We Still Pray for Heretics, Schismatics and the Conversion of the Jews

[meltzerboy]

Only a very unwise person, to put it mildly would do that. that.

Having grown up Protestant and being around many holy protestant folks, including my dear grandmother, who lived a life dedicated to the Lord, I would obviously prefer the term “separated brethren.”

But actually does the Church today state that anyone is automatically damned? It seems to me that no one is wrong no matter what religion they are.

From what I’ve learned, the Catholic Church does not believe anyone is automatically damned since the mercy of G-d extends to everyone. However, the Church does believe we Jews are wrong, as are Protestants, since neither group has the fullness of truth found in Catholicism. I would imagine, according to Catholic teaching, Protestants are thought to be closer to the truth than Jews since most of the former believe in the Trinity and the divinity of Jesus. Still, it is not meant for any Catholic to prejudge the eternal fate of other individuals, but rather to pray for them. The Jewish perspective is that both Catholics and Protestants, as well as those of other religions and even atheists, can be rewarded in the World to Come provided they live according to the fundamental moral laws of G-d. We are forbidden to judge others, including fellow Jews, who are held to a higher standard than non-Jews, and are commanded to trust in G-d’s justice and mercy.

 

[TrueLight]

From what I’ve learned, the Catholic Church does not believe anyone is automatically damned since the mercy of G-d extends to everyone. However, the Church does believe we Jews are wrong, as are Protestants, since neither group has the fullness of truth found in Catholicism. I would imagine, according to Catholic teaching, Protestants are thought to be closer to the truth than Jews since most of the former believe in the Trinity and the divinity of Jesus. Still, it is not meant for any Catholic to prejudge the eternal fate of other individuals, but rather to pray for them. The Jewish perspective is that both Catholics and Protestants, as well as those of other religions and even atheists, can be rewarded in the World to Come provided they live according to the fundamental moral laws of G-d. We are forbidden to judge others, including fellow Jews, and are commanded to trust in G-d’s justice and mercy.

Right. I agree that no one knows who is damned save for God.

It does seem to me that the Church is moving more in the direction in the way the Jews view “reward” provided that people “live according to the fundamental moral laws of G-d.” But that was not always the case.

 

[gentle_atheist]

Today’s Protestants and Orthodox should be called “the followers of heretics and schismatics.”

With regard to the prayer for Jews, the prayer in the OF is a classic example of Vatican 2 ambiguity. In praying for Jews to “continue to grow in the love of his (God’s) name and in faithfulness to his covenant,” Catholics are arguably praying for Jews to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem and resume animal sacrifices.

 

[Rich_C]

Interesting.

But since the EF is celebrated according to the 1962 missal, then that is what is read.

This new GFP was composed specifically for the 1962 missal, it is the only change made to that missal since 1962, but since the Holy Father didn’t actually add it to the missal, making a new missal of 2007 or Mass of Pope Benedict XVI, I’m not sure what status this prayer has exactly. Also I have no idea whether or not it’s actually being used by the parishes.

 

[MarkThompson]

Interesting.

But since the EF is celebrated according to the 1962 missal, then that is what is read.

What you quoted in your OP is the 2008 revision. You can recap the entire history of this issue here, although Wikipedia is not correct that the term perfidis “did not mean perfidious but rather ‘unfaithful, non-believer.’” The definition given in the Oxford Latin Dictionary of adjective perfidus, runs, in its entirety:
That deliberately breaks faith, treacherous, false, deceitful. b (transf., of material things). c (of actions, words, etc.) marked by treachery or deceit.
And similarly Lewis & Short has:
I. that breaks his promise, faithless, false, dishonest, treacherous, perfidious.
I. Lit. (class.; “syn. infidus): vanum et perfidiosum esse,” Cic. Quint. 6, 26: “omnes, aliud agentes, aliud simulantes, perfidi, improbi, malitiosi sunt,” id. Off. 3, 14, 60.—
INDENT. With gen. (poet.): “gens perfida pacti,” faithless, Sil. 1, 5.—
b. Of inanim. and abstr. things (poet.): “bella,” Sil. 15, 819: “nex,” effected by treachery, Sen. Agam. 887: “arma,” Ov. F. 4, 380: “verba,” id. R. Am. 722.—
c. Adverb.: perfidum ridens Venus (= maligne ac dolose), Hor. C. 3, 27, 67.—As subst.: perfĭdus , i, m., a scoundrel, Juv. 13, 245; 9, 82.—
II. Transf., treacherous, unsafe, dangerous (poet. and in post-class. prose):[/INDENT]

 

[ProVobis]

Below are the English translations of the prayers of the Great Intercessions which occur during the Good Friday Liturgy:

In the pre-1962 missal (I have the Father Lasance and St. Andrew’s missals),

Oremus et pro perfidis Judaeis…

which interestingly enough was translated as “Let us pray, also, for the unfaithful Jews…” (“faithless” in St. Andrew’s). Somewhere along the line someone changed the translation to “perfidious Jews,” which seems to be much more demeaning to ALL the Jews. Shows the power of the translators when they wish to carry out an agenda, IMO. Cognates aren’t always the best translations, sometimes damaging.

