Catholic Encyclopedia: Heresy

I.    Connotation and Definition
II.   Distinctions
III.  Degrees of heresy
IV.   Gravity of the sin of heresy
V.    Origin, spread, and persistence of heresy
VI.   Christ, the Apostles, and the Fathers on heresy
VII.  Vindication of their teaching
VIII. Church legislation on heresy: ancient, medieval, present-day
IX.   Its principles
X.   Ecclesiastical jurisdiction over heretics
XI.   Reception of converts
XII.  Role of heresy in history
XIII. Intolerance and cruelty

I. CONNOTATION AND DEFINITION

 The term heresy connotes, etymologically, both a choice and the thing chosen, the
meaning being, however, narrowed to the selection of religious or political doctrines,
adhesion to parties in Church or State.  Josephus applies the name (<airesis>) to the
three religious sects prevalent in Judea since the Machabean period: the Sadducees, the
Pharisees, the Essenes (Bel. Jud., II, viii, 1; Ant., XIII, v, 9).  St. Paul is described to the
Roman governor Felix as the leader of the heresy (<aireseos>) of the Nazarenes (Acts,
xxiv, 5); the Jews in Rome say to the same Apostle: "Concerning this sect [<airesoeos>],
we know that it is everywhere contradicted" (Acts, xxviii, 22).  St. Justin (Dial., xviii,
108) uses <airesis> in the same sense.  St. Peter (II, ii, 1) applies the term to Christian
sects: "There shall be among you lying teachers who shall bring in sects of perdition
[<aireseis apoleias>]".  In later Greek, philosophers' schools, as well as religious sects,
are  "heresies".

 St. Thomas (II-II:11:1) defines heresy: "a species of infidelity in men who, having
professed the faith of Christ, corrupt its dogmas".  "The right Christian faith consists in
giving one's voluntary assent to Christ in all that truly belongs to His teaching.  There
are,therefore,two ways of deviating from Christianity: the one by refusing to believe in
Christ Himself, which is the way of infidelity, common to Pagans and Jews; the other
by restricting belief to certain points of Christ's doctrine selected and fashioned at
pleasure, which is the way of heretics.  The subject-matter of both faith and heresy is,
therefore, the deposit of the faith, that is, the sum total of truths revealed in Scripture
and Tradition as proposed to our belief by the Church.  The believer accepts the whole
deposit as proposed by the Church; the heretic accepts only such parts of it as
commend themselves to his own approval.  The heretical tenets may be ignorance of
the true creed, erroneous judgment, imperfect apprehension and comprehension of
dogmas: in none of these does the will play an appreciable part, wherefore one of the
necessary conditions of sinfulness--free choice--is wanting and such heresy is merely <
objective>, or < material>.  On the other hand the will may freely incline the intellect to
adhere to tenets declared false by the Divine teaching authority of the Church.  The
impelling motives are many: intellectual pride or exaggerated reliance on one's own
insight; the illusions of religious zeal; the allurements of political or ecclesiastical
power; the ties of material interests and personal status; and perhaps others more
dishonourable.  Heresy thus willed is imputable to the subject and carries with it a
varying degree of guilt; it is called < formal>, because to the material error it adds the
informative element of "freely willed".

 Pertinacity, that is, obstinate adhesion to a particular tenet is required to make heresy
< formal>.  For as long as one remains willing to submit to the Church's decision he
remains a Catholic Christian at heart and his wrong beliefs are only transient errors and
fleeting opinions.  Considering that the human intellect can assent only to truth, real or
apparent, studied pertinacity, as distinct from wanton opposition, supposes a firm
subjective conviction which may be sufficient to inform the conscience and create "good
faith".  Such firm convictions result either from circumstances over which the heretic
has no control or from intellectual delinquencies in themselves more or less voluntary
and imputable.  A man born and nurtured in heretical surroundings may live and die
without ever having a doubt as to the truth of his creed.  On the other hand a born
Catholic may allow himself to drift into whirls of anti-Catholic thought from which no
doctrinal authority can rescue him, and where his mind becomes incrusted with
convictions, or considerations sufficiently powerful to overlay his Catholic conscience.
It is not for man, but for Him who searcheth the reins and heart, to sit in judgment on
the guilt which attaches to an heretical conscience.

II. DISTINCTIONS

 Heresy differs from apostasy (q. v.).  The apostate < a fide>  abandons wholly the faith
of Christ either by embracing Judaism, Islamism, Paganism, or simply by falling into
naturalism and complete neglect of religion; the heretic always retains faith in Christ.
Heresy also differs from schism. Schismatics, says St. Thomas, in the strict sense, are
they who of their own will and intention separate themselves from the unity of the
Church.  The unity of the Church consists in the connection of its members with each
other and of all the members with the head.  Now this head is Christ whose
representative in the Church is the supreme pontiff.  And therefore the name of
schismatics is given to those who will not submit to the supreme pontiff nor
communicate with the members of the Church subject to him.  Since the definition of
Papal Infallibility, schism usually implies the heresy of denying this dogma.  Heresy is
opposed to faith; schism to charity; so that, although all heretics are schismatics because
loss of faith involves separation from the Church, not all schismatics are necessarily
heretics, since a man may, from anger, pride, ambition, or the like, sever himself from
the communion of the Church and yet believe all the Church proposes for our belief (II-
II, Q. xxix, a. 1).  Such a one, however, would be more properly called rebellious than
heretical.

III.  DEGREES OF HERESY

 Both matter and form of heresy admit of degrees which find expression in the
following technical formula of theology and canon law.  Pertinacious adhesion to a
doctrine contradictory to a point of faith clearly defined by the Church is heresy pure
and simple, heresy in the first degree.  But if the doctrine in question has not been
expressly "defined" or is not clearly proposed as an article of faith in the ordinary,
authorized teaching of the Church, an opinion opposed to it is styled < sententia
haeresi proxima>, that is, an opinion approaching heresy.  Next, a doctrinal
proposition, without directly contradicting a received dogma, may yet involve logical
consequences at variance with revealed truth.  Such a proposition is not heretical, it is a
< propositio theologice erronea>, that is, erroneous in theology.  Further, the opposition
to an article of faith may not be strictly demonstrable, but only reach a certain degree of
probability.  In that case the doctrine is termed < sententia de haeresi suspecta,
haeresim sapiens> ; that is, an opinion suspected, or savouring, of heresy (see
CENSURES, THEOLOGICAL).

IV.  GRAVITY OF THE SIN OF HERESY

 Heresy is a sin because of its nature it is destructive of the virtue of Christian faith.  Its
malice is to be measured therefore by the excellence of the good gift of which it
deprives the soul.  Now faith is the most precious possession of man, the root of his
supernatural life, the pledge of his eternal salvation.  Privation of faith is therefore the
greatest evil, and deliberate rejection of faith is the greatest sin.  St. Thomas (II-II, Q. x,
a. 3) arrives at the same conclusion thus: "All sin is an aversion from God.  A sin,
therefore, is the greater the more it separates man from God.  But infidelity does this
more than any other sin, for the infidel (unbeliever) is without the true knowledge of
God: his false knowledge does not bring him help, for what he opines is not God:
manifestly, then, the sin of unbelief (< infidelitas> ) is the greatest sin in the whole
range of perversity."  And he adds: "Although the Gentiles err in more things than the
Jews, and although the Jews are farther removed from true faith than heretics, yet the
unbelief of the Jews is a more grievous sin than that of the Gentiles, because they
corrupt the Gospel itself after having adopted and professed the same. . . .  It is a more
serious sin not to perform what one has promised than not to perform what one has not
promised."  It cannot be pleaded in attenuation of the guilt of heresy that heretics do
not deny the faith which to them appears necessary to salvation, but only such articles
as they consider not to belong to the original deposit.  In answer it suffices to remark
that two of the most evident truths of the < depositum fidei> are the unity of the
Church and the institution of a teaching authority to maintain that unity.  That unity
exists in the Catholic Church, and is preserved by the function of her teaching body:
these are two facts which anyone can verify for himself.  In the constitution of the
Church there is no room for private judgment sorting essentials from non-essentials:
any such selection disturbs the unity, and challenges the Divine authority, of the
Church; it strikes at the very source of faith.  The guilt of heresy is measured not so
much by its subject-matter as by its formal principle, which is the same in all heresies:
revolt against a Divinely constituted authority.

V.  ORIGIN, SPREAD, AND PERSISTENCE OF HERESY

(a) Origin of Heresy  The origin, the spread, and the persistence of heresy are due to
different causes and influenced by many external circumstances.  The undoing of faith
infused and fostered by God Himself is possible on account of the human element in it,
namely man's free will.  The will determines the act of faith freely because its moral
dispositions move it to obey God, whilst the non-cogency of the motives of credibility
allows it to withhold its consent and leaves room for doubt and even denial.  The non-
cogency of the motives of credibility may arise from three causes: the obscurity of the
Divine testimony (< inevidentia attestantis> ); the obscurity of the contents of
Revelation; the opposition between the obligations imposed on us by faith and the evil
inclinations of our corrupt nature.  To find out how a man's free will is led to withdraw
from the faith once professed, the best way is observation of historical cases.  Pius X,
scrutinizing the causes of Modernism, says: "The proximate cause is, without any
doubt, an error of the mind.  The remoter causes are two: curiosity and pride.
Curiosity, unless wisely held in bounds, is of itself sufficient to account for all errors. . .
 But far more effective in obscuring the mind and leading it into error is pride, which
has, as it were, its home in Modernist doctrines.  Through pride the Modernists
overestimate themselves. . . .   We are not like other men . . . they reject all submission
to authority . . . they pose as reformers.  If from moral causes we pass to the intellectual,
the first and most powerful is ignorance . . . .  They extol modern philosophy . . . .
completely ignoring the philosophy of the Schools and thus depriving themselves of
the means of clearing away the confusion of their ideas and of meeting sophisms.  Their
system, replete with so many errors, had its origin in the wedding of false philosophy
with faith" (Encycl. "Pascendi", 8 September, 1907).

 So far the pope.  If now we turn to the Modernist leaders for an account of their
defections, we find none attributing it to pride or arrogance, but they are almost
unanimous in allowing that curiosity--the desire to know how the old faith stands in
relation to the new science--has been the motive power behind them.  In the last
instance, they appeal to the sacred voice of their individual conscience which forbids
them outwardly to profess what inwardly they honestly hold to be untrue.  Loisy, to
whose case the Decree "Lamentabili" applies, tells his readers that he was brought to
his present position "by his studies chiefly devoted to the history of the Bible, of
Christian origins and of comparative religion".  Tyrrell says in self-defence: "It is the
irresistible facts concerning the origin and composition of the Old and New
Testaments; concerning the origin of the Christian Church, of its hierarchy, its
institutions, its dogmas; concerning the gradual development of the papacy; concerning
the history of religion in general--that create a difficulty against which the synthesis of
scholastic theology must be and is already shattered to pieces."  "I am able to put my
finger on the exact point or moment in my experience from which my 'immanentism'
took its rise.  In his 'Rules for the discernment of Spirits' . . . Ignatius of Loyola says . . .
etc."  It is psychologically interesting to note the turning-point or rather the breaking-
point of faith in the autobiographies of seceders from the Church.  A study of the
personal narratives in "Roads to Rome" and "Roads from Rome" leaves one with the
impression that the heart of man is a sanctuary impenetrable to all but to God and, in a
certain measure, to its owner.  It is, therefore, advisable to leave individuals to
themselves and to study the spread of heresy, or the origin of heretical societies.

  (b) Spread of Heresy  The growth of heresy, like the growth of plants, depends on
surrounding influences, even more than on its vital force.  Philosophies, religious ideals
and aspirations, social and economic conditions, are brought into contact with revealed
truth, and from the impact result both new affirmations and new negations of the
traditional doctrine.  The first requisite for success is a forceful man, not necessarily of
great intellect and learning, but of strong will and daring action.  Such were the men
who in all ages have given their names to new sects.  The second requisite is
accommodation of the new doctrine to the contemporary mentality, to social and
political conditions.  The last, but by no means the least, is the support of secular rulers.
A strong man in touch with his time, and supported by material force, may deform the
existing religion and build up a new heretical sect.  Modernism fails to combine into a
body separate from the Church because it lacks an acknowledged leader, because it
appeals to only a small minority of contemporary minds, namely, to a small number
who are dissatisfied with the Church as she now is, and because no secular power
lends it support.  For the same reason, and proportionately, a thousand small sects have
failed, whose names still encumber the pages of church history, but whose tenets
interest only a few students, and whose adherents are nowhere.  Such were, in the
Apostolic Age, the Judeo-Christians, Judeo-Gnostics, Nicolaites, Docetae, Cerinthians,
Ebionites, Nazarenes, followed, in the next two centuries, by a variety of Syrian and
Alexandrian Gnostics, by Ophites, Marcionites, Encratites, Montanists, Manichaeans,
and others.  All the early Eastern sects fed on the fanciful speculations so dear to the
Eastern mind, but, lacking the support of temporal power, they disappeared under the
anathemas of the guardians of the < depositum fidei>.

 Arianism (q. v.) is the first heresy that gained a strong footing in the Church and
seriously endangered its very nature and existence.  Arius appeared on the scene when
theologians were endeavouring to harmonize the apparently contradictory doctrines of
the unity of God and the Divinity of Christ.  Instead of unravelling the knot, he simply
cut it by bluntly asserting that Christ was not God like the Father, but a creature made
in time.  The simplicity of the solution, the ostentatious zeal of Arius for the defence of
the "one God", his mode of life, his learning and dialectic ability won many to his side.
"In particular he was supported by the famous Eusebius of Nicomedia who had great
influence on the Emperor Constantine.  He had friends among the other bishops of Asia
and even among the bishops, priests, and nuns of the Alexandrian province.  He gained
the favour of Constantia, the emperor's sister, and he disseminated his doctrine among
the people by means of his notorious book which he called <thaleia> or 'Entertainment'
and by songs adapted for sailors, millers, and travellers." (Addis and Arnold, "A
Catholic Dictionary", 7th ed., 1905, 54.)  The Council of Nicaea anathematized the
heresiarch, but its anathemas, like all the efforts of the Catholic bishops, were nullified
by interference of the civil power.  Constantine and his sister protected Arius and the
Arians, and the next emperor, Constantius, assured the triumph of the heresy: the
Catholics were reduced to silence by dire persecution.  At once an internecine conflict
began within the Arian pale, for heresy, lacking the internal cohesive element of
authority, can only be held together by coercion either from friend or foe.  Sects sprang
up rapidly: they are known as Eunomians, Anomoeans, Exucontians, Semi-Arians,
Acacians.  The Emperor Valens (364-378) lent his powerful support to the Arians, and
the peace of the Church was only secured when the orthodox Emperor Theodosius
reversed the policy of his predecessors and sided with Rome.  Within the boundaries of
the Roman empire the faith of Nicaea, enforced again by the General Council of
Constantinople (381), prevailed, but Arianism held its own for over two hundred years
longer wherever the Arian Goths held sway: in Thrace, Italy, Africa, Spain, Gaul.  The
conversion of King Recared of Spain, who began to reign in 586, marked the end of
Arianism in his dominions, and the triumph of the Catholic Franks sealed the doom of
Arianism everywhere.

 Pelagianism, not being backed by political power, was without much difficulty
removed from the Church.  Eutychianism, Nestorianism, and other Christological
heresies which followed one upon another as the link, of a chain, flourished only so
long and so far as the temporal power of Byzantine and Persian rulers gave them
countenance.  Internal dissension, stagnation, and decay became their fate when left to
themselves.  Passing over the great schism that rent East from West, and the many
smaller heresies which sprang up in the Middle Ages without leaving a deep
impression on the Church, we arrive at the modern sects which date from Luther and
go by the collective name of Protestantism (q. v.).  The three elements of success
possessed by Arianism reappear in Lutheranism and cause these two great religious
upheavals to move on almost parallel lines.  Luther was eminently a man of his people:
the rough-hewn, but, withal sterling, qualities of the Saxon peasant lived forth under
his religious habit and doctor's gown; his winning voice, his piety, his learning raised
him above his fellows yet did not estrange him from the people: his conviviality, the
crudities in his conversation and preaching, his many human weaknesses only
increased his popularity.  When the Dominican John Tetzel began to preach in
Germany the indulgences proclaimed by Pope Leo X for those who contributed to the
completion of St. Peter's Basilica in Rome, opposition arose on the part of the people
and of both civil and ecclesiastical authorities.  Luther set the match to the fuel of
widespread discontent.  He at once gained a number of adherents powerful both in
Church and State; the Bishop of W&uuml;rzburg recommended him to the protection
of the Elector Frederick of Saxony.  In all probability Luther started on his crusade with
the laudable intention of reforming undoubted abuses.  But his unexpected success, his
impetuous temper, perhaps some ambition, soon carried him beyond all bounds set by
the Church.  By 1521, that is within four years from his attack on abuse of indulgences,
he had propagated a new doctrine; the Bible was the only source of faith; human nature
was wholly corrupted by original sin, man was not free, God was responsible for all
human actions good and bad; faith alone saved; the Christian priesthood was not
confined to the hierarchy but included all the faithful.  The masses of the people were
not slow in drawing from these doctrines the practical conclusion that sin was sin no
longer, was, in fact, equal to a good work.

With his appeal to the lower instincts of human nature went an equally strong appeal
to the spirit of nationality and greed.  He endeavored to set the German emperor
against the Roman pope and generally the Teuton against the Latin; he invited the
secular princes to confiscate the property of the Church.  His voice was heard only too
well.  For the next 130 years the history of the German people is a record of religious
strife, moral degradation, artistic retrogression, industrial breakdown; of civil wars,
pillage, devastation, and general ruin.  The Peace of 1648 established the principle: <
Cujus regio illius et religio> ; the lord of the land shall be also lord of religion.  And
accordingly territorial limits became religious limits within which the inhabitant had to
profess and practise the faith imposed on him by the ruler.  It is worthy of remark that
the geographical frontier fixed by the politicians of 1648 is still the dividing line
between Catholicism and Protestantism in Germany.  The English Reformation, more
than any other, was the work of crafty politicians.  The soil had been prepared for it by
the Lollards or Wycliffites, who at the beginning of the sixteenth century were still
numerous in the towns.  No English Luther arose, but the unholy work was thoroughly
done by kings and parliaments, by means of a series of penal laws unequalled in
severity.

  (c) Persistence of Heresy  We have seen how heresy originates and how it spreads; we
must now answer the question why it persists, or why so many persevere in heresy.
Once heresy is in possession, it tightens its grip by the thousand subtle and often
unconscious influences which mould a man's life.  A child is born in heretical
surroundings: before it is able to think for itself its mind has been filled and fashioned
by home, school, and church teachings, the authority of which it never doubted.  When,
at a riper age, doubts arise, the truth of Catholicism is seldom apprehended as it is.
Innate prejudices, educational bias, historical distortions stand in the way and
frequently make approach impossible.  The state of conscience technically termed <
bona fides>, good faith, is thus produced.  It implies inculpable belief in error, a
mistake morally unavoidable and therefore always excusable, sometimes even
laudable.  In the absence of good faith worldly interests often bar the way from heresy
to truth.  When a government, for instance, reserves its favours and functions for
adherents of the state religion, the army of civil servants becomes a more powerful
body of missionaries than the ordained ministers.  Prussia, France, and Russia are cases
in point.

VI. CHRIST, THE APOSTLES, AND THE FATHERS ON HERESY

 Heresy, in the sense of falling away from the Faith, became possible only after the
Faith had been promulgated by Christ.  Its advent is clearly foretold, Matt., xxiv, 11, 23-
26: " . . . many false prophets shall rise. and shall seduce many. . . . Then if any man
shall say to you: Lo here is Christ, or there, do not believe him.  For there shall rise false
Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch as to
deceive (if possible) even the elect.  Behold I have told it to you, beforehand.  If
therefore they shall say to you: Behold he is in the desert, go ye not out: Behold < he> is
in the closets, believe it not.  "Christ also indicated the marks by which to know the
false prophets: "Who is not with me is against me" (Luke, xi, 23); "and if he will not
hear the Church let him be to thee as the heathen and the publican" (Matt., xviii, 17);
"he that believeth not shall be condemned" (Mark, xvi, 16).  The Apostles acted upon
their Master's directions.  All the weight of their own Divine faith and mission is
brought to bear upon innovators.  "If any one",says St.Paul, "preach to you a gospel,
besides that you have received, let him be anathema" (Gal., i, 9).  To St. John the heretic
is a seducer, an antichrist, a man who dissolves Christ (I John, iv, 3; II John, 7); "receive
him not into the house nor say to him, God speed you" (II John, 10).  St. Peter, true to
his office and to his impetuous nature, assails them as with a two-edged sword: " . . .
lying teachers who shall bring in sects of perdition, and deny the Lord who bought
them: bringing upon themselves swift destruction . . . These are fountains without
water, and clouds tossed with whirlwinds, to whom the mist of darkness is reserved"
(II Pet., ii, 1, 17).  St. Jude speaks in a similar strain throughout his whole epistle.  St.
Paul admonishes the disturbers of the unity of faith at Corinth that "the weapons of our
warfare . . . are mighty to God unto the pulling down of fortifications, destroying
counsels, and every height that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God . . . and
having in readiness to revenge all disobedience" (II Cor., x, 4, 5, 6).

