Can the pope be the anti-Christ on the end of times?

  • Thread starter Thread starter fabio_rocha
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R_C said:
I must admit you are right. My terminology misses a very important and very subtle difference.

I would however think that God would not allow either Antichrist or any such figure to ascend to the Chair of Peter 🤷 It’s all very speculative, though - at least from my side.

Thanks again for pointing this out.
Click to expand...
I totally agree
 
Mijo12 said:
May I reccomend a book called “Defiance: the Antichrists of History and their Doomed War against the Church” by Fr Joseph Esper. It discusses the many enemies againts the Church and it does discuss the end of times in accord with Catholic teaching.

Very unlikely for a pope to be an antiChrist. If you are refering to the supposed prediction made by St Malachy it is inaccurate. The “prophecy” was written 200 years after his death and the writing is very vague to know what it was talking about at all.
Click to expand...
May I also recommand a book; It’s" Trial, Tribulation and Triumph" by Desmond A.Birch. It will give you a good knowledge about the antichrist.
 
A pope can be a heretic.
A heretic can be a pope.

What cannot happen is the pope absolutely positively CANNOT NOW OR EVER hold a false doctrine binding on the whole Church. The heretic might change his mind. The Holy Spirit might make him fall over dead. He might word his statement in a way that can be interpreted in an orthodox fashion. It’s a mystery how the details work themselves out.

If you are reading something contrary to that, you are reading something that is fundementally wrong.
 
I personally believe that THE anti-Christ MUST be a Pope. Who else could it be? A cheesemonger? A cashier at McDonalds? A college professor? C’mon - Jesus was born in a stable. The road to God is paved in irony. Who better than a Pope to be the (ironic) anti-Christ?

He will not know that he is the anti-Christ (and he would be appalled at the suggestion). He will not teach heresy. He will not violate any of the promises that Jesus made to Peter.

But, suppose a Pope were to be very “ecumenical.” Realizing that the Sacrifice of the Mass was an impediment to relations between Catholics and protestants, he could suspend the Sacrifice of the Mass for one year (except, perhaps, during the season of Easter). Catholic parishes were to hold “worship services” similar to protestant services. Such an action is well within the authority of the Roman Pontiff, and cannot be accused of heresy.

And, when ecumenical relationships seem to improve, this “one year” deadline could be extended indefinitely.

Imagine the Catholic Church without the Mass. This is possible, and it would not be heretical. It could be ordered with good intention, but it would destroy the Church. Any Pope could do this. Tomorrow.
 
DavidFilmer said:
I personally believe that THE anti-Christ MUST be a Pope. Who else could it be? A cheesemonger? A cashier at McDonalds? A college professor? C’mon - Jesus was born in a stable. The road to God is paved in irony. Who better than a Pope to be the (ironic) anti-Christ?

He will not know that he is the anti-Christ (and he would be appalled at the suggestion). He will not teach heresy. He will not violate any of the promises that Jesus made to Peter.

But, suppose a Pope were to be very “ecumenical.” Realizing that the Sacrifice of the Mass was an impediment to relations between Catholics and protestants, he could suspend the Sacrifice of the Mass for one year (except, perhaps, during the season of Easter). Catholic parishes were to hold “worship services” similar to protestant services. Such an action is well within the authority of the Roman Pontiff, and cannot be accused of heresy.

And, when ecumenical relationships seem to improve, this “one year” deadline could be extended indefinitely.

Imagine the Catholic Church without the Mass. This is possible, and it would not be heretical. It could be ordered with good intention, but it would destroy the Church. Any Pope could do this. Tomorrow.
Click to expand...
How would suspending the Mass impact the infallible teaching on the Sunday obligation? Wouldn’t suspending the Mass contradict the teaching and constitute heresy?

I’m not saying it would but rather trying to understand what suspending the Mass would mean and why.
 
How can the Jewish people find fulfillment of their long-awaited political Messiah in a Catholic Pope?
 
thistle said:
How would suspending the Mass impact the infallible teaching on the Sunday obligation? Wouldn’t suspending the Mass contradict the teaching and constitute heresy?
Click to expand...
The Sunday obligation is not an infallible teaching - it is one of the five precepts (ie, rules) of the Church. The precepts have been around for a very long time, but they could be changed at any time. They are all rules, not doctrine (and are certainly not infallible). The rules are binding upon all Catholics, but as a matter of obedience, not as a matter of doctrine.
 
DavidFilmer said:
The Sunday obligation is not an infallible teaching - it is one of the five precepts (ie, rules) of the Church. The precepts have been around for a very long time, but they could be changed at any time. They are all rules, not doctrine (and are certainly not infallible). The rules are binding upon all Catholics, but as a matter of obedience, not as a matter of doctrine.
Click to expand...
Okay. My mistake. I thought it was doctrine and not discipline.

Does that also apply to the obligation to receive Communion once a year during the Easter period?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top