OrthodoxChristianity.net
November 24, 2014, 04:37:31 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope  (Read 349 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
gueranger
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 268


St. Alexis of Wilkes Barre, pray for me a sinner.


« on: November 19, 2014, 12:59:32 PM »

I have never seen a Catholic source admit that Pope Viligilus was excommunicated, but here it is as a caption on the Remnant.

http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/1284-can-the-church-depose-an-heretical-pope


It is amazing to read the mental gymnastics they go through to reconcile deposing a Pope while upholding Vatican I. If the the Pope can be deposed for heresy, he is not the guarantee of unity or orthodoxy. The faith is. And that's Orthodoxy!
Logged

“Hold firmly that your faith is identical to that of the ancients, deny this and you dissolve the unity of the Church.” -St. Thomas Aquinas

http://www.amazon.com/His-Broken-Body-Understanding-Catholic/dp/0615183611

http://www.bloomsbury.com/us/the-banished-heart-9780567442208/
Paisius
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Wherever the wind blows......
Posts: 1,194


Scheherazade


« Reply #1 on: November 19, 2014, 01:41:00 PM »

My favorite explanation is that Pope Vigilius was stricken from the diptychs because he was the pope and that Justinian and the council knew they needed his approval to legitimize the council. So far from being a rebuke to modern Catholic claims it actually confirms them.  Cheesy





« Last Edit: November 19, 2014, 01:41:34 PM by Paisius » Logged
Gunnarr
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,797



« Reply #2 on: November 21, 2014, 03:38:47 AM »

Pope Adrian VI stating:

"If by the Roman Church you mean its head or pontiff, it is beyond question that he can err even in matters touching the faith. He does this when he teaches heresy by his own judgment or decretal. In truth, many Roman pontiffs were heretics. The last of them was Pope John XXII († 1334)."

from the link

oh dear....
« Last Edit: November 21, 2014, 03:39:09 AM by Gunnarr » Logged

I am a demonic servant! Beware!
Minnesotan
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Raised evangelical, inquiring into Orthodoxy
Jurisdiction: Interested in becoming Antiochian
Posts: 462


From the Land of 10,000 Lakes


« Reply #3 on: November 21, 2014, 03:50:21 AM »

Yeah, the Old Catholics definitely had a point, but unfortunately their side lost.

There is an ongoing dialogue between the Old Catholics and the Orthodox, and there are agreements on most of the main doctrines, but there are several sticking points that may be very hard to iron out (like women's ordination among some OC's, and intercommunion with outside groups like Anglicans).
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,316


"Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee..."


WWW
« Reply #4 on: November 21, 2014, 11:13:22 AM »

Pope Adrian VI stating:

"If by the Roman Church you mean its head or pontiff, it is beyond question that he can err even in matters touching the faith. He does this when he teaches heresy by his own judgment or decretal. In truth, many Roman pontiffs were heretics. The last of them was Pope John XXII († 1334)."

from the link

oh dear....

But, but...Theodore Abu Qurrah!!!!!!!!!
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.
PorphyriosK
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 40



« Reply #5 on: November 22, 2014, 11:28:40 PM »

I have never seen a Catholic source admit that Pope Viligilus was excommunicated, but here it is as a caption on the Remnant.

http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/1284-can-the-church-depose-an-heretical-pope


It is amazing to read the mental gymnastics they go through to reconcile deposing a Pope while upholding Vatican I. If the the Pope can be deposed for heresy, he is not the guarantee of unity or orthodoxy. The faith is. And that's Orthodoxy!

My understanding is that there is the office of the papacy, and then there is the person holding the office.  The office of the papacy, the See of Rome, is the guarantee of unity and orthodoxy, not necessarily the individual seated in it.  The individual who is occupying that office at any given time can be faithful or unfaithful.  Most of the time he is faithful, but there have been times in history where he was not faithful.  In those times, he was either prevented from teaching heresy, or was removed from holding the office.  That's what I've come to understand.  I could be wrong.  If so, maybe someone can correct me.
Logged
Paisius
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Wherever the wind blows......
Posts: 1,194


Scheherazade


« Reply #6 on: Yesterday at 12:18:41 AM »

Pope Adrian VI stating:

"If by the Roman Church you mean its head or pontiff, it is beyond question that he can err even in matters touching the faith. He does this when he teaches heresy by his own judgment or decretal. In truth, many Roman pontiffs were heretics. The last of them was Pope John XXII († 1334)."

from the link

oh dear....


