On Heresy, Dissidence, And Scandal

Catholics who disagree with some Catholic Doctrine or Doctrines may not be formal heretics.  They may only be material heretics.  Or they may just be dissidents.  It really depends on which Church Doctrine or Doctrines they don’t agree with and why.  But they could also be committing the sin of scandal.

According to Dr. Robert Fastiggi, Professor of Systematic Theology, Sacred Heart Major Seminary, Detroit MI,

“The term dissident can be applied to all heretics but not all dissidents are heretics.  The Church now refers to three levels of magisterial authority that correspond to the 1989 Profession of Faith.  Heresy would only pertain to the first level.”

The three levels of magisterial authority (authoritative teaching) on Church Doctrine that Dr. Fastiggi is referencing are:

1. Truths taught as divinely revealed.
2. Definitively proposed doctrines on matters closely connected with revealed truth.
3. Ordinary teaching on faith and morals.

Heresy

The CCC 2089 defines heresy in much the same way as canon 751 of The Code of Canon Law (CIC, 751):

“Heresy is the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt, after the reception of baptism, of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith [credenda] . . .”

So a heretic would be a baptized Catholic who obstinately denies or doubts a truth or truths which must be believed by divine and Catholic faith.  These truths are to be believed by divine and Catholic faith (de fide credenda – with the assent of faith) because these truths have been divinely revealed by God Himself.  The question is then, which truths are to be believed by divine and Catholic faith?

First Level Truths

The truths belonging to the first level of magisterial authority are called de fide credenda or simply de fide truths, and are also referred to as “infallible dogma” or “definitive dogma.”  The magisterium has affirmed these to be truths divinely revealed by God.  Denying or doubting such truths is either material heresy or formal heresy.

Examples of these de fide credenda truths are the articles of faith stated in the Nicene Creed; the divinity of Christ; the Marian dogmas of the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption; and the real and substantial presence of Christ in the Eucharist; the doctrine on the primacy and infallibility of the Pope; the existence of original sin; and the immorality of killing of an innocent human being.

Fastiggi also points out, though, that

“There is, of course, a difference between a material heretic and a formal heretic. Some people might hold to heretical views, but we should refrain from calling them formal heretics until an inquiry has been made. Only if, after such an inquiry, the person obstinately persists in denying or doubting a truth to be believed with divine and Catholic faith should such a person be called a heretic in the formal sense. The local bishop can initiate inquiries into possible heresy, but prominent cases are often referred to the Holy See, which would rely on the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to decide specific cases.”

Material vs. Formal Heresy

The fact that there is material heresy which differs from formal heresy, is not something of which most Catholics are aware.  A material heretic is an individual who persists in questioning or doubting a divinely revealed truth or truths, perhaps as a result of poor catechesis, but who, in the words of St. Augustine is “seeking the truth with cautious solicitude and ready to be corrected.”

But to complicate matters just a bit, there really isn’t a hard and fast list of divinely revealed truths that the layperson can conveniently consult. “This would be similar to asking for a list of all the infallible truths taught in the Bible,” says Fastiggi.  “The Church is more concerned with recognizing de fide teachings as de fide rather than creating an official list of such teachings.“ There are, though, manuals of dogmatic theology that classify certain theological propositions as de fide. The best known such manual in English is The Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma by Fr. Ludwig Ott.

Marriage And Homosexuality

Catholics who disagree with Catholic teaching on marriage or homosexuality are, however, treading in dangerous territory.  Fastiggi says:

“I believe the Church’s teaching on marriage as possible only between one man and one woman is infallible by virtue of the ordinary and universal Magisterium,” says Fastiggi. “A Catholic who obstinately denies or calls into doubt this truth would be guilty of at least material heresy.  This would become formal heresy if the person, after warning by competent ecclesial authority, like the local bishop or the Holy See, refuses to give assent to this truth of the faith.

“The same would apply, I believe, to one who justifies homosexual acts. Some theologians might argue that these teachings are definitive doctrines of the Church rather than truths revealed by God. It seems to me, though, that the nature of marriage and the immorality of homosexual acts are truths made quite clear in Sacred Scripture and by the ordinary and universal Magisterium.”

