Pope Honarius and Heresy
#1
I just read this fascinating pre-Vatican I essay on Pope Honarius, who many have accused of being a heretic, and thought I would share:

http://books.google.com/books?id=A2UVAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA200#v=onepage&q&f=false
Reply
#2
Many a defence of Honorious's reputation have been compiled over the years.
Reply
#3
(11-22-2011, 12:27 AM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: Many a defence of Honorious's reputation have been compiled over the years.

It's much more than that and well worth the read. 
Reply
#4
(11-22-2011, 12:29 AM)Someone1776 Wrote:
(11-22-2011, 12:27 AM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: Many a defence of Honorious's reputation have been compiled over the years.

It's much more than that and well worth the read. 

I skimmed through it and got the general idea. Perhaps I'll read it in full later.

Personally, I still believe Honorious fell into heresy.
Reply
#5
(11-22-2011, 12:30 AM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
(11-22-2011, 12:29 AM)Someone1776 Wrote:
(11-22-2011, 12:27 AM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: Many a defence of Honorious's reputation have been compiled over the years.

It's much more than that and well worth the read. 

I skimmed through it and got the general idea. Perhaps I'll read it in full later.

Personally, I still believe Honorious fell into heresy.

It also considers the possibility that he did and what that means.  Interesting article. 
Reply
#6
(11-22-2011, 12:10 AM)Someone1776 Wrote: I just read this fascinating pre-Vatican I essay on Pope Honarius, who many have accused of being a heretic, and thought I would share:

http://books.google.com/books?id=A2UVAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA200#v=onepage&q&f=false

Excessively ultramontanist notions weren't the creation of Vatican I; they had existed decades before it.
Reply
#7
I am convinced he did not fall into heresy. It is massively unhelpful that all his allegedly heretical correspondence was burned. Only a few fragments survive, which only sound monothelite on a casual examination.

http://www.eclipseofthechurch.com/HonoriusCalumny.htm
Reply
#8
The Honorius issue was discussed at Vatican I because of the opposition raised by some to defining the dogma of papal infallibility. The Council Fathers as a whole, while they acknowledged he was condemned by the Sixth Council, concluded Honorius neither personally professed heresy nor taught it. There are unfortunately a substantial number of self-professed traditionalists, and well-respected ones at that, who like to use the story of Honorius to establish a precedent for heretical but valid popes. What they end up doing in the process, although they of course do not say so explicitly, is deny the dogma of papal infallibility as it was defined by Vatican Council I. It is tragic.   
Reply
#9
(11-22-2011, 03:13 AM)shamrock Wrote: That they end up doing in the process, although they of course do not say so explicitly, is deny the dogma of papal infallibility as it was defined by Vatican Council I.

LOL!
Reply
#10
If Vatican I had wanted to define that the pope cannot hold heretical opinions, it would have done so. Instead, it defined that the pope is free from error in defining dogma.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)