As some of you may have read on this forum, I occasionally bring up disagreements that I have with current Church doctrine or teachings. Usually, I get slammed for it by the forum’s more devout and zealot posters. Sometimes these posters either call me a heretic or accuse me of heresy. I used to take offense at that because I’m a cradle Catholic and I to go to Church, and feel I have a pretty good relationship with God. I admit, I’m not a perfect practicing Catholic, but I think I do pretty good, but I’m also not afraid to question, if I think the Church is in error over some issue.
Anyway, one poster gave a definition of heresy as one who disagrees with the teachings/doctrines of the Church (I’m paraphrasing). Thus, according to his definition, I was practicing heresy by disagreeing with the Church.
If his definition is accurate, isn’t the Church then full of heretics to one degree or another? For instance, many here feel Vatican 2 was a step backwards for the Church and thus disagree with the reforms that came with it. Aren’t those folks who disagree with those reforms then considered heretics according to the definition that was provided me? They openly disagree with the Church on those subjects.
My point being, can’t one disagree with the Church on an issue and still remain a good Catholic and w/o being referred to as a heretic? For you posters who like to throw that accusation around remember, “he who is w/o sin throw the first stone”.
Every Catholic in the world probably has something he/she disagrees with the Church on. There are times where the heresy label has been earned (denying Christ’s divinity, etc); however IMO, most of the discussions that go in this forum do not warrant a heresy accusation.
Just my :twocents: