Is this really church teaching?
No, Church teaching officially comes from a document of the Magisterium, such as a papal encyclical, council, or the Catechism, not the website you quote.
Whoever put that together is probably trying to justify their view that recent Popes have taught heresy to the whole Church. And based on that individual’s perception, he/she feels those Popes must therefore have excommunicated themselves (technically called a latae sententiae excommunication). Thus, that individual perhaps justifies for themselves grounds for rejecting an actual papal teaching.
Closed pending moderator review.
Link removed because it does not represent the Catholic Church.
The question however can be discussed.
Moved to NCRs.
As far as I know, Pope Honorius I is about as good of evidence you can find that Pope can teach heresy - though from a Catholic perspective, his fault was allowing herecy within the church, and not expressly teaching heresy himself. Others may disagree.
From the Lutheran Perspective, Pope Leo X promulgated teachings we view as heretical or at least troubling - that the Holy Spirit potentially desired burning of some heretics and misuse of the treasury of merit.
Oddly enough, from Lutheran (and I presume Orthodox and Anglican) perspective, we would view the teaching of Papal Infallibility as being at least slightly heretical.
For churches that weigh “Tradition” as authoritative, though not apart from Scripture, Vatican I presents a dilemma. How do things “get into” Tradition in the first place? It does no good to argue "only what has been believed and practiced for centuries. Lot of things we all consider heretical have been around for centuries; furthermore, that factor could not have guided the earliest Christians. You might say, whatever is consistent with the ECF’s, and avoids reliance on heretics. But who declared this list of guys to be “ECF’s”, and that list to be “heretics”? You could say, the Councils. But who declared which councils to be Councils? You might say “by common agreement”, but what if there was and is disagreement?
It’s hard for Christians who incorporate Tradition at all to measure Papal Infallibility as heretical, if the Magisterium is the yardstick from which your yardsticks, rulers, and measuring tapes are derived.
Agreed, from that standpoint, Papal Infallibility is a distillation of that process.
In addition, the two other dogmas (as I understand it) made clear via Papal Infallibility - the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption- are not troubling to most Lutherans.
I was discussing Pope Honorius and the whole “one will” debate with an Orthodox Christian and it sparked me to study the history of the situation a bit more. I found it to be worthwhile and I hope you will do the same. After some study, I came to the conclusion that Pope Honorius’ letter to Patriarch Sergius of Constantinople is probably not going to go on the highlight reel of Papal Actions; but that there were many mitigating historical factors that showed me that though he was going down an unorthodox path, he might have been doing it for good reasons. The main one being to try to bring unity between the Egyptian and Syrian churches and the rest of Christendom at a time when the Muslim threat in the Middle East was increasing.
Pope Benedict XVI’s statement in Nov 2010 that condoms use ( by male prostitutes) may be justified in some cases to help stop the spreading of AIDS could be viewed as controversial. Not sure whether it was heretical. It seemed to be more of a personal opinion since it was not written officially in any of his encyclicals. But if it was really a teaching by the Pope, who then would say it was heretical? The Protestants, as far as they are concerned, approved of condoms usage. Catholics do not, for that matter, but Pope B XVI did make an exception in certain case such as this, like prevention of the spreading of AIDS.
He did not say it was justified. He actually said it was “not a moral solution.” He basically said because it was not a contraceptive in such an occasion that it could move the sinners in question in a direction of moral concern. See full context of Pope Benedict’s words here.
A crude analogy would be a bully at school severely beats on a certain kid all the time. At some point, he starts to feel bad about it, and only punches the kid a few times one day. Are those fewer punches moral? No. But could the bully possibly be moving in a better direction? Possibly.
Thanks. He was consistent with the Church’s position then, that condoms usage was artificial contraception and therefore morally not right. I remembered then that the media was buzzed in reporting that statement, rightly or wrongly.
Just wondering, who got to say that a Pope’s teaching is heretical?
You mean who can declare a Pope’s teaching heretical? Well, no Pope has ever taught heresy as something for the universal Church to hold. But if you mean who could declare that a Pope personally held a heretical teaching? I don’t know that anyone can authoritatively, unless a subsequent council in union with a future Pope decided it was necessary. But I’m not positive about that.
I was more of thinking in regards to the title of the thread. IDK. I myself have not heard of a Pope giving heretical teaching though there could be perception in matters of opinion.
Maybe this is perhaps more of Protestants issue where they disagree with Catholicism. And when they do, would that make a Pope’s teaching heretical? How could this thread be addressed in order to help the OP?
No he didn’t.
Really, he didn’t.
He said that the impulse (even though it regarding use of something wrong) which a person might have to protect somebody from an ill effect MIGHT be a ‘first step’ on the way to truly recognizing wrong and repentance.
He did NOT say that condom use by male prostitutes could be justified.
And I see somebody else also caught this for you, Reuben. That’s good.
Thank goodness. I was hoping we would not have to hash through that again!!!
Thanks for producing the statement’s extract. The media, one of which The New York Times, I think, used the word ‘justified’. Those who merely relied on newspaper report may not have the benefit of the context of the Pope Emeritus’ statement and thus may misunderstood the thrust of his teaching/opinion.