Zone1 What the Church does when a pope is a heretic

[ding]

Maybe without the society's permission in the case of the churches?
And then there are the children who have been indoctrinated when very young?


I don't think we can afford to be quiet about criticizing religion.

Most militant atheists can’t.

 

[ninja007]

Its not a problem at all, if you understand precedent. In January 897, Pope Formosus was indicted for heresy, so they just dug up his corpus and put him on trial.

If Francis, or a subsequent pope gets accused of the same thing, the precedent is there.

compare rc teaching to the bible- its false.

 

[forkintheroad7]

I remember when I was in Catholic Prison Camp #225 where they tried to reconcile Evolution and the Bible and really couldn't do it before admitting that the Bible is a fairy tale.

I don't think this is a big theological problem that there wasn't a talking snake any more than any of the more fantastical elements of the Bible.

The bigger problem I see with the Church is that Francis is the first 'Third World" Pope. He represents third-world concerns, which is fair, as the vast majority of the world's Catholics live in Third world countries.

But the Church's wealth comes from the 20% of the world's Catholics who live in wealthy countries.

distortion of reality

 

[forkintheroad7]

I need to get back to studying this issue bc I still don't really know what the Church is supposed to do about this issue...

weird it's so hard to find out..

 

[forkintheroad7]

compare rc teaching to the bible- its false.

LIE

you just haven't studied it.. too intellectually lazy

 

[frigidweirdo]

I have read up on this issue and am still researching, which means I only have a few conclusions at this point.

It appears to be a complex issue, probably because it is human nature to complicate things? I dunno. But in any case, I think I "know" the following:

Apparently, in Catholic teaching (the original teachings, NOT what is falsely being taught today by many clergy including the [supposed] pope), even if a pope is thought to be a notorious heretic (has not kept his heresy secret), he can only be deposed if he walks away from the papacy. Actually, I am not even sure that is correct because I don't really trust the authors of the material I am reading.

I am reading the material on this because the Sedevacantists believe one thing about how to deal with a heretical pope and the novus ordo people believe something else. So far, I am not clear on what makes the most sense (who is right). I'd have to research authentically-Catholic literature to attain perfect understanding.

However, there is this: The person who wrote the material says that people in the CIMRI Church (Sedevacantists) are not Catholic!

That is not true! The person who wrote the material seems to think he has to steer people away from the Sedevacantist position, and apparently thinks he may have to go to the point of being dishonest. It's like he is saying "Don't be a Sede or you will be called a schismatic or "un-Catholic." I have been in the CIMRI Church and it is a traditional CATHOLIC Church, using missals from 1962...

So I tend to think the writer of the material I am wading through is dishonest... which makes me not want to bother w/ the un-read parts.

But it does kind of make sense that the pope (alleged pope) cannot easily be removed.

In any case, we were all, fortunately, given a brain, so we don't need to listen to "popes" who teach anti-Catholic nonsense

When people decide your fiction is fiction, and their fiction isn't.

 

[forkintheroad7]

I guess the only thing the Church can do is put up with a heretical pope until the next Conclave

unless he himself admits to the heresy or and/or he leaves the Church

Well, we can pray, can't we?

 

[JoeB131]

I guess the only thing the Church can do is put up with a heretical pope until the next Conclave

unless he himself admits to the heresy or and/or he leaves the Church

Well, we can pray, can't we?

Francis isn't your problem, your backwards beliefs are.

 

[forkintheroad7]

compare rc teaching to the bible- its false.

You are SO ignorant. The RCC is the Church who put together the New Testament, deciding which books to include and which ones not.

Every time you rely on or quote Scripture, you are unwittingly acknowledging that they did a great job..

(ironically)

 

[JoeB131]

You are SO ignorant. The RCC is the Church who put together the New Testament, deciding which books to include and which ones not.

Every time you rely on or quote Scripture, you are unwittingly acknowledging that they did a great job..

(ironically)

Again, why do you keep pretending the Orthodox Church isn't a thing?

 

[forkintheroad7]

no response ot #29

figures

 

[JoeB131]

no response ot #29

figures

Yes, I responded to it...you ignored it...

Your church is just older than most of the Christian Churches.

All your churches lost track of what Jesus was trying to say. (Or more specifically, what words Saul of Tarses was shoving into Jesus' mouth.)

 

[forkintheroad7]

I learned something about the Catholic Church today, namely that a heretical (or fake) pope calling someone "beatified" --which is the first step toward declaring the person a saint, or one of the steps anyhow...

is not an issue of infallibility (such as proclaiming a given dogma is (ex cathedra )

BUT

canonizing someone IS an issue of infallibility, meaning Catholics are required to accept the person really is a saint.

But a lot of heretical popes have been "canonized" by... ha ha.. too funny... other heretical popes.

can't make it up

So this PROVES if nothing else does

that the last 6 (?) "popes" are not for real because some popes are manifestly heretics.. or in other words, preach and teach what is NOT true Christian doctrine

 

[JoeB131]

I learned something about the Catholic Church today, namely that a heretical (or fake) pope calling someone "beatified" --which is the first step toward declaring the person a saint, or one of the steps anyhow...

is not an issue of infallibility (such as proclaiming a given dogma is (ex cathedra )

BUT

canonizing someone IS an issue of infallibility, meaning Catholics are required to accept the person really is a saint.

But a lot of heretical popes have been "canonized" by... ha ha.. too funny... other heretical popes.

can't make it up

So this PROVES if nothing else does

that the last 6 (?) "popes" are not for real because some popes are manifestly heretics.. or in other words, preach and teach what is NOT true Christian doctrine

The concept of Papal Infallibility is a relatively recent one.

It didn't become official until Pius IX in 1870, who then chopped off all the dicks in the Vatican museum.