Second Level Truths

Some teachings also being debated and discussed these days, however, are truths that are in the second category of teachings. These truths also need to be believed with irrevocable assent.  In this instance, however, the assent is a “firm and definitive assent” as opposed to the first level’s assent of faith to what has been set forth by the Church as revealed by God.  Truths in this second category are definitively proposed doctrines on matters that are closely connected with revealed truth.  They are rooted in the primary points of the deposit of faith but they are “secondary objects of infallibility.”

“Secondary objects of infallibility do not involve truths revealed by God, which are primary objects of infallibility until the Church says they do,” says Fastiggi.

Examples of second level truths are the illicitness of prostitution and fornication, the solemn canonization of saints, and the inability of the Church to ordain women as priests.

Individuals who reject truths in this second category are dissidents, but not heretics.

Dissidents

“Dissidents,” says Fastiggi,

“are those who oppose definitive decisions that have not been declared as revealed by God [de fide truths].  An example would be the case of a person who claims the Church has the authority to ordain women to the priesthood.  A person, who supports women’s ordination, would be dissident but not a heretic, because he or she has not denied a truth set forth by the Church as revealed by God

“St. John Paul II, in 1994, did not state that the Church’s inability to confer priestly ordination on woman was revealed by God. Rather, he stated that this decision “is to be definitively held by all the faithful.  Thus, his 1994 judgment was definitive and irreformable, but it is also infallible because the Holy Spirit protects the Magisterium from error when it makes such definitive judgments.

“Obstinate resistance to these definitive teachings, though, does not fall under the definition of heresy.   According to canon law, heresy is liable to automatic excommunication, but obstinate resistance to definitive teachings would usually involve a lesser punishment,” says Fastiggi.

Third Level Truths

The third category of Doctrine is ordinary teaching on faith and morals. The CCC 892 says Christians are to receive such doctrines with “religious assent” which, while distinct from the “assent of faith,” is still an extension of it.

Dr. Fastiggi, who is also a contributor to the New Catholic Encyclopedia, lists these examples of third level truths: the criteria for the assessment of the just use of military force (CCC, 2309); the strict conditions regarding the use of the death penalty set forth by John Paul II in Evangelium vitae, 56 and the CCC, 2267; and John Paul II’s March 20, 2004 affirmation of the obligation to provide hydration and nutrition, even by tube-feeding, to persistently unconscious patients, so long as the hydration and nutrition is achieving its proper end of sustaining life and alleviating suffering.

Fourth Level Truths

Fastiggi also points out that,

“Some theologians, such as Avery Cardinal Dulles, also speak of a fourth level of assent related to prudential judgments or interventions by the Holy See or bishops regarding the application of moral or doctrinal teachings to concrete situations.

“For example, the Holy See or a group of bishops might criticize a particular military intervention or offer suggestions on policies of immigration, health care, or the penal system. These judgments would require serious consideration, but the ultimate decisions on such public policies would belong to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good.

“A distinction, though, must be made between public policies that involve intrinsic evils, such as abortion and euthanasia – which can never be justified – and prudential applications of moral principles, such as the criteria for justified military force in CCC 2309 that may or may not be justified depending on the circumstances.”

Catholicism And Politicians

So when prominent Catholic politicians speak out in support of same-sex ‘marriage’ or ‘a woman’s right to choose,’ they are most certainly dissenting from Catholic Teaching. Such individuals are no longer in full communion with the Catholic Church and should refrain from receiving Holy Communion until they have received proper counseling and gone to Confession.  But such individuals may also be either a material heretic or even a formal heretic.

In some instances, such individuals may also be committing the sin of scandal, which would also warrant a penalty (penance) of some sort.

Scandal

The sin of Scandal is explained in the CCC 2284-2287, but CCC 2285 specifically notes that “Scandal is grave when given by those who by nature or office are obliged to teach and educate others.” Politicians, by nature of their public stature, are so obliged.

CCC 2287 goes on to say that “anyone who uses the power at his disposal in such a way that it leads others to do wrong becomes guilty of scandal and responsible for the evil that he has directly or indirectly encouraged.”

When all is said and done, however, it is up to the competent ecclesial authority, like the local bishop or the Holy See, to make these determinations.