Posted on 02/21/2018 5:56:13 PM PST by NRx
Readers will be aware that I do not enable any comments which even delicately hint at anything even remotely like Sedevacantism. Even if a Bishop of Rome were personally a heretic, even if, like Pope Honorius I, he actually promoted and propagated heresy, he would still be pope. I have no doubt whatsoever about this. And it is the duty of every Catholic to be in Full Communion with him. Sedevacantism is illogical and unhistorical rubbish.
But I must admit that I have no worked-out solution to the following very hypothetical hypothesis.
Suppose a pope were, additionally, to require of every Catholic explicit assent ex animo to heresy as a necessary condition for Communion with himself, what would be the situation?
I think this is humanly impossible in the current pontificate, because PF likes to operate by creating a mess and being imprecise and trusting to Time being more powerful than Space. It is inconceivable that he would waste the energy which would be needed to be precise enough to specify a heresy in a way that would be juridically watertight. Moreover, he would run the risk of putting himself in danger, and I think he is far too fly an individual to do that. Genuinely, I am asking about something genuinely hypothetical.
I'm not terribly keen on receiving lots of ranting comments, either one way or the other. But I would value sober and sensible materials for a solution to this problem. Especially, historical analogues. Unless you feel that this scenario, like an erroneous ex cathedra definition, is something the Holy Spirit can be relied on simply to prevent.
Does S Athanasius ...
And, yes, poor Dr Doellinger is a terrible warning to us all about the dangers inherent in getting answers to this sort of question wrong ...
My own take (full disclosure I am Eastern Orthodox): If I were a convicted Roman Catholic and confronted with a Pope who was at the least a material heretic intent on subverting the Deposit of the Faith my answer is that you resist. You follow the lead of the great French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. That is to say you commemorate him at mass, you pray for him ceaselessly, you obey him in all matters not contrary to the faith (also excluding changes to immemorial discipline intended to undermine Catholic Faith), and in all other matters you ignore him until he either repents or God calls him to judgement.
Correct.
Unam Sanctam already requires that does it not?
Who are you going to follow - the pope or God? Why is this difficult?
I realize that Catholics think the pope is the head of the Church - but there is nothing in scripture to support that belief other than a brief conversation between Peter and Jesus that, to say the least, is wide open for other interpretation - especially in the Greek.
I have many good Catholic friends who are strong Christians - but the Catholic church is only part of the body of Christ.
The apostasy of the last days is swirling around us.
What responsible and true kingdom does not have a Steward until The King returns, as He promised?
The word “pope” is a shibboleth. There is no invocation in Scripture of this term. The term has been imbued falsely with meaning as a sacred “infallible” seer by contorting the Latinate derivation (”patriarch,” I.e., from “popa”).
Lest we forget, the pope bleeds when cut, and his arthritic bones ache when the weather turns cold, as is true of many a man. He fails and falls short of the glory, a trait that makes him more peer than prelate.
It is the One who forgives who commands our attention. All else holds the form of godliness while denying its power.
I agree.
I would also add that a pope may not only be a material heretic, but a formal heretic, in which case he loses his office.
Eh. I agree with Fr. H in his rejection of sedevacantism. A Catholic cannot logically subscribe to that without accepting that Rome has fallen. Once you cross that bridge the game is over.
He called him by Simon's full hame ... not a casual conversation.
He changed his name to Peter. It was NOT a casual conversation.
Every instance Jesus used the word "you" was the singular form, directed toward the man, Peter ... not the group ... not a "faith statement'" ... not a "pebble" (petra) ... A ROCK (Kephas).
Our King proclaimed this whole next command directly to Peter:
"And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven."
BECAUSE the next line is ..." Then he commanded his disciples, that they should tell no one that he was Jesus the Christ."
This is where Jesus pivoted to the group, away from Peter. Everything before this line IS. DIRECTLY. TO. PETER.
Peter was given keys of The Kingdom. Peter is Steward until He returns in glory ....
+Amen. +Alleluia.
Pope Benedict XVI?
He is retired. One can argue about whether it was the right thing to do, but he did it and it is allowed under RC canon law.
He didn’t retire; he renounced his office, yet still wears white and retains the title.
He abdicated to use the the technical term. He would have to be elected again. Further he is 90 and in declining health. The color of his cassock is not really relevant. If you are Catholic then Francis is your Pope until he either abdicates or God calls him home.
Here are Pope Benedict's own words (emphasis mine):
For this reason, and well aware of the seriousness of this act, with full freedom I declare that I renounce the ministry of Bishop of Rome, Successor of Saint Peter, entrusted to me by the Cardinals on 19 April 2005, in such a way, that as from 28 February 2013, at 20:00 hours, the See of Rome, the See of Saint Peter, will be vacant and a Conclave to elect the new Supreme Pontiff will have to be convoked by those whose competence it is.
NRx: If you are Catholic then Francis is your Pope until he either abdicates or God calls him home.
I am a Catholic. But if a pope's election is rigged or he becomes a formal heretic, he is not a pope.
But to quote Bergoglio: "Who am I to judge?"
I appreciate your efforts to "school" me in the religion that is mine, not yours, but they are not at all necessary.
Have a blessed Lent.
well said
+ In Christo Rege
Every Christian is a steward for the King - not just a pope.
However, this is not historically not accurate.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.