Those privileged with a certain degree of education should use it as foundation for their case rather than asserting it by appealing to the authority of such education. If a pope fails to sanction a heretic, this merely proves him a weak pope, not a fellow heretic.
Of course, the Pope has primacy in defining heresy. What I questioned was how he deals with it. Heretofore, he has chosen the path of exposure, but avoided confrontation. In fact, I could be wrong, perhaps letting Kasper hang himself with his own rope is a better method than mere sanction. It denies his liberal colleagues of a potential 'martyr' for their cause.
So doesn't this almost make Garabandal and Bosco incompatible. Or at least makes them reference completely different events if both are accurate
BH, do you really pretend to know the mind of the Pope? Or has he told you what he thinks about Kasper? Not supporting Kasper's outspoken heresy in his final document tells me that even 'if' the Pope personally agrees with Kasper the Holy Spirit did not permit him to support heresy in the final document. It is true, I am not a theologian and they will be held much more culpable on judgment day for their 'learned' heresy if they so preach it. However, the nuns did teach me how to read and I know what scripture and the Catholic Catechism teaches on sodomy, which Kasper explicitly supports. Modern Catholic Dictionary by Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J. HERESY. Commonly refers to a doctrinal belief held in opposition to the recognized standards of an established system of thought. Theologically it means an opinion at variance with the authorized teachings of any church, notably the Christian, and especially when this promotes separation from the main body of faithful believers. In the Roman Catholic Church, heresy has a very specific meaning. Anyone who, after receiving baptism, while remaining nominally a Christian, pertinaciously denies or doubts any of the truths that must be believed with divine and Catholic faith is considered a heretic. Accordingly four elements must be verified to constitute formal heresy; previous valid baptism, which need not have been in the Catholic Church; external profession of still being a Christian, otherwise a person becomes an apostate; outright denial or positive doubt regarding a truth that the Catholic Church has actually proposed as revealed by God; and the disbelief must be morally culpable, where a nominal Christian refuses to accept what he knows is a doctrinal imperative. Objectively, therefore, to become a heretic in the strict canonical sense and be excommunicated from the faithful, one must deny or question a truth that is taught not merely on the authority of the Church but on the word of God revealed in the Scriptures or sacred tradition. Subjectively a person must recognize his obligation to believe. If he acts in good faith, as with most persons brought up in non-Catholic surroundings, the heresy is only material and implies neither guilt nor sin against faith. (Etym. Latin haeresis, from the Greek hairesis, a taking, choice, sect, heresy.) HERETIC. A person professing heresy. Ecclesiastical law distinguishes between a formal heretic, as one who is sinfully culpable, and a material heretic, who is not morally guilty for professing what may be objectively heretical doctrine.
http://www.oremus.org/hymnal/s/s382.html In this hymn we have the jubilee, the storm and the solution.
Look, if Pope Francis reprimands C. Kasper and C. Kasper maintains public exposure of his views I will be the first to agree with you guys he has gone heretical. But given the close study I have done of all his interviews (as opposed to listening to appalling 3rd party summaries) I believe he would readily pull his head in if so confronted by Pope Francis.
Fatima I was quoting from memory the definition given by the Old Catholic Encyclopedia. Unfortunately I cannot confirm my memory because the New Advent Site appears to have removed the Encyclopedia (as well as Aquinas's Summa) which is a great loss to the Catholic Community. Its been down for 2 weeks now. Anways I see the key requirement in this context re C Kasper being "obstinancy". Fr Hardon's equivalent term you have provided appears to be "pertinacity". For myself the CCC is as far as we need to go I suppose: "Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same;". It speaks of obstinancy. For myself I suggest that obstinancy is not yet proven in Card Kasper for the reasons I have provided above. Namely, he was invited by Pope Francis to put forward his proposals to kick off the discussion. When he got blow-back from significant numbers of his fellow participants he again took a rain check with Pope Francis. In his long personal interviews (which few here seem interested in actually listening to) he categorically states he will pull his head in if final consensus or Pope Francis goes against him. This is why I believe heresy is a completely inappropriate label to be throwing at C.Kasper yet. Sure, say he's misguided, an extreme liberal, a loose cannon, likely to be left in the theological dustbin of history. But to say he's a heretic simply because we theologically less educated lay persons think "he's wrong" does not appear to fulfil all the very clear conditions required before this highly pejorative label can be thrown at him. (BTW he does not support Sodomy. He supports, in this case, the right of secular nations to pass laws inimical to some Christian values. This is a moral principle clearly enunciated by Aquinas that you may not be aware of though the Cardinal obviously is aware. To hold otherwise is to believe the Catholic Church has the right to impose the equiv of Catholic Shariah in Ireland. This is how it used to be...now the Irish have clearly rejected Catholic Shariah law which is their right...unfortunately). Anyways, I am going to have a rest from this topic. For reasons I do not understand people seem to get too uncomfortable when I express my personal views on the matter. Have a happy and holy Christmas everybody. I leave you with this picture I snapped in Kuala Lumpur yesterday - MOG is a chain store name in this country. It provides vision- though I am unsure of the prophetic meaning of the "clearance" sign underneath! View attachment 3927
Thank you! That's me in my pinecone hat with my son in front of a 1000 yr old douglas fir called "big tree". 40' circumference. Humongous tree really. There are a few things I get uppity about but mostly I would rather share ideas than argue. I know some folks thrive on arguing, I have family like that, when they start in I go outside so I'll do the same here in the future--find a different thread or go read a book. Please give your dogs a scratch behind the ears for me, I miss having a dog. God sent me a cat this time and while he's a good cat, he's not a dog. God bless you Padraig, pcj
BH, while your post is generally wonderful (and orthodox in the most proper and truest sense), being the reactionary troglodyte that I can't help being, I can't let it go without pointing out my suspicion that Kasper lacks your eminent and indisputably genuine virtues. A man of Kasper's authority and learning should not be conducting his theological 'research' amongst an audience of the ignorant like myself. We should not be hearing of it until there is agreement about it from the Pope. Otherwise, as we see, confusion is all we get. What can be the motives of a man that feels the compulsion to appeal to the most vulgar, populist and immediate opinions of the "people of God" through the generally hostile channels of the mass media in order to acquire leverage for his views? Frankly, I can't agree that Kasper is in any way concerned with the contrast between Catholic and civil law (noticed very many civil authorities giving a damn about it lately?), but is rather solely concerned about surrendering what is effectively subversive Catholic law to the secular zeitgeist.
