Chapter IX — On Heresy, and Apostasy from the faith, and the penalties enacted against Heretics

I. Heresy is a voluntary and pertinacious error of the intellect against some truth of the catholic faith, in one who has received the faith. It is called an error of the intellect, because faith resides in the intellect, and therefore the error contrary to it must be found in the intellect also. Voluntary, because without liberty there is no sin. Pertinacious, because, since heresy signifies a choosing, it requires an obstinate deliberation in the error. That anyone be called pertinacious, he must knowingly and advertently hold some error deliberately against the definition of the catholic Church. Wherefore, just as for true faith the condition of the Church proposing is required, so for true heresy the contempt of that same Church is demanded. It is not required, however, that one will to contemn the Church directly; but it suffices that he know that he holds an error against the definition of the Church. This pertinacity is taken for a deliberate election of the will, whether it arise from infirmity or from an impulse of fury; nor is delay necessary, but in a moment of time the crime of heresy, like other crimes, can be committed. In one who has received the faith. Error in one who has not received the catholic faith can constitute an Infidel, a Pagan, a Jew, but not a Heretic.

II. Heresy is twofold: one formal, the other material. Formal is that which I have now defined. Material is when someone believes or utters something against the faith, not knowing that it pertains to the faith. If the ignorance be invincible, the material heresy is without fault; if vincible, with fault — provided, however, the error be not affected, for the end of speaking and living more freely, or of contradicting the authority of the Church: for then it is formal heresy. There is also material heresy when someone exteriorly pronounces an error against the faith, without internal consent. Again, heresy is divided into mental, or merely internal, and into internal-and-external together. The former halts within the mind and soul, and is manifested by no exterior sign. But when it comes forth outwardly, then it is at once internal and external. Again, formal heresy at once internal and external is divided into that which is manifest per se — which is also wont to be called public — which has been uttered not only by signs and words, but also before many hearers; and into that which is hidden per accidens — which is also called private — which, though uttered exteriorly by words and signs, has yet happened with no one hearing or seeing. Finally, one heresy is affirmative, when someone openly professes before all, by word or sign, an error against the faith conceived in the mind; and another negative, when someone, juridically convicted of heresy, pertinaciously refuses to confess his heresy.

III. Question I. Is one doubting in the faith to be held a Heretic? Answer. The Theologians dispute on both sides; but the disagreement is of words rather than of the thing. It is agreed among all that a doubt arisen from infirmity does not savor of heresy, nor constitute a heretic. The question is of pertinacious doubt alone. If the doubt be regarded according to the laws of Metaphysics — according to which the intellect, remaining suspended and undecided, elicits no assent or dissent — then it is certain that one so doubting is not a heretic. But because in practice it can scarcely, nay hardly at all, happen that anyone pertinaciously doubts without passing some reflex judgment by which he judges the things of faith to be doubtful, therefore in practice they are commonly heretics who with pertinacious mind doubt about the things of faith. Hence has arisen the common axiom: One doubting in the faith is an Infidel. Those who doubt on account of the difficulties which arise in the articles of faith, and who, pressed by the weight of these difficulties, command a suspension of assent, sin against the faith: since, while they deliberately withhold assent, by that very fact — if not explicitly, yet in very deed — they approve the weight of the difficulties against the faith, contemn the definition of the Church, which they know to have defined such an article, and dare to measure the things of faith by their own judgment. But if they withdraw the intellect from the contemplation of the articles of faith for this reason, that they may decline weariness and labor, and remove themselves from the danger of doubting, they in no way sin. He who feels himself agitated by these straits should elicit acts of faith, and desist from the conflict. The disposition and state of the one doubting must always be regarded. If he who doubts is distressed by scruples, let him count the doubts as nothing, and turn his mind elsewhere. He who deliberately doubts on account of difficulties which occur to him, prepared to be corrected not on account of the authority of the Church, but on account of reasons which may satisfy his difficulties, is to be held as a heretic. For such a one gives faith neither to God, nor to the Church defining that such an article is from God; but trusts solely in his own brain.