 What Paul did at Corinth he enjoins to be done by every bishop in his own church.
Thus Timothy is instructed to "war in them a good warfare, having faith and a good
conscience, which some rejecting have made shipwreck concerning the faith.  Of whom
is Hymeneus and Alexander, whom I have delivered up to Satan, that they may learn
not to blaspheme" (I Tim., i, 18-20).  He exhorts the ancients of the Church at Ephesus to
"take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed
you bishops, to rule the church of God, . . .  I know that, after my departure, ravening
wolves will enter in among you, not sparing the flock . . . Therefore watch, . . ." (Acts,
xx. 28, 29, :31).  "Beware of dogs", he writes to the Philippians (iii, 2), the dogs being the
same false teachers as the "ravening wolves".  The Fathers show no more leniency to
perverters of the faith.  A Protestant writer thus sketches their teaching (Schaff-Herzog,
s. v. Heresy): "Polycarp regarded Marcion as the first-born of the Devil.  Ignatius sees in
heretics poisonous plants, or animals in human form.  Justin and Tertullian condemn
their errors as inspirations of the Evil One; Theophilus compares them to barren and
rocky islands on which ships are wrecked; and Origen says, that as pirates place lights
on cliffs to allure and destroy vessels in quest of refuge, so the Prince of this world
lights the fires of false knowledge in order to destroy men.  [Jerome calls the
congregations of the heretics synagogues of Satan (Ep. 123), and says their communion
is to be avoided like that of vipers and scorpions (Ep. 130).]" These primitive views on
heresy have been faithfully transmitted and acted on by the Church in subsequent ages.
There is no break in the tradition from St. Peter to Pius X.

VII.  VINDICATION OF THEIR TEACHING

 The first law of life, be it the life of plant or animal, of man or of a society of men, is
self-preservation.  Neglect of self- preservation leads to ruin and destruction.  But the
life of a religious society, the tissue that binds its members into one body and animates
them with one soul, is the symbol of faith, the creed or confession adhered to as a
condition < sine qua non>  of membership.  To undo the creed is to undo the Church.
The integrity of the rule of faith is more essential to the cohesion of a religious society
than the strict practice of its moral precepts.  For faith supplies the means of mending
moral delinquencies as one of its ordinary functions, whereas the loss of faith, cutting at
the root of spiritual life, is usually fatal to the soul.  In fact the long list of heresiarchs
contains the name of only one who came to resipiscence: Berengarius.  The jealousy
with which the Church guards and defends her deposit of faith is therefore identical
with the instinctive duty of self-preservation and the desire to live.  This instinct is by
no means peculiar to the Catholic Church; being natural it is universal.  All sects,
denominations, confessions, schools of thought, and associations of any kind have a
more or less comprehensive set of tenets on the acceptance of which membership
depends.  In the Catholic Church this natural law has received the sanction of Divine
promulgation, as appears from the teaching of Christ and the Apostles quoted above.
Freedom of thought extending to the essential beliefs of a Church is in itself a
contradiction; for, by accepting membership, the members accept the essential beliefs
and renounce their freedom of thought so far as these are concerned.

 But what authority is to lay down the law as to what is or is not essential?  It is
certainly not the authority of individuals.  By entering a society, whichever it be, the
individual gives up part of his individuality to be merged into the community.  And
that part is precisely his private judgment on the essentials: if he resumes his liberty he
< ipso facto> separates himself from his church.  The decision, therefore, rests with the
constitutional authority of the society--in the Church with the hierarchy acting as
teacher and guardian of the faith.  Nor can it be said that this principle unduly curtails
the play of human reason.  That it does curtail its play is a fact, but a fact grounded in
natural and Divine law, as shown above.  That it does not curtail reason unduly is
evidenced by this other fact: that the deposit of faith (1) is itself an inexhaustible object
of intellectual effort of the noblest kind, lifting human reason above its natural sphere,
enlarging and deepening its outlook, soliciting its finest faculties; (2) that, side by side
with the deposit, but logically connected with it, there is a multitude of doubtful points
of which discussion is free within the wide bounds of charity--"in necessariis unitas, in
dubiis libertas, in omnibus charitas."  The substitution of private judgment for the
teaching < magisterium> has been the dissolvent of all sects who have adopted it.  Only
those sects exhibit a certain consistency in which private judgment is a dead letter and
the teaching is carried on according to confessions and catechisms by a trained clergy.