Is this an accurate quote?
Logged
Gunnarr
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,797



« Reply #7 on: Yesterday at 04:40:15 AM »

Pope Adrian VI stating:

"If by the Roman Church you mean its head or pontiff, it is beyond question that he can err even in matters touching the faith. He does this when he teaches heresy by his own judgment or decretal. In truth, many Roman pontiffs were heretics. The last of them was Pope John XXII († 1334)."

from the link

oh dear....


Is this an accurate quote?

Well, the stated source for the quote is:

Quaest. in IV Sent. Quote in: “L'Infaillibilité du pape et le Syllabus", (Besançon: Jacquin; Paris: P. Lethielleux, 1904)



So........   good luck finding a 1904 book on the internet, we may never know if it is true or not!

EDIT: Actually, it is found! Lets see.. brb!
« Last Edit: Yesterday at 04:42:26 AM by Gunnarr » Logged

I am a demonic servant! Beware!
Gunnarr
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,797



« Reply #8 on: Yesterday at 04:51:49 AM »

Ok, for the source on Pope Adrian IV saying that Popes may be heretics and previous popes were heretics there is this passage from that book where the author quotes him:

Quote
Celui qui devait être Adrien VI a examiné cette question dans son commentaire sur le Maître des Sentences et l'a résolue avec une précision et une netteté qui ne laissent rien à désirer : « Dico primo quod si per Romanam Ecclesian intelligatur caput ejus, puta pontifex, certum est quod possit errare, etiam in iis quae tangerent fldem, haeresim per suam determinationem aut decretalem asserendo. Plures enim fuerunt pontifices Romani hœretici, etc. (1). »

At the 1 this is stated:

Quote
Adrien VI, Questiones in quartum Sententiarum, De sacramento confirmationis, in fine, Venumdatur in œdibus Jodoci Badii, fol. en v. L'ouvrage a été réimprimé sous le pontificat d'Adrien VI sans que ce passage ait été modifié. Sur quoi ceux qui sont choqués par cette doctrine font l'observation que voici : « Non perciô è a dirsi, ch'egli corne papa conformasse una sift'atta proposizione. Quante volte non si ristampano délie opere, senzachè ne sia consapevole l'autore, o che ne abbia dato l'ultima mano ? » (Moroni, Dizionario di erudizione storicoecclesiastica, 1.1", pp. 104,105). L'observation est juste; mais, en regard de ce qui est possible, il faut considérer ce qui est probable; or, il est probable que les réimpressions ont été faites de l'aveu de l'auteur, devenu pape. Et pourquoi nous étonnerions-nous de voir Adrien VI professer la même doctrine qu'Adrien II, Innocent III, Innocent IV?

With all the mixing of french and latin, with my failures in french class when I was younger, I cannot tell what is being said much, but It appears the source is from that first latin thingy listed there...


link to the book

http://books.google.com/books?id=pYgvAAAAYAAJ&pg=RA1-PA118&lpg=RA1-PA118&dq=L%27Infaillibilite%CC%81+du+pape+et+le+Syllabus&source=bl&ots=U1mrvYQugR&sig=OqwHMF_86iG44sSIDNQX6VbfYzQ&hl=en&sa=X&ei=rp1xVMOqBMydgwTpvIKICw&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=adrien&f=false

go to page 21 for this passage
Logged

I am a demonic servant! Beware!
Gunnarr
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,797



« Reply #9 on: Yesterday at 04:53:14 AM »

Pope Adrian VI stating:

"If by the Roman Church you mean its head or pontiff, it is beyond question that he can err even in matters touching the faith. He does this when he teaches heresy by his own judgment or decretal. In truth, many Roman pontiffs were heretics. The last of them was Pope John XXII († 1334)."

from the link

oh dear....

But, but...Theodore Abu Qurrah!!!!!!!!!

I never heard of this person, how does he relate to Papal Infallibility??? Did he speak about the Pope?
Logged

I am a demonic servant! Beware!
Tags:
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.072 seconds with 38 queries.