Author Topic: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope  (Read 40862 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Wandile

  • Peter the Roman
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,684
  • Love God with All your heart and all your Soul
  • Faith: Holy Catholic Church - Latin
  • Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #180 on: January 20, 2015, 04:35:30 PM »
Understand that this all relates to formal heresy, not material heresy.
A distinction without a difference. Bottom line, if your supreme pontiff denies the divinity of Christ or proclaimed the divinity of the Theotokos, your ecclesiastical community has no means by which to remove him. Plenty of his predecessors have been removed, but that was before Pastor Aeternus and your present code of canon law which enacts it.

Without a difference? You should certainly know thee is a huge difference.

Just told you how we deal with it. The doctors speak .

I think people throw around that phrase, "a distinction without a difference," all too readily. It seems like an easy way of ignoring a real difference.
I notice that you two meet the fact "if your supreme pontiff denies the divinity of Christ or proclaimed the divinity of the Theotokos, your ecclesiastical community has no means by which to remove him" with silence.

I've addressed this issue numerous times on various threads including this one and also mentioned the doctors on this issue. The fact that you don't accept our answer is your problem
« Last Edit: January 20, 2015, 04:36:30 PM by Wandile »
During the Iconoclastic Crisis, Stephen the Faster challenged the assembled Bishops at Hiereia:

"How can you call a council ecumenical when the bishop of Rome has not given his consent, and the canons forbid ecclesiastical affairs to be decided without the pope of Rome?"
-Stephen the Faster

Venerable Benedict Daswa, Blessed Isidore Bakanja and St Charles Lwanga, martyrs, pray for the Church today

Offline Kerdy

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,813
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #181 on: January 20, 2015, 05:50:00 PM »
EDIT:  Was thinking of a different Pope.  Pope Leo IX who excommunicated the Patriarch of Constantinople and was dead before the excommunicated Patriarch supposedly excommunicated him.  Not sure how you can excommunicate a dead guy especially after you were excommunicated, but whatever works.
« Last Edit: January 20, 2015, 06:15:14 PM by Kerdy »

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,541
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #182 on: January 20, 2015, 06:05:17 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!
Is he the one who was dead before he was excommunicated?
Not that it matters, but no. But don't let that stop your agenda.
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

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,758
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #183 on: January 20, 2015, 06:07:10 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!
Is he the one who was dead before he was excommunicated?
Not that it matters, but no. But don't let that stop your agenda.
I don't think Kerdy is Catholic. So what agenda are you talking about?
"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,541
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #184 on: January 20, 2015, 06:08:01 PM »
Understand that this all relates to formal heresy, not material heresy.
A distinction without a difference. Bottom line, if your supreme pontiff denies the divinity of Christ or proclaimed the divinity of the Theotokos, your ecclesiastical community has no means by which to remove him. Plenty of his predecessors have been removed, but that was before Pastor Aeternus and your present code of canon law which enacts it.

Without a difference? You should certainly know thee is a huge difference.

Just told you how we deal with it. The doctors speak .

I think people throw around that phrase, "a distinction without a difference," all too readily. It seems like an easy way of ignoring a real difference.
I notice that you two meet the fact "if your supreme pontiff denies the divinity of Christ or proclaimed the divinity of the Theotokos, your ecclesiastical community has no means by which to remove him" with silence.

I've addressed this issue numerous times on various threads including this one and also mentioned the doctors on this issue. The fact that you don't accept our answer is your problem
The fact that your assertion has no foundation in your ecclesiastical communities constitution and canons remains your problem.
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

Offline Wandile

  • Peter the Roman
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,684
  • Love God with All your heart and all your Soul
  • Faith: Holy Catholic Church - Latin
  • Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #185 on: January 20, 2015, 06:44:48 PM »
Understand that this all relates to formal heresy, not material heresy.
A distinction without a difference. Bottom line, if your supreme pontiff denies the divinity of Christ or proclaimed the divinity of the Theotokos, your ecclesiastical community has no means by which to remove him. Plenty of his predecessors have been removed, but that was before Pastor Aeternus and your present code of canon law which enacts it.

Without a difference? You should certainly know thee is a huge difference.

Just told you how we deal with it. The doctors speak .

I think people throw around that phrase, "a distinction without a difference," all too readily. It seems like an easy way of ignoring a real difference.
I notice that you two meet the fact "if your supreme pontiff denies the divinity of Christ or proclaimed the divinity of the Theotokos, your ecclesiastical community has no means by which to remove him" with silence.

I've addressed this issue numerous times on various threads including this one and also mentioned the doctors on this issue. The fact that you don't accept our answer is your problem
The fact that your assertion has no foundation in your ecclesiastical communities constitution and canons remains your problem.


Just as many other things before they got put into the canons. But don't let that stop your agenda...
During the Iconoclastic Crisis, Stephen the Faster challenged the assembled Bishops at Hiereia:

"How can you call a council ecumenical when the bishop of Rome has not given his consent, and the canons forbid ecclesiastical affairs to be decided without the pope of Rome?"
-Stephen the Faster

Venerable Benedict Daswa, Blessed Isidore Bakanja and St Charles Lwanga, martyrs, pray for the Church today

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,541
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #186 on: January 20, 2015, 06:50:03 PM »
Understand that this all relates to formal heresy, not material heresy.
A distinction without a difference. Bottom line, if your supreme pontiff denies the divinity of Christ or proclaimed the divinity of the Theotokos, your ecclesiastical community has no means by which to remove him. Plenty of his predecessors have been removed, but that was before Pastor Aeternus and your present code of canon law which enacts it.

Without a difference? You should certainly know thee is a huge difference.

Just told you how we deal with it. The doctors speak .

I think people throw around that phrase, "a distinction without a difference," all too readily. It seems like an easy way of ignoring a real difference.
I notice that you two meet the fact "if your supreme pontiff denies the divinity of Christ or proclaimed the divinity of the Theotokos, your ecclesiastical community has no means by which to remove him" with silence.

I've addressed this issue numerous times on various threads including this one and also mentioned the doctors on this issue. The fact that you don't accept our answer is your problem
The fact that your assertion has no foundation in your ecclesiastical communities constitution and canons remains your problem.


Just as many other things before they got put into the canons. But don't let that stop your agenda...
...Truth won't stop.

Produce a single canon or "apostolic constitution" empowering anyone to depose your supreme pontiff gone off the rails.

Because I can produce a lot saying no one can.
« Last Edit: January 20, 2015, 06:50:50 PM by ialmisry »
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

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,758
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #187 on: January 20, 2015, 06:54:49 PM »
Grind that ax!
"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

Offline Deacon Lance

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,903
  • Faith: Byzantine Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #188 on: January 20, 2015, 08:21:13 PM »
Understand that this all relates to formal heresy, not material heresy.
A distinction without a difference. Bottom line, if your supreme pontiff denies the divinity of Christ or proclaimed the divinity of the Theotokos, your ecclesiastical community has no means by which to remove him. Plenty of his predecessors have been removed, but that was before Pastor Aeternus and your present code of canon law which enacts it.

Without a difference? You should certainly know thee is a huge difference.

Just told you how we deal with it. The doctors speak .

I think people throw around that phrase, "a distinction without a difference," all too readily. It seems like an easy way of ignoring a real difference.
I notice that you two meet the fact "if your supreme pontiff denies the divinity of Christ or proclaimed the divinity of the Theotokos, your ecclesiastical community has no means by which to remove him" with silence.

I've addressed this issue numerous times on various threads including this one and also mentioned the doctors on this issue. The fact that you don't accept our answer is your problem
The fact that your assertion has no foundation in your ecclesiastical communities constitution and canons remains your problem.


Just as many other things before they got put into the canons. But don't let that stop your agenda...
...Truth won't stop.

Produce a single canon or "apostolic constitution" empowering anyone to depose your supreme pontiff gone off the rails.

Because I can produce a lot saying no one can.
How about three:

Can. 194
§1. The following are removed from an ecclesiastical office by the law itself:

1/ a person who has lost the clerical state;

2/ a person who has publicly defected from the Catholic faith or from the communion of the Church;

3/ a cleric who has attempted marriage even if only civilly.

§2. The removal mentioned in nn. 2 and 3 can be enforced only if it is established by the declaration of a competent authority.

Can. 1336
§1. In addition to other penalties which the law may have established, the following are expiatory penalties which can affect an offender either perpetually, for a prescribed time, or for an indeterminate time:

1/ a prohibition or an order concerning residence in a certain place or territory;

2/ privation of a power, office, function, right, privilege, faculty, favor, title, or insignia, even merely honorary;

3/ a prohibition against exercising those things listed under n. 2, or a prohibition against exercising them in a certain place or outside a certain place; these prohibitions are never under pain of nullity;

4/ a penal transfer to another office;

5/ dismissal from the clerical state.

§2. Only those expiatory penalties listed in §1, n. 3 can be latae sententiae.

Can. 1364
§1. Without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 194, §1, n. 2, an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication; in addition, a cleric can be punished with the penalties mentioned in ⇒ can. 1336, §1, nn. 1, 2, and 3.

§2. If contumacy of long duration or the gravity of scandal demands it, other penalties can be added, including dismissal from the clerical state.

And a long article explaining how the application of the canons would work.
http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/1284-can-the-church-depose-an-heretical-pope

Basically if a pope were to adhere to a heresy before he could be deposed he would have to be warned by the College of Bishops or at least the College of Cardinals and given the chance to recant.  If does not he is declared a heretic and the canons kick in he is excommunicated automatically, since excommunicated he loses power of office and is deposed, and if he persists can be laicized.
My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,541
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #189 on: January 20, 2015, 08:59:05 PM »
Understand that this all relates to formal heresy, not material heresy.
A distinction without a difference. Bottom line, if your supreme pontiff denies the divinity of Christ or proclaimed the divinity of the Theotokos, your ecclesiastical community has no means by which to remove him. Plenty of his predecessors have been removed, but that was before Pastor Aeternus and your present code of canon law which enacts it.

Without a difference? You should certainly know thee is a huge difference.

Just told you how we deal with it. The doctors speak .

I think people throw around that phrase, "a distinction without a difference," all too readily. It seems like an easy way of ignoring a real difference.
I notice that you two meet the fact "if your supreme pontiff denies the divinity of Christ or proclaimed the divinity of the Theotokos, your ecclesiastical community has no means by which to remove him" with silence.

I've addressed this issue numerous times on various threads including this one and also mentioned the doctors on this issue. The fact that you don't accept our answer is your problem
The fact that your assertion has no foundation in your ecclesiastical communities constitution and canons remains your problem.


Just as many other things before they got put into the canons. But don't let that stop your agenda...
...Truth won't stop.

Produce a single canon or "apostolic constitution" empowering anyone to depose your supreme pontiff gone off the rails.

Because I can produce a lot saying no one can.
How about three:

Can. 194
§1. The following are removed from an ecclesiastical office by the law itself:

1/ a person who has lost the clerical state;

2/ a person who has publicly defected from the Catholic faith or from the communion of the Church;

3/ a cleric who has attempted marriage even if only civilly.

§2. The removal mentioned in nn. 2 and 3 can be enforced only if it is established by the declaration of a competent authority.

Can. 1336
§1. In addition to other penalties which the law may have established, the following are expiatory penalties which can affect an offender either perpetually, for a prescribed time, or for an indeterminate time:

1/ a prohibition or an order concerning residence in a certain place or territory;

2/ privation of a power, office, function, right, privilege, faculty, favor, title, or insignia, even merely honorary;

3/ a prohibition against exercising those things listed under n. 2, or a prohibition against exercising them in a certain place or outside a certain place; these prohibitions are never under pain of nullity;

4/ a penal transfer to another office;

5/ dismissal from the clerical state.

§2. Only those expiatory penalties listed in §1, n. 3 can be latae sententiae.

Can. 1364
§1. Without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 194, §1, n. 2, an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication; in addition, a cleric can be punished with the penalties mentioned in ⇒ can. 1336, §1, nn. 1, 2, and 3.

§2. If contumacy of long duration or the gravity of scandal demands it, other penalties can be added, including dismissal from the clerical state.

And a long article explaining how the application of the canons would work.
http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/1284-can-the-church-depose-an-heretical-pope

Basically if a pope were to adhere to a heresy before he could be deposed he would have to be warned by the College of Bishops or at least the College of Cardinals and given the chance to recant.  If does not he is declared a heretic and the canons kick in he is excommunicated automatically, since excommunicated he loses power of office and is deposed, and if he persists can be laicized.
Alas! Deacon, you have to get by a quite a few canons before we can even consider the ones you offer as a solution, for instance:
Can. 343 It is for the synod of bishops to discuss the questions for consideration and express its wishes but not to resolve them or issue decrees about them unless in certain cases the Roman Pontiff has endowed it with deliberative power, in which case he ratifies the decisions of the synod.

Can. 344 The synod of bishops is directly subject to the authority of the Roman Pontiff who:

1/ convokes a synod as often as it seems opportune to him and designates the place where its sessions are to be held;

2/ radios the election of members who must be elected according to the norm of special law and designates and appoints other members;

3/ determines at an appropriate time before the celebration of a synod the contents of the questions to be treated, according to the norm of special law;

4/ defines the agenda;

5/ presides at the synod personally or through others;

6/ concludes, transfers, suspends, and dissolves the synod.

Your canon 194.2 has the problem that the Vatican has redefined Catholicism as communion with its pontiff. As Lumen Gentium notes, your episcopal college cannot act without its head, i.e. said pontiff. Since, by your constitution, defines what passes as the Catholic Faith in the Vatican, what judicial review can judge him as removed from office by the law itself?

Then there is this:
Quote
Can.  1404 The First See is judged by no one.
« Last Edit: January 20, 2015, 09:08:49 PM by ialmisry »
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

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,541
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #190 on: January 20, 2015, 09:00:11 PM »
Grind that ax!
It needs the sharpness to cut through the cr...obfuscation!
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

Offline Deacon Lance

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,903
  • Faith: Byzantine Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #191 on: January 20, 2015, 09:43:42 PM »
Understand that this all relates to formal heresy, not material heresy.
A distinction without a difference. Bottom line, if your supreme pontiff denies the divinity of Christ or proclaimed the divinity of the Theotokos, your ecclesiastical community has no means by which to remove him. Plenty of his predecessors have been removed, but that was before Pastor Aeternus and your present code of canon law which enacts it.

Without a difference? You should certainly know thee is a huge difference.

Just told you how we deal with it. The doctors speak .

I think people throw around that phrase, "a distinction without a difference," all too readily. It seems like an easy way of ignoring a real difference.
I notice that you two meet the fact "if your supreme pontiff denies the divinity of Christ or proclaimed the divinity of the Theotokos, your ecclesiastical community has no means by which to remove him" with silence.

I've addressed this issue numerous times on various threads including this one and also mentioned the doctors on this issue. The fact that you don't accept our answer is your problem
The fact that your assertion has no foundation in your ecclesiastical communities constitution and canons remains your problem.


Just as many other things before they got put into the canons. But don't let that stop your agenda...
...Truth won't stop.

Produce a single canon or "apostolic constitution" empowering anyone to depose your supreme pontiff gone off the rails.

Because I can produce a lot saying no one can.
How about three:

Can. 194
§1. The following are removed from an ecclesiastical office by the law itself:

1/ a person who has lost the clerical state;

2/ a person who has publicly defected from the Catholic faith or from the communion of the Church;

3/ a cleric who has attempted marriage even if only civilly.

§2. The removal mentioned in nn. 2 and 3 can be enforced only if it is established by the declaration of a competent authority.

Can. 1336
§1. In addition to other penalties which the law may have established, the following are expiatory penalties which can affect an offender either perpetually, for a prescribed time, or for an indeterminate time:

1/ a prohibition or an order concerning residence in a certain place or territory;

2/ privation of a power, office, function, right, privilege, faculty, favor, title, or insignia, even merely honorary;

3/ a prohibition against exercising those things listed under n. 2, or a prohibition against exercising them in a certain place or outside a certain place; these prohibitions are never under pain of nullity;

4/ a penal transfer to another office;

5/ dismissal from the clerical state.

§2. Only those expiatory penalties listed in §1, n. 3 can be latae sententiae.

Can. 1364
§1. Without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 194, §1, n. 2, an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication; in addition, a cleric can be punished with the penalties mentioned in ⇒ can. 1336, §1, nn. 1, 2, and 3.

§2. If contumacy of long duration or the gravity of scandal demands it, other penalties can be added, including dismissal from the clerical state.

And a long article explaining how the application of the canons would work.
http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/1284-can-the-church-depose-an-heretical-pope

Basically if a pope were to adhere to a heresy before he could be deposed he would have to be warned by the College of Bishops or at least the College of Cardinals and given the chance to recant.  If does not he is declared a heretic and the canons kick in he is excommunicated automatically, since excommunicated he loses power of office and is deposed, and if he persists can be laicized.
Alas! Deacon, you have to get by a quite a few canons before we can even consider the ones you offer as a solution, for instance:
Can. 343 It is for the synod of bishops to discuss the questions for consideration and express its wishes but not to resolve them or issue decrees about them unless in certain cases the Roman Pontiff has endowed it with deliberative power, in which case he ratifies the decisions of the synod.

Can. 344 The synod of bishops is directly subject to the authority of the Roman Pontiff who:

1/ convokes a synod as often as it seems opportune to him and designates the place where its sessions are to be held;

2/ radios the election of members who must be elected according to the norm of special law and designates and appoints other members;

3/ determines at an appropriate time before the celebration of a synod the contents of the questions to be treated, according to the norm of special law;

4/ defines the agenda;

5/ presides at the synod personally or through others;

6/ concludes, transfers, suspends, and dissolves the synod.

Your canon 194.2 has the problem that the Vatican has redefined Catholicism as communion with its pontiff. As Lumen Gentium notes, your episcopal college cannot act without its head, i.e. said pontiff. Since, by your constitution, defines what passes as the Catholic Faith in the Vatican, what judicial review can judge him as removed from office by the law itself?

Then there is this:
Quote
Can.  1404 The First See is judged by no one.
The article deals with your objections with scholastic precision.  Also the College of Bishops is different than the Synod of Bishops, which has no relevance to this discussion.  If the Pope would pronounce heresy he is automatically excommunicated, no longer Pope, and liable to deposition.  How this would workout in reality is another matter.  I am sure it would messy if it were over some obscure point.  I doubt it would be messy at all if the Pope really went bonkers and proclaimed Arianism the faith.
My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,758
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #192 on: January 20, 2015, 10:05:23 PM »
Grind that ax!
I'm going to call myself out on this stupid and unproductive comment.
"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,541
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #193 on: January 20, 2015, 10:19:23 PM »
Understand that this all relates to formal heresy, not material heresy.
A distinction without a difference. Bottom line, if your supreme pontiff denies the divinity of Christ or proclaimed the divinity of the Theotokos, your ecclesiastical community has no means by which to remove him. Plenty of his predecessors have been removed, but that was before Pastor Aeternus and your present code of canon law which enacts it.

Without a difference? You should certainly know thee is a huge difference.

Just told you how we deal with it. The doctors speak .

I think people throw around that phrase, "a distinction without a difference," all too readily. It seems like an easy way of ignoring a real difference.
I notice that you two meet the fact "if your supreme pontiff denies the divinity of Christ or proclaimed the divinity of the Theotokos, your ecclesiastical community has no means by which to remove him" with silence.

I've addressed this issue numerous times on various threads including this one and also mentioned the doctors on this issue. The fact that you don't accept our answer is your problem
The fact that your assertion has no foundation in your ecclesiastical communities constitution and canons remains your problem.


Just as many other things before they got put into the canons. But don't let that stop your agenda...
...Truth won't stop.

Produce a single canon or "apostolic constitution" empowering anyone to depose your supreme pontiff gone off the rails.

Because I can produce a lot saying no one can.
How about three:

Can. 194
§1. The following are removed from an ecclesiastical office by the law itself:

1/ a person who has lost the clerical state;

2/ a person who has publicly defected from the Catholic faith or from the communion of the Church;

3/ a cleric who has attempted marriage even if only civilly.

§2. The removal mentioned in nn. 2 and 3 can be enforced only if it is established by the declaration of a competent authority.

Can. 1336
§1. In addition to other penalties which the law may have established, the following are expiatory penalties which can affect an offender either perpetually, for a prescribed time, or for an indeterminate time:

1/ a prohibition or an order concerning residence in a certain place or territory;

2/ privation of a power, office, function, right, privilege, faculty, favor, title, or insignia, even merely honorary;

3/ a prohibition against exercising those things listed under n. 2, or a prohibition against exercising them in a certain place or outside a certain place; these prohibitions are never under pain of nullity;

4/ a penal transfer to another office;

5/ dismissal from the clerical state.

§2. Only those expiatory penalties listed in §1, n. 3 can be latae sententiae.

Can. 1364
§1. Without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 194, §1, n. 2, an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication; in addition, a cleric can be punished with the penalties mentioned in ⇒ can. 1336, §1, nn. 1, 2, and 3.

§2. If contumacy of long duration or the gravity of scandal demands it, other penalties can be added, including dismissal from the clerical state.

And a long article explaining how the application of the canons would work.
http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/1284-can-the-church-depose-an-heretical-pope

Basically if a pope were to adhere to a heresy before he could be deposed he would have to be warned by the College of Bishops or at least the College of Cardinals and given the chance to recant.  If does not he is declared a heretic and the canons kick in he is excommunicated automatically, since excommunicated he loses power of office and is deposed, and if he persists can be laicized.
Alas! Deacon, you have to get by a quite a few canons before we can even consider the ones you offer as a solution, for instance:
Can. 343 It is for the synod of bishops to discuss the questions for consideration and express its wishes but not to resolve them or issue decrees about them unless in certain cases the Roman Pontiff has endowed it with deliberative power, in which case he ratifies the decisions of the synod.

Can. 344 The synod of bishops is directly subject to the authority of the Roman Pontiff who:

1/ convokes a synod as often as it seems opportune to him and designates the place where its sessions are to be held;

2/ radios the election of members who must be elected according to the norm of special law and designates and appoints other members;

3/ determines at an appropriate time before the celebration of a synod the contents of the questions to be treated, according to the norm of special law;

4/ defines the agenda;

5/ presides at the synod personally or through others;

6/ concludes, transfers, suspends, and dissolves the synod.

Your canon 194.2 has the problem that the Vatican has redefined Catholicism as communion with its pontiff. As Lumen Gentium notes, your episcopal college cannot act without its head, i.e. said pontiff. Since, by your constitution, defines what passes as the Catholic Faith in the Vatican, what judicial review can judge him as removed from office by the law itself?

Then there is this:
Quote
Can.  1404 The First See is judged by no one.
The article deals with your objections with scholastic precision.
 
Scholasticism, always going ad absurdum, always blunts its point, depriving it of "precision."

Quite succinct:
Quote
Can.  1404 The First See is judged by no one.
Also the College of Bishops is different than the Synod of Bishops,
a difference which has no relevance when we are talking about the "possess[or of] supreme, full, immediate, and universal ordinary power in the Church, which he is always able to exercise freely."
which has no relevance to this discussion.
because its impotence against its pontiff is all the more readily demonstrated:
§3. It is for the Roman Pontiff, according to the needs of the Church, to select and promote the ways by which the college of bishops is to exercise its function collegially regarding the universal Church.
If the Pope would pronounce heresy he is automatically excommunicated, no longer Pope, and liable to deposition.
 
And who is going to judge him for his heresy? remember
Quote
Can.  1404 The First See is judged by no one.
How this would workout in reality is another matter.
LOL. The Vatican has left reality at least since 1870.
I am sure it would messy if it were over some obscure point.  I doubt it would be messy at all if the Pope really went bonkers and proclaimed Arianism the faith.
au contraire, given that he has diplomatic recognition by powers that couldn't care less if not meta-Arian (of the Unitarian-Universalist type), and would retain it, it could get even messier than
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

Offline Wandile

  • Peter the Roman
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,684
  • Love God with All your heart and all your Soul
  • Faith: Holy Catholic Church - Latin
  • Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria
During the Iconoclastic Crisis, Stephen the Faster challenged the assembled Bishops at Hiereia:

"How can you call a council ecumenical when the bishop of Rome has not given his consent, and the canons forbid ecclesiastical affairs to be decided without the pope of Rome?"
-Stephen the Faster

Venerable Benedict Daswa, Blessed Isidore Bakanja and St Charles Lwanga, martyrs, pray for the Church today

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,758
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #195 on: January 21, 2015, 10:55:58 AM »
"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,541
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #196 on: January 21, 2015, 01:23:48 PM »
The Case is closed; let the doctors speak for themselves
Like so many times, this time that assertion-wretched out of its context and mangled in the first place-is false on its face.

Your article starts “The Church must render a judgment before the pope loses his office. Private judgment of the laity in this matter does not suffice.”

Your ecclesiastical community has no means to render that judgment. In particular as it bars anyone from judging the first see.

Sorry, Jesuitry isn't going to get you out of this one.

« Last Edit: January 21, 2015, 01:35:16 PM by ialmisry »
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

Offline Wandile

  • Peter the Roman
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,684
  • Love God with All your heart and all your Soul
  • Faith: Holy Catholic Church - Latin
  • Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #197 on: January 21, 2015, 01:43:16 PM »
The Case is closed; let the doctors speak for themselves
Like so many times, this time that assertion-wretched out of its context and mangled in the first place-is false on its face.

Your article starts “The Church must render a judgment before the pope loses his office. Private judgment of the laity in this matter does not suffice.”

Your ecclesiastical community has no means to render that judgment. In particular as it bars anyone from judging the first see.

Sorry, Jesuitry isn't going to get you out of this one.



Your objection is dealt with within the article. And most of the time the doctors qualify that statement with "or rather show him to already be judged". But if you read further, you would have seen your objection already addressed.
During the Iconoclastic Crisis, Stephen the Faster challenged the assembled Bishops at Hiereia:

"How can you call a council ecumenical when the bishop of Rome has not given his consent, and the canons forbid ecclesiastical affairs to be decided without the pope of Rome?"
-Stephen the Faster

Venerable Benedict Daswa, Blessed Isidore Bakanja and St Charles Lwanga, martyrs, pray for the Church today

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #198 on: January 21, 2015, 01:50:27 PM »
I thought the article was a good discussion on the Catholic position regarding the matter. I disagree with their position, but it is better to know the actual position as opposed to tilting at windmills and slashing at straw men.
God bless!

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,541
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #199 on: January 21, 2015, 03:37:53 PM »
The Case is closed; let the doctors speak for themselves
Like so many times, this time that assertion-wretched out of its context and mangled in the first place-is false on its face.

Your article starts “The Church must render a judgment before the pope loses his office. Private judgment of the laity in this matter does not suffice.”

Your ecclesiastical community has no means to render that judgment. In particular as it bars anyone from judging the first see.

Sorry, Jesuitry isn't going to get you out of this one.



Your objection is dealt with within the article.

No, it is not. Like I said, Jesuitry isn't going to get you out of this one-unless you can show the canonical authority for your "imperfect council," which by YOUR definition is uncanonical.
And most of the time the doctors qualify that statement with "or rather show him to already be judged". But if you read further, you would have seen your objection already addressed.
I went through your Jesuitry and found it wanting.

Btw, your ecclesiastical community does not recognize theologians as part of your claimed magisterium. That leaves your John of St. Thomas and Suarez out in the cold by the Code of Canon Law and the "apostolic constitutions" of Vatican I, Vatican II, etc. As for Cajetan, he has his own problems, which I have brought up before:
No his problem was that the title "universal bishop" implied that there was only ONE TRUE BISHOP IN AND OF THE WHOLE WORLD which meant all others were actually vicars.

Sounds like the modern day Papacy to me.
But it isn't. We Catholics do believe that local bishops are true bishops, and we do believe that Catholic Church is present in its entirety in every diocese.

Nope. The local diocese makes up a part of the Church which finds its unity in the pope. How can the local diocese represent the fullness of the Church when another entity can interfere at will?

I was RC for 35 years and feel quite confident that you are mistaken.
You may feel we are mistaken but the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches this very thing.