VIII.  CHURCH LEGISLATION ON HERESY

 Heresy, being a deadly poison generated within the organism of the Church, must be
ejected if she is to live and perform her task of continuing Christ's work of salvation.
Her Founder, who foretold the disease, also provided the remedy: He endowed her
teaching with infallibility (see CHURCH).  The office of teaching belongs to the
hierarchy, the < ecclesia docens>, which, under certain conditions, judges without
appeal in matters of faith and morals (see COUNCILS).  Infallible decisions can also be
given by the pope teaching < ex cathedra> (see INFALLIBILITY).  Each pastor in his
parish, each bishop in his diocese, is in duty bound to keep the faith of his flock
untainted; to the supreme pastor of all the Churches is given the office of feeding the
whole Christian flock.  The power, then, of expelling heresy is an essential factor in the
constitution of the Church.  Like other powers and rights, the power of rejecting heresy
adapts itself in practice to circumstances of time and place, and, especially, of social
and political conditions.  At the beginning it worked without special organization.  The
ancient discipline charged the bishops with the duty of searching out the heresies in
their diocese and checking the progress of error by any means at their command.
When erroneous doctrines gathered volume and threatened disruption of the Church,
the bishops assembled in councils, provincial, metropolitan, national, or ecumenical.
There the combined weight of their authority was brought to bear upon the false
doctrines.  The first council was a meeting of the Apostles at Jerusalem in order to put
an end to the judaizing tendencies among the first Christians.  It is the type of all
succeeding councils: bishops in union with the head of the Church, and guided by the
Holy Ghost, sit as judges in matters of faith and morals.  The spirit which animates the
dealings of the Church with heresy and heretics is one of extreme severity.  St. Paul
writes to Titus: "A man that is a heretic, after the first and second admonition, avoid:
knowing that he, that is such a one, is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned by his
own judgment" (Tit., iii, 10-11).  This early piece of legislation reproduces the still
earlier teaching of Christ: "And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the
heathen and the publican" (Matt., xviii, 17); it also inspires all subsequent anti-heretical
legislation.  The sentence on the obstinate heretic is invariably excommunication.  He is
separated from the company of the faithful, delivered up "to Satan for the destruction
of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ" (I Cor., v,
5).

 When Constantine had taken upon himself the office of lay bishop, < episcopus
externus>, and put the secular arm at the service of the Church, the laws against
heretics became more and more rigorous.  Under the purely ecclesiastical discipline no
temporal punishment could be inflicted on the obstinate heretic, except the damage
which might arise to his personal dignity through being deprived of all intercourse
with his former brethren.  But under the Christian emperors rigorous measures were
enforced against the goods and persons of heretics.  From the time of Constantine to
Theodosius and Valentinian III (313-424) various penal laws were enacted by the
Christian emperors against heretics as being guilty of crime against the State.  "In both
the Theodosian and Justinian codes they were styled infamous persons; all intercourse
was forbidden to be held with them; they were deprived of all offices of profit and
dignity in the civil administration, while all burdensome offices, both of the camp and
of the curia, were imposed upon them; they were disqualified from disposing of their
own estates by will, or of accepting estates bequeathed to them by others; they were
denied the right of giving or receiving donations, of contracting, buying, and selling;
pecuniary fines were imposed upon them; they were often proscribed and banished,
and in many cases scourged before being sent into exile.  In some particularly
aggravated cases sentence of death was pronounced upon heretics, though seldom
executed in the time of the Christian emperors of Rome.  Theodosius is said to be the
first who pronounced heresy a capital crime; this law was passed in 382 against the
Encratites, the Saccophori, the Hydroparastatae, and the Manichaeans.  Heretical
teachers were forbidden to propagate their doctrines publicly or privately; to hold
public disputations; to ordain bishops, presbyters, or any other clergy; to hold religious
meetings; to build conventicles or to avail themselves of money bequeathed to them for
that purpose.  Slaves were allowed to inform against their heretical masters and to
purchase their freedom by coming over to the Church.  The children of heretical
parents were denied their patrimony and inheritance unless they returned to the
Catholic Church.  The books of heretics were ordered to be burned."  (< Vide> "Codex
Theodosianus", lib. XVI, tit. 5, "De Haereticis".)

 This legislation remained in force and with even greater severity in the kingdom
formed by the victorious barbarian invaders on the ruins of the Roman Empire in the
West.  The burning of heretics was first decreed in the eleventh century.  The Synod of
Verona (1184) imposed on bishops the duty to search out the heretics in their dioceses
and to hand them over to the secular power.  Other synods, and the Fourth Lateran
Council (1215) under Pope Innocent III, repeated and enforced this decree, especially
the Synod of Toulouse (1229), which established inquisitors in every parish (one priest
and two laymen).  Everyone was bound to denounce heretics, the names of the
witnesses were kept secret; after 1243, when Innocent IV sanctioned the laws of
Emperor Frederick II and of Louis IX against heretics, torture was applied in trials; the
guilty persons were delivered up to the civil authorities and actually burnt at the stake.
Paul III (1542) established, and Sixtus V organized, the Roman Congregation of the
Inquisition, or Holy Office, a regular court of justice for dealing with heresy and
heretics (see ROMAN CONGREGATIONS).  The Congregation of the Index, instituted
by St. Pius V, has for its province the care of faith and morals in literature; it proceeds
against printed matter very much as the Holy Office proceeds against persons (see
INDEX OF PROHIBITED BOOKS).  The present pope, Pius X (1909), has decreed the
establishment in every diocese of a board of censors and of a vigilance committee
whose functions are to find out and report on writings and persons tainted with the
heresy of Modernism (Encycl. "Pascendi", 8 Sept., 1907).  The present-day legislation
against heresy has lost nothing of its ancient severity; but the penalties on heretics are
now only of the spiritual order; all the punishments which require the intervention of
the secular arm have fallen into abeyance.  Even in countries where the cleavage
between the spiritual and secular powers does not amount to hostility or complete
severance, the death penalty, confiscation of goods, imprisonment, etc., are no longer
inflicted on heretics.  The spiritual penalties are of two kinds: < latae> and < ferendae
sententiae>.  The former are incurred by the mere fact of heresy, no judicial sentence
being required; the latter are inflicted after trial by an ecclesiastical court, or by a
bishop acting < ex informata conscientia>, that is, on his own certain knowledge, and
dispensing with the usual procedure

