Canon law and the removal of a Pope

  • Thread starter Thread starter theCardinalbird
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Rau said:
If you were not aware, I can only suggest you read a little more widely. The discipline itself is not doctrine, but the reasoning that proposes the discipline traverses doctrine and not all are comfortable that said reasoning conforms to doctrine
Click to expand...
Because God forbid bishops being uncomfortable, right? Especially in the service of their flock.

The assertion that there is some sort of doctrinal conflict is weak at best. Maybe, just maybe there is - so lets not move in the service of souls trying to get back to the Church because I think (not really sure) that there might be a conflict with something that I’m not really even sure is doctrine.

Some of the Pharisees were sure that Jesus had broken one of the most important commandments when He had healed someone on the Sabbath.
 
1Lord1Faith said:
The assertion that there is some sort of doctrinal conflict is weak at best. Maybe, just maybe there is - so lets not move in the service of souls trying to get back to the Church because I think (not really sure) that there might be a conflict with something that I’m not really even sure is doctrine.
Click to expand...
Why would moving in the service of souls be in question? The only matter in question is the path on which we move. Should we prefer one founded on the doctrines simultaneously proclaimed by the Church? Should we prefer one on which bishops are united as consistent with doctrine? The former is in doubt on account of the absence of the latter.

Please note I am taking no position on the goodness or otherwise of AL, I only object to arm-waving assertions that there is no issue.
 
Last edited:
Rau said:
Why would moving in the service of souls be in question?
Click to expand...
Because some bishops are not assenting to the Holy Father’s intent with AL.
Rau said:
The only matter in question is the path on which we move. Should we prefer one founded on the doctrines simultaneously proclaimed by the Church? Should we prefer one on which bishops are united as consistent with doctrine? The former is in doubt on account of the absence of the latter.
Click to expand...
Which is, presumably, the reason Francis threw it back to the bishops.
Rau said:
Please note I am taking no position on the goodness or otherwise of AL, I only object to arm-waving assertions that there is no issue.
Click to expand...
Good enough.
 
Rau said:
What do you understand the practical import of that to be?
Click to expand...
Many on this forum seem to be ultramontanists because they refuse to engage in constructive criticism of the Pope. Maybe they should remember that Pope Francis telephoned some Italian journalists to personally thank them for their criticisms. In other words, Pope Francis realises that laymen sometimes have the right to criticise the Pope.
 
Vatican I declared:
  1. For the Holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles.
Indeed, their apostolic teaching was embraced by all the venerable fathers and reverenced and followed by all the holy orthodox doctors, for they knew very well that this See of St. Peter always remains unblemished by any error, in accordance with the divine promise of our Lord and Savior to the prince of his disciples: I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren [60].
  1. This gift of truth and never-failing faith was therefore divinely conferred on Peter and his successors in this See so that they might discharge their exalted office for the salvation of all, and so that the whole flock of Christ might be kept away by them from the poisonous food of error and be nourished with the sustenance of heavenly doctrine. Thus the tendency to schism is removed and the whole Church is preserved in unity, and, resting on its foundation, can stand firm against the gates of hell.
Click to expand...
http://www.ewtn.com/library/councils/V1.htm

Jesus will not let a Pope teach heresy. It never has happened, and never will happen.

The Pope is supreme and is judged by Jesus Christ alone.

Canon lawyers, theologians, and doctors of the church have no authority to declare when a Pope may be removed. The Pope has the supreme power to write and change canon law as he pleases, and the rest of us simply need to reverently obey him in all things.
 
Last edited:
Context is everything.
Some Catholics, be they Cardinals or inexpert laymen, have little understanding of a humble apprpriate forum or context.

They only seem to understand grandstands but not private letters 🤷‍♂️.
 
Last edited:
Blue_Horizon said:
God save us if Bellarmine is consideted the last word, or even mainstream, on this matter. He also erroneously believed in geocentrism.

The simple fact is there is no solid “traditional” teaching on this matter as its never had to be faced in any serious way.
Click to expand...
The good doctor was a faithful Catholic, he believed in geocentrism because the church had taught that for 1600+ years. So he was/is in good company.
 
Casilda said:
40.png
Blue_Horizon:
God save us if Bellarmine is consideted the last word, or even mainstream, on this matter. He also erroneously believed in geocentrism.

The simple fact is there is no solid “traditional” teaching on this matter as its never had to be faced in any serious way.
Click to expand...
The good doctor was a faithful Catholic, he believed in geocentrism because the church had taught that for 1600+ years. So he was/is in good company.
Click to expand...
Where did I deny this?

For myself I am more interested in being a good human being and a follower of God. That may at times conflict with being a good Catholic.
 
Last edited:
Blue_Horizon said:
For myself I am more interested in being a good human being and a follower of God. That may at times conflict with being a good Catholic.
Click to expand...
Have you ever recognized such a situation or do you merely anticipate it could arise? Juicy details please!
 
Blue_Horizon said:
They only seem to understand grandstands but not private letters 🤷‍♂️.
Click to expand...
I never read private letters unless they’re addressed to me personally. Important issues such as those surrounding Amoris Laetitia should be debated publicly and answered publicly.

You rightly note that I am an inexpert layman; since this is the case, I find it best to follow what Church has always taught rather than follow a private letter that is not addressed to me.
 
Not for you Rau.
From previous experience it just encourages your non participative, voyeuristic tendancies 🙀
 
Last edited:
Saxum said:
40.png
Blue_Horizon:
They only seem to understand grandstands but not private letters 🤷‍♂️.
Click to expand...
Important issues such as those surrounding Amoris Laetitia should be debated publicly and answered publicly.
Click to expand...
Do you know the Latin for “to make a bridge”.
Its interesting that this Latin expression, introduced into English, means quite the opposite.
Your contribution is a good example.
 
Last edited:
poche said:
That the Pope is judged by no one is a point of Canon Law.
Click to expand...
Right, and noting the section of the Canon Law in which it appears, I think we can safely say it is not intended to “hold the tongues” of CAFers.
 
I don’t think it would be a bad idea for him to resign when he’s had enough. I like Benedict wasn’t bad to give Francis a chance. It would be awesome if they’d serve as Pope for 10 years and give someone else a chance. Not saying that is how its set up but it would be a great way to have more popes over time.

The Pope is Peter’s adopted descendants in the Church.

I have seen the Pope when he came to DC. I have disagreed with this pope a lot when he’s gotten into politics, but I think he’s a good pope in terms of bringing Catholics to Christ and that is what ultimately matters.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top