Yup as one catholic saint said " if all the world apostasized and only one person was left Catholic, he would be the one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church". The church I present fully at local level
Yep. The Church continues to exist when there is not a Pope. Though I have some non-Catholics tell me otherwise.  :D
Like Card. Cajetan?
Jokes aside, isn't this period of sedevacante does put into question many claims about the Papacy brought forward by the Roman Catholic Church?  Like my earlier comment about the Church being built on Peter and that Peter only has one successor, what now?  On whom is the Church built on?  And how are the Churches of the Catholic Communion in communion with one another?  How are they "in communion with Rome" if there is no Bishop of Rome?
1. Peter was the rock and he always will be
2. We are in communion with one another. The times in which there is no Pope are a clear indication that our communion is more fundamentally founded in our common faith in Christ. When there is a Pope, we must be in communion, but this necessity is less fundamental than our communion in the faith.  
You may not like that answer because it does not fit your "disaffected Catholic" narrative, but such is life. No one, not even the authors of Pastor Aeternus thought that the Church suddenly ceases to exist when there is no Pope.
But as pointed out earlier, isn't it a clear indication that the Papacy is indeed unnecessary?
Cajetan tried to claim otherwise:
But the Catholic Church, the Church of my baptism, teaches that each bishop participates in the magisterial charge and the petrine charge equally, and that each bishop and his See are the fullness of the Body of Christ.
The Catholic Church teaches that, but the Vatican who baptized you does not:
I can across something else of interest to the issue of the "manus" on supreme pontiff: Cajetan's Authority of Pope and Council Compared.
Quote
If someone insists that, when the apostolic see is vacant, the universal Church still exists, even without the pope as its head, the answer is that the universal Church exists only imperfectly, in such a way that this imperfection is a condition diminishing "the universal Church," just as a beheaded body diminishes an intact body.  The universal [body], after all, includes within itself all its office-holding members, the chief of whom is the head. Accordingly, the Church at such a time is headless and without its supreme part and power. Whoever denies this falls into the error of John Hus, denying the necessity of a head of the Church, which was condemned by Saint Thomas and by Martin V with the Council of Constance." And if someone took the view that the universal Church in this sense [without its head] has power immediately from Christ and is represented by the universal council, he would err intolerably, as is obvious from the texts cited and as will become more apparent further on.

Concerning the second comparison at the other extreme, between the pope set on one side and the whole Church, that is, even including the pope, on the other, it is said that the pope with the rest of the Church does not have greater power of spiritual jurisdiction than he has by himself, because his power
contains in itself the powers of all the rest, as their universal cause
There is no power of jurisdiction in the Church which is not in the pope, as is inductively obvious.

Even the power to elect the pope is in the pope's power. This is obvious both from the case of Peter, who chose his successor, as John III says in c. Si Petrus [C. 8 q. 1 c. 1], and from the fact that the pope ordains the exercise of the power to elect, determining when and how an election should be held, and, what is more important, determining the location of that power, when he established that election belongs to at least two thirds of the cardinals. This is proved from c. Si papa [D. 40 c. 6], where it is said that the whole body of the faithful recognizes that its salvation depends most, after the Lord, on the pope's good condition. Pope Leo says in c. Ita Dominus [D. 19 c. 7], "The Lord wished the sacrament of this gift to belong to the office of all the apostles, so that He placed [it] principally in most blessed Peter, chief of all the apostles, that from him, as from a head, He might pour out His gifts, as it were, upon the whole body."  It is absolutely obvious in that passage that all the rest of the Church's body is allocated power by the pope as if by a head.
http://books.google.com/books?id=mC-I3inCYOIC&pg=PA23&dq=%22If+someone+insists+that,+when+the+apostolic+see+is+vacant,+the+universal+Church%22&hl=en#v=onepage&q=%22If%20someone%20insists%20that%2C%20when%20the%20apostolic%20see%20is%20vacant%2C%20the%20universal%20Church%22&f=false

Oh dear, it seems that not even a Council has the power to make a bishop into a supreme pontiff, a real problem for Petrine succession.
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

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,541
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #200 on: January 21, 2015, 03:40:01 PM »
I thought the article was a good discussion on the Catholic position regarding the matter. I disagree with their position, but it is better to know the actual position as opposed to tilting at windmills and slashing at straw men.
Not propping up the straw men is better still.

Unless those strawmen can show the authority of this uncanonical (according to the Vatican's canons) "imperfect council."
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

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,758
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #201 on: January 21, 2015, 04:27:20 PM »
u contraire, given that he has diplomatic recognition by powers that couldn't care less if not meta-Arian (of the Unitarian-Universalist type), and would retain it, it could get even messier than

I post a map. Therefore, I win.

"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

Offline Wandile

  • Peter the Roman
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,684
  • Love God with All your heart and all your Soul
  • Faith: Holy Catholic Church - Latin
  • Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #202 on: January 21, 2015, 04:30:59 PM »
LOL Isa I'll pray for you.
During the Iconoclastic Crisis, Stephen the Faster challenged the assembled Bishops at Hiereia:

"How can you call a council ecumenical when the bishop of Rome has not given his consent, and the canons forbid ecclesiastical affairs to be decided without the pope of Rome?"
-Stephen the Faster

Venerable Benedict Daswa, Blessed Isidore Bakanja and St Charles Lwanga, martyrs, pray for the Church today

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #203 on: January 21, 2015, 04:31:10 PM »
Alderaan, Alderaan, who rebels against the Empire! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling. Behold, your house is being left to you desolate!…
God bless!

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,656
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #204 on: January 21, 2015, 04:31:33 PM »
Yaaaay, maps!  ;D


Christ my God, set my heart on fire with love in You, that in its flame I may love You with all my heart, with all my mind, and with all my soul and with all my strength, and my neighbor as myself, so that by keeping Your commandments I may glorify You the Giver of every good and perfect gift. Amen.

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,758
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #205 on: January 21, 2015, 04:34:17 PM »
"For, by its immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, I, 14.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,541
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #206 on: January 21, 2015, 04:36:29 PM »
u contraire, given that he has diplomatic recognition by powers that couldn't care less if not meta-Arian (of the Unitarian-Universalist type), and would retain it, it could get even messier than

I post a map. Therefore, I win.


only if it maps reality. The Great Western Schism, all admit, happened. I'm not even sure if the Jedi in the UK (where it is now a recognized religion) believe Star Wars happened.
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

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,541
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #207 on: January 21, 2015, 04:37:32 PM »
LOL Isa I'll pray for you.
while you are at it, pray that those canons of the "imperfect council" are revealed to you.
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

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,541
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

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,656
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #209 on: January 21, 2015, 04:40:16 PM »
only if it maps reality. The Great Western Schism, all admit, happened. I'm not even sure if the Jedi in the UK (where it is now a recognized religion) believe Star Wars happened.
I dunno. There's a woman in Canada who believes she's spiritually married to Cyclops from the X-Men.
Christ my God, set my heart on fire with love in You, that in its flame I may love You with all my heart, with all my mind, and with all my soul and with all my strength, and my neighbor as myself, so that by keeping Your commandments I may glorify You the Giver of every good and perfect gift. Amen.

