Conservative Roman Catholic theologians accuse pope of spreading heresy

  • Thread starter Thread starter thephilosopher6
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It may not be as formal, but it’s a step in the right direction.

And heresy? First off, even if people on CAF were rejecting the authority of the Pope, that’s not heresy that’s schism. Second, nobody ever said they were rejecting the authority of the Pope and I don’t believe anyone is.
 
EternalFlame said:
Have these people accused the Pope of heresy?
Click to expand...
The letter never accuses the Pope of formal heresy, but it acknowledges that he has been inciting heresy, regardless of what his intentions are.
EternalFlame said:
Is disagreeing with the Pope heresy?
Click to expand...
No, Catholics can hold different opinions. It’s only heresy when someone is denying a fundamental Church doctrine that is dogma like transubstantiation or the assumption.
 
Last edited:
Thank you!

I confess I am quite ignorant about this subject, so I’m going to read their letter to see what their concerns are!
 
Sorry for spamming the page, I assume everyone has gone to sleep!

From what I can tell, the letter concerns, mainly, the question of whether divorced or remarried Catholics are allowed to receive Communion. They believe the Pope has not adequately answered this question and thus leaves open the door to heresy.

My interpretation, which is open to correction, is that only those in a state of grave sin should not receive Communion. Which means the real question is, are divorced or remarried individuals in a state of grave sin?
 
And CAF continues its conversion from a nice Catholic forum to a fundamentalist Church-bashing rant fest.
 
I recognize some of the signatories. They are conservative Catholic scholars - good scholars. I think these days they are categorized more commonly as ‘traditionalists.’ I don’t doubt that they sincerely believe what they say and are motivated by conscience. Or would that be ‘discernment’, not sure.
 
Last edited:
Glad to see you back,DaddyGirl.
I ve always appreciated your perspective and didn’t t have the chance to let you know. Also how you present your point of view,similar or different,either way. I was missing it.
Welcome back!
 
Last edited:
The below line caught my attention:

“None of the signatories of the new letter is a cardinal, and the highest-ranking churchman listed is actually someone whose organization has no legal standing in the Catholic Church: Bishop Bernard Fellay, superior of the breakaway Society of St. Pius X. Several other signatories are well-known admirers of the old Latin Mass which Fellay’s followers celebrate.”

It seems to me like the people who reject Vatican II are the real heretics.

In any case, it seems like Pope Francis’ suggestion was meant to lure sinners into repentance. I don’t see what’s wrong with that.
 
Last edited:
Wrong. An SSPX bishop asked if he could sign it, AFTER he learned of its having been sent to the Pope. It was not “put together” by him.
 
You are wrong,Vadne He is among the Signatories in the .org Latin name site you yourself so much approve of.
His signature went with the letter according to that site.He belongs in the original group.
You were the one who opened a thread with the letter.
Do you even read what you yourself post?
This you are saying is misleading.
 
Last edited:
No, I am not wrong.

Bishop Fellay’s name was NOT on the letter sent to the pope in August. He asked to sign it later, as did others.
 
Check it out yourself.
It is in the site you posted.Go to the link and you will find this name among the sixty or something.
I went back and read what is posted in the site,and then clicked on the Signatoires.
If you didn’t t realize,perhaps you didn’t ,you will see it there,Vadne.
Please,check it out yourself. It is very clear,you’ ll see.
 
Last edited:
Let me repeat myself. Bishop Fellay did not sign the letter until after it was sent to the pope 11 August.
 
Vadne,the letter would have gone unsigned otherwise…
Bring down the bridge for a while…
I do not mean to upset,but it is visible there…
 
Let me repeat myself again. Bishop Fellay did not sign the letter until after it was delivered on 11 August. Your inability to grasp the fact that the letter has had signatures added to it after the original copy was sent to the pope is not my problem.
 
I see.,we cannot tell who the first 40 from the signatoires were because the 62 have been laid out in alphabetical order.
But he belongs in the original web site which decided to go public at least…The 62 are laid there originally,indistinguishable from the ones who signed it.
So how were you able to tell from that list that he was added after the letter was sent ?
It doesn t matter…not to me anyway.
 
Last edited:
pianistclare said:
Sorry, it is garbage. Shame on the people who disrespect Pope Francis.
Click to expand...
so how do you convey your disagreement with his statements if sending a letter is disrespectful?

not that francis is preaching another gospel but we are to prove all things and not just obey because he is pope.
1 Thessalonians 5:21
but prove all things, hold fast the right;
Click to expand...
Galatians 1:8
But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse!
Click to expand...
 
It is no disrespect to correct errors. And the pope does not have immunity from error. Infallibility does not mean he is always right.
 
I use phones to communicate. Whatsap. Skype. Email. …or in person
And you? How do you communicate with other people?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top