OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 22, 2014, 06:26:08 PM *
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 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Why  (Read 11546 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Warned
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 14,037


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #450 on: April 28, 2012, 02:26:25 PM »

http://www.vatican.va/phome_en.htm

It won't make a difference, but here goes.
any specific needle in that haystack?

Just in case you wanted to write to them or look at their site, that's all.
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,147



« Reply #451 on: April 28, 2012, 03:02:51 PM »



Your Vatican doesn't have the escape clause in its canon law.  Once validly elected and accepted, you are stuck with your supreme pontiff with no means of removing him, except killing him.

That is an outright lie.  That is why I will always say that what you do here is not in the service of truth, and in that manner is evil.

How? That's an actual question, because I don't recall it ever having occurred or hearing about a mechanism by which it could be accomplished.

Heck, skip the 'heretic' example, you don't have to go that far. What if he is mentally and physically incapacitated by a stroke? What then?

Good question...
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,147



« Reply #452 on: April 28, 2012, 03:03:33 PM »

Alright, now I've read all that's been posted here today -- and boy are my arms tired!

So if the Pope and his Synod - the college of Cardinals - were to concur that a union based upon the principles stated above were to happen and that it was the will of the Holy Spirit that the time for all to be one was at hand - and he so proclaimed saying clearly he was speaking 'ex cathedra' and stated explicitly stating that this determination was consistent with the Magesterium of the Catholic Church - you would accept it and submit to the revised definition of Papal authority.

Even if he says "I am speaking ex cathedra" that doesn't necessarily make it so.
So Pastor Aeternus is an even more worthless dogma than we have hereto been led to believe?

That's a pretty loaded question, but I can safely say: if you've been led to believe that Pastor Aeternus says that the pope is infallible anytime he says "I am speaking ex cathedra", you've been deceived.
Not at all, as I know it is all crap.

Old legal(istic) trick:hinge everything on a clause (like "ex cathedra") and then never define nor specify the term.

As for it being worthless, I would ask you this: is it a dogma in Orthodoxy that any council that says "This is an ecumenical council" is infallible? If not, does that mean that ecumenical councils are a worthless concept?
Not at all: the Second Ecumenical Council did not say "this is an Ecumenical Council" yet it was, and the council of Hiera said "this is an ecumenical council" and it wasn't.

Unlike Pastor Aeternus' claims , Orthodoxy does not define an Ecumenical Council by external criteria.  We know it when we see it.

Correction: Pastor Aeternus appears to define ex cathedra by external criteria (if you don't think about it to closely).
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #453 on: April 28, 2012, 04:52:21 PM »



Your Vatican doesn't have the escape clause in its canon law.  Once validly elected and accepted, you are stuck with your supreme pontiff with no means of removing him, except killing him.

That is an outright lie.  That is why I will always say that what you do here is not in the service of truth, and in that manner is evil.

How? That's an actual question, because I don't recall it ever having occurred or hearing about a mechanism by which it could be accomplished.

Heck, skip the 'heretic' example, you don't have to go that far. What if he is mentally and physically incapacitated by a stroke? What then?

Good question...

Each pope has a document established at the beginning of his papacy, to cover any case where he becomes mentally incapacitated to the point where he can no longer indicate his own wishes.  It is a document of resignation according to the canons.

Logged

biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Warned
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 14,037


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #454 on: April 28, 2012, 08:56:59 PM »

Yes. Popes are allowed to abdicate in the RCC.
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #455 on: April 28, 2012, 09:13:03 PM »

Yes. Popes are allowed to abdicate in the RCC.

Not only allowed but more often than not, historically, encouraged!!

As an aside: I hit some sort of tipping point lately as well...perhaps it's the season.

XB!!

M.
Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #456 on: April 29, 2012, 12:57:58 AM »

http://www.vatican.va/phome_en.htm

It won't make a difference, but here goes.
any specific needle in that haystack?

Just in case you wanted to write to them or look at their site, that's all.
Looked at it many a time.  That's how I know that its supreme pontiff cannot be removed, according to their rules.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #457 on: April 29, 2012, 01:14:13 AM »

Pointing to the possibility of removing an incapacitated Pope as per some preexisting regulation while sidestepping the much more interesting question of heretical Popes in the post-Schism West does us no good. Honorius, to return to an example I'd still like an answer for, was not unable to fulfill his duties -- would that he were so that you could fall back on what is apparently the only legitimate grounds for removal of a Pope, according to modern RC mindset! Because it certainly can't be for heresy, since that's systematically excluded from even potentially being considered a possibility by the hijacking work of the Holy Spirit in the RC church.
Logged

Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #458 on: April 29, 2012, 01:16:17 AM »

Pointing to the possibility of removing an incapacitated Pope as per some preexisting regulation while sidestepping the much more interesting question of heretical Popes in the post-Schism West does us no good. Honorius, to return to an example I'd still like an answer for, was not unable to fulfill his duties -- would that he were so that you could fall back on what is apparently the only legitimate grounds for removal of a Pope, according to modern RC mindset! Because it certainly can't be for heresy, since that's systematically excluded from even potentially being considered a possibility by the hijacking work of the Holy Spirit in the RC church.

Then again you always have the sedevacantists.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #459 on: April 29, 2012, 01:21:07 AM »

True, but I meant mainstream RCism.
Logged

Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #460 on: April 29, 2012, 01:22:47 AM »

True, but I meant mainstream RCism.

*shivers*
Logged


I'm going to need this.
JR
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: No idea
Jurisdiction: Athens
Posts: 381



« Reply #461 on: April 29, 2012, 04:21:44 AM »


I'm not mocking anything, I'm asking a question, which I'll repeat since you didn't really answer it--*How* would it be accomplished? And podkarpasta makes a good point in extending the question--I've always presumed that a corollary of the teachings on infallibility is that most Roman Catholic sincerely believe they will never need to remove a Pope for teaching heresy, so it would make sense not to have a process in place for something that can't happen--but what about dementia or blatant immorality?

Al Misry, not you, is the one who sets the tone of half-truth here that I abhor.  I am not upset with you at all and will do my best to answer.

If a pope is truly and genuinely a bad pope, then there is a canon which allows the pope to retire.  What has happened historically is that popes who are absolutely out of favor have been strongly encouraged to retire, and they have indeed done so.   It is a process that is discouraged but it can, has and could happen and for any variety of reasons that would include a plunge into heresy...and I do not mean a mistake or the expression of a personal opinion...I mean formal heresy where the man in the office would try to destroy the Church by taking it off the rails entirely.

I really have nothing more to add to it because anything that I do say will be torqued and twisted by others.

Mary



So what would happen if they refuse to retire? is there a way to oust them?
Logged

"If you judge people, you have no time to love them".

Mother Teresa
ZealousZeal
Gainsaying Helpmeet
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: ✔
Posts: 2,741


look into my lovable alpaca eyes


« Reply #462 on: April 29, 2012, 10:40:09 AM »

Looking around on Google, this is the closest thing I've found to an answer:

http://archive.catholic.com/thisrock/2001/0103fea1.asp

Quote
What I will show is that the 1917 Code of Canon Law, together with traditional papal conclave legislation, leaves no room for the view that the commission of heresy or apostasy prevents a man from validly attaining or retaining the papal office. This is equally true of the 1983 Code and current papal conclave legislation, but, since the validity and binding character of these documents is not accepted by sedevacantists, I will not appeal to their authority here.

On the basis of twentieth-century canon law (found in both the 1917 and 1983 Codes), a pope who fulfilled the canonical requirements for heresy—that is, who pertinaciously doubted or denied one or more truths to be believed with divine and Catholic faith (cf. 1983 Code 751; 1917 Code 1325 §2)—would not have the moral right before God to be pope. Therefore, his remaining in office would be illicit. Still, if he refused to resign, he would truly be the pope in the sense that his acts of papal governance would still be valid before God and the Church. It should go without saying that divine providence would never permit him to define his heresy ex cathedra. The dogma of papal infallibility assures us this can never happen.

Valid, but illicit...
Logged

"For this God is our God forever and ever; He will be our guide, even to the end." Psalm 48:14
dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #463 on: April 29, 2012, 10:52:42 AM »

Quote
What I will show is that the 1917 Code of Canon Law, together with traditional papal conclave legislation, leaves no room for the view that the commission of heresy or apostasy prevents a man from validly attaining or retaining the papal office.

My head hurts. Sad

So nothing is essentially a matter of correct doctrine and Christian living, only ecclesiology? No wonder they allow their faithful to commune with Nestorians, their Pope to kiss the Qur'an, etc. Sad.
Logged

elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #464 on: April 29, 2012, 11:00:53 AM »


I'm not mocking anything, I'm asking a question, which I'll repeat since you didn't really answer it--*How* would it be accomplished? And podkarpasta makes a good point in extending the question--I've always presumed that a corollary of the teachings on infallibility is that most Roman Catholic sincerely believe they will never need to remove a Pope for teaching heresy, so it would make sense not to have a process in place for something that can't happen--but what about dementia or blatant immorality?

Al Misry, not you, is the one who sets the tone of half-truth here that I abhor.  I am not upset with you at all and will do my best to answer.

If a pope is truly and genuinely a bad pope, then there is a canon which allows the pope to retire.  What has happened historically is that popes who are absolutely out of favor have been strongly encouraged to retire, and they have indeed done so.   It is a process that is discouraged but it can, has and could happen and for any variety of reasons that would include a plunge into heresy...and I do not mean a mistake or the expression of a personal opinion...I mean formal heresy where the man in the office would try to destroy the Church by taking it off the rails entirely.

I really have nothing more to add to it because anything that I do say will be torqued and twisted by others.

Mary



So what would happen if they refuse to retire? is there a way to oust them?

Trust me.  History shows that when pushed, they go.  Even when the papacy was a stronger seat of earthly power, they went when pushed.  It was go...or die.  And some died.   Now that the papacy is no longer quite the seat of earthly power that it was once, though it retains influence, there is even less reason for a pope to linger if his Church informs him that he as crossed the line and no longer has any support.

So yes.  A pope can be pushed out.

Some of the inane questions and comments that precede this note can be answered by looking at all the times Orthodox hierarchs have crossed the line and remained in place.  Ask yourselves about those instances first...then get back to me.

M.
Logged

dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #465 on: April 29, 2012, 11:21:39 AM »

Remained in place without correctives, or...? Because I don't think anyone here would argue that an errant bishop or priest or layperson cannot be reconciled to the true faith...but the RC doctrines surrounding the Pope seem to make that an impossibility. After all, what is there to be reconciled to if you exclude the possibility of a Pope ever going bad? Certainly Popes of old needed correction occasionally, did they not? Pope Zosimus' wavering on Pelagianism, for instance (before his eventual condemnation of it, thank God). And even more occasionally, this correction included outright condemnation (e.g., Honorius), because Rome used to be more about preserving the faith than preserving the man or particular peculiar beliefs about the office. The Orthodox still are. This is the difference between the Catholics and the Orthodox on this matter, not whether or not any Orthodox hierarchs ever crossed the line into heresy (Nestorius, anyone?).
Logged

elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #466 on: April 29, 2012, 12:33:56 PM »

Remained in place without correctives, or...? Because I don't think anyone here would argue that an errant bishop or priest or layperson cannot be reconciled to the true faith...but the RC doctrines surrounding the Pope seem to make that an impossibility. After all, what is there to be reconciled to if you exclude the possibility of a Pope ever going bad? Certainly Popes of old needed correction occasionally, did they not? Pope Zosimus' wavering on Pelagianism, for instance (before his eventual condemnation of it, thank God). And even more occasionally, this correction included outright condemnation (e.g., Honorius), because Rome used to be more about preserving the faith than preserving the man or particular peculiar beliefs about the office. The Orthodox still are. This is the difference between the Catholics and the Orthodox on this matter, not whether or not any Orthodox hierarchs ever crossed the line into heresy (Nestorius, anyone?).

You presume too much.  Excuse Orthodoxy, Condemn Papacy...

nah...does not fit the reality.

If you think that the possibility for error is greater in the Catholic Church than it is in Orthodoxy, then you are blinded by love and animus.  Strange bed-fellows.

M.
Logged

dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #467 on: April 29, 2012, 01:15:50 PM »

What's that? I see a lot of words, but unfortunately none of them are answers to the several quite simple questions that were in my post, so they're not much of a reply.

If you read what I wrote, it was not to condemn Papacy (after all, my church had one before yours did) or excuse Orthodoxy, but to ask questions about the nature of the Roman Papacy in dealing with heresies of its Popes. Obviously there is ample evidence from the non-Uniate East as to how other churches have dealt with it in their leadership (including among the Coptic Orthodox Popes, who have been deposed for various wrong teachings at different points in time), but from the Romanists...nothing much beyond "well that can't happen anyway, so..."

Pretty lame, Milhouse.
Logged

elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #468 on: April 29, 2012, 01:37:59 PM »

What's that? I see a lot of words, but unfortunately none of them are answers to the several quite simple questions that were in my post, so they're not much of a reply.

If you read what I wrote, it was not to condemn Papacy (after all, my church had one before yours did) or excuse Orthodoxy, but to ask questions about the nature of the Roman Papacy in dealing with heresies of its Popes. Obviously there is ample evidence from the non-Uniate East as to how other churches have dealt with it in their leadership (including among the Coptic Orthodox Popes, who have been deposed for various wrong teachings at different points in time), but from the Romanists...nothing much beyond "well that can't happen anyway, so..."

Pretty lame, Milhouse.

Besides being Catholic, what is lame about the statement that there is a canonical procedure for removing a pope.  It is the same procedure in use for more than a thousand years.

A bad pope may be forced to retire.

How much more clear can that get?

Logged

dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #469 on: April 29, 2012, 02:18:03 PM »

So do you hold it, then, as possible for a validly-elected Pope to be a heretic? Because why I wanted to get back to heresy is that I don't think it's very instructive of how Rome deals with its Popes if we only talk about how an incapacitated Pope may retire. We have in this thread people who are saying that no Pope embrace heresy (that is automatically not Pope), but then what do you make of "bad Popes", since you apparently recognize that such a thing is possible? Would they be asked to leave for something less than heresy, but still be considered to be protected by Papal infallibility (e.g., I've heard some RCs claim that Honorius was not a heretic because they say he didn't teach the heresy he was condemned for embracing, so he is not a challenge to the doctrine of P.I.)? Again, I'm NOT trying to say that Rome is by default bad, but some of the stances advanced in this thread are confusing to me.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2012, 02:18:54 PM by dzheremi » Logged

Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,147



« Reply #470 on: April 29, 2012, 02:21:58 PM »

Obviously there is ample evidence from the non-Uniate East as to how other churches have dealt with it in their leadership

Alright, admit it, you've been reading the "New Catholic Dictionary" haven't you?  Smiley Tongue Non-Uniat Churches

Pretty lame, Milhouse.

I am not a crook's head!
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,147



« Reply #471 on: April 29, 2012, 02:22:30 PM »


I'm not mocking anything, I'm asking a question, which I'll repeat since you didn't really answer it--*How* would it be accomplished? And podkarpasta makes a good point in extending the question--I've always presumed that a corollary of the teachings on infallibility is that most Roman Catholic sincerely believe they will never need to remove a Pope for teaching heresy, so it would make sense not to have a process in place for something that can't happen--but what about dementia or blatant immorality?

Al Misry, not you, is the one who sets the tone of half-truth here that I abhor.  I am not upset with you at all and will do my best to answer.

If a pope is truly and genuinely a bad pope, then there is a canon which allows the pope to retire.  What has happened historically is that popes who are absolutely out of favor have been strongly encouraged to retire, and they have indeed done so.   It is a process that is discouraged but it can, has and could happen and for any variety of reasons that would include a plunge into heresy...and I do not mean a mistake or the expression of a personal opinion...I mean formal heresy where the man in the office would try to destroy the Church by taking it off the rails entirely.

I really have nothing more to add to it because anything that I do say will be torqued and twisted by others.

Mary



So what would happen if they refuse to retire? is there a way to oust them?

Trust me.  History shows that when pushed, they go.  Even when the papacy was a stronger seat of earthly power, they went when pushed.  It was go...or die.  And some died.   

Are we talking martyrdom?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #472 on: April 29, 2012, 02:45:45 PM »

So do you hold it, then, as possible for a validly-elected Pope to be a heretic? Because why I wanted to get back to heresy is that I don't think it's very instructive of how Rome deals with its Popes if we only talk about how an incapacitated Pope may retire. We have in this thread people who are saying that no Pope embrace heresy (that is automatically not Pope), but then what do you make of "bad Popes", since you apparently recognize that such a thing is possible? Would they be asked to leave for something less than heresy, but still be considered to be protected by Papal infallibility (e.g., I've heard some RCs claim that Honorius was not a heretic because they say he didn't teach the heresy he was condemned for embracing, so he is not a challenge to the doctrine of P.I.)? Again, I'm NOT trying to say that Rome is by default bad, but some of the stances advanced in this thread are confusing to me.

I think that it is possible for the pope of Rome to be in error personally.  I think it is a fact that not every word written or spoken by a pope is protected by the Holy Spirit to be free from error.  So there is good cause for all Catholics to be aware that the pope does not expect to be perfectly accurate in all things.  He prays to be as accurate as humanly possible and trusts that the Holy Spirit will take care of all things for the salvation of the members of the Body of Christ.

I do not think it is possible for a pope of Rome to formally teach error.  He may not teach the full truth every time he makes a comment but when he writes, and when he speaks, with the invocation of the protection of the Holy Spirit and the long tradition of the Church's concourse with the Holy Spirit, he will not err in as much as he has spoken.

To me, formally, and we are speaking formally here for the moment, heresy is the active effort to force a false teaching upon the members of the Body of Christ, and to persist in that effort, in the face of every effort to persuade one to cease and desist with that false teaching.

There is not a case in history of a pope who has done that.  I realize I am not preaching to the choir but I do not think that a pope will resign because an Orthodox layman accuses him of heresy.   Wink...and I believe the Orthodox Primates have stopped doing that publicly so the top of the hierarchy seems to be relatively more peaceful than the rest of us.

Keep talking, I may not answer immediately but I'll be watching for more from you.

Christ is Risen!

M.

Logged

dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #473 on: April 29, 2012, 02:46:52 PM »

Alright, admit it, you've been reading the "New Catholic Dictionary" haven't you?  Smiley Tongue Non-Uniat Churches

No, but I think I will now if it is all this hilariously bad (about the EOTC):

Quote from:  some idiot
A body of Monophysite Christians in Abyssinia, governed by the Abuna, a vicar of the Coptic Patriarchate of Alexandria. Next in importance to the Abuna, who must be an Egyptian monk, is the Etsch’ege, a native Abyssinian who rules the monastic orders. Besides priests and monks, there is a class called Deftaras whose duty is to study the written ordinances. The liturgical language, Geez, shows a mixture of Greek and Arabic. They claim there is but one nature in Christ, reject all the aecumenical councils since Ephesus, have some minor heresies of their own, and practise probably the lowest type of Christianity in the world. Discarded Christian customs, such as immersion and infant communion, are observed

Pretty lame, Milhouse.

I am not a crook's head!

This is much more my style. Wink
« Last Edit: April 29, 2012, 02:47:17 PM by dzheremi » Logged

elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #474 on: April 29, 2012, 02:51:19 PM »

Alright, admit it, you've been reading the "New Catholic Dictionary" haven't you?  Smiley Tongue Non-Uniat Churches

No, but I think I will now if it is all this hilariously bad (about the EOTC):

Quote from:  some idiot
A body of Monophysite Christians in Abyssinia, governed by the Abuna, a vicar of the Coptic Patriarchate of Alexandria. Next in importance to the Abuna, who must be an Egyptian monk, is the Etsch’ege, a native Abyssinian who rules the monastic orders. Besides priests and monks, there is a class called Deftaras whose duty is to study the written ordinances. The liturgical language, Geez, shows a mixture of Greek and Arabic. They claim there is but one nature in Christ, reject all the aecumenical councils since Ephesus, have some minor heresies of their own, and practise probably the lowest type of Christianity in the world. Discarded Christian customs, such as immersion and infant communion, are observed



What is this?Huh...

M.
Logged

Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,147



« Reply #475 on: April 29, 2012, 03:20:34 PM »

Quote from:  some idiot
A body of Monophysite Christians in Abyssinia, governed by the Abuna, a vicar of the Coptic Patriarchate of Alexandria. Next in importance to the Abuna, who must be an Egyptian monk, is the Etsch’ege, a native Abyssinian who rules the monastic orders. Besides priests and monks, there is a class called Deftaras whose duty is to study the written ordinances. The liturgical language, Geez, shows a mixture of Greek and Arabic. They claim there is but one nature in Christ, reject all the aecumenical councils since Ephesus, have some minor heresies of their own, and practise probably the lowest type of Christianity in the world. Discarded Christian customs, such as immersion and infant communion, are observed

Wow. I've read some of the New Catholic Dictionary before, but I'm pretty I've never read that particular entry before.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #476 on: April 29, 2012, 03:44:39 PM »

I think that it is possible for the pope of Rome to be in error personally.  I think it is a fact that not every word written or spoken by a pope is protected by the Holy Spirit to be free from error.  So there is good cause for all Catholics to be aware that the pope does not expect to be perfectly accurate in all things.  He prays to be as accurate as humanly possible and trusts that the Holy Spirit will take care of all things for the salvation of the members of the Body of Christ.

I do not think it is possible for a pope of Rome to formally teach error.  He may not teach the full truth every time he makes a comment but when he writes, and when he speaks, with the invocation of the protection of the Holy Spirit and the long tradition of the Church's concourse with the Holy Spirit, he will not err in as much as he has spoken.

Hmm. Is this a somehow measurable or definable condition? As in, before the Pope says something that is meant to be an authoritative teaching (and not just a private opinion, as you've said those may be heretical), does he have to literally, out loud call for the protection of the Holy Spirit? Otherwise, I don't really see how this means anything, because if there are problems it can just be said that it was not meant as an authoritative teaching (e.g., the debates about the CCC: It is intended to be authoritative or not? Some say yes, some say no, and some say either but add various conditions that define/restrict its authority depending on exactly what passages are being discussed).

Quote
To me, formally, and we are speaking formally here for the moment, heresy is the active effort to force a false teaching upon the members of the Body of Christ, and to persist in that effort, in the face of every effort to persuade one to cease and desist with that false teaching.

There is not a case in history of a pope who has done that.  I realize I am not preaching to the choir...

Haha. That would be one way to stop me from writing what you apparently could sense was coming on in response to that assertion. Smiley I'm fine with agreeing to disagree here.

Quote
but I do not think that a pope will resign because an Orthodox layman accuses him of heresy.   Wink...and I believe the Orthodox Primates have stopped doing that publicly so the top of the hierarchy seems to be relatively more peaceful than the rest of us.

Hahaha. Why should I of all people here care for the Roman Pope's hypothetical resignation? He's not the Pope who I'm going to be looking to for any kind of guidance or Orthodox exposition to begin with. Besides, I brought up heresy again because the point isn't resignation, but out and out condemnation and removal. The East and Orient have done this as necessary with leaders of their own sees. Rome used to do it with leaders of their see, too. When a new Nestorius or Arius comes along (hypothetically), do you wait for him to voluntarily resign himself? I wouldn't, and more importantly, our forefathers, East and West, didn't.
Logged

Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,147



« Reply #477 on: April 29, 2012, 04:12:17 PM »

Generally I'm reluctantly to take anything seriously if it has a url like "sedevacantist.com"; nevertheless, I think this article has some interesting points on the whole "What could we do if ... " question:

http://www.sedevacantist.com/papalelections.html
« Last Edit: April 29, 2012, 04:12:52 PM by Peter J » Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #478 on: April 29, 2012, 04:38:17 PM »


I'm not mocking anything, I'm asking a question, which I'll repeat since you didn't really answer it--*How* would it be accomplished? And podkarpasta makes a good point in extending the question--I've always presumed that a corollary of the teachings on infallibility is that most Roman Catholic sincerely believe they will never need to remove a Pope for teaching heresy, so it would make sense not to have a process in place for something that can't happen--but what about dementia or blatant immorality?

