Posted on 03/04/2007 2:15:29 PM PST by TradicalRC
Towards the end of the second century, St Ireneus of Lyons wrote his "Against Heresies".
Great work if there are no heresies!
The word "heretic" means "rebel". A heretic is a rebel against an orthodox establishment he belongs to.
and
To commit heresy, one must refuse to be corrected. A person who is ready to be corrected or who is unaware that what he has been saying is against Church teaching is not a heretic.
This seems to imply (and I agree) that one can believe a heresy sincerely and yet not be a heretic. Intentional rebellion is a necessary part
But of course, you weren't trying to "stir the pot" you were only seeking information, gosh, gee. Why do you refer to other "traditions" and not just say "Hey all you heretics". It is plainly disingenuous.
Of what possible interest could it be to reply to someone so confused and disingenuous?
Sounds right. However, the person has to be *open* to correction.
mega-dittoes!!!
Yup.
One of the best characters in that movie, wasn't he the key master?
The Popes have approved the Catholic Charismatic Renewal as a valid movement in the Church. One of the most popular writers and speakers in CCR, Father Cantalamessa, has been preacher to the papal househole for many years!
This doesn't mean that there aren't individual Catholic Charismatics who fall into error or even heresy - that can happen to anyone, Charismatic or not. However, it does imply that whoever compiled this list doesn't take the authority of the Pope too seriously!
"Household," that is.
"mega-dittoes!!!"
Ah, Padre, I was engaging at least a bit in hyperbole, which seemed the appropriate response to what this author has written. The "filioque" really isn't a dividing issue between Rome and Orthodoxy anymore and the declarations of the Council of Lyons on the filioque are no longer considered valid by Rome. The "submission" declarations of the Council of Trent as well as the similar ones found in Vatican I are as a practical matter and vis a vis Orthodoxy, no longer viable either. It is clear that at least +BXVI does not read the jurisdictional and papal infallibility declarations of Vatican I to be inconsistent with the Orthodox view of the role of the papacy in the Church. I did not comment on the post-Schism heresies listed because they really are Rome's problem, not Orthodoxy's. You Protestants are the children (wayward or otherwise) of Rome, not Orthodoxy.
I will say that the composition of such a list has to be suspect and at base not at all helpful. For example, and this is what really got me, did you notice that the author lists the "Greek Schism" of the 9th century? That refers to the Photian Schism and dealt with in greatest part, Rome's insistence on the use of the filioque. Rome at that point was saying that the East had taken the filioque out of the Creed rather than recognizing, as it soon did, that Rome had inserted it without council approval. The schism ended when, at a council in Constantinople, Rome backed off its demands that the East use the filioque in the Creed. So much for the historical bona fides of this author.
I will say that the pre-Photian Schism list is pretty good and nearly complete. I am surprised that so many Protestants, in an effort to not be "Roman" or to create some sort of ancient pedigree, identify with some of those groups. They are a pretty nasty and spiritually dangerous bunch, in my opinion, and certainly not the sort of people any of the original reformers would have wanted to be identified with.
Hope springs eternal. But, in this case I will pass the baton.
Wouldn't that make him a heretic?
Not my decision. It might just make him (or her) a crank.
That popped into my mind, too...
Yup. Keymaster of Gozer.
"For one who fancies herself adept at wordplay, you seem to have missed the fact that neither "heresy" nor "Luther" have the letter c in them. More proof that perhaps your contributions do not do much to further serious thinking."
But LUCIFER has an "L" for Luther and a "C" for Calvin.
Btw this Macoraba is a male.
Macoraba is the ancient Greek name for Mecca. I chose that "handle" because I never want to forget 9/11 and those who did it!
I suppose that St. Ireneus was a believer in the Roman state religion? Sacrifices to Caesar, Apollo, Jupiter, Venus, Juno, Minerva, Vulcan? The Romans had a college of religions, which decided, by vote, on what religious practices were acceptable. I don't recall him rising to a point where he merited their attention.
I figure that using the term "Heresy" implies some quasi judicial authority to decide what is theologically correct, and incorrect. If there is not, then there is no heresy, just a difference of opinion, on a subject that is not subject to experiment, test or objective measure.
If he wrote "I have the true understanding, and the rest of you are just wrong" he would have been closer to trying to convince people of what he thought was error. Instead, he used "Heresy" which implied that there was more than his opinion at work.
With Matthew being written in the 4th century, there was still a lot of new and authoritative creation going on in the second century.
I kind of like the Pelagians. And the Arians.
The Vandals were Arians, and at least had that in their favor.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.