Is This Heretical?

[havok579257]

Yes, of course the issue is much greater than one statement. I've simply focused in on this one very specific comment for the sake of discussion. We can say that maybe this was an off cuff the remark and the Pope confused "Islam" with "Muslims" or just mispoke, never intending that God protect falsehood. But there are other issues which paint a particular pattern when it comes to our late Holy Father. This itself is a large issue of an even greater issue, namely the transformation the Church has made since the 1960s.

 

 

so do you think the church has been in error on things since its "supposed change" in the 1960s?

[mortify]

so do you think the church has been in error on things since its "supposed change" in the 1960s?

 

No, I don't think the Church is in error. Theologically speaking the Church can not be in error. What I see is a problem and I'm trying to understand it. The first impression is that our holy religion has been changed, but this may simply be my misinterpretation, I simply don't know right now.

[Nihil Obstat]

Yes, of course the issue is much greater than one statement. I've simply focused in on this one very specific comment for the sake of discussion. We can say that maybe this was an off cuff the remark and the Pope confused "Islam" with "Muslims" or just mispoke, never intending that God protect falsehood. But there are other issues which paint a particular pattern when it comes to our late Holy Father. This itself is a large issue of an even greater issue, namely the transformation the Church has made since the 1960s.

So, for a moment here, let us assume that everything you say here is true. What then do you think is the proper response to this widespread crisis of faith?

[Apotheoun]

At the time of John XII's election it was the general belief but not defined. He can't be charged with formal heresy anymore than Thomas Aquinas for rejecting the immaculate conception. But either way, the point is that with John XXII he retracted his private opinion and died accepting the general belief. His successor first formally defined the Beatific Vision immediatly post death as dogma. This does not mean that is when the belief became into being, just that when it was formally defined.

If it was the general belief of the Church then it was already, even by modern Roman Catholic standards, infallibly taught by the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium, and as a consequence Pope John XXII publicly taught error in his sermons in defense if his novel position.

Edited April 8, 2013 by Apotheoun

[mortify]

So, for a moment here, let us assume that everything you say here is true. What then do you think is the proper response to this widespread crisis of faith?

 

That's a really good question. If the worst case scenerio is true in that the teaching aparatus of the Church has taught heresy, then the Sedevacantists were right, though such a position is self defeating and one would ultimately have to seek spiritual safety outside of contemporary Roman Catholicism.

[Nihil Obstat]

That's a really good question. If the worst case scenerio is true in that the teaching aparatus of the Church has taught heresy, then the Sedevacantists were right, though such a position is self defeating and one would ultimately have to seek spiritual safety outside of contemporary Roman Catholicism.

I do not think that follows. At least not the way you are phrasing it. First you would have to establish that a pope holding heretical opinions makes de facto makes him an antipope. Because clearly in this case there was no danger of the pope attempting to infallibly define the opinion in question. Nor was it taught in any official sense by the Magisterium. Therefore I think that premise is quite weak.

 

So let us say that sedevacantism is far too extreme a response. We will remain sedeplenists. What else have we got?

[mortify]

I do not think that follows. At least not the way you are phrasing it. First you would have to establish that a pope holding heretical opinions makes de facto makes him an antipope. Because clearly in this case there was no danger of the pope attempting to infallibly define the opinion in question. Nor was it taught in any official sense by the Magisterium. Therefore I think that premise is quite weak.

 

So let us say that sedevacantism is far too extreme a response. We will remain sedeplenists. What else have we got?

 

A heretic is outside of the Church and can hold no jurisdiction, therefore any manifestly heretical Bishop is ipso facto devoid of an ecclesiastical authority or dignity. If a pope were deteremined to be a manfiest heretic, then he is no pope at all but and ordinary man who is can be subjected to the Church for judgement. 

[Nihil Obstat]

A heretic is outside of the Church and can hold no jurisdiction, therefore any manifestly heretical Bishop is ipso facto devoid of an ecclesiastical authority or dignity. If a pope were deteremined to be a manfiest heretic, then he is no pope at all but and ordinary man who is can be subjected to the Church for judgement. 

It would take a lot of mental gymnastics to turn this off-the-cuff statement into an obstinately held manifest error.

 

So I will say again, assuming we are going to remain sedeplenists, what next?

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

We should be asking for the intercession of the saints to protect all kinds of people. Do you feel disgust in praying for prostitutes,drug addicts,murderers, the pschizophrenic orphan, the over burdened widow, than perhaps you are the heretic and on the wrong team.

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

We should be asking for the intercession of the saints to protect all kinds of people. Do you feel disgust in praying for prostitutes,drug addicts,murderers, the pschizophrenic orphan, the over burdened widow, than perhaps you are the heretic and on the wrong team. Why have trouble praying for islam or asking for the intercession of the saints for islam or even offering up a rosary for islam? They all need our prayers too.

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

actually scratch that heretic comment and replace it with 'perhaps you are misled.'