Al Misry, not you, is the one who sets the tone of half-truth here that I abhor.  I am not upset with you at all and will do my best to answer.

If a pope is truly and genuinely a bad pope, then there is a canon which allows the pope to retire.  What has happened historically is that popes who are absolutely out of favor have been strongly encouraged to retire, and they have indeed done so.   It is a process that is discouraged but it can, has and could happen and for any variety of reasons that would include a plunge into heresy...and I do not mean a mistake or the expression of a personal opinion...I mean formal heresy where the man in the office would try to destroy the Church by taking it off the rails entirely.

I really have nothing more to add to it because anything that I do say will be torqued and twisted by others.

Mary



So what would happen if they refuse to retire? is there a way to oust them?

Trust me.
LOL.

History shows that when pushed, they go.
Name a single instance.

Because I can name a couple counterinstances.

Even when the papacy was a stronger seat of earthly power, they went when pushed.  It was go...or die.  And some died.
So like I said, according to the Vatican constitution, the only way to remove a pope is through assassination.

Now that the papacy is no longer quite the seat of earthly power that it was once, though it retains influence, there is even less reason for a pope to linger if his Church informs him that he as crossed the line and no longer has any support.

So yes.  A pope can be pushed out.
So no.  You have yet to demonstrate that.

Some of the inane questions and comments that precede this note can be answered by looking at all the times Orthodox hierarchs have crossed the line and remained in place.  Ask yourselves about those instances first...then get back to me.
Nice deflection.

But not entirely successful: Metropolitans Herman and Theodosius were forced from office, the Patriarch of Jerusalem was recently deposed, etc.  The Orthodox have, in theory and in fact, demonstrated that Orthodox hierarchs that have crossed the line can and have been removed. 

(of course, mercy can be shown, as was to Metropolitan Coreanu for taking communion from the chalice of the Vatican.  The Holy Synod of Romania let him off with a warning, after his repentance).

In contrast, no theory nor fact (except assassination) remains to the Vatican to get rid of its supreme pontiff.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #479 on: April 29, 2012, 04:42:06 PM »


I'm not mocking anything, I'm asking a question, which I'll repeat since you didn't really answer it--*How* would it be accomplished? And podkarpasta makes a good point in extending the question--I've always presumed that a corollary of the teachings on infallibility is that most Roman Catholic sincerely believe they will never need to remove a Pope for teaching heresy, so it would make sense not to have a process in place for something that can't happen--but what about dementia or blatant immorality?

Al Misry, not you, is the one who sets the tone of half-truth here that I abhor.  I am not upset with you at all and will do my best to answer.

If a pope is truly and genuinely a bad pope, then there is a canon which allows the pope to retire.  What has happened historically is that popes who are absolutely out of favor have been strongly encouraged to retire, and they have indeed done so.   It is a process that is discouraged but it can, has and could happen and for any variety of reasons that would include a plunge into heresy...and I do not mean a mistake or the expression of a personal opinion...I mean formal heresy where the man in the office would try to destroy the Church by taking it off the rails entirely.

I really have nothing more to add to it because anything that I do say will be torqued and twisted by others.

Mary



So what would happen if they refuse to retire? is there a way to oust them?

Trust me.
LOL.

History shows that when pushed, they go.
Name a single instance.

Because I can name a couple counterinstances.

Even when the papacy was a stronger seat of earthly power, they went when pushed.  It was go...or die.  And some died.
So like I said, according to the Vatican constitution, the only way to remove a pope is through assassination.

Now that the papacy is no longer quite the seat of earthly power that it was once, though it retains influence, there is even less reason for a pope to linger if his Church informs him that he as crossed the line and no longer has any support.

So yes.  A pope can be pushed out.
So no.  You have yet to demonstrate that.

Some of the inane questions and comments that precede this note can be answered by looking at all the times Orthodox hierarchs have crossed the line and remained in place.  Ask yourselves about those instances first...then get back to me.
Nice deflection.

But not entirely successful: Metropolitans Herman and Theodosius were forced from office, the Patriarch of Jerusalem was recently deposed, etc.  The Orthodox have, in theory and in fact, demonstrated that Orthodox hierarchs that have crossed the line can and have been removed. 

(of course, mercy can be shown, as was to Metropolitan Coreanu for taking communion from the chalice of the Vatican.  The Holy Synod of Romania let him off with a warning, after his repentance).

In contrast, no theory nor fact (except assassination) remains to the Vatican to get rid of its supreme pontiff.

Half-truths and all lies.

Cheers!

M.
Logged

ZealousZeal
Gainsaying Helpmeet
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: ✔
Posts: 2,741


look into my lovable alpaca eyes


« Reply #480 on: April 29, 2012, 05:11:03 PM »


I'm not mocking anything, I'm asking a question, which I'll repeat since you didn't really answer it--*How* would it be accomplished? And podkarpasta makes a good point in extending the question--I've always presumed that a corollary of the teachings on infallibility is that most Roman Catholic sincerely believe they will never need to remove a Pope for teaching heresy, so it would make sense not to have a process in place for something that can't happen--but what about dementia or blatant immorality?

Al Misry, not you, is the one who sets the tone of half-truth here that I abhor.  I am not upset with you at all and will do my best to answer.

If a pope is truly and genuinely a bad pope, then there is a canon which allows the pope to retire.  What has happened historically is that popes who are absolutely out of favor have been strongly encouraged to retire, and they have indeed done so.   It is a process that is discouraged but it can, has and could happen and for any variety of reasons that would include a plunge into heresy...and I do not mean a mistake or the expression of a personal opinion...I mean formal heresy where the man in the office would try to destroy the Church by taking it off the rails entirely.

I really have nothing more to add to it because anything that I do say will be torqued and twisted by others.

Mary



So what would happen if they refuse to retire? is there a way to oust them?

Trust me.
LOL.

History shows that when pushed, they go.
Name a single instance.

Because I can name a couple counterinstances.

Even when the papacy was a stronger seat of earthly power, they went when pushed.  It was go...or die.  And some died.
So like I said, according to the Vatican constitution, the only way to remove a pope is through assassination.

Now that the papacy is no longer quite the seat of earthly power that it was once, though it retains influence, there is even less reason for a pope to linger if his Church informs him that he as crossed the line and no longer has any support.

So yes.  A pope can be pushed out.
So no.  You have yet to demonstrate that.

Some of the inane questions and comments that precede this note can be answered by looking at all the times Orthodox hierarchs have crossed the line and remained in place.  Ask yourselves about those instances first...then get back to me.
Nice deflection.

But not entirely successful: Metropolitans Herman and Theodosius were forced from office, the Patriarch of Jerusalem was recently deposed, etc.  The Orthodox have, in theory and in fact, demonstrated that Orthodox hierarchs that have crossed the line can and have been removed. 

(of course, mercy can be shown, as was to Metropolitan Coreanu for taking communion from the chalice of the Vatican.  The Holy Synod of Romania let him off with a warning, after his repentance).

In contrast, no theory nor fact (except assassination) remains to the Vatican to get rid of its supreme pontiff.

Half-truths and all lies.

Cheers!

M.

How is it? There is no canon that I've found in my (admittedly brief) Googling that allows for the deposition of a pope. I'm not saying that's a positive or a negative thing, just what it is from what I've seen and with nothing in this thread to indicate otherwise. If that is what it is, then so be it. If the answer is "There is no way to depose a heretic pope because we believe the Holy Spirit protects the pope from preaching heresy", then that at least has some internal logic I can understand. It would start another conversation, no doubt, but why make a cure for a disease you don't believe you can catch? It's a lot easier for me to swallow than "There's ways to get rid of him ifyouknowwhatImeanandIthinkyoudo, *wink* *wink*."  Wink
Logged

"For this God is our God forever and ever; He will be our guide, even to the end." Psalm 48:14
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #481 on: April 29, 2012, 05:23:21 PM »

ifyouknowwhatImeanandIthinkyoudo

I don't think that's a real word.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #482 on: April 29, 2012, 05:38:03 PM »


I'm not mocking anything, I'm asking a question, which I'll repeat since you didn't really answer it--*How* would it be accomplished? And podkarpasta makes a good point in extending the question--I've always presumed that a corollary of the teachings on infallibility is that most Roman Catholic sincerely believe they will never need to remove a Pope for teaching heresy, so it would make sense not to have a process in place for something that can't happen--but what about dementia or blatant immorality?

Al Misry, not you, is the one who sets the tone of half-truth here that I abhor.  I am not upset with you at all and will do my best to answer.

If a pope is truly and genuinely a bad pope, then there is a canon which allows the pope to retire.  What has happened historically is that popes who are absolutely out of favor have been strongly encouraged to retire, and they have indeed done so.   It is a process that is discouraged but it can, has and could happen and for any variety of reasons that would include a plunge into heresy...and I do not mean a mistake or the expression of a personal opinion...I mean formal heresy where the man in the office would try to destroy the Church by taking it off the rails entirely.

I really have nothing more to add to it because anything that I do say will be torqued and twisted by others.

Mary



So what would happen if they refuse to retire? is there a way to oust them?

Trust me.
LOL.

History shows that when pushed, they go.
Name a single instance.

Because I can name a couple counterinstances.

Even when the papacy was a stronger seat of earthly power, they went when pushed.  It was go...or die.  And some died.
So like I said, according to the Vatican constitution, the only way to remove a pope is through assassination.

Now that the papacy is no longer quite the seat of earthly power that it was once, though it retains influence, there is even less reason for a pope to linger if his Church informs him that he as crossed the line and no longer has any support.

So yes.  A pope can be pushed out.
So no.  You have yet to demonstrate that.

Some of the inane questions and comments that precede this note can be answered by looking at all the times Orthodox hierarchs have crossed the line and remained in place.  Ask yourselves about those instances first...then get back to me.
Nice deflection.

