Skip to main content

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

Image
By
+
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

Labels

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

By
Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making.  It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX.  The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience.  The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members.  It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...
8 comments
Read more

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

By
+ 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
Post a Comment
Read more

Church Militant TV and the SSPX - Again

By
+ JMJ The old narrative used to be that the SSPX was 'schismatic' and 'excommunicated'. Now the excommunication has been lifted for a number of years and the only ones who think it still has effect are the 'resistors'. That leaves the other opponents of the SSPX with the label 'schismatic'. Make it clear, the conservative Catholics have issues with the SSPX probably because they violate some of their assumptions about the Faith and this crisis of the Church. Church Militant TV is one of these the exists along the Catholic thought spectrum. They like the Traditional Mass but must ensure that they don't get tarred with the same 'schismatic' brush that the liberals use against the SSPX.  So what do they do, they use the same brush against the SSPX. The funny thing is that even when the Church does speak, they don't want to listen and persist in calling the SSPX 'schismatic'. Here's a transcript of the latest s...
Post a Comment
Read more

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

By
 + 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...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Position of the SSPX on Canonizations by the Saint Factory

By
+ JMJ I have sometimes been criticized for including 'St' as a title for Pope John Paul II et al. I've given my reasons here  in a discussion with Alex Long. The question is one of prudence in discussions with ntCatholics and in some cases with tCatholics. In discussions with:  ntCatholics, I will use the title in order to continue the discussion and help them arrive at a realistic understanding of the crisis of the Church. tCatholics, I will use the title in order to broaden their perspective on the doctrine of dogmatic facts. This broader perspective is, in my opinion, essential maintaining a realistic understanding of the crisis of the Church. So from a doctrinal position, I have written the article Dogmatic Fact of Fancy  and includes a reference on canonizations. Now, I know the position of the SSPX is that the canonizations are doubtful (see references below) and I also know of at least one non-SSPX theologian who agrees with the level of doubt du...
Post a Comment
Read more