Should Heretics Be Burned?

[Patrick]

I was rather shocked in my research to come across Exsurge Domine (1520) which seems to proclaim ex cathedra that "we condemn, reprobate, and reject completely ... [other things rejected] ... that heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit."

Could some knowledgeable Catholic please enlighten me on this?

[MichaelF]

Almost all the executions were mandated by the secular authorities (not counting mob action). Heresy caused social disruption, which the governments of the day....frowned upon.

[Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam]

As far as I know heretics were not burned by the Church but rather by civil governments who at the time had outlawed heresy as a crime against the state and for which a possible punishment was being burned alive. An example of this is Saint Joan of Arc who was burned by the English for being a heretic after she was captured by the Burgundians and sold to the English. She was declared a martyr by the Church.

[Patrick]

[quote name='MichaelF' post='1894465' date='Jun 17 2009, 01:37 PM']Almost all the executions were mandated by the secular authorities (not counting mob action). Heresy caused social disruption, which the governments of the day....frowned upon.[/quote]

My question is regarding an official proclamation from the Roman Catholic church, not the practices of the governments of the time.

For example, is this proclamation still in effect?

[Patrick]

And also, what is the consequence? If you say that the burning of heretics is against God's will, you are condemned, reprobated, and rejected completely by the Catholic Church, at least at the time, if not still now. What does that mean though? Excommunication? A slap on the hand?

[Patrick]

And, does this proclamation mean that the Roman Catholic Church officially condoned (condones?) the burning of heretics?

[Resurrexi]

I would say that there were a few times in the past where burning heretics at the stake were justified, thus I agree with the Holy Father that it was not always wrong to execute heretics in the past.

Edited June 17, 2009 by Resurrexi

[Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam]

I do think this proclamation is in effect (I do not know if and how it would not be in effect any longer). I think this means thought that in general things are left up to the local bishop as in any other things of this nature. I mean if the Church says something is murder and as such a very grave sin then the local Bishop has the responsibility to teach it. It would be the responsibility of the Bishop to excommunicate etc etc if he felt the situation called for it. The Roman Church does not condone the burning of heretics just as it is against capital punishment. However, I don't think this is an issue anymore since I don't think governments will be burning people for heresy anymore seeing as society can't even seem to agree that there is an object truth to be pursued in life. I think the only way the issue is carried over is into the debate about capital punishment.

[Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam]

[quote name='Patrick' post='1894494' date='Jun 17 2009, 04:48 PM']And, does this proclamation mean that the Roman Catholic Church officially condoned (condones?) the burning of heretics?[/quote]

When did a pope or a bishop ever proclaim such a thing? I am unaware of any such statement. From the excerpt you quoted it seems as if the Church does discourage it and does not condone the burning of heretics.

[Resurrexi]

In the bull [i]Exsurge Domine[/i], Leo X condemned 41 of Luther's theses. The Holy Father said of those condemned theses: "All and each of the above mentioned articles or errors, so to speak, as set before you, we condemn, disapprove, and entirely reject as respectively heretical, or scandalous, or false, or offensive to pious ears, or seductive of simple minds, and in opposition to Catholic truth."

"Haereticos comburi est contra voluntatem Spiritus" (Pope Leo X, [i]Exsurge Domine[/i], 33: DS 1483), which means "That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit" was among the propositions condemned.

Therefore, a Catholic cannot hold that the execution of heretics was always immoral in the past.

Edited June 17, 2009 by Resurrexi

[Patrick]

[quote name='Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam' post='1894516' date='Jun 17 2009, 03:15 PM']When did a pope or a bishop ever proclaim such a thing? I am unaware of any such statement. From the excerpt you quoted it seems as if the Church does discourage it and does not condone the burning of heretics.[/quote]

Re-read it. It's easy to miss a negative in there.

[Resurrexi]

By the way, I don't like how the poll is worded. I don't think it would be a good idea to execute heretics today, but in the past it was often fine.

[Patrick]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1894522' date='Jun 17 2009, 03:24 PM']Therefore, a Catholic cannot hold that the execution of heretics was always immoral in the past.[/quote]

And it's still in effect, so a Catholic cannot hold that the execution of heretics (by burning even) is immoral now. Right?

[Resurrexi]

If there were some country that had a medieval culture (e.g. nearly everyone was Catholic and heretics were a threat to the State; putting the heretic in prison for life wasn't really an option), then it would be moral to execute heretics now in certain instances.

[Patrick]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1894546' date='Jun 17 2009, 03:42 PM']If there were some country that had a medieval culture (e.g. nearly everyone was Catholic and heretics were a threat to the State; putting the heretic in prison for life wasn't really an option), then it would be moral to execute heretics now in certain instances.[/quote]

You seem to be adding a lot of conditions that weren't in the original bull. Are there other sources that refine this one?

[Patrick]

Interesting. People are starting to vote yes. :-)

[Apotheoun]

I think that excommunication is a sufficient punishment.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Patrick' post='1894575' date='Jun 17 2009, 03:57 PM']Interesting. People are starting to vote yes. :-)[/quote]
Resurrexi probably just cast his vote.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Patrick' post='1894556' date='Jun 17 2009, 05:49 PM']You seem to be adding a lot of conditions that weren't in the original bull. Are there other sources that refine this one?[/quote]

We must interpret Pope Leo X's [i]Exsurge Domine[/i] in light of the the [i]Catechism of the Catholic Church[/i], which states:

'Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically non-existent."' ([i]Catechism of the Catholic Church[/i], No. 2267)

Edited June 17, 2009 by Resurrexi

[Patrick]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1894589' date='Jun 17 2009, 04:05 PM']We must interpret Pope Leo X's [i]Exsurge Domine[/i] in light of the the [i]Catechism of the Catholic Church[/i], which states:

'Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically non-existent."' ([i]Catechism of the Catholic Church[/i], No. 2267)[/quote]

Thank you. Is there a source that delineates the relationship between ex cathedra pronoucements and documents like the Catechism of the Catholic Church (I don't know what class of documents this is)? My first reaction would be that the Catechism would have to be interpreted in light of the ex cathedra statement and not the other way around.