Can a Pope Be Removed from Office?

Canon Law Made Easy ^ | January 31, 2013 | canonlawmadeeasy

[CondorFlight]

I think a case could be made that Francis’ election was flawed; hence, he was never legally pope; and therefore, also, all of his appointments and the like are invalid.

In that case either Benedict has remained pope, or else the papal chair has been vacant since Benedict retired.

[AlaskaErik]

To be clear....I AM NOT a Roman Catholic. I am not arguing for or against Francis staying as pope.

My post was not directed toward you. It was in reference to the article.

[ealgeone]

When the Pope makes heretical statements or acts contrary to cannon law or the gospel, then is he still Pope?

Per the article....yes.

There is NO ONE in Roman Catholicism with the authority to remove the pope.

[ClearBlueSky]

A big enough mob can remove anyone. If the homos arent purged we will see.

[ealgeone]

Yes. The the legitimate reasons for removing a Pope, what steps must precede the removal, what the process is, and so on along with every false rationale and line of reasoning rabbit hole Sedevacantists go down is spelled out in

There's even an article on sedevacantists as well.

http://canonlawmadeeasy.com/2017/04/20/can-you-be-both-a-catholic-and-a-sedevacantist/

These Roman Catholics are no longer in full communion with the Roman Catholic church per the article.

[Campion]

Read more carefully. She’s talking about a Pope who is not mentally competent (technically, an “impeded Papal see”), not the case of a Pope who is a heretic. As I said, SOME canonists hold that a Pope can be “removed” for heresy, not all.

[ealgeone]

+1

[PGR88]

I would bet $100 Benedict XVI was removed from office.

[AlaskaErik]

Well, there is that....but then they'd be committing mortal sin upon mortal sin.

Sometimes there are people who will take a hit for the team. But in this case, it would be pointless. The same homosexual/pedophile mafia that engineered Bennie's departure and Frankie's installment would just put another one of their own in the papacy. Nothing will get better with Frankie's death.

[Campion]

Show us the quotes from "Roman Catholic canon lawyers" that agree with your false interpretation of Unam Sanctam. There aren't any.

I already pointed you to a very sound article on obedience and its limits from a monsignor. Do you want to pretend that you are more of an authority on what Unam Sanctam means than he is, or than Cardinal Burke, or Archbishop Schneider, etc.? Because, well, you aren't.

[ealgeone]

Read more carefully. She’s talking about a Pope who is not mentally competent (technically, an “impeded Papal see”), not the case of a Pope who is a heretic. As I said, SOME canonists hold that a Pope can be “removed” for heresy, not all.

It's going to be interesting to see how Roman Catholicism handles this.

A good lawyer can argue anything.

[narses]

The heretical mocking gets old. Go take the beam out of what ever heretical eye you see through and leave us to deal with our mote.

[ealgeone]

Show us the quotes from "Roman Catholic canon lawyers" that agree with your false interpretation of Unam Sanctam. There aren't any. I already pointed you to a very sound article on obedience and its limits from a monsignor. Do you want to pretend that you are more of an authority on what Unam Sanctam means than he is, or than Cardinal Burke, or Archbishop Schneider, etc.? Because, well, you aren't.

Oh I know Roman Catholics have tried to limit the scope of Unam Sanctam. I can understand why. It was a total power grab.....something liberals today would really love to have.

It's interesting watching Roman Catholicism change the very things they say don't change. Unam really gets ya'll going.

[ealgeone]

The heretical mocking gets old. Go take the beam out of what ever heretical eye you see through and leave us to deal with our mote.

Let's be clear...I posted an article from a Roman Catholic Canon Lawyer.

This is not my opinion.

You might want to get off that high horse of yours.

[narses]

And you keep opining in ignorance about what the article and the ancient Bull require and mean. Your anti-Catholic history is well known and your efforts to harm the faithful through same are as clear as glass.

[Campion]

Nice dodge. The bob-and-weave and subject change makes it clear that you have no response to my challenge.

You'll be back in a week or so continuing the charade that pretends you are more of an authority on Catholic teaching and church law than actual Catholics, including one (Burke) who was the Vatican equivalent of Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

[ealgeone]

I merely posted an honest question on the minds of your fellow Romam Catholics from a Roman Catholic canon lawyer. Her conclusions were what I posted. Your disagreement is with the lawyer.....not me.

[House Atreides]

However, the Pope is not immune to RICO laws.
....................................
True...but per the article he would still be the pope.
**********************************
Well then, he could lead his flock from his jail cell like the convicted child predator Warren Jeffs.

[ealgeone]

There is no dodge. I merely posted information from Romam Catholic sites. If you have counter info post it for discussion.

You know the playground rules: put up or hush up.

[Mark17]

if it were established that a Pope was a heretic, he could be “removed” by the College of Cardinals,

I admit, the only things I know about Frank, come from FR threads, that bad mouth him. Has it been established by the collage of cardinals, that Frank is a heretic? Are they silent on the matter?