Similarly, St. Jerome wrote:
Between heresy and schism there is this difference, that heresy perverts dogma, while schism, by rebellion against the bishop, separates from the Church. Nevertheless there is no schism which does not trump up a heresy to justify its departure from the Church. (In Ep. ad Tit., iii, 10)
In St. Augustine’s work titled “Of Faith and the Creed” which he delivered to the bishops assembled at the Council of Hippo-Regius in AD 393, which was the “general assembly of the North African Church,” he wrote the following:
Inasmuch, I repeat, as this is the case, we believe also in The Holy Church, [intending thereby] assuredly the Catholic. For both heretics and schismatics style their congregations churches. But heretics, in holding false opinions regarding God, do injury to the faith itself; while schismatics, on the other hand, in wicked separations break off from brotherly charity, although they may believe just what we believe. Wherefore neither do the heretics belong to the Church catholic, which loves God; nor do the schismatics form a part of the same, inasmuch as it loves the neighbor, and consequently readily forgives the neighbor’s sins, because it prays that forgiveness may be extended to itself by Him who has reconciled us to Himself, doing away with all past things, and calling us to a new life. And until we reach the perfection of this new life, we cannot be without sins. Nevertheless it is a matter of consequence of what sort those sins may be. (Of Faith and the Creed, 10)3
To the best of my knowledge, St. Optatus, St. Jerome, St. Augustine and all the Church Fathers who wrote about schism wrote about schism from as something conceptually distinct from heresy. Yes, any schism fromthe Church would invariably fall into some heresy, at least in order to justify its schism from the Church. But, nevertheless, schism from the Church referred to a particular Church’s (or smaller group’s) visible break in communion with the Catholic Church (even where that particular Church or group had not embraced any heresy), whereas ‘heresy’ always referred to a departure from the Apostolic faith, even if communion had not yet been visibly broken.
SCHISM
Schism on a whim, or schism on a guess, or schism on a hunch, or schism on a maybe, is simply not justified. One does not slice up the Body of Christ on a maybe. One would have to be absolutely certain that one is right, that the Church is wrong, and that schism from the Church is justified, because one will have to stand before the Bridegroom and give an account for having carved up His Bride into pieces, and for having influenced others to do so as well by one’s actions and example, and because one’s eternal salvation is at stake. As St. Ignatius of Antioch wrote to the Philadelphians in AD 107, “If any man follows him that makes a schism in the Church, he shall not inherit the kingdom of God.” A fortiorisuch a judgment applies to the one who makes a schism in the Church. I would not want to have to stand before the Lord and answer for having perpetuated schism on the basis of mere uncertain speculation. The stakes are far too high, to possibly commit the sin of schism on the basis of beliefs about which one is uncertain. In short, if you are anything short of absolutely certain about the truth of Reformed (or Protestant) theology, you should return to the Catholic Church.
Bryon Cross found in comment 88 here
Here is another interesting article: http://catholicwindow.blogspot.com/2016/02/can-heretics-go-to-heaven.html
Here is another interesting article: http://catholicwindow.blogspot.com/2016/02/can-heretics-go-to-heaven.html
No comments:
Post a Comment