Bad Popes

  • Thread starter Thread starter regression
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

regression

Guest
Hi, a while back I heard someone (who is a devout Catholic) say there were some bad popes in the Church’s history and the reason for them might have been to punish the Church. I, as well as he, believe the Holy Spirit directs the Cardinals on who to vote on.

A few years ago I read A Concise History of the Catholic Church by Thomas Bokenkotter, but don’t recall mention of the bad popes. Perhaps I need to reread the book.

Just curious what people’s thoughts were on this matter.

Thanks.
 
Some of the popes were moral reprobates - despicable people, from what I understand. I’ve heard there were a total of 6 really bad popes, morality speaking. And I think the Catholic Church suffered from those years of poor leadership. Look at Israel and how she flourished under good kings.

But, these popes never taught anything contrary to Church Doctrine. Maybe they were too busy being sinful.
 
Yes,. there have been some bad popes – proof that the gates of hell haven’t prevailed yet!

Thank our God that the Holy Spirit got us back on track. A situation with a bad pope has happened in history when political situations and plain old sin caused their either to be error in who was selected as a pope, or when there was strife between nation states or countries about selecting a pope.
 
Hmmmmmmmm, bad popes – nothing for protestants to get ever too smug about though – there have been some bad “ministers” also. : )
 
Junebug999 said:
Hmmmmmmmm, bad popes – nothing for protestants to get ever too smug about though – there have been some bad “ministers” also. : )
Click to expand...
But it is something that the Church should mourn. A good Pope during those times may have been able to do wonderful things to lead people into the light.
 
Yes, I agree there have been few in number and none have taught errors. I guess I need to go study my Church history some more. For example, I understand Pope John XII (937-964) wasn’t exactly a very holy person, putting it nicely. Is the notion the Church was doing something wrong or bad before he became pope and the Holy Spirit made him pope to punish the church? Or is it wrong to think that?
 
regression said:
Hi, a while back I heard someone (who is a devout Catholic) say there were some bad popes in the Church’s history and the reason for them might have been to punish the Church. I, as well as he, believe the Holy Spirit directs the Cardinals on who to vote on.

A few years ago I read A Concise History of the Catholic Church by Thomas Bokenkotter, but don’t recall mention of the bad popes. Perhaps I need to reread the book.

Just curious what people’s thoughts were on this matter.

Thanks.
Click to expand...
Here’s an audio file of Patrick Madrid on this subject:

catholic.com/radio/event.php?calendar=1&category=&event=1084&date=1999-07-14
 
regression said:
Yes, I agree there have been few in number and none have taught errors. I guess I need to go study my Church history some more. For example, I understand Pope John XII (937-964) wasn’t exactly a very holy person, putting it nicely. Is the notion the Church was doing something wrong or bad before he became pope and the Holy Spirit made him pope to punish the church? Or is it wrong to think that?
Click to expand...
I don’t think it’s wrong to think that, but I don’t know if I agree with the assessment. Did God allow the Church to punish herself by “getting the poor pope that she deserved at the time”? Maybe that’s called “divine punishment”, maybe not.

In Ephesians, St. Paul promised that Christ would be devoted to the Church and loyal to her. Is punishing the Church a means of being loyal - you know, the “tough love” technique? Again, I don’t know.
 
6 bad Popes out of 266? = 2.3%

260 good Popes? = 97.7% not bad over 2000 years!

The Pope is just a man chosen by the Holy Spirit to lead the Church, not to be perfect. Only Jesus was perfect!

44 Presidents, 2 impeached by the House of Representatives (Clinton and Johnson) and 1 resigned (Nixon) =3 bad Presidents? or 6.8%.

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Peccatoribus!

Mark
 
Mark77 said:
6 bad Popes out of 266? = 2.3%

260 good Popes? = 97.7% not bad over 2000 years!
Click to expand...
14 Apostles - 1 of them bad.

93% good Apostles
7% bad Apostles.

Although I wouldn’t list each and every Pope that “wasn’t bad” as a good Pope, it is evident that Judas set the precedent for “tares among the wheat”.
 
Yeah 97% good popes compared to 93% good apostles. I’d say the Catholic Church’s good:bad leader ratio has improved.
 
The Renaissance ones were quite colorful, Borgia had a child with his daughter I believe. I remember reading that the Roman citizens basically protested till he left.
 
Catholics confidently say that although there have been bad or questionable Popes, none of them have ever taught error.

So here’s my question: on what basis would you EVER say that a Pope taught error? What sort of thing would a Pope have to do or say for you to not just revise your understanding of the faith, defer to the authority of Rome, and say that what used to be considered error is now unshakeable truth?

I ask because I know that certain things (like Mary’s ascension, established as infallible dogma by Pius XII in 1950 ) were at earlier stages considered heresies. What it suggests to a non-Catholic believer like myself is that the Catholic view is that it’s a logical and spiritual impossibility for the Pope to teach error in the first place.

Were he to do so, there’d be no mechanism for saying so, responding to it, or even acknowledging that it happened. It would simply become the job of believers to revise their understanding of truth and error to fall in line with the authority of Rome. No?
 
OK so what exactly does one have to do to be considered a ‘Bad Pope’?

I see some numbers being touted around here and am just curious how we know of only those, or for that matter know that those numbered, were bad.
 
CharlesTT said:
Catholics confidently say that although there have been bad or questionable Popes, none of them have ever taught error.

So here’s my question: on what basis would you EVER say that a Pope taught error? What sort of thing would a Pope have to do or say for you to not just revise your understanding of the faith, defer to the authority of Rome, and say that what used to be considered error is now unshakeable truth?
Click to expand...
Well, I’ll answer that when I see a Pope teach in error.
CharlesTT said:
I ask because I know that certain things (like Mary’s ascension, established as infallible dogma by Pius XII in 1950 ) were at earlier stages considered heresies. What it suggests to a non-Catholic believer like myself is that the Catholic view is that it’s a logical and spiritual impossibility for the Pope to teach error in the first place.
Click to expand...
You’ll need to show more proof of this “earlier stages considered this a heresy”. I highly doubt you’ll find much support for that statement.
 
vz71 said:
OK so what exactly does one have to do to be considered a ‘Bad Pope’?

I see some numbers being touted around here and am just curious how we know of only those, or for that matter know that those numbered, were bad.
Click to expand...
There were popes that had mistresses and openly had these relationships. There were other popes that may have robbed from the till, in one way or another (its been a while since I’ve studied them). But again, these popes were too busy being morally bankrupt to try and teach false doctrine.
 
Awake said:
What do you consider to be teaching in error?
Click to expand...
A matter of faith and morals, where the Pope teaches something “with the authority of the Pope”. Catholics call this an “Ex-Cathedra” statement. Meaning, the Pope is teaching with the authority given to him by Christ through the chair (cathedra) of Peter.

Someone mentioned that the Assumption is a novelty that was once viewed as a heresy by the Church. I’d like to see proof of that.

But, to further my point, if the Pope declared that Catholics need to start eating Peanuts every day, in order to prove our obedience to Christ and His Church, I’d be going to the store to stock up (of course, only after I invest in Planters, Inc.).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top