Offline Wandile

  • Peter the Roman
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,684
  • Love God with All your heart and all your Soul
  • Faith: Holy Catholic Church - Latin
  • Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #210 on: January 21, 2015, 04:46:47 PM »
LOL Isa I'll pray for you.
while you are at it, pray that those canons of the "imperfect council" are revealed to you.

Not gonna do that :-/
During the Iconoclastic Crisis, Stephen the Faster challenged the assembled Bishops at Hiereia:

"How can you call a council ecumenical when the bishop of Rome has not given his consent, and the canons forbid ecclesiastical affairs to be decided without the pope of Rome?"
-Stephen the Faster

Venerable Benedict Daswa, Blessed Isidore Bakanja and St Charles Lwanga, martyrs, pray for the Church today

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,541
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #211 on: January 21, 2015, 04:53:26 PM »
LOL Isa I'll pray for you.
while you are at it, pray that those canons of the "imperfect council" are revealed to you.

Not gonna do that :-/
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

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,656
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #212 on: January 21, 2015, 04:55:10 PM »
I'm sure Jack Nicholson's giant, toothy maw has convicted many of the way to eternal life.
Christ my God, set my heart on fire with love in You, that in its flame I may love You with all my heart, with all my mind, and with all my soul and with all my strength, and my neighbor as myself, so that by keeping Your commandments I may glorify You the Giver of every good and perfect gift. Amen.

Offline Wandile

  • Peter the Roman
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,684
  • Love God with All your heart and all your Soul
  • Faith: Holy Catholic Church - Latin
  • Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #213 on: January 21, 2015, 05:20:56 PM »
LOL Isa I'll pray for you.
while you are at it, pray that those canons of the "imperfect council" are revealed to you.

Not gonna do that :-/


SIGH... the irony of you posting that picture
During the Iconoclastic Crisis, Stephen the Faster challenged the assembled Bishops at Hiereia:

"How can you call a council ecumenical when the bishop of Rome has not given his consent, and the canons forbid ecclesiastical affairs to be decided without the pope of Rome?"
-Stephen the Faster

Venerable Benedict Daswa, Blessed Isidore Bakanja and St Charles Lwanga, martyrs, pray for the Church today

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,541
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #214 on: January 21, 2015, 09:34:56 PM »
LOL Isa I'll pray for you.
while you are at it, pray that those canons of the "imperfect council" are revealed to you.

Not gonna do that :-/


SIGH... the irony of you posting that picture
yeah, I didn't care for the movie. But the scene was good.
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

Offline Wandile

  • Peter the Roman
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,684
  • Love God with All your heart and all your Soul
  • Faith: Holy Catholic Church - Latin
  • Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #215 on: January 21, 2015, 10:08:44 PM »
LOL Isa I'll pray for you.
while you are at it, pray that those canons of the "imperfect council" are revealed to you.

Not gonna do that :-/


SIGH... the irony of you posting that picture
yeah, I didn't care for the movie. But the scene was good.
Good scene indeed
During the Iconoclastic Crisis, Stephen the Faster challenged the assembled Bishops at Hiereia:

"How can you call a council ecumenical when the bishop of Rome has not given his consent, and the canons forbid ecclesiastical affairs to be decided without the pope of Rome?"
-Stephen the Faster

Venerable Benedict Daswa, Blessed Isidore Bakanja and St Charles Lwanga, martyrs, pray for the Church today

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • A highly skilled and trained Freudian feminist slut
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,715
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Mercenary Freudianism
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Feminist Coptic
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #216 on: January 21, 2015, 10:23:23 PM »
The Case is closed; let the doctors speak for themselves

Thanks for the article, but unfortunately it is not as open and shut as you want us to believe. 

I could probably go into some detail about certain contradictions in the article without touching upon areas on which we Orthodox would disagree with the doctrinal presuppositions contained in it (doctrinal presuppositions on which I thought Eastern Catholics would agree with us, making Fr Lance's "endorsement" of it all the more curious to me), but I will forgo all that for now in favour of asking a simple question:

What is the canon-legal basis for the argument it makes? 

After all, the 1983 Code of Canon Law (never cited in the article) abrogates the 1917 Code (referred to twice in the article) in can. 6, making the 1983 Code the current law of the Latin Church (though, presumably, it would also affect the Eastern Churches insofar as laws touching upon the universal aspects of the Roman Pontiff's ministry would also affect them).  The overwhelming majority of the citations in the article are not to canons of either Code or to pre-existing canons, but rather to the speculative writings and commentaries of theologians and canonists from before the Second Vatican Council (mostly from, but not limited to, the 16th and 17th centuries).  The article refers not once to any source which could be said to definitely possess the force of law in the RCC today regarding the subject of deposing a heretical Pope.  The only time it refers to anything which would be authoritative today, AFAIK, is when it clarifies the meaning of infallibility by referring to Vatican I. 

So I fail to see how this lengthy article really is not just an exercise in sophistry or false propaganda meant to encourage the brethren scandalised by Pope Francis and Friends (after all, it is brought to us by The Remnant, not L'osservatore Romano).     



 

« Last Edit: January 21, 2015, 10:24:27 PM by Mor Ephrem »

Offline biro

  • Site Supporter
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 21,579
  • Excelsior
    • Archive of Our Own works
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #217 on: January 21, 2015, 10:53:24 PM »
I'm sure Jack Nicholson's giant, toothy maw has convicted many of the way to eternal life.

Or, some people like to yell.
https://archiveofourown.org/users/Parakeetist


Warning: stories have mature content.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,541
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #218 on: January 21, 2015, 11:15:03 PM »
I'm sure Jack Nicholson's giant, toothy maw has convicted many of the way to eternal life.

