EWTN's Father Mitch Pacwa Denounces Pachamamas
#11
Quote:Also, if the official answer is that he can't teach heresy, and in fact does at some point, that becomes a problem.
All that's been defined is that he cant teach heresy ex cathedra, the limits if which were defined by Vatican 1. There is no definitive magisterial teaching that says the Pope cannot err outside of these conditions.

This issue has been discussed before, I highly recommend St. Robert Bellermines treatment of this issue. He gives fourth five opinions on the topic. He rejects the first one, which is the one your asking about, namely that a Pope cant be a heretic. I highly recommend reading his treatment of this issue.

Sent from my SM-J260T1 using Tapatalk
[-] The following 2 users Like 1Faith's post:
  • jack89, SeeTheLight
Reply
#12
I talked to a priest in my local parish, an NO parish, and he asked me if my doubts were with the Church or Jorge Bergoglio. He actually said Jorge Bergoglio. He talked about having bad popes before and we'll get through it. kind of surprised me. He was clearly not happy with the idol worship either, and told me a lot of parishioners have been asking him about it.

I rarely attend Mass there anymore because it is pretty liberal, but hearing one of its priests and many parishioners express concern over this actually brightened my day. It tells me that this isn't just a trad concern and folks are talking.
[-] The following 4 users Like jack89's post:
  • antiquarian, Fionnchu, jovan66102, Sacred Heart lover
Reply
#13
(11-09-2019, 07:54 PM)jack89 Wrote: I rarely attend Mass there anymore because it is pretty liberal, but hearing one of its priests and many parishioners express concern over this actually brightened my day.  It tells me that this isn't just a trad concern and folks are talking.

And people like Fr Pacwa denouncing it is enlightening a lot of people who would never think of going to a TLM, but who watch EWTN religiously (pun intended :LOL:)
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
[-] The following 4 users Like jovan66102's post:
  • antiquarian, Eric F, jack89, SeeTheLight
Reply
#14
And ChurchPOP can hardly be considered a 'Trad' site!

Fr. Mitch Pacwa Denounces Idol Worship at Amazon Synod: “We’re Not Stupid – This Is An Idol”
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
[-] The following 1 user Likes jovan66102's post:
  • Eric F
Reply
#15
(11-08-2019, 04:40 PM)jack89 Wrote:
(11-08-2019, 04:14 PM)1Faith Wrote: That presumes the Pope is orthodox. The same catechism makes clear no Catholic can assent to heresy or follow a heretic. The notion of a manifestly heretical Pope was unthinkable at that time....but here we are. Note I said unthinkable, not theologically impossible. St. Robert Bellermine and others considered that issue.

We must certainly recognize the Pope as the Pope, but if hes a heretic you cant follow him into heresy. You have to obey him in whatever is not sin, but to assent to heresy into sin against faith. This has always been the true notion of catholic obedience; you obey your lawful superiors in all things but sin. Simple application of logic makes it plain that we cannot assent to the heresies are errors Francis promulgates; none of which, I might add, has he bound the church to.

Sent from my SM-J260T1 using Tapatalk

I completely agree with you.  It's the "notion of a manifestly heretical Pope was unthinkable" part that I'm thinking about.  

I recently had a conversation with somehow who claimed that the Pope can't teach heresy.  If he really can't teach heresy, and I disagree with him, then I'm in the wrong.  It's kind of a big thing to disagree with as a Catholic, so I'm looking to find out more about it.

Also, if the official answer is that he can't teach heresy, and in fact does at some point, that becomes a problem.

Yes - we see more and more people like Fr. Mitch that used to support the Vatican even when they had to really bend to do so, finally saying they just can't.  I think Patrick Coffin is in that growing group as well.

One can only deny reality for so long.  Francis is teaching heresy - if one can't say that, I don't know what to say.  Just because he hasn't made it "doctrine", I don't think Jesus gives it a pass, as he says let your yes be yes, and no be no.  When you broadcast heresy to hundreds of millions of people, you are teaching - but who am I to judge. 

I believe God may allow things to get worse until Papal Infallibility is undone.  This doctrine has not helped the Church any, but has caused even more division.  