Since then the perfidis has been understandably removed from the missal.

 

[Dranu]

First of all, Protestants are not heretics or schismatics. Their ancestors may have been, but they aren’t.

The crime of heresy or the crime of schism is an ecclesiastical law define in the CIC (Can 751). If the Protestant in question was not baptized in the Catholic Church or received into it, he/she is not bound to Canon Law. Therefore, the term “heretic” or “schismatic” could not, in a legal sense, apply.

I think this more means they are not heretics in the legal sense for jurisdictional purposes, but they are in another if heretic means choosing falsities in the faith without amounting to apostasy.

I do not think most of them are to be counted as heretics in the sense of the mortal sin because I think most of them lack the requisite knowledge and consent. I think many of them think they are actually doing the right thing by advancing some of their errors. However, they are certainly holders of heresy, and so are heretics in at least some understanding of that term (as unpolitically correct as the term is).

Therefore, I tend to think the term definitely applies to them in that prayer.

 

[TrueLight]

In the pre-1962 missal (I have the Father Lasance and St. Andrew’s missals),

which interestingly enough was translated as “Let us pray, also, for the unfaithful Jews…” (“faithless” in St. Andrew’s). Somewhere along the line someone changed the translation to “perfidious Jews,” which seems to be much more demeaning to ALL the Jews. Shows the power of the translators when they wish to carry out an agenda, IMO. Cognates aren’t always the best translations, sometimes damaging.

Since then the perfidis has been understandably removed from the missal.

Ah. Interesting. Yeah my missal doesn’t have the perfidis.

What you quoted in your OP is the 2008 revision. You can recap the entire history of this issue…

Thanks for the info mark.

It also makes me wonder if Ecclesia Dei will eventually make changes to the 1962 missal, and I don’t mean adding Saints.

 

[joanofarc2008]

I followed along in the Angelus Press Roman Catholic Daily missal and it used the terms schismatics and heretics, as did the Celebrant.

Is there another missal that uses different language?

Now I’m really curious. Would the pre-1962 missals have different language?

I believe it is the pre-1962 missal but I am no sure what year this actually changed.

 

[joanofarc2008]

I believe it is the pre-1962 missal but I am no sure what year this actually changed.

Oops just saw someone answered.

 

[newyorkcatholic]

Heresy, meaning the sin of heresy, obviously doesn’t apply to all Protestants because they often have limited knowledge of the Truth.

But all Protestants are heretics in the sense of “those who follow heretical beliefs.”

But many Protestants probably fit the first definition, because they are exposed to the Catholic Church but then choose to deny it. There is only one baptism, all are baptized Catholic, and as soon as a person raised in a Protestant group knows about the Catholic Church but rejects it, they are a heretic. One could theoretically estimate this as the vast majority of Protestants.

Same with the Orthodox and schismatic … you can’t assume they are personally guilty of schism but if they know about the True Church in unity with Peter and they reject it, they probably are schismatics then.

I think it was Archbishop Sheen who said “there are no Protestants under 5 years old.”

 

[EcceAgnusDei]

I don’t see the prayers as harsh. They are a loving plea that God will convert souls.

Exactly. We have to remember that salvation comes through Jesus Christ and His Church. It would be much more harsh of us to not pray for conversions. If we truly believe that the Roman Catholic Church is the Church of Jesus Christ, established by Jesus Christ, and that it contains the fullness of truth and the means of grace and salvation, then we should be fervently praying for the conversion of all people. I like how the Good Friday prayers break down non-Catholics into their perspective groupings in order to offer specific prayers for their specific needs.

It galls me that people get offended that we pray for their conversion, because what they are asking us to do is to change our doctrine (extra ecclesiam nulla salus) to accommodate their beliefs. Most Catholics don’t go around asking the Jews or the Muslims to change their religious practices to match our beliefs, do we? What’s even more frustrating is how often we bow to that pressure instead of holding firm to clearly defined truths. “You’re good, I’m good, it’s all good” is not what the Lord is going to be saying to all of us on the Judgement Day.

So, let us pray for the conversion of all: ourselves, the Church, the Jews, the heretics, the schismatics, the pagans, and all souls, that we may lead a holy life and have a holy death so that the perpetual light of God may shine upon us.

• PAX

 

[RyanBlack]

Heresy, meaning the sin of heresy, obviously doesn’t apply to all Protestants because they often have limited knowledge of the Truth.