Or, some people like to yell.
you mean, like St. John the Forerunner?
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

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,656
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #219 on: January 21, 2015, 11:16:06 PM »
I'm sure Jack Nicholson's giant, toothy maw has convicted many of the way to eternal life.

Or, some people like to yell.
Indeed ;)
Christ my God, set my heart on fire with love in You, that in its flame I may love You with all my heart, with all my mind, and with all my soul and with all my strength, and my neighbor as myself, so that by keeping Your commandments I may glorify You the Giver of every good and perfect gift. Amen.

Offline Deacon Lance

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,903
  • Faith: Byzantine Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #220 on: January 22, 2015, 05:52:51 PM »
The Case is closed; let the doctors speak for themselves

Thanks for the article, but unfortunately it is not as open and shut as you want us to believe. 

I could probably go into some detail about certain contradictions in the article without touching upon areas on which we Orthodox would disagree with the doctrinal presuppositions contained in it (doctrinal presuppositions on which I thought Eastern Catholics would agree with us, making Fr Lance's "endorsement" of it all the more curious to me), but I will forgo all that for now in favour of asking a simple question:

What is the canon-legal basis for the argument it makes? 


Well I do agree with you.  I am not subscribing to their presuppositions I just think they make a good argument.  I think the canons from the 1983 layout the framework sufficiently.  If a pope were to be outed as a formal heretic and refused to recant he would be deposed.  I know it looks good polemically to state Catholics have painted themselves into a corner on Papal teaching but does anyone seriously believe that if a pope were to state Christ isn't God he would get away with it?  Isa can state the pope can't be judged by anyone till he is blue in the face but the fact remains that the law itself states heretics lose their office and if a pope is obviously a heretic he no longer has the office of supreme pontiff and can be deposed.  Would it be messy?  maybe depending on the heresy the pope proclaims.  If he says something crazy like Christ isn't God I don't think it is that messy.  If he states something more subtle, like Hell isn't eternal than yes pretty messy and probably a schism.
My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,656
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #221 on: January 22, 2015, 07:27:45 PM »
There's a difference between how the Catholic Church would pick up and carry on in practice and how logically consistent their dogmas are. If the Pope is capable of propagating heresy and getting removed by his inferiors (whether cleanly or not), then he really isn't the infallible guarantee of Church unity that Papal Supremacy/Infallibility was designed for. The buck either stops with him or it stops somewhere else (in this case, bishops realizing in the Spirit that the Pope has propagated heresy) thus rendering Papal claims unnecessary.

The very fact that this discussion is occurring almost seems like the Papacy has lost the game from the start.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2015, 07:28:56 PM by Volnutt »
Christ my God, set my heart on fire with love in You, that in its flame I may love You with all my heart, with all my mind, and with all my soul and with all my strength, and my neighbor as myself, so that by keeping Your commandments I may glorify You the Giver of every good and perfect gift. Amen.

Offline Minnesotan

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,329
  • Milo Thatch is the ONLY Milo for me. #FreeAtlantis
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #222 on: January 22, 2015, 07:30:59 PM »
only if it maps reality. The Great Western Schism, all admit, happened. I'm not even sure if the Jedi in the UK (where it is now a recognized religion) believe Star Wars happened.
I dunno. There's a woman in Canada who believes she's spiritually married to Cyclops from the X-Men.

Scientologists believe that all science fiction, which they refer to as "Space Opera", actually happened and that it is the memories of our past lives, which stretch back a very long time because they believe the universe is quintillions of years old.

That doctrine was very convenient for L. Ron Hubbard because it enabled him to retroactively canonize everything he'd ever written as scripture!
I'm not going to be posting as much on OC.Net as before. I might stop in once in a while though. But I've come to realize that real life is more important.

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,656
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #223 on: January 22, 2015, 07:34:16 PM »
only if it maps reality. The Great Western Schism, all admit, happened. I'm not even sure if the Jedi in the UK (where it is now a recognized religion) believe Star Wars happened.
I dunno. There's a woman in Canada who believes she's spiritually married to Cyclops from the X-Men.

Scientologists believe that all science fiction, which they refer to as "Space Opera", actually happened and that it is the memories of our past lives, which stretch back a very long time because they believe the universe is quintillions of years old.

That doctrine was very convenient for L. Ron Hubbard because it enabled him to retroactively canonize everything he'd ever written as scripture!
The Q Continuum loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life.
Christ my God, set my heart on fire with love in You, that in its flame I may love You with all my heart, with all my mind, and with all my soul and with all my strength, and my neighbor as myself, so that by keeping Your commandments I may glorify You the Giver of every good and perfect gift. Amen.

Offline Wandile

  • Peter the Roman
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,684
  • Love God with All your heart and all your Soul
  • Faith: Holy Catholic Church - Latin
  • Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria
Re: The Remnant and Deposing a Pope
« Reply #224 on: January 22, 2015, 07:55:21 PM »
There's a difference between how the Catholic Church would pick up and carry on in practice and how logically consistent their dogmas are. If the Pope is capable of propagating heresy and getting removed by his inferiors (whether cleanly or not), then he really isn't the infallible guarantee of Church unity that Papal Supremacy/Infallibility was designed for. The buck either stops with him or it stops somewhere else (in this case, bishops realizing in the Spirit that the Pope has propagated heresy) thus rendering Papal claims unnecessary.

The very fact that this discussion is occurring almost seems like the Papacy has lost the game from the start.

Actually the dogma never claims that the pope can't ever teach heresy or be a heretic. He is only infallible within the specified limits of Vatican 1
« Last Edit: January 22, 2015, 07:56:10 PM by Wandile »
During the Iconoclastic Crisis, Stephen the Faster challenged the assembled Bishops at Hiereia:

"How can you call a council ecumenical when the bishop of Rome has not given his consent, and the canons forbid ecclesiastical affairs to be decided without the pope of Rome?"
-Stephen the Faster

Venerable Benedict Daswa, Blessed Isidore Bakanja and St Charles Lwanga, martyrs, pray for the Church today