Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: stonehouse01
According to the Catholic Encyclopedia entry re: Honorius:

It is clear that no Catholic has the right to defend Pope Honorius. He was a heretic, not in intention, but in fact; .....but he was not condemned as a Monothelite, nor was Sergius. And it would be harsh to regard him as a "private heretic", for he admittedly had excellent intentions.

Honorius can not be regarded as even a "private heretic". Therefore, we can not use Honorius as an example when we are discussing public heretics such as Francis. I know many traditionalists like to use Honorius' situation as analogous, but the fact is it is apples and oranges.

Not even a private heretic? Still a member of the Catholic Church.

Public heretic? Not a member of the Catholic Church.

84 posted on 12/08/2016 2:45:23 AM PST by piusv (Pray for a return to the pre-Vatican II (Catholic) Faith)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies ]


To: piusv; stonehouse01

Are you arguing he is not a heretic or not an ‘antipope’? I would argue regardless of status he is both.

BTW, what side of Joan of Arc are you on?


90 posted on 12/11/2016 7:01:05 PM PST by reaganaut (I'm just a historian specializing in religion...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson