The importance of distinctions - some reflections of Fr. Gleize's "The Question of Papal Heresy"

JMJ

Fr. Gleize's study on "The Question of Papal Heresy", has caused a few people to, unknowingly, enter into mental gymnastics as they "jump" to conclusions and "leap" through flaming hoops.

I've seen Fr. Gleize have the same affect a few years ago when he penned another scholarly article. My suspicion is that the ability to read a long academic article is not a skill easily learned. I now consider myself fortunate to have read over a hundred such articles for my under-grad thesis, although I definitely did not think so at the time.

So, if you're going to read Fr. Gleize, Dr. Lamont, Dr. Shaw et al, you're going to have to exert yourself and if necessary draw a mind-map of the concepts as they are described.

Why? Because the concepts and principles being discussed are not simple and require deep study to master.

I have received the following brief explanations to some questions posed about Fr. Gleize's article:

At the beginning of Part 4, he clearly stated "after carefully defining terms, we review the essential question; can the Vicar of Christ be heretical, in the exact sense of the word?"

Fr. Gleize makes all the distinctions, clearly defining the terms used: internal forum vs. external forum; material heresy vs. formal heresy; act of heresy vs. heretical proposition; occult, occult vs. public or notorious heresy. Then, he applies these terms to the question of the possibility of a heretical Pope. He explains that what makes a formal heretic is the notoriety of the heresy along with the pertinacity of that person in teaching heretical statements. Now, applying to the person of the Pope, Fr. Gleize concludes that a Pope could not be declared as notorious heretic during his lifetime, because notorious heresy has in fact to be declared by the competent superior, and since the Pope has no superior here on earth, no one is competent to declare his heresy canonically.

The astute reader will note that Fr. Gleize and Dr. Lamont (Considerations on the Dubia) are not in perfect agreement. While most people like things black and white, this is not the case in unprecedented cases of theology - such as we have today. Theologians will need to work this out by putting forth arguments and discussions. As Sts. Robert Bellarmine and Suarez were not in perfect agreement, we shall have to sit back and listen to the arguments of various theologians to reach a concensus. I know more than one person who is impatient for this process to end, but there is nothing for it, we'll have to just wait.

Fr. Gleize adds further: "the question that we are asking ourselves here is extremely precise: Does Pope Francis deserve this designation [heretic] in the eyes of simple theology... and does he deserves it because of what he affirms in the Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia?"

This is a hang-up for many mental gymnasts. Don't jump to the conclusion that you want, do the heavy lifting and work through the points one by one.

To answer that question, Fr. Gleize went over the Five Dubia from the Cardinals. Father then concludes that even though they point out to a number of very confusing and misleading propositions from Amoris Laetitia, we cannot conclude that the said propositions could be considered as "heretical statements" stricte sensu.

I agree with Fr. Gleize who, by the way, is in agreement with the other 40+ theologians.

I think that we have to be careful when we use such words like "heretical". We have to make the distinction between the broad sense and the technical meaning, according to Catholic theology and Canon Law.

I agree absolutely, as I've seen many use the work "heretic" when they meant simply error.

In any case, there is no much else we can do besides "Oremus pro pontfice nostro Francsico!"

On that note:

P^3

The Curious Case of Steve Skojec and the Dangers of Deep Diving into the Crisis Sub-Titled: The Failings of Others

+ JMJ It's been a while now since Steve Skojec sold 1P5 and abandoned the Catholic Faith. I've been a 'Trad' since 1982 and in those 40+ years I seen this death-spiral before with a similar end point. It seems that anyone who jumps into the fray unprepared for the enormous task of righting wrongs will, eventually, become discouraged by not the task but the people who surround them. I remember when Skojec complained of the treatment his family received from a traditional priest. This seems to have been the start of the end for him. So what can we learn from the likes of Steve Skojec, Michael Voris (maybe?), Louie Verrecchio, Gerry Matatix and other celebrity Catholics? Probably quite a lot about what not to do. First, don't burn out on the crisis? When you burn out, on work or anything else, little things assume a more greater importance than they are due. This is one of my 'canary in the coal mine' signals that I've been stretching myself too th...

Communique about Avrille Dominicans - SSPX.org

+ JMJ Having completed the review of the 'Avrille' perspective, this communique from the French District Superior is perfectly timed. I believe that the 'resistance' has lost rationality and further argumentation simply results in their holding on to their false ideal all the more firmly. Pray much ... First, for them to acquiesce to the grace of humility in order to obtain a clear perspective on the principles involved. Second, that we may remain faithful to the Church, and Her Dogmas, Doctrines and Principles. Lest we become that which against we strove ... P^3 Courtesy of SSPX.org

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3

A Reply to Martin Blackshaw’s FLAWED Remnant article titled: FLAWED: SSPX Advice on Abortion-tainted Vaccines

+ JMJ An article has appeared in the Remnant (link to article) and I am afraid that there are a number of flaws in it that need to be addressed. The author, Martin Blackshaw, believes that both the Church and the SSPX are misapplying the principle of Moral Theology called 'Cooperation In Evil'. Unfortunately, Mr. Blackshaw rests most of his arguments on citing authors that support his position, without considering the possibility that they are wrong. This highlights a key factor in this crisis: ignorance of the faith and its application . I don't am not singling out Mr. Blackshaw for this criticism, I have observed that it applies to laity and religious, superior and subject a like. No one seems immune in this enduring crisis, myself included. I further believe that this ignorance is why so many Catholics, both traditional and non, rely on their gut feeling or "Catholic conscience" for charting their way through this crisis of the faith. While...

Magisterium and Levels of Assent

+ JMJ Understanding the levels of assent to be given to the teachings of the Church is a critical success factor in walking the knife's edge during this crisis of the Church. The levels of assent are generally associated with the theological grades of certainty, which are not surprisingly mirrored by the censures for contravening the teachings of the various levels.

Tradicat

Search This Blog