The Apocrypha

[Bootstrap]

If neither Google nor vatican.va's search engine finds anything, maybe it is apocryphal (in the "hidden" sense). It's not like the search function on the .va site isn't working, I can search for "bull" and find it.

interrete quaerere erroneum?

[Judas Maccabeus]

Good. I'm glad you understand now that the sale of indulgences wasn't something that Luther imagined of his own accord. And that the RCC's attempt to burn him was wrong.

It got blown WAY out of proportion as even many Protestant scholars admit today, and I don’t think anyone should have gotten burned, nor have I ever said otherwise.

Indeed. Nevertheless, Christians best do well to live their discipleship in the present; forgive the past; and carry the Gospel into the future.

But changing your position does not erase history. I will believe that the Roman Catholic Church has truly repented when they return all of the documents that were stolen from us during the reformation and later. We know they have an original of the Schlictheim confession in their possession, taken from Michael Sattler. There is a multitude of other documents likely in the archives of the Vatican. When they are returned, then I will believe that there is true repentance. True repentance requires a willingness to make things right, and restore the injured party. We would never consider a person truly to have repented, if he maintained possession of things that he had stolen.

I am waiting…..

[MaxPC]

But did you search for "propositio theologice erronea" and get any results? Or is your browser also not in communion with their server?

If neither Google nor vatican.va's search engine finds anything, maybe it is apocryphal (in the "hidden" sense). It's not like the search function on the .va site isn't working, I can search for "bull" and find it.

I returned to the Vatican website and it is as slow as the proverbial. Something is going on with it. It did finally return results for "Theological Censure". I have a full day tomorrow but will do a dig into it and see if I can get some operative links for you.

[MaxPC]

I returned to the Vatican website and it is as slow as the proverbial. Something is going on with it. It did finally return results for "Theological Censure". I have a full day tomorrow but will do a dig into it and see if I can get some operative links for you.

In the meantime if your Latin, French and Italian are good, you might be able to work through the citation sources for that term:

Sessa, Scrutinium doctrinarum (Rome, 1709)
D'Argentré, Collectio iudiciorum (Paris 1728)
Viva, Damnatarum thesium theologica trustina (Padua, 1737)
Montagne, De censuria seu notis theologicis, ed. Migne (Paris, 1837)
Didiot, Logigue surnaturelle subjective (Paris 1891), No. 377
Manning, The Vatican Council in Privilegium Petri (London, 1871)

Ecclesiastical approbation. Nihil Obstat. November 1, 1908. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York. (Indicative that the information therein is in accord with Catholic teaching)

[Soloist]

You could also share the information you said you had when you offered to send it to Josh?

[MaxPC]

Update: Heard from Rome contact that apparently the Vatican website has been receiving a number of cyberattacks. They have limited access to recent documents (past 30 years or so) but the larger archive has not been linked in order to more easily manage security in the face of these attacks. He suggested that for the older information (100 or more years) to use the older reference books until their tech department can determine a better course of action.

Right then. If you are so inclined, I suggest the use of the next best source of general info that is considered more academic as well as has articles with the Imprimi Potest and Nihil Obstat (as opposed to personal opinion blogs).
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/
I have this resource on a thumb drive and it serves well enough.

Now I am off to my day with its full schedule. May all stay warm in this chill.

[Josh]

If they’re in need of cybersecurity services, I’m currently accepting new clients.

[ohio jones]

Tell me, are Anabaptists who you admire so much considered heretical by the Catholics? And if so, are they your brothers? Are you a heretic too by accepting us?

The official Catholic teaching on Anabaptism in the present day is propositio theologice erronea; meaning we believe that some of Anabaptist theology is at odds with Catholic teaching but that Anabaptists are not heretics. In short, Anabaptists are not in Communion with us on baptismal protocols but most Anabaptists still hold to the same core Christian theological dogma.

Do you believe in the Holy Trinity? Then you are still our brothers in Christ.
Do you believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, fully human and fully divine? Then you are still our brothers in Christ.

If you are so inclined, I suggest the use of the next best source of general info that is considered more academic as well as has articles with the Imprimi Potest and Nihil Obstat (as opposed to personal opinion blogs).
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/

Thank you, Max, this is helpful. In particular, the portion of the article on Heresy explaining the Degrees of Heresy (numbers added) is relevant to Soloist's question:

Both matter and form of heresy admit of degrees which find expression in the following technical formula of theology and canon law. Pertinacious adhesion to a doctrine contradictory to a point of faith clearly defined by the Church is heresy pure and simple, (1) heresy in the first degree. But if the doctrine in question has not been expressly "defined" or is not clearly proposed as an article of faith in the ordinary, authorized teaching of the Church, an opinion opposed to it is styled (2) sententia haeresi proxima, that is, an opinion approaching heresy. Next, a doctrinal proposition, without directly contradicting a received dogma, may yet involve logical consequences at variance with revealed truth. Such a proposition is not heretical, it is (3) a propositio theologice erronea, that is, erroneous in theology. Further, the opposition to an article of faith may not be strictly demonstrable, but only reach a certain degree of probability. In that case the doctrine is termed (4) sententia de haeresi suspecta, haeresim sapiens; that is, an opinion suspected, or savouring, of heresy.

