Are modern-day Protestants "heretics"?
#41
Thanks everyone for the replies so far.

The only thing I still don't fully understand is how Prots fall under the jurisdiction of the Church. 

In the OP I argued, citing the CCC, that this is because "baptism makes us members of the Body of Christ", and that this Body is the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, citing Pius XII's encyclical Mystici Corporis Christi, "it is not enough that the Body of the Church should be an unbroken unity; it must also be something definite and perceptible to the senses" and so "they err in a matter of divine truth, who imagine the Church to be invisible, intangible....by which many Christian communities, though they differ from each other in their profession of faith, are united by an invisible bond."

So everyone seems to be in agreement that a child under the age of reason who is validly baptized in a Prot church is, technically speaking, a Catholic.  But TraditionalistThomas stated: "You can't be part of the universal Church while not being in communion with it. The Church of Christ and the Catholic Church are one and the same thing. Baptism leaves an indelible mark on the soul but adherence to a heretical/schismatic creed after the age of reason severs your membership with the Church."

So how is someone baptized as an adult in a Prot church within the jurisdiction of the Church if he does not, even theoretically, become a Catholic for an instant when "Amen" is said to close the Trinitarian baptismal formula?
Reply
#42
(03-12-2013, 10:30 AM)Servus Immaculatae Wrote: So how is someone baptized as an adult in a Prot church within the jurisdiction of the Church if he does not, even theoretically, become a Catholic for an instant when "Amen" is said to close the Trinitarian baptismal formula?
Because every baptized person is subject to the authority of the Church, including those outside the Church due to formal excommunication, interdict, heresy, and so on. Their baptism is only valid because of the One True Church - the Catholic Church. Thus may She have jurisdiction over him.
Reply
#43
(03-12-2013, 10:53 AM)MRose Wrote:
(03-12-2013, 10:30 AM)Servus Immaculatae Wrote: So how is someone baptized as an adult in a Prot church within the jurisdiction of the Church if he does not, even theoretically, become a Catholic for an instant when "Amen" is said to close the Trinitarian baptismal formula?
Because every baptized person is subject to the authority of the Church, including those outside the Church due to formal excommunication, interdict, heresy, and so on. Their baptism is only valid because of the One True Church - the Catholic Church. Thus may She have jurisdiction over him.

So, if I am understanding correctly, it's because the use of the Sacrament of Baptism was placed in the custody of the Church by Christ (via the power of "binding and loosing"), and so the Prots are sort of "borrowing" the Sacrament from her?
Reply
#44
(03-12-2013, 10:59 AM)Servus Immaculatae Wrote:
(03-12-2013, 10:53 AM)MRose Wrote:
(03-12-2013, 10:30 AM)Servus Immaculatae Wrote: So how is someone baptized as an adult in a Prot church within the jurisdiction of the Church if he does not, even theoretically, become a Catholic for an instant when "Amen" is said to close the Trinitarian baptismal formula?
Because every baptized person is subject to the authority of the Church, including those outside the Church due to formal excommunication, interdict, heresy, and so on. Their baptism is only valid because of the One True Church - the Catholic Church. Thus may She have jurisdiction over him.

So, if I am understanding correctly, it's because the use of the Sacrament of Baptism was placed in the custody of the Church by Christ (via the power of "binding and loosing"), and so the Prots are sort of "borrowing" the Sacrament from her?

No.  Baptism can be administered by anyone. 
Reply
#45
(03-12-2013, 11:20 AM)per_passionem_eius Wrote:
(03-12-2013, 10:59 AM)Servus Immaculatae Wrote:
(03-12-2013, 10:53 AM)MRose Wrote:
(03-12-2013, 10:30 AM)Servus Immaculatae Wrote: So how is someone baptized as an adult in a Prot church within the jurisdiction of the Church if he does not, even theoretically, become a Catholic for an instant when "Amen" is said to close the Trinitarian baptismal formula?
Because every baptized person is subject to the authority of the Church, including those outside the Church due to formal excommunication, interdict, heresy, and so on. Their baptism is only valid because of the One True Church - the Catholic Church. Thus may She have jurisdiction over him.

So, if I am understanding correctly, it's because the use of the Sacrament of Baptism was placed in the custody of the Church by Christ (via the power of "binding and loosing"), and so the Prots are sort of "borrowing" the Sacrament from her?

No.  Baptism can be administered by anyone. 

Right, but the Sacrament itself is in the custody of the Church, correct?  Not the physical administration of the Sacrament, but the Sacrament.