But some will never let go of it, regardless of how bad and obvious it is.  My conscience is not letting me dismiss the reality I see in preference for rules on paper.
Reply
#16
(11-10-2019, 08:47 AM)Markie Boy Wrote: I believe God may allow things to get worse until Papal Infallibility is undone.  This doctrine has not helped the Church any, but has caused even more division. 
Why stop with just Papal Infallibility? If dogma can be undone, why not 'undo' the teachings on marriage and sexual morality? We could convert them by droves. How about 'undoing' the dogma on life? Imagine how popular the Church would be with modern society. I could go on, but I'm sure you get the picture.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
[-] The following 2 users Like jovan66102's post:
  • antiquarian, MagisterMusicae
Reply
#17
(11-08-2019, 04:51 PM)1Faith Wrote:
Quote:Also, if the official answer is that he can't teach heresy, and in fact does at some point, that becomes a problem.
All that's been defined is that he cant teach heresy ex cathedra, the limits if which were defined by Vatican 1. There is no definitive magisterial teaching that says the Pope cannot err outside of these conditions.

This issue has been discussed before, I highly recommend St. Robert Bellermines treatment of this issue. He gives fourth five opinions on the topic. He rejects the first one, which is the one your asking about, namely that a Pope cant be a heretic. I highly recommend reading his treatment of this issue.

St Robert actually professed his opinion as more probable that the Pope could not fall into heresy.

His other opinion, often quoted, was a hedge on what if the more probable was wrong (since it was not a certain opinion).

Theologians after St Robert more commonly agree that his first opinion (that the Pope could not fall into heresy) is incorrect, and this because of the limited conditions surrounding infallibility as defined at Vatican I. That is why his other opinion is usually the one referenced. He and Cajetan disagreed only on the mechanism of how such a heresy would be identified and thus how such a Pope would lose his office, but agree that there must be some involvement from some significant notable imperfect ecclesiastical authority who could then make some quasi-official judgement on the heresy.

Fortunately for us, we aren't paid enough to make such calls.
Reply
#18
(11-10-2019, 08:47 AM)Markie Boy Wrote: One can only deny reality for so long.  Francis is teaching heresy - if one can't say that, I don't know what to say.  Just because he hasn't made it "doctrine", I don't think Jesus gives it a pass, as he says let your yes be yes, and no be no.  When you broadcast heresy to hundreds of millions of people, you are teaching - but who am I to judge.

No one is saying that the Pope is not falling into grave sin and many souls will go to Hell because of his favoring of heresy.

Nor is anyone, here, denying reality. Popes have been doing very similar things for a long time. John Paul II did objectively worse in participating in pagan ceremonies and promoting the 1986 Assisi event.

In their own personal teaching Popes have taught heresy before. No one is saying this is okay.
 
(11-10-2019, 08:47 AM)Markie Boy Wrote: I believe God may allow things to get worse until Papal Infallibility is undone.  This doctrine has not helped the Church any, but has caused even more division.  

But some will never let go of it, regardless of how bad and obvious it is.  My conscience is not letting me dismiss the reality I see in preference for rules on paper.

Aside from what Jovan said, the problem is not the highly defined and limited Infallibility of the Pope. It was the Ultramontaine exaggeration in the wake of many good Popes that made people pay attention to what the Popes were saying instead of the more medieval idea of praying for the Pope (who was probably a corrupt Roman patrician) and just going about your daily life, and believing what the Faith taught.

Infallibility is a negative charism, not a positive one. It does not do something (make the Pope infallible). It prevents something, precisely it prevents the Pope from binding the faithful to accept some premise of morality or theology as a revealed truth when it is false. That's it.

One of the result of this mess will be that, I think, we much more clearly understand this aspect, and how limited it is, and thus will be a bit more humble in our thoughts of the value of the Pope in day-to-day affairs, and Popes, themselves, will have to be a bit more honest and humble about their role.

But it will not come about by declaring some dogma of the Faith false. That would be to destroy the Faith.
[-] The following 1 user Likes MagisterMusicae's post:
  • Fionnchu
Reply
#19
See post below.
Reply
#20
The idea of it being a negative charism is the only thing that seems possibly OK. But I read a book by Adrian Fortescue - The Early Papacy to Chalcedon. He tries to show supremacy from the beginning, but when you look at all of his examples the best it turns out is Primacy like the East states.

The Papacy was a final court of appeals yes, but not a global reaching power that placed all local bishops. It just wasn't so. That is a later development - much later than the idea of Sola Scriptura or the King James Bible. Bishops for centuries were appointed locally.

This makes it not the same issue as sexuality or marriage that have been clear from the time of Christ.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)