Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3

Author Topic: Objectively Speaking, heretical and or schismatic  (Read 1418 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Matthew

  • Mod
Objectively Speaking, heretical and or schismatic
« on: May 25, 2021, 11:19:59 AM »
Imagine a huge group in the Church had a council in the year X, refused to invoke the Holy Ghost, and ended up deciding to completely change everything about the Catholic Church. From then on, they never reference anything before the year X, except maybe to deride and criticize it. All popes after that council act as if the church they belong to literally began in year X. The popes after this council only refer to each other -- never to the popes before the council.

What would you call that new church? A heretical sect? A new church in schism with the Catholic Church?

Obviously, this is not exactly hypothetical. It actually happened. The year X was 1965, and the new sect is the "conciliar" church, or the Church of the (Vatican 2) Council.
Logged

Offline ByzCat3000

Re: Objectively Speaking, heretical and or schismatic
« Reply #1 on: May 25, 2021, 11:50:11 AM »
Quote from: Matthew on May 25, 2021, 11:19:59 AM
Imagine a huge group in the Church had a council in the year X, refused to invoke the Holy Ghost, and ended up deciding to completely change everything about the Catholic Church. From then on, they never reference anything before the year X, except maybe to deride and criticize it. All popes after that council act as if the church they belong to literally began in year X. The popes after this council only refer to each other -- never to the popes before the council.

What would you call that new church? A heretical sect? A new church in schism with the Catholic Church?

Obviously, this is not exactly hypothetical. It actually happened. The year X was 1965, and the new sect is the "conciliar" church, or the Church of the (Vatican 2) Council.
I get what you're saying but my question is, according to the 1917 code of Canon law, schism is rejecting communion with the Pope or the members of the church subject to the Pope.
Based on that, I simply do not understand how it makes logical sense to refer to the novus ordo as schizmatic, however understandable the impulse might be, and whatever the archbishop might have said about it.
Call it heretical. Call it scandalous. Call it sacrilegious. But I don't see how calling it schizmatic doesn't implicitly admit Eastern Orthodox ecclesiology.  Please explain what I'm missing.
Logged

Offline DigitalLogos

Re: Objectively Speaking, heretical and or schismatic
« Reply #2 on: May 25, 2021, 12:39:20 PM »
I prefer to recognize this neo-church as heretical and apostate, rather than schismatic.
Logged

Offline Matthew

  • Mod
Re: Objectively Speaking, heretical and or schismatic
« Reply #3 on: May 25, 2021, 01:06:10 PM »
The Conciliar Church has cut itself off from the Catholic Church of All Time. How is that not schism?
It has created a whole new religion, and called it "Catholic". 
Logged

Offline 2Vermont

Re: Objectively Speaking, heretical and or schismatic
« Reply #4 on: May 25, 2021, 04:25:39 PM »
Quote from: Matthew on May 25, 2021, 01:06:10 PM
The Conciliar Church has cut itself off from the Catholic Church of All Time. How is that not schism?
It has created a whole new religion, and called it "Catholic".
I tend to agree with the others.  Every other church (other than the Orthodox) cut themselves off from the Catholic Church, but they are not considered schismatic.  They are heretics.

Furthermore, if the Conciliar Church cut itself off from the Catholic Church, doesn't that mean that the leader of the Conciliar Church (ie. the conciliar pope) has also cut himself off from the Catholic Church?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3
« previous next »