Otherwise, why does baptism bring one under the jurisdiction of the Church?
Reply
#46
(03-12-2013, 11:24 AM)Servus Immaculatae Wrote:
(03-12-2013, 11:20 AM)per_passionem_eius Wrote:
(03-12-2013, 10:59 AM)Servus Immaculatae Wrote:
(03-12-2013, 10:53 AM)MRose Wrote:
(03-12-2013, 10:30 AM)Servus Immaculatae Wrote: So how is someone baptized as an adult in a Prot church within the jurisdiction of the Church if he does not, even theoretically, become a Catholic for an instant when "Amen" is said to close the Trinitarian baptismal formula?
Because every baptized person is subject to the authority of the Church, including those outside the Church due to formal excommunication, interdict, heresy, and so on. Their baptism is only valid because of the One True Church - the Catholic Church. Thus may She have jurisdiction over him.

So, if I am understanding correctly, it's because the use of the Sacrament of Baptism was placed in the custody of the Church by Christ (via the power of "binding and loosing"), and so the Prots are sort of "borrowing" the Sacrament from her?

No.  Baptism can be administered by anyone. 

Right, but the Sacrament itself is in the custody of the Church, correct?  Not the physical administration of the Sacrament, but the Sacrament.

Otherwise, why does baptism bring one under the jurisdiction of the Church?

Sounds good to me.
Reply
#47
(03-12-2013, 10:53 AM)MRose Wrote:
(03-12-2013, 10:30 AM)Servus Immaculatae Wrote: So how is someone baptized as an adult in a Prot church within the jurisdiction of the Church if he does not, even theoretically, become a Catholic for an instant when "Amen" is said to close the Trinitarian baptismal formula?
Because every baptized person is subject to the authority of the Church, including those outside the Church due to formal excommunication, interdict, heresy, and so on. Their baptism is only valid because of the One True Church - the Catholic Church. Thus may She have jurisdiction over him.
And they'd better be under the authority of the Church, because "Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus" (Outside the Church, nothing is saved). BTW, this dogma was upheld in the documents of the Second Vatican Council (if anyone bothered to actually read them).  :doh:
Reply
#48
Quote:Are modern-day Protestants "heretics"?

Well, they always used to be, but according to then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger in his book, The Meaning of Christian Brotherhood, pp. 87-88, this not necessarily the case anymore:
Benedict XVI Wrote:“The difficulty in the way of giving an answer is a profound one.  Ultimately it is due to the fact that there is no appropriate category in Catholic thought for the phenomenon of Protestantism today (one could say the same of the relationship to the separated churches of the East).  It is obvious that the old category of ‘heresy’ is no longer of any value.  Heresy, for Scripture and the early Church, includes the idea of a personal decision against the unity of the Church, and heresy’s characteristic is pertinacia, the obstinacy of him who persists in his own private way.  This, however, cannot be regarded as an appropriate description of the spiritual situation of the Protestant Christian.  In the course of a now centuries-old history, Protestantism has made an important contribution to the realization of Christian faith, fulfilling a positive function in the development of the Christian message and, above all, often giving rise to a sincere and profound faith in the individual non-Catholic Christian, whose separation from the Catholic affirmation has nothing to do with the pertinacia characteristic of heresy.  Perhaps we may here invert a saying of St. Augustine’s: that an old schism becomes a heresy.  The very passage of time alters the character of a division, so that an old division is something essentially different from a new one.  Something that was once rightly condemned as heresy cannot later simply become true, but it can gradually develop its own positive ecclesial nature, with which the individual is presented as his church and in which he lives as a believer, not as a heretic.  This organization of one group, however, ultimately has an effect on the whole.  The conclusion is inescapable, then: Protestantism today is something different from heresy in the traditional sense, a phenomenon whose true theological place has not yet been determined.” [Emphasis added.]
Reply
#49
(03-12-2013, 02:25 AM)10th_Crusader Wrote:
(03-12-2013, 02:12 AM)jovan66102 Wrote:
(03-12-2013, 01:12 AM)Servus Immaculatae Wrote: I know, I know, but they started on with the nonsense about "but that doesn't apply to Prots; they're our Separated Brethren."
In other words, in their deep hatred of the Faith they are unwilling to even accept the post-V II Code of Canon Law and Catechism? Why bother with them? They are as bad as the heretics!
Actually, the "separated brethren" referred to in the documents of the Second Vatican Council is in the context of the Eastern Orthodox Churches (yes, I actually read the documents), not the Protestants.

"Separated brethren" refers to both Protestants and Eastern Orthodox:

"Nevertheless, our separated brethren, whether considered as individuals or as Communities and Churches, are not blessed with that unity which Jesus Christ wished to bestow on all those who through Him were born again into one body" (Unitatis Redintegratio, n. 3 §5).  Here, communities refer to the Protestant sects, while Churches refer to the Eastern Orthodox and probably the other, first-millennium heretical sects (e.g., Assyrians, Nestorians) as well, which have material apostolic succession.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_counc...io_en.html
Reply
#50
Correct, as I recall, Leo XIII used the term to refer to both Protestants and the Orthodox.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)