So you've placed us at the third degree. I suspect we are more heretical than that (or maybe there are not as many clearly defined doctrines as I think there are), but a charitable classification is welcome.

[ken_sylvania]

Tell me, are Anabaptists who you admire so much considered heretical by the Catholics? And if so, are they your brothers? Are you a heretic too by accepting us?

The official Catholic teaching on Anabaptism in the present day is propositio theologice erronea; meaning we believe that some of Anabaptist theology is at odds with Catholic teaching but that Anabaptists are not heretics. In short, Anabaptists are not in Communion with us on baptismal protocols but most Anabaptists still hold to the same core Christian theological dogma.

Do you believe in the Holy Trinity? Then you are still our brothers in Christ.
Do you believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, fully human and fully divine? Then you are still our brothers in Christ.

If you are so inclined, I suggest the use of the next best source of general info that is considered more academic as well as has articles with the Imprimi Potest and Nihil Obstat (as opposed to personal opinion blogs).
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/

Thank you, Max, this is helpful. In particular, the portion of the article on Heresy explaining the Degrees of Heresy (numbers added) is relevant to Soloist's question:

Both matter and form of heresy admit of degrees which find expression in the following technical formula of theology and canon law. Pertinacious adhesion to a doctrine contradictory to a point of faith clearly defined by the Church is heresy pure and simple, (1) heresy in the first degree. But if the doctrine in question has not been expressly "defined" or is not clearly proposed as an article of faith in the ordinary, authorized teaching of the Church, an opinion opposed to it is styled (2) sententia haeresi proxima, that is, an opinion approaching heresy. Next, a doctrinal proposition, without directly contradicting a received dogma, may yet involve logical consequences at variance with revealed truth. Such a proposition is not heretical, it is (3) a propositio theologice erronea, that is, erroneous in theology. Further, the opposition to an article of faith may not be strictly demonstrable, but only reach a certain degree of probability. In that case the doctrine is termed (4) sententia de haeresi suspecta, haeresim sapiens; that is, an opinion suspected, or savouring, of heresy.

So you've placed us at the third degree. I suspect we are more heretical than that (or maybe there are not as many clearly defined doctrines as I think there are), but a charitable classification is welcome.

I certainly would have thought that to teach that infant baptism is no baptism at all, that Mary the mother of Jesus was not sinless, and that the bread and wine do not become the literal body and blood of Christ, would be against expressly "defined" doctrine. Apparently not.

[Bootstrap]

So you've placed us at the third degree. I suspect we are more heretical than that (or maybe there are not as many clearly defined doctrines as I think there are), but a charitable classification is welcome.

I do think the Catholic Church talks a LOT less about heresy and heretics than it did before Vatican II. But their emphasis is still on Redintegratio - "reintegration".

GPT gave me a useful summary - does this seem accurate?

The Catholic Church's View on Protestants:

1. Historical Perspective (Pre-Vatican II):
   - Historically, the Catholic Church used the term "heretic" to describe those who rejected or deviated from official Catholic doctrine.
   - Before the Second Vatican Council (Vatican II), which took place from 1962 to 1965, the Catholic Church had a more rigid and exclusive view of other Christian denominations. Protestants were often considered heretics because they were seen as having broken away from the Catholic Church during the Protestant Reformation.
2. Post-Vatican II Perspective:
   - The Second Vatican Council brought significant changes in the Catholic Church's approach to other Christian traditions. Vatican II produced a document titled "Unitatis Redintegratio" (Decree on Ecumenism), which emphasized a more ecumenical and inclusive approach.
   - Vatican II acknowledged that there are elements of truth and sanctification present in other Christian communities, including Protestant denominations. It recognized the need for dialogue and collaboration among Christians.
   - The term "heretic" is rarely used in contemporary Catholic documents and discourse when referring to other Christian groups. Instead, there is an emphasis on seeking common ground and promoting Christian unity.
3. Current Perspective:
   - The current official teaching of the Catholic Church is one of openness to dialogue and cooperation with other Christian denominations.
   - Pope Francis, in particular, has promoted ecumenism and interfaith dialogue. He has emphasized the importance of recognizing the good in other Christian traditions and working together for common goals.

It's important to note that there can be variations in individual beliefs and interpretations within the Catholic Church, but the overall direction of the Church has been toward greater ecumenism and a more inclusive approach to other Christian communities, including Protestants. The term "heretic" is less commonly used today in ecumenical discussions.