IV. Question II. What is apostasy? Answer. Apostasy is the withdrawal of a baptized man from the whole faith, as St. Thomas says, II-II, q. 12, art. 1. The Apostate differs from the Heretic. For the latter knowingly and stubbornly denies some one evangelical truth, admits many others, and boasts that he professes Christ and his Religion; but the Apostate bids farewell to Christ and to his whole Religion, as is evident in Julian the Apostate. They also are called apostates who withdraw from some Order which they have professed. But these do not by that very fact fall away from the Christian Religion.

V. Question III. What are the penalties enacted against Heretics? Answer. There are two kinds of penalties. The first kind of penalties is spiritual: namely, excommunication; irregularity; the privation of spiritual power in those who are attached to sacred orders. The fourth penalty is the privation of dignities and benefices, and inability to obtain them thereafter. The fifth is the privation of burial.

VI. There are four temporal penalties. The first is the confiscation of all goods. The second is infamy, by which Heretics become unworthy of any honor and dignity whatsoever. The third is the penalty of prison. The last is capital condemnation.

VII. Question IV. Who are subject to the penalties enacted against Heretics? Answer. The Heretic who has conceived a merely internal heresy is not subject to the penalties recounted, because, as the common axiom has it, the Church does not judge of internal things. Similarly the merely external Heretic is immune from these penalties, because he is not a true Heretic. Now the excommunication has been enacted against true Heretics. And this is understood of the interior forum: for if the external Heretic be brought before the tribunal, the judges judge him as guilty of heresies. Any Confessor, therefore, can absolve one who is either a merely internal or a merely external Heretic. But he who is a Heretic both internal and external, though most hidden — who in his own chamber, no one being present, pronounces the heresy conceived in his mind — is liable to the excommunication, and cannot be absolved by any Confessor whatever. Now the heresy is external when words or signs expressly and completely betray the conceived heresy, so that bystanders could truly conceive the heresy. If the external action be light, it does not suffice for manifesting heresy. Similarly, equivocal words do not suffice in the exterior forum for constituting a truly external heresy. An internal Heretic does not become external if, sleeping, he pronounce the conceived heresy in his sleep.

VIII. Question V. Has excommunication been enacted against the believers, favorers, receivers, and defenders of Heretics? Answer. Those are called believers who give faith to the errors of the Heretics; and if they betray this faith by signs and words, they are subject to the excommunication enacted against Heretics. Those are called favorers, receivers, and defenders of Heretics who conspire in their errors, or bring aid lest they be apprehended by the Judges, or extend help in the propagating of the heresy; and this both by omission — as if someone, interrogated by the Judges, should refuse to reveal a Heretic, or, one being consigned to his custody, should neglect to guard him — and by commission, when someone praises with words, or with aid helps the Heretic to escape. Receivers are named those who receive with hospitality, in their own house, dominion, or kingdom, a Heretic fleeing or hiding himself.

IX. Question VI. Is it permitted to Catholics to dispute with Heretics? Answer. To laymen, even learned ones, it is forbidden to enter upon a disputation with heretics about matters of faith, whether publicly or privately. Some contend that learned Laymen are not comprehended in the chapter Quicumque, § Inhibemus, On heretics, in the Sixth Book: because, they say, when the Laymen are learned, the end of the Law ceases. The contrary opinion is to me the more probable. If the law regarded the unlearned alone, it would be fruitless, because by the natural law the unlearned are interdicted from disputing. Yet cases can occur in which Laymen may — nay, ought, if they be truly learned — to undertake a disputation with Heretics. For if the Heretics, by sermons or disputations, should attempt to pervert Catholics, and apt Clerics were wanting, then they ought to descend into the arena and defend the Catholics. Under this decree are comprehended also lay Religious, since the reason of the Law is the same.