F
Fox
Guest
If the Holy Spirit is with the conclave guiding the cardinals during Papal election, why is it we’ve had evil, bad, and self absorbed Popes that damaged the Church?
- Status
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
For all their personal sinfulness, NONE of those Popes has ever truly damaged the Church itself. Really. Their sins do not make the Church sinful. And none of those ‘bad’ Popes ever, ever, taught anything other than authentic Christian teaching in regard to faith and morals. . .
Remember, we are guaranteed through the Holy Spirit the CHARISM of INFALLIBILITY, NOT IMPECCABILITY.
T
tbcrawford
Guest
Fox I agree with you. Why is it we have had these bad popes? The Holy Spirit has been guiding the conclave as you say, so how or why did all this happen?
Pope Stephen VI (896–897), who had his predecessor Pope Formosus exhumed, tried, de-fingered, briefly reburied, and thrown in the Tiber.
Pope John XII (955–964), who gave land to a mistress, murdered several people, and was killed by a man who caught him in bed with his wife.
Pope Benedict IX (1032–1044, 1045, 1047–1048), who “sold” the Papacy
Pope Boniface VIII (1294–1303), who is lampooned in Dante’s Divine Comedy
Pope Urban VI (1378–1389), who complained that he did not hear enough screaming when Cardinals who had conspired against him were tortured.
Pope Alexander VI (1492–1503), a Borgia, who was guilty of nepotism and whose unattended corpse swelled until it could barely fit in a coffin.
Pope Leo X (1513–1521), a spendthrift member of the Medici family who once spent 1/7 of his predecessors’ reserves on a single ceremony
Pope Clement VII (1523–1534), also a Medici, whose power-politicking with France, Spain, and Germany got Rome sacked.
Pope Stephen VI (896–897), who had his predecessor Pope Formosus exhumed, tried, de-fingered, briefly reburied, and thrown in the Tiber.
Pope John XII (955–964), who gave land to a mistress, murdered several people, and was killed by a man who caught him in bed with his wife.
Pope Benedict IX (1032–1044, 1045, 1047–1048), who “sold” the Papacy
Pope Boniface VIII (1294–1303), who is lampooned in Dante’s Divine Comedy
Pope Urban VI (1378–1389), who complained that he did not hear enough screaming when Cardinals who had conspired against him were tortured.
Pope Alexander VI (1492–1503), a Borgia, who was guilty of nepotism and whose unattended corpse swelled until it could barely fit in a coffin.
Pope Leo X (1513–1521), a spendthrift member of the Medici family who once spent 1/7 of his predecessors’ reserves on a single ceremony
Pope Clement VII (1523–1534), also a Medici, whose power-politicking with France, Spain, and Germany got Rome sacked.
M
MarcoPolo
Guest
Tantum Ergo is right, infallibility is different than impeccability. And sometimes a father determines it’s best to let a child learn the hard way. So too is it with God and the Church.
C
copperblade
Guest
Because the Holy Spirit doesn’t necessarily guide the Pope when he chooses his breakfast. So although it might be wrong for him to eat bacon, his decision to eat bacon doesn’t mean that you should.
Or to put it another way, it’s more or less the Holy Spirit guiding the Church through certain aspects of the papacy.
Or to put it another way, it’s more or less the Holy Spirit guiding the Church through certain aspects of the papacy.
T
The_Scott
Guest
You also have to remember, especially during the Middle Ages (when ALL of the above listed popes lived), the position of Pope was not only a position of spiritual power over all Christians, but a temporal power over the Papal States. And the Papal States were quite rich, too. Compare the actions of these popes to the Dukes of Florence, Milan, Venice, or any other Italian city-state, and you’ll find the popes’ actions are not uncommon.
Also, the Borgias were the “first crime family,” as the Showtime series puts it. Alexander VI had preset goals, and he wanted to use the papacy to accomplish these goals. If he was the Duke of Florence, he’d still want to accomplish these goals.
The Church had nothing to do with any of these sins – the men in charge of her simply wanted to use their power to accomplish their own personal goals.
Also, context is everything. The Middle Ages were different from the present day, and customs have obviously changed.
Does this help?
I
InternetWoman
Guest
Just remember that even though the Holy Spirit is with a conclave He does not FORCE them to vote for a particular person. All the cardinals voting had/have free will. They will have to stand before their Lord and Savior and account for the use of that free will, especially if they put an unworthy man into Peter’s chair.
As noted, none of the bad Pope changed Church dogma or doctrine. The Holy Spirit does that much if a bad Pope gets into office - he makes sure they don’t touch the deposit of faith.
