Can a Pope create or belong to a false religion?

  • Thread starter Thread starter StAugustine
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

StAugustine

Guest
Often times in the past we have heard various traditionalists insist the structures put in place by Vatican II constitute a false religion.

Is it possible for a true Pope to attempt to create a false religion founded on modernist principles (like inclusivity and sensistivity) and act as it’s head while simultaneously remaining head of the Catholic Church?

I ask simply because this is something thoughtful Catholics have to deal with, and I wonder if anybody can address it knowledgeably and theologically.

Please check your gut reaction at the door, thanks!
 
Last edited:
No, Popes aren’t allowed to start new, false religions to compete with Catholic Church.
 
Not allow- Capable. Without any intention of revoking their Catholic faith, but to create another faith alongside it. Spiritual polyamory. Strictly speaking it does not constitute defection of the Church, but a parallel organization.
 
There have been a handful of heretical popes in the past, but none of them began a new religion or were able to change the teachings of the Church. Jesus promised to protect His church, and that’s what He’s going to do.

It would be the height of irrationality for a pope to try to start an entirely new religion, so my answer is no. They are the head of hte Catholic Church. They’re not going to reach the station of pope and then suddenly decide they don’t want to be Catholic anymore…
 
Last edited:
Often times in the past we have heard various traditionalists insist the structures put in place by Vatican II constitute a false religion.
I haven’t heard this .

Who are the traditionalists who have said these things ?

Which are the structures put in place by the Second Council of the Vatican ?

What exactly is this false religion ?
 
No, he has no authority to do so. And if the Pope joined a false religion, he would simply cease to be a member of the Church and (and therefore Pope) like anyone else would. And the Church, which is indefectible, would not follow him in it, (especially the particular Church of Rome, which all the other churches must agree with) although, some individuals might .

Are there any particular points you are having trouble with where a claim has been made that a Pope has replaced a specific revealed truth with a specific false doctrine?
 
Last edited:
Yes, all of Unitatis Redintegratio vs. Mortalium Animos and Dignitatis Humanae vs. Quanta Cura and Sacrosanctum Concilium vs. Both Mediator Dei and Especially Auctorem Fidei.

Are you aware of these apparent contradictions?
 
No, actually it was the original SSPX position. This is what Abp. Lefebvre meant by saying Rome was in Schism, and why they call the post-Vatican II Church the Conciliar Church, because they distinguish between an artificial construct of man, Vatican II, and Eternal Rome, Catholic Rome.

So, just as Bellarmine says a Pope can fall into heresy and cease to be Pope, I wonder if a Pope, while being suspect of heresy, proximate to heresy and materially schismatic in despising the rites of the Church that came before him, could attempt to remake the Church according to his own conception.

Strictly speaking it is impossible which is why the resultant edifice would necessarily be separate from the Catholic Church.

It appears that that state of affairs was predicted by Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich-

"I had another vision of the great tribulation. It seems to me that a concession was demanded from the clergy which could not be granted. I saw many older priests, especially one, who wept bitterly. A few younger ones were also weeping. But others, and the lukewarm among them, readily did what was demanded. It was as if people were splitting into two camps.

"I saw that many pastors allowed themselves to be taken up with ideas that were dangerous to the Church. They were building a great, strange, and extravagant Church. Everyone was to be admitted in it in order to be united and have equal rights: Evangelicals, Catholics, sects of every description. Such was to be the new Church … But God had other designs. "

"I saw again the strange big church that was being built there in Rome. There was nothing holy in it. I saw this just as I saw a movement led by Ecclesiastics to which contributed angels, saints, and other Christians. But there in the strange big church all the work was being done mechanically according to set rules and formulae. Everything was being done according to human reason …I saw all sorts of people, things, doctrines, and opinions. There was something proud, presumptuous, and violent about it, and they seemed very successful. I di not see a single Angel nor a single saint helping in the work. But far away in the background, I saw the seat of the cruel people armed with spears, and I saw a laughing figure which said: " Do build it as solid as you can; we will pull it to the ground."


So If we accept this will happen, what do we really expect it to look like? Would it not look like exactly what we have, where we have essentially traditional minded Catholics and liberal Catholics?
 
So, just as Bellarmine says a Pope can fall into heresy and cease to be Pope, I wonder if a Pope, while being suspect of heresy, proximate to heresy and materially schismatic in despising the rites of the Church that came before him, could attempt to remake the Church according to his own conception.
Could he try? Sure. But God would strip him off his Papal office and might even strike him dead before he could try.
 
I do not deny the Pope is the Pope. But can he simultaneously head a liberal organization that is not the church but masquerading as such?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top