The church would have to collapse on him. Or at least drop a heavy part of itself.
If not, y'all screwed up by making a man a god ... y'should'a studied ancient Rome a little more closely.
HOW?
Archbishop Gilday.
I’m counting the days until “the stuff with that smoke business” happens again in Rome.
A grave error of the type not contemplated by pope John XXII is in view here. We are living in the days of Antichrist.
Accountable to no one and he has a pen and a fancy hat...
This entire scenario reminds me (begging your pardon) of the recent descent into open heresy in the Church of England and the US Episcopal Church.
There have always been traditionalist Anglican bishops, first in the US (Duncan, Aker, Wantland, Ackerman), then in the third world (the “primates”) who have challenged the wave of anti-Christianity, and many faithful who hoped and believed it would mark a turning point or at least make a difference.
Sadly, that hasn’t happened. Francis is a symptom of a deep sickness in the West, and the hope that there is SIGNIFICANT opposition to be found among the cardinalate is probably misplaced.
Francis knew from the beginning that Burke would be a problem - hence the exile. The cleanout of Sacraments and Divine Worship appears to be going without a hitch.
Apart from the fact that he was elected by a majority of a more conservative College of Cardinals than exists today, he’s been moving radicals like Cupich up the ladder rapidly.
Obviously, as I would have said in my Evangelical days, “Jesus knows what He’s doing”. But what He is doing in Rome right now is a bit veiled.
I think Pope Francis is one of the Revelation cast characters but not gonna name it because the Catholics on here take offense every time.
Not possible.
The Pope is infallible.
However, the Holy Father’s actions belied his words. Pope John XXII’s treatment of supporters and opponents showed his preference for those who upheld his “new” teaching. Supporters received honours and preferment, while those who opposed Pope John XII, either informally or formally, experienced papal disfavour, and even punishment. He also sought to disseminate his erroneous teaching by commanding that copies of his sermons were distributed to his supporters.
It doesn't surprise me that EWTN is using Pope John XXII's situation as analogous to Francis' situation. There appears to be a lot of accusations about John XXII's actions here. It sounds like a whole lot of rumour. Where is the proof?
It is my understanding that John XXII did preach as a private theologian not to teach it to the universal church as the Vicar Of Christ. Where are his apostolic letters, the encyclicals, the councils that teach the universal church? Furthermore, the doctrine in question was yet to be defined. Also in one of his sermons he wrote:
I say with Augustine that, if I am deceived on this point, let someone who knows better correct me. For me it does not seem otherwise, unless the Church would so declare with a contrary statement or unless authorities on sacred scripture would express it more clearly than what I have said above.”
This man doesn't sound like a pertinacious heretic in the least. This man doesn't sound anything like a Francis.
Laugh at him and point out his error.
Supporters received honours and preferment, while those who opposed Pope John XII, either informally or formally, experienced papal disfavour, and even punishment.
But the more Pope John XII and his supporters sought to promulgate his error, the greater the uproar and resistance from the Church beyond the papal court.
Determined to meet the challenge of Pope John XXI’s error head on,....
The commission drew up a profession of faith which they signed, and submitted to Pope John XII.
So is it John the 12th, the 21st or the 22nd, or can't the author make up his mind?
FReegards!
Stop sending money... no money the organization withers on the ‘vine’!
Serious error of a Pope bump
In the church I attend the pastor would be fired if he went off the ranch like Frances.