So when a bad one gets into office the Church has to endure.
As noted, none of the bad Pope changed Church dogma or doctrine. The Holy Spirit does that much if a bad Pope gets into office - he makes sure they don’t touch the deposit of faith.
So when a bad one gets into office the Church has to endure.
D
DavidFilmer
Guest
In a strange sort of way, the bad Popes are an asset to the Church.
It would be easy to believe in Papal infallibility if every Pope was saintly. If that were the case, then, SURE no Pope has taught anything evil - they have all been holy and godly men.
But we have had bad Popes. Openly sinful men. Did any one of them EVEN ONCE try to define or alter a doctrine to justify his evil behavior? Or any other evil behavior? Even once?
No, it never happened.
The existence of bad Popes lends additional credibility to the doctrine of Infallibility. The Doctrine of the Church is safe and protected whether in the hands of saints or sinners.
It would be easy to believe in Papal infallibility if every Pope was saintly. If that were the case, then, SURE no Pope has taught anything evil - they have all been holy and godly men.
But we have had bad Popes. Openly sinful men. Did any one of them EVEN ONCE try to define or alter a doctrine to justify his evil behavior? Or any other evil behavior? Even once?
No, it never happened.
The existence of bad Popes lends additional credibility to the doctrine of Infallibility. The Doctrine of the Church is safe and protected whether in the hands of saints or sinners.
D
DaveBj
Guest
I am in complete agreements with statements 2, 3, and 4, but I have to disagree with the first statement. The bad popes have damaged the Church by providing an opportunity for its enemies to point fingers. Paul could have been talking about them when he quoted Ezekiel and said, “Because of you, the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles.” (Rom. 2:24).
F
Fox
Guest
Didn’t see it in that light, thanks for the clear up guys.
M
Mark_David
Guest
A better question would be: How did the Church survive these “bad” Popes? Whereas other institutions would have surely collapsed? The answer should be obvious to the faithful. Furthermore, considering the total number of Popes we’ve had, the number of bad ones is amazingly low. Christ has not and will not abandon His Church, no matter how many sins are committed by individuals. We should also praise God that we’re in a golden era of great Popes!
T
themonk86
Guest
Another way to see this issue also is to say that in the same way that even though the Holy Spirit guides the conclave and protects the papacy, we can have bad popes, also is the same way a baptized catholic can commit grievous/mortal sins, even though he/she has been filled with the Holy Spirit and became child of God. Like others have said, every person has free will and can choose to follow God or not. So we should thank God that all these bad popes were too busy sinning then to teach. Remember this is Christ Church and He promised to protect it.
F
Fox
Guest
Amen.
C
cargau
Guest
This response is right on. We have to remember that thses me were part of a culture that formed who they were as human beings. And, it wasn’t just the popes but the priests and bishops, as well. What is most impressive is the fact that the Church was able to survive the simony, nepotism and debauchery. That is where the Holy Spirit comes in.
I see a lot of parallels between the Church in the middle ages and the sex abuse scandal in recent times. These men are fallible human beings who are molded by the culture of the time. I am sure the Holy Spirit is busy working through the sinfulness and evil to make the Church stronger than ever.
T
The_Scott
Guest
There have been 265 popes since the Church’s beginning (including Benedict XVI). There have been about ten really bad popes - or at least the ones who failed their moral obligation.
10/265 = 3 %
Let’s round up to 4 %, for the couple of popes that some would include in the bottom ten.
Now, Judas Iscariot betrayed Christ by denying Him and turning Him in to the authorities – something that the popes, no matter how bad, have never done since. The popes, even if they were despicable people, never denied Christ like Judas did.
Judas was the only one who betrayed Christ, of the Twelve Apostles (let’s not count Peter, since Peter later reconciled).
1/12 = 8%
So, 4 % of the popes have betrayed their holy obligation. And 8% of the Apostles betrayed Christ.
Seems to me the Church has a better record than the original Twelve Apostles…
10/265 = 3 %
Let’s round up to 4 %, for the couple of popes that some would include in the bottom ten.
Now, Judas Iscariot betrayed Christ by denying Him and turning Him in to the authorities – something that the popes, no matter how bad, have never done since. The popes, even if they were despicable people, never denied Christ like Judas did.
Judas was the only one who betrayed Christ, of the Twelve Apostles (let’s not count Peter, since Peter later reconciled).
1/12 = 8%
So, 4 % of the popes have betrayed their holy obligation. And 8% of the Apostles betrayed Christ.
Seems to me the Church has a better record than the original Twelve Apostles…
- Status