Yep.
Posted on 10/14/2014 10:35:56 AM PDT by Fithal the Wise
... So, the Pope wants full and free debate, and free deliberations... except when he doesn't. And when the secret ballot reveals a conservative majority -- then he interferes against what had been settled beforehand to get what he wants. It is his prerogative, of course, even if it severely contradicts his own words and commitments, and, ultimately, his reliability.
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/10/cardinal-burke-pariah-not-for-synod.html#more
(Excerpt) Read more at rorate-caeli.blogspot.com ...
Same. My Russian orthodox great grandmother used to spit whenever she would hear about Rome. She used to tell me that Rome would be the death of Catholicism. Interesting revelation.
If he attempted to declare ‘ex cathedra’ something so obviously incompatible with the Old and New Testaments, as well as 2,000 years of Catholic doctrine, he would be a manifest heretic.
If the synod comes out with something heretical no Catholic should listen to it.
No sign of panic at EWTN. So I give this no credence at the moment.
Jesuit piece of garbage.
Doesn't work. The minute he speaks heresy he can no longer speak for the Church. It's not *his* Church, after all, it's Christ's.
There are so many who disagree with his “colors”. There will be intransigence or backlash on this by cardinals and bishops who disagree.
Yep.
The short answer is, no.
I'm not sure how to frame the longer answer. "Infallibility" is a gift of the Holy Spirit to the Church, expressed through a validly elected Pope, such that he cannot teach error WHEN exercising his office AND when teaching the Faith as expressed in scripture (unchangeable) and Tradition (also unchangeable).
A Pope who was a heretic when elected would not be validly elected (the College of Cardinals lacks the power to elect a heretic). A Pope who became a heretic after he was validly elected would cease to be Pope, whether formally deposed or otherwise.
This particular situation is especially interesting because there is a man, validly elected Pope in 2005, who is alive today (Josef Ratzinger). If you were a novelist, this situation would give you a broad canvas to work with.
We can only speculate, as we'd be in largely uncharted waters, and I'm sure it'd be fruitless speculation anyway because no way Francis is that dumb.
When Pope Honorius played cute with the Monothelites, he served out his term but then was stingingly rebuked for it by a later Pope and ecumenical council.
It would probably be best for a modern heretical Pope to be shown the door, yes. If he in any way resisted, to the point where the faithful were unsure who was Pope, there would probably have to be an Ecumenical Council called. Benedict XVI may feel compelled to step in.
But like I said, I don't believe Francis is that dumb, and he's not a big fan of the whole gay thing anyway.
I do not think you know what that word means.
Mind you, that's comparing different degrees of error, but the late Fred Phelps and company act least recognize sodomy as one of the sins crying out to heaven for vengenance.
Yeah I think the libs are going to push hard but in the end get nowhere. Humanae Vitae redux.
> If the synod comes out with something heretical no Catholic
> should listen to it.
Yes, but if recent voting trends are any indication, more than half of them would do so with glee.
“If he attempted to declare ‘ex cathedra’ something so obviously incompatible with the Old and New Testaments, as well as 2,000 years of Catholic doctrine, he would be a manifest heretic.”
I would think so, but still, if he has the power to sit in Peter’s recliner and declare revelation, it would not be heresy. It would be divine revelation... one would think.
This raises an additional question - perhaps for a different thread...
If a pope can declare something true by virtue of revelation, why doesn’t Rome update their version of the Scriptures to include this revelation?
They can ride that glee all the way to hell. It's long past time for the fur to start flying. People need to make a stark choice: in or out. Sheep or goats. Christ or Satan.
tagline
But who gets to make that call? The ecclesiastical theology of the Catholic church as it currently is (post 1870) makes that VERY hard to do.
Now, I have asked this a few times and you are the first with some quotes (thank you for that!). But is there anything in canon law relating to an apostate or heretical Pope?
Well, I'm still "in" to the pre-1960's Church; that will never change.
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.