 The penalties (see CENSURES, ECCLESIASTICAL) < latae sententiae> are: (1)
Excommunication specially reserved to the Roman pontiff, which is incurred by all
apostates from the Catholic Faith, by each and all heretics, by whatever name they are
known and to whatever sect they belong, and by all who believe in them (< credentes>
), receive, favour, or in any way defend them (Const. "Apostolicae Sedis", 1869).
Heretic here means < formal> heretic, but also includes the < positive>  doubter, that is,
the man who posits his doubt as defensible by reason, but not the < negative> doubter,
who simply abstains  from formulating a judgment.  The believers (< credentes> ) in
heretics are they who, without examining  particular doctrines, give a general assent to
the teachings of the sect; the favourers (< fautores> ) are they who by commission or
omission lend support to heresy and thus help or allow it to spread; the receivers and
defenders are they who shelter heretics from the rigours of the law. (2)
"Excommunication specially reserved to the Roman Pontiff incurred by each and all
who knowingly read, without authorization from the Apostolic See, books of apostates
and heretics in which heresy is defended; likewise readers of books of any author
prohibited by name in letters Apostolic, and all who retain possession of, or print, or in
any way defend such books" (Apost. Sedis, 1869).  The < book> here meant is a volume
of a certain size and unity; newspapers and manuscripts are not books, but serial
publications intended to form a book when completed fall under this censure.  To read
knowingly (< scienter> ) implies on the reader's part the knowledge that the book is the
work of a heretic, that it defends heresy, and  that it is forbidden.  "Books . . . prohibited
by name in letters Apostolic" are books condemned by Bulls, Briefs, or Encyclicals
emanating directly from the pope; books prohibited by decrees of Roman
Congregations, although the prohibition is approved by the  pope, are not included.
The "printers" of heretical books are the editor who gives the order and the publisher
who executes it, and perhaps the proof-reader, but not the workman who performs the
mechanical part of printing.

 Additional penalties to be decreed by judicial sentences: Apostates and heretics are <
irregular>, that is, debarred from receiving clerical orders or exercising lawfully the
duties and rights annexed to them; they are < infamous>, that is, publicly noted as
guilty and dishonoured.  This note of infamy clings to the children and grandchildren
of unrepented heretics.  Heretical clerics and all who receive, defend, or favour them
are < ipso facto> deprived of their benefices, offices, and  ecclesiastical jurisdiction.
The pope himself, if notoriously guilty of heresy, would cease to be pope because he
would cease to be a member of the Church.  Baptism received without necessity by an
adult at the hands of a declared heretic renders the recipient irregular.  Heresy
constitutes an impedient impediment  to marriage with a Catholic (< mixta religio> )
from which  the pope dispenses or gives the bishops power to dispense (see
IMPEDIMENTS).  < Communicatio in sacris>, i. e. active participation in non-Catholic
religious functions, is on the whole unlawful, but it is not so intrinsically evil that,
under given circumstances, it  may not be excused.  Thus friends and relatives may for
good reasons accompany a funeral, be present at a marriage or a baptism, without
causing scandal or lending support, to the non-Catholic rites, provided no active part
be taken in them: their motive is friendship, or maybe courtesy, but it nowise implies
approval of the rites.  Non-Catholics are admitted to all Catholic services but not to the
sacraments.

IX.  PRINCIPLES OF CHURCH LEGISLATION

 The  guiding principles in the Church's treatment of heretics are the following:
Distinguishing between formal and material heretics, she applies to the former the
canon, "Most firmly hold and in no way doubt  that every heretic or schismatic is to
have part with the Devil and his angels in the flames of eternal fire, unless before the
end of his life he be incorporated with, and restored to the Catholic Church."  No one is
forced to enter the Church, but having once entered it through baptism, he is bound to
keep the promises he freely made.  To restrain and bring back her rebellious sons the
Church uses both her own spiritual power and the secular power at her command.
Towards material heretics her conduct is ruled by the saying of St. Augustine: "Those
are by no means to be accounted heretics who do not defend their false and perverse
opinions with pertinacious zeal (< animositas> ), especially when their error is not the
fruit of audacious presumption but has been communicated to them by seduced and
lapsed parents, and when they are seeking the truth with cautious solicitude and ready
to be corrected" (P. L., XXXIII, ep. xliii, 160).  Pius IX, in a letter to the bishops of Italy
(10 Aug., 1863), restates this Catholic doctrine: "It is known to Us and to You that they
who are in invincible ignorance concerning our religion but observe the natural law . . .
and are ready to obey God and lead an honest and righteous life, can, with the help of
Divine light and grace, attain to eternal life . . . for God . . . will not allow any one to be
eternally punished who is not wilfully guilty" (Denzinger, "Enchir.", n. 1529). X.

X. ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION OVER HERETICS

 The fact of having received valid baptism places material heretics under the
jurisdiction of the Church, and if they are in good faith, they belong to the soul of the
Church.  Their material severance, however, precludes them from the use of
ecclesiastical rights, except the right of being judged according to ecclesiastical law if,
by any chance, they are brought before an ecclesiastical court.  They are not bound by
ecclesiastical laws enacted for the spiritual well-being of its members, e. g. by the Six
Commandments of the Church.

XI. RECEPTION OF CONVERTS

Converts to the Faith, before being received, should be well instructed in Catholic
doctrine.  The right to reconcile heretics belongs to the bishops, but is usually delegated
to all priests having charge of souls.  In England a special licence is required for each
reconciliation, except in case of children under fourteen or of dying persons, and this
licence is only granted when the priest can give a written assurance that the candidate
is sufficiently instructed and otherwise prepared, and that there is some reasonable
guarantee of his perseverance.  The order of proceeding in a reconciliation is: first,
abjuration of heresy or profession of faith; second, conditional baptism (this is given
only when the heretical baptism is doubtful); third, sacramental confession and
conditional absolution.

XII.  ROLE OF HERESY IN HISTORY

 The role of heresy in history is that of evil generally.  Its roots are in corrupted human
nature.  It has come over the Church as predicted by her Divine Founder; it has rent
asunder the bonds of charity in families, provinces, states, and nations; the sword has
been drawn and pyres erected both for its defence and its repression; misery and ruin
have followed in its track.  The prevalence of heresy, however, does not disprove the
Divinity of the Church, any more than the existence of evil disproves the existence of an
all-good God.  Heresy, like other evils, is permitted as a test of faith and a trial of
strength in the Church militant; probably also as a punishment for other sins.  The
disruption and disintegration of heretical sects also furnishes a solid argument for the
necessity of a strong teaching authority.  The endless controversies with heretics have
been indirectly the cause of most important doctrinal developments and definitions
formulated in councils to the edification of the body of Christ.  Thus the spurious
gospels of the Gnostics prepared the way for the canon of Scripture; Patripassian,
Sabellian, Arian, and Macedonian heresies drew out a clearer concept of the Trinity; the
Nestorian and Eutychian errors led to definite dogmas on the nature and Person of
Christ.  And so down to Modernism, which has called forth a solemn assertion of the
claims of the supernatural in history.

XIII.  INTOLERANCE AND CRUELTY

The Church's legislation on heresy and heretics is often reproached with cruelty and
intolerance.  Intolerant it is: in fact its <raison d'&ecirc;tre> is intolerance of doctrines
subversive of the faith.  But such intolerance is essential to all that is, or moves, or lives,
for tolerance of destructive elements within the organism amounts to suicide.  Heretical
sects are subject to the same law: they live or die in the measure they apply or neglect
it.  The charge of cruelty is also easy to meet.  All repressive measures cause suffering
or inconvenience of some sort: it is their nature.  But they are not therefore cruel.  The
father who chastises his guilty son is just and may be tender-hearted.  Cruelty only
comes in where the punishment exceeds the requirements of the case.  Opponents say:
Precisely; the rigours of the Inquisition violated all humane feelings.  We answer: they
offend the feelings of later ages in which there is less regard for the purity of faith; but
they did not antagonize the feelings of their own time, when heresy was looked on as
more malignant than treason.  In proof of which it suffices to remark that the
inquisitors only renounced on the guilt of the accused and then handed him over to the
secular power to be dealt with according to the laws framed by emperors and kings.
Medieval people found no fault with the system, in fact heretics had been burned by
the populace centuries before the Inquisition became a regular institution.  And
whenever heretics gained the upper hand, they were never slow in applying the same
laws: so the Huguenots in France, the Hussites in Bohemia, the Calvinists in Geneva,
the Elizabethan statesmen and the Puritans in England.  Toleration came in only when
faith went out; lenient measures were resorted to only where the power to apply more
severe measures was wanting.  The embers of the < Kulturkampf> in Germany still
smoulder; the separation and confiscation laws and the ostracism of Catholics in France
are the scandal of the day.  Christ said: "Do not think that I came to send peace upon
earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword" (Matt., x, 34).  The history of heresy
verifies this prediction and shows, moreover, that the greater number of the victims of
the sword is on the side of the faithful adherents of the one Church founded by Christ
(see INQUISITION).

J. WILHELM

Transcribed by Mary Ann Grelinger

Taken from the New Advent Web Page (www.knight.org/advent).

This article is part of the Catholic Encyclopedia Project, an effort aimed at placing the entire Catholic Encyclopedia on the World Wide Web. The coordinator is Kevin Knight, editor of the New Advent Catholic Website. If you would like to contribute to this worthwhile project, you can contact him by e-mail at ([email protected]). For more information please download the file cathen.txt/.zip.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

  Provided courtesy of:

       Eternal Word Television Network
       PO Box 3610
       Manassas, VA 22110
       Voice: 703-791-2576
       Fax: 703-791-4250
       Data: 703-791-4336
       FTP: EWTN.COM
       Telnet: EWTN.COM
       Email address: [email protected]

  EWTN provides a Catholic online
  information and service system.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

You are viewing proxied material from gopher.ratthing.com. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.