.

 

[PietroPaolo]

Anger and hate are sins. So no, I do not hate Protestantism, Orthodoxy, Islam, Judaism, or any teaching that contradict the Catholic Faith. Actually, in order for something to be a heresy, it must practice valid baptism. So, Mormonism, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Islam, etc. are not heresies. Plus, I don’t know if we should hate Judaism. Under the Old Covenant, Jews were the chosen people of God.

However, what I do is pray for non-Catholics to join the Church.

Hatred of evil is just.
Nothing just is sinful.
Therefore, hatred of evil is not sinful.

AND

Heresy is evil.
All evil is to be hated.
Therefore, heresy is to be hated.

Also, in his book The Great Heresies, Hillaire Belloc makes a convincing argument for considering Islam a heresy. Remember, Islam is based on a twisted form of Christianity. My favorite passage from Belloc’s book is:

*[t]here is no such thing as a religion called “Christianity” - there never has been such a religion".

“There is and always has been the Church, and various heresies proceeding from a rejection of some of the Church’s doctrines by men who still desire to retain the rest of her teaching and morals. But there never has been and never can be or will be a general Christian religion professed by men who all accept some central important doctrines, while agreeing to differ about others. There has always been from the beginning and will always be the Church, and sundry heresies either doomed to decay, or, like Mohammedanism, to grow into a separate religion. Of a common Christianity there never has been and never can be a definition, for it has never existed.”*

 

[njlisa]

I think this is going to be my last post on ecumenism. I think it makes the point pretty well. It’s from the Second Vatican Council, as cited by Blessed John Paul:

“It follows that these separated Churches and Communities, though we believe that they suffer from defects, have by no means been deprived of significance and value in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church”.12

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_25051995_ut-unum-sint_en.html#$3V

Their beliefs are defective but not without value. I don’t think I can say much more, because I’m banging the same drum.

I wish you well in your faith journey.

 

[PietroPaolo]

If you really want to delve into the nature of heresy, you can’t do better than reading St. Thomas Aquinas, you can read his thoughts from the Summa HERE.

 

[PietroPaolo]

I think this is going to be my last post on ecumenism. I think it makes the point pretty well. It’s from the Second Vatican Council, as cited by Blessed John Paul:

“It follows that these separated Churches and Communities, though we believe that they suffer from defects, have by no means been deprived of significance and value in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church”.12

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_25051995_ut-unum-sint_en.html#$3V

Their beliefs are defective but not without value. I don’t think I can say much more, because I’m banging the same drum.

I wish you well in your faith journey.

I think you are missing the point. The defects in their beliefs ARE the heretical beliefs they have. The degree to which their beliefs have value is the degree to which their beliefs are not heretical. Remember, ALL heretics believe some truth, only Christians can be heretics by definition. If a baptized person loses all faith in Christ they are not a heretic but an apostate.

 

[njlisa]

I think you are missing the point. The defects in their beliefs ARE the heretical beliefs they have. The degree to which their beliefs have value is the degree to which their beliefs are not heretical. Remember, ALL heretics believe some truth, only Christians can be heretics by definition. If a baptized person loses all faith in Christ they are not a heretic but an apostate.

I do get the idea that the “defects” are heresies and separated Churches do not have the fullness of faith. I think, in the spirit of ecumenism and the rules of CAF (which urges us to be respectful of other faiths), I would steer clear from the term “heretical” – especially if we are speaking of someone burdened by hatred. This really is my last contribution to the discussion. I’ve made my point, however clumsily.

 

[eyesopening]

I do get the idea that the “defects” are heresies and separated Churches do not have the fullness of faith. I think, in the spirit of ecumenism and the rules of CAF (which urges us to be respectful of other faiths), I would steer clear from the term “heretical” – especially if we are speaking of someone burdened by hatred. This really is my last contribution to the discussion. I’ve made my point, however clumsily.

Thank you for contributing!

 

[njlisa]

Thank you for contributing!

You’re welcome.

 

[PietroPaolo]

I do get the idea that the “defects” are heresies and separated Churches do not have the fullness of faith. I think, in the spirit of ecumenism and the rules of CAF (which urges us to be respectful of other faiths), I would steer clear from the term “heretical” – especially if we are speaking of someone burdened by hatred. This really is my last contribution to the discussion. I’ve made my point, however clumsily.

“Separated Churches” refer to the Eastern Orthodox Churches which are widely held to be the prime example of Schism without heresy, so we wouldn’t use the term heresy to apply to them anyhow. Protestants are “Ecclesial Communities” not “Separated Churches” and they are examples of both heresy and schism. In general all heretics are schismatics, but not all schismatics are heretics. If you find the word offensive you might prefer Christians with heterodox beliefs but that is quite a circumlocution. I’d caution against jettisoning a term that has been in use since the Early Church Fathers, many of whom wrote works “Against the Heretics” (e.g. St Irenaeus).

If you are interested in the ecumenical movement, I’d highly recommend reading *Mortalium Animos/I] by Pius XI, written in 1928 at the beginning of ecumenism it gives the proper context for reading the pronouncements of Vat 2 on the subject. Remember, BOTH Mortalium Animos and Vat 2 docs like Nostra Aetate and Dignitatis Humanae are a part of the infallible magisterium of the Church - one doesn’t cancel out the other, they need to be read in light of each other.

God bless.*

 

[VanSensei]

I too would suggest abstaining from referring to non-Catholic churches as “heretical”. “Separated” would be the better word in my opinion. Heretical is something better suited to refer to a Catholic who has adopted theological ideas contrary to the Church arbitrarily.

 

[njlisa]

I too would suggest abstaining from referring to non-Catholic churches as “heretical”. “Separated” would be the better word in my opinion. Heretical is something better suited to refer to a Catholic who has adopted theological ideas contrary to the Church arbitrarily.

 

[clem456]

There have been quite a few discussions on the proper use of the word heresy. A search can turn up good posts from some knowledgeable posters.

In general, one must be baptized Catholic to be a heretic. A person born Protestant is not a heretic. The founder of the denomination may have been a heretic, if he was a Catholic who left. Simply holding to protestant beliefs does not make a person a heretic.

The other issue is…heretic is a legal term. What place does it have in ecumenical dialogue? And who of us posting here has the authority to throw the word around with any credence? It’s counterproductive.

 

[njlisa]

There have been quite a few discussions on the properly use of the word heresy. A search can turn up good posts from some knowledgeable posters.

In general, one must be baptized Catholic to be a heretic. A person born Protestant is not a heretic. The founder of the denomination may have been a heretic, if he was a Catholic who left. Simply holding to protestant beliefs does not make a person a heretic.

The other issue is…heretic is a legal term. What place does it have in ecumenical dialogue? And who of us posting here has the authority to throw the word around with any credence? It’s counterproductive.