But all Protestants are heretics in the sense of “those who follow heretical beliefs.”

But many Protestants probably fit the first definition, because they are exposed to the Catholic Church but then choose to deny it. There is only one baptism, all are baptized Catholic, and as soon as a person raised in a Protestant group knows about the Catholic Church but rejects it, they are a heretic. One could theoretically estimate this as the vast majority of Protestants.

Or not. Knowing that the Catholic Church exists is by no means the same thing as knowing that the Catholic Church is the one true Church, in possession of the fullness of truth.

 

[Rich_C]

Right. I agree that no one knows who is damned save for God.

It does seem to me that the Church is moving more in the direction in the way the Jews view “reward” provided that people “live according to the fundamental moral laws of G-d.” But that was not always the case.

Since Pope Paul VI stated afterward that Vatican II was merely a pastoral council, I took its ecumenical statements to be an expression of charity and hope for new and improved relationships, but not a change in doctrine.

Therefore, when I read that we hope for the salvation of non-Catholics, I read it in the traditional sense espoused before Vatican II. To the best of my understanding, which is incomplete that means that only because ignorance can mitigate people’s responsibility for their sins can we hope for the salvation of non-Christians, if they try to act according to natural law and God’s grace as best they know how. For non-Catholic Christians, their baptism redeems them but they have no means for future forgiveness of sin except perfect contrition. Basically, it is much harder to reach heaven if one isn’t Catholic, because the Church’s doctrines and most of all the sacraments are a sinner’s best hope.

 

[TrueLight]

Or not. Knowing that the Catholic Church exists is by no means the same thing as knowing that the Catholic Church is the one true Church, in possession of the fullness of truth.

Yeah. This is where it gets tricky. If I went back to the Protestant church now, I would definitely be a heretic because I know what the Catholic church is now.

As a Protestant, I knew some things about the Catholic Church like how Catholics “worship Mary” and all sort of wrong things. I knew as much about the Catholic church as I knew about Muslims and the chances of me converting to either one was about the same. That’s how much I believed the Catholic church had fallen away from the faith.

However, whether Protestants know it or not, their beliefs are heretical so we should pray for them as heretics. Ultimately it is up to God.

 

[joanofarc2008]

Yeah. This is where it gets tricky. If I went back to the Protestant church now, I would definitely be a heretic because I know what the Catholic church is now.

As a Protestant, I knew some things about the Catholic Church like how Catholics “worship Mary” and all sort of wrong things. I knew as much about the Catholic church as I knew about Muslims and the chances of me converting to either one was about the same. That’s how much I believed the Catholic church had fallen away from the faith.

However, whether Protestants know it or not, their beliefs are heretical so we should pray for them as heretics. Ultimately it is up to God.

This is a good example of what Rahner speaks about when he talks about “invincible ignorance” and “anonymous Christians.” However, many people attribute these ideas to mean salvation even with knowledge. This was one of my term papers last semester.

 

[TrueLight]

This is a good example of what Rahner speaks about when he talks about “invincible ignorance” and “anonymous Christians.” However, many people attribute these ideas to mean salvation even with knowledge. This was one of my term papers last semester.

Ooh so you must have lots of good info!

I am sort of torn on this topic probably because I am such a recent convert and not only that, but there were times in my life as a Protestant that I had a very close relationship with the Lord, so it is hard for me to discount that. I know that I was wrong, but I also know that God knew my heart - the heart who believed in Jesus as my Savior and who believed in the Trinity – in other words, I was a Christian.

Now that I understand the history of Protestantism, I do see that Protestants have heretical beliefs but I do believe that a lot of them have invincible ignorance.

Or maybe I’m still too close to my recent defection.

 

[TrueLight]

The reason that I started this thread was that I found it interesting that one portion of the Church does not use that language while another portion does.

Does anyone else find that interesting?

 

[newyorkcatholic]

Or not. Knowing that the Catholic Church exists is by no means the same thing as knowing that the Catholic Church is the one true Church, in possession of the fullness of truth.

You’re right, I retract my statement.

I should have been clear that knowing what the Church actually teaches (not all of it, but the basic claim) would be necessary, not only knowing she exists.

However, any Protestant who knows that the Church is so large and has existed for so long and claims to be the True Church probably has a seriously responsibility to examine this claim!

 

[EcceAgnusDei]

The reason that I started this thread was that I found it interesting that one portion of the Church does not use that language while another portion does.

Does anyone else find that interesting?

Yes, it is quite interesting. The intent of one set of prayers is much clearer than the intent of the other. In my experience, this seems to go across the board. Meaning, purpose, intent, and doctrine in the EF seem to be clearer than in the OF, especially how the OF is usually celebrated.

Let us pray for unity in faith, tradition, and truth.

• PAX