Anyone Know Their Pope History Well?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JamalChristophr
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JamalChristophr

Guest
I am curious if someone can identify a few Popes in the last 500 years that, when their pontificate was looked back upon or during their day, were seen to be quite problematic or could be easily criticized for the way they did things during their time spent as the Bishop of Rome?

I have not worded this question very eloquently or articulately, but even so, I think many of you can get a feel for my meaning. I’m not a historian at all, but this question interests me.

I get the sense that the Popes of approximately the last 200 years have been thought of in a fairly positive light when looked back upon, as well as during their reign.

I suppose some of you will say that every Pope can be easily be criticized if looked at from a certain vantage point. In that case, I may have to rephrase my question. To me, it seems like, from the little I don know, that the Popes since John XXII have been Pope who almost everyone loved.
 
Last edited:
Pius XII certainly got some flack for the Reichsconcordat…
 
There have been a number of legitimately downright terrible popes. Some have had many children, and some of those children even became popes as if it was a monarchy.

Here’s the thing; not one of those pope, despite their vileness, ever taught heresy. They may have lived terrible personal lives, but they themselves still spoke directly in favor of Church teaching. I can’t remember the names, I’ll have to look that up when I get a chance.
 
Can persons also give a slight synopsis of a particular issue, such as the one you mentioned, if a specific example was given.

I don’t know a thing about the Reichsconcordat, but I guess I can easily look it up.
 
I’m curious about the last 500 years specifically, however.
 
How was that a bad thing? I mean, can you tell something about it.
 
Last edited:
I think this was within the last 500 years – though maybe I’m off a little.
 
What about a Pope seeming to shake up traditional church teaching? Anyone?

I’m guessing this has not happened for a very long time, but perhaps I’m wrong.

(I think taking a course on the history of the Popes in the last 1000 years would be interesting. Doing the full 2000 years in one course is asking too much, probably, just my opinion.)
 
JamalChristophr said:
I’m curious about the last 500 years specifically, however.
Click to expand...
At the very beginning of your 500-year period Leo X (1513-1521) was a controversial pope, accused of nepotism and selling off church property to finance the extravagant, aristocratic lifetstyle at the papal court.
 
This is what worries me.

I love the Popes of the 20th and 21st century.

Pope Francis, Benedict, and John Paul II have generally been extraordinary lights in the world that have attracted many to the Catholic Church.

But I fear that this global popularity of the Papacy will cause just the opposite when a bad Pope comes along. We know that there can be bad popes. The promise is in the office, not the person. But the world will likely be turned off from Christ if, say, a Pope ends up being the worst of public sinners.
 
I doubt that moral qualities shall be called into question any time soon, but an intentional doctrinal ambiguity is for me quite problematic, and I’m not sure there has been such a precedent in the last 500 years, but I don’t wish to digress into that in this thread. Looking to see if something similar has happened and other issues that were very problematic is what I was hoping to take a look at.
 
Last edited:
Catholics have always loved the Pope, even the ones held in less than high esteem by historians today.

There are two factors which modern popes have it over their predecessors in the 19th Century and before.

One, there really isn’t historical perspective yet.

But , also, more importantly, Pius IX was the last pope to actually be a head of state with an army and obligations to all of his subjects not just Catholics. The dissolution of the Papal States means the pope was almost exclusively concerned with religious matters, which doesn’t really rile historians that much. What does a secular historian care about regulations on Holy Communion or Marian doctrines?
 
my 2cents is researchless, but the Pope who suppressed the Jesuits
at the bequest of European royalty gets a -9 from me. A movie was made
about what happened in Argentina ? after that
 
Pope Leo X was much criticized while Pope, but his Papal Bull excommunicating Luther reads ‘Arise, O Lord, for a wild boar is loose in the vineyard of the Church’, so it almost sounds prophetic to me.
 
You can subscribe to Popes in a Year and learn all you want about them.
 
JamalChristophr said:
I am curious if someone can identify a few Popes in the last 500 years that, when their pontificate was looked back upon or during their day, were seen to be quite problematic or could be easily criticized for the way they did things during their time spent as the Bishop of Rome?
Click to expand...
It is very difficult to compare recent Popes with past. The Papacy has changed considerably in the last 150 years. The Bishop of Rome pre-1870 was the secular ruler of the Papal states as well as the senior bishop of the Catholic Church. Modern Popes have accepted their loss of political power but have gained religious authority. Today, thanks to modern communication, the Pope is an influential spiritual leader as never before.
 
PaulfromIowa said:
the Pope is an influential spiritual leader as never before.
Click to expand...
Yeah, you’re right. There is not a single person like him on the Earth that carries such moral authority. Where would the world be without the Catholic Church and the Vicar of Rome. Seven continents seem to pay close attention to what he says on moral matters of our time, believer or atheist, far left to far right and all in between.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top