catholicworldreport.com

‘Dogma lives loudly in you’ – Amy Coney Barrett’s 2017 confirmation hearing

Amy Coney Barrett before the Senate Judiciary Committee Sept. 6, 2017. (Image: Twitter) Washington D.C., Sep 19, 2020 / 02:25 pm (CNA).- Federal …
Ultraviolet
What YOU know of "Catholic Dogma" @Zimbo 2:19 (BS) is equal to what you know of Canon Law regarding heresy. Namely nothing. Quick recap of Canon Law and Heresy vs. Error.

Heresy and error are two different things. A Pope may err, everything a Pope states is not automatically infallible. Heresy, as the Church defines it in Canon Law 751, is "an obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the …More
What YOU know of "Catholic Dogma" @Zimbo 2:19 (BS) is equal to what you know of Canon Law regarding heresy. Namely nothing. Quick recap of Canon Law and Heresy vs. Error.

Heresy and error are two different things. A Pope may err, everything a Pope states is not automatically infallible. Heresy, as the Church defines it in Canon Law 751, is "an obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith; "

Obstinacy shows a deliberate course of action, i.e. "stubbornly adhering to an opinion, purpose, or course in spite of reason, arguments, or persuasion."

In this context, the term shows that
a.) the accused heretic has expressed a view
b.) The Church has disgreed with that view as contrary to its teachings.
c.) The Church has attempted to correct the accused heretic
d.) the accused heretic has opposed that correction by the Church.

Regarding Pope Francis,
a.) has happened.
b.)-d.) have not.

You aren't qualified to represent The Church in doing b.-d., not in law or in fact. Neither is some blogger.

Your opinion that the Pope doubts or denies a truth taught by the Church to be divine is not an objective fact. Likewise, your opinion that his supposed doubt or denial is maintained in an obstinate manner is also an opinion. You haven't shown The Church has attempted to correct it and failed. So your claim has no support.

A more relevant question in light of a charge of heresy is this: who has the temporal authority to represent the Church when attempting to correct the supposed errors of the Church's highest temporal authority?

"and his defenders excommunicated,"

Now that you mention it, and I'm glad that you did, according to Canon Law, those who refuse to accept the authority of the Supreme Pontiff are schismatics and are automatically excommunicated That's you , bucko. :D See? This is the difference between us. You talk about heresy and antipopes, but you don't know what you're talkng ABOUT. I do, and that's why I cite facts while best you can do is create obviously butthurt posts with lots of big bold text and underlining to cover an obviously contrived argument absent any factual support..

Enjoy your Canon Law refresher, pic realted.