Skip to comments.Can a Pope Commit Heresy? ("Heresy Defined)
Posted on 09/01/2018 7:30:20 AM PDT by ealgeone
This question had already been asked, before the September 24 announcement that a group of Catholic scholars from around the world had issued a "filial correction" to Pope Francis, warning him that some of his statements and writings have caused heresy to spread within the church. Needless to say, the news renders this discussion more timely than ever.
(Excerpt) Read more at canonlawmadeeasy.com ...
Is the Pope Catholic?
According to Martin Luther and the Lutheran Confessions, the pope fulfills the Scriptural description of the Antichrist.
I am a loyal Catholic and don’t really care too much about canon law at this time as we are dealing with criminals. Wuerl has left the country, so we are told, just like a mafia don going on the run. The bishop of Cheyene we are told had a long track record of sodomy against boys long, long before he was made a bishop. we have a network of criminals who are trying to destroy the church and they will use canon law in their defense, trying to make us quiver and shake with fear. If you are a criminal and an accessory then canon law, heresy really makes no difference to me.
BAAAAAD question, at least these days. With THIS Pope.
Better: does the bear s##t in the forest? and Does a china doll have a glass ass?
“Is the Pope Catholic?”
Not this one.
This one has. He doesn’t believe there’s a hell. He doesn’t think gay is a fundamental disorder. He believes there should be gay “marriage” in the church. He trashed the church’s longstanding teaching that the death penalty is allowed under certain circumstances.
I can’t make out whether “666” or “heretic” is tattooed on this evil man’s forehead.
He’s a pope in name only. Worthless....
I don’t find anything disagreeable about the article, but she doesn’t actually answer the question!
This is why papal infallibility is actually a conservative doctrine and it actually limits the power of current and more recent popes. Doctrines already defined as Dogmatic (e.g., Doctrines embedded in the Nicene and Apostles Creeds) can’t be undone, no matter how a current Pope tries to tap dance around them (Francis has not done so in these areas). Same thing for Sacramental Theology and Moral Theology. Moral Doctrines being an area he seems to tap dance around. So while Francis has not dogmatically done anything to change moral doctrine (i.e. homosexual acts as being sinful), he has in pastoral approach watered down criticizing them to such a point that one wonders if he holds opinions personally that are heretical. I think it is possible that the current Pope does personally hold some positions that are borderline heretical.
But as I said, he can’t use Papal authority to change already defined Doctrine. Any such proclamation would be null and void.
Sounds like Fr Martin was engaging in some bad exegesis.
Well, yes she does.
Last five paragraphs say it cannot be done.
She cites canon 1404...Can. 1404 The First See is judged by no one. [http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P5A.HTM] in the next to last paragraph.
Her third paragraph from the bottom:
The fact is, if a Pope were to become so debilitated that he actually became incapable of governing the Church, and was so physically and/or mentally incapacitated that he couldn't even resign his office, nobody could step in and take charge. There is absolutely no legal mechanism that would permit any cardinal, or even the College of Cardinals together, to decide that the Pope is no longer sui compos and somehow to take charge themselves.
my error in this post....replying to the wrong thread. this should be directed to the thread asking if the pope can be removed.
I think she does. She just isn't saying this Pope has committed heresy.
And from what I gather from the article it's a very precise definition which has several components involved.
I gather this is designed to protect the pope from random allegations from people who don't like him.
That case is different from the case of a Pope who is a contumacious heretic. The author of your piece writes a solid discussion of heresy, and the difference between heresy and a questionable administrative act, but wiffs on the question of what to do with a heretical Pope.
As I pointed out yesterday, some canonists hold that it would be up to the College of Cardinals to act and proclaim that the Pope was -- quite literally -- no longer Catholic and therefore no longer Pope. Others say that God would never permit it to happen so it's not productive to talk about it.
The better question is, “Can a heretic become Pope!?”
More concerned about what to do with the misguided cardinals who elected Pope Francis.
Scripture speaks (Matt. 24:5, 23-24; Mark 13:6, 21-22; Luke: 21:8; 1 John 2:18,22; 4:3; 2 John 7) about many antichrists appearing in the church throughout history. These antichrists teach against God's Word. However Scripture also speaks (Dan.7:8, 11, 20-21, 24-25; 11:36-45; 2 Thessalonians 2; 1 John 2:18; 4:3; Revelation 17-18) of one climactic "Antichrist." It is the pope and his successors who Martin Luther and the Lutheran Confessions explain fit the Scriptural description and marks of the Antichrist.
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.