But not entirely successful: Metropolitans Herman and Theodosius were forced from office, the Patriarch of Jerusalem was recently deposed, etc.  The Orthodox have, in theory and in fact, demonstrated that Orthodox hierarchs that have crossed the line can and have been removed. 

(of course, mercy can be shown, as was to Metropolitan Coreanu for taking communion from the chalice of the Vatican.  The Holy Synod of Romania let him off with a warning, after his repentance).

In contrast, no theory nor fact (except assassination) remains to the Vatican to get rid of its supreme pontiff.

Half-truths and all lies.
The Truth, the whole Truth, and nothing but the Truth.

Btw, that's one thing, not three.

Again, I reiterate, your time would be more productively spent if you spent a hundredth of the time you spend posting such slander, to post instead facts to back you up.  That is, if there are facts to back you up.*wink**wink* Wink
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #483 on: April 29, 2012, 05:42:18 PM »

Could you all stop winking at each other? I feel like it's creating a hostile avoiding-work environment.
Logged

biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Warned
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 14,037


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #484 on: April 29, 2012, 05:44:41 PM »

Could you all stop winking at each other? I feel like it's creating a hostile avoiding-work environment.

Creating?

It's there already.
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
ZealousZeal
Gainsaying Helpmeet
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: ✔
Posts: 2,741


look into my lovable alpaca eyes


« Reply #485 on: April 29, 2012, 06:43:09 PM »

ifyouknowwhatImeanandIthinkyoudo

I don't think that's a real word.

I was free-styling.
Logged

"For this God is our God forever and ever; He will be our guide, even to the end." Psalm 48:14
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,147



« Reply #486 on: April 29, 2012, 07:14:08 PM »

- What is it Mama? Why do you keep winking at me?

- Why should I wink at my own daughter? What an imagination!
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #487 on: April 29, 2012, 07:18:12 PM »

ifyouknowwhatImeanandIthinkyoudo

I don't think that's a real word.

I was free-styling.

 Cheesy Cheesy

I love your Avatar.  It is perfect for this part of the Forum.

The way to move a pope out of office is to show him the wisdom and charity of resignation.

You know God is far more charitable than most of you here.

To listen to you, it is a Trophy religion you seek:  how many primatial heads can you hang on the wall?

 Roll Eyes
Logged

biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Warned
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 14,037


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #488 on: April 29, 2012, 07:19:19 PM »

http://www.comedycentral.com/video-clips/eb32ns/chappelle-s-show-popcopy

"Why? Because... that's why!"

(NSFW)
« Last Edit: April 29, 2012, 07:19:33 PM by biro » Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #489 on: April 29, 2012, 07:22:02 PM »

99 primatial heads on the wall!
99 primatial heads!
Take one down.
Toss it around. Whoops!
98 primatial heads on the wall!
Logged


I'm going to need this.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #490 on: April 29, 2012, 07:44:22 PM »

ifyouknowwhatImeanandIthinkyoudo

I don't think that's a real word.

I was free-styling.

 Cheesy Cheesy

I love your Avatar.  It is perfect for this part of the Forum.

The way to move a pope out of office is to show him the wisdom and charity of resignation.

You know God is far more charitable than most of you here.

To listen to you, it is a Trophy religion you seek:  how many primatial heads can you hang on the wall?

 Roll Eyes
A fish rots from the head down-Italian and Greek proverb.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPSVY_CQknc&feature=related
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #491 on: April 29, 2012, 07:56:10 PM »

Ugh. I like it better when you post maps, Isa.
Logged

ZealousZeal
Gainsaying Helpmeet
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: ✔
Posts: 2,741


look into my lovable alpaca eyes


« Reply #492 on: April 29, 2012, 07:56:44 PM »

ifyouknowwhatImeanandIthinkyoudo

I don't think that's a real word.

I was free-styling.

 Cheesy Cheesy

I love your Avatar.  It is perfect for this part of the Forum.

The way to move a pope out of office is to show him the wisdom and charity of resignation.

You know God is far more charitable than most of you here.

To listen to you, it is a Trophy religion you seek:  how many primatial heads can you hang on the wall?

 Roll Eyes

I'm sincerely not trying to be uncharitable. I hope I'm not coming off that way.
Logged

"For this God is our God forever and ever; He will be our guide, even to the end." Psalm 48:14
ZealousZeal
Gainsaying Helpmeet
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: ✔
Posts: 2,741


look into my lovable alpaca eyes


« Reply #493 on: April 29, 2012, 08:08:58 PM »


LOL. That was hilarious.  Cheesy
Logged

"For this God is our God forever and ever; He will be our guide, even to the end." Psalm 48:14
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Warned
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 14,037


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #494 on: April 29, 2012, 08:17:50 PM »

Thanks. It's been eleven pages, I thought someone ought to try to deal with the question.  Wink Cheesy
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 »   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 0.172 seconds with 72 queries.