[Apotheoun]

We should be asking for the intercession of the saints to protect all kinds of people. Do you feel disgust in praying for prostitutes,drug addicts,murderers, the pschizophrenic orphan, the over burdened widow, than perhaps you are the heretic and on the wrong team. Why have trouble praying for islam or asking for the intercession of the saints for islam or even offering up a rosary for islam? They all need our prayers too.

Praying for people is what Christ tells us to do in the Holy Gospel, but He nowhere commands (or even tells) us to pray for ideologies, and especially evil or harmful ideologies. I would no more pray for Islam than I would pray for Hinduism or Buddhism, or for Communism or Nazism. I would never ask the saints to protect an evil ideology.

Edited April 8, 2013 by Apotheoun

[Papist]

Can the Vicar of Christ preach heresy?

 

One statement out of a small prayer is not preaching. I am not saying I am comfortable with the statement. I am saying it should have no bearing on truth and your faith. 

 

Have you examined each and every Pope's prayers, writings and actions? Or just JPII? I don't understand your complete focus on JPII's shortcomings (shortcomings, as you define)

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

Praying for people is what Christ tells us to do in the Holy Gospel, but He nowhere commands (or even tells) us to pray for ideologies, and especially evil or harmful ideologies. I would no more pray for Islam than I would pray for Hinduism or Buddhism, or for Communism or Nazism. I would never ask the saints to protect an evil ideology.

 

And do you really think the saints would protect evil even if you asked? All prayers for things that are in accordance with the will of GOD are answered before we even ask, even for our enemies, if indeed they are enemies. The trick is to find out exactly what GOD wills. Maybe he doesn't wan't you in paticular to pray for islamists, perhaps your better suited to pray for something or someone else.

Edited April 8, 2013 by Tab'le Du'Bah-Rye

[Apotheoun]

And do you really think the saints would protect evil even if you asked? 

No, the saints would never protect an evil ideology, and that is true whether we are talking about Islam and paganism, or Nazism and totalitarianism, or any other false religious or political system. And of course the saints would not protect such evil even if I asked them to do it (something I would never do), nor would they do it even if a bishop or priest asked for such a terrible thing.

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

I would say that the "prayer" quoted in the poll is at face value unorthodox, but if you look at the Vatican's German language version of the pope's remarks in Jordan on 21 March 2000, the bizarre comment is not present. Quite honestly I think that the prepared remarks end somewhat earlier than the quoted comment, and that the quotation (as infelicitous as it is) is probably an off the cuff remark meant to convey diplomatic niceties to the King of Jordan and the Jordanian people. Should the pope have said it? No.

Yes but I think that is an interpretation of the prayer, and we can't say with any certainty what he intended to convey. For instance, I could see "protect Islam from violent exploitation" as another interpretation, or something else. It would have more doctrinal content if he had said "Islam, even as a non-Catholic religion, ought to be protected and flourish." It just seems to me that is going further than the seemingly off the cuff remark allows.

 

Yes, of course the issue is much greater than one statement. I've simply focused in on this one very specific comment for the sake of discussion. We can say that maybe this was an off cuff the remark and the Pope confused "Islam" with "Muslims" or just mispoke, never intending that God protect falsehood. But there are other issues which paint a particular pattern when it comes to our late Holy Father. This itself is a large issue of an even greater issue, namely the transformation the Church has made since the 1960s.

Confusing "Islam" with "Muslims" is another possible interpretation of what was said, but an interpretation nonetheless.

[Apotheoun]

The trick is to find out exactly what GOD wills. Maybe he doesn't wan't you in paticular to pray for islamists, perhaps your better suited to pray for something or someone else.

Once again you are confusing Islam (i.e., the Muslim religion) with what you call "Islamists" (i.e., Muslims, the followers of Muhammad).

 

I pray for Muslims every day. And my prayer - of course - is for the saints to intercede with God for the conversion of Muslims to Christianity, because only upon coming to faith in Christ may those who have been deceived by the false prophet Muhammad be truly freed from the curse of that religious system.

 

But I do not pray for God to protect Islam, which is a false religion, because such a prayer is utterly pointless.

[Apotheoun]

Confusing "Islam" with "Muslims" is another possible interpretation of what was said, but an interpretation nonetheless.

That is possible, because the pope's comments in the English (and a few of the other languages) text came after his official remarks had concluded. It is possible that he simply misspoke. 

Edited April 8, 2013 by Apotheoun

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

That is possible, because the pope's comments in the English (and a few of the other languages) text came after his official remarks had concluded. It is possible that he simply misspoke. 

I also saw that, which makes me wonder if that's even what he actually said. I wish we had video of the remarks.

[Apotheoun]

For instance, I could see "protect Islam from violent exploitation" as another interpretation, or something else. It would have more doctrinal content if he had said "Islam, even as a non-Catholic religion, ought to be protected and flourish." It just seems to me that is going further than the seemingly off the cuff remark allows.

Saying either of those two things would be theologically problematic. One cannot pray for a false religion, but one can pray for the deceived members of a false religion.

 

So for example a prayer that says "protect Muslims from violent exploitation" would be acceptable. Although a better prayer would be to say: "Free all Muslims from captivity to the false religion of Muhammad and bring them to faith in Christ, the only savior of mankind."