Discerning Question On Anti-Popes

[centurionguard]

I have a discerning question on ANTI-POPES. Why is it that since the Reformation Period the Catholic Church has never had an Anti-Pope ? All a sudden for the last 500 years the Holy Spirit has blessed the Catholic Church with infallibility. Any thoughts ?

Antipope
tt=47

A false claimant of the Holy See in opposition to a pontiff canonically elected. At various times in the history of the Church illegal pretenders to the Papal Chair have arisen, and frequently exercised pontifical functions in defiance of the true occupant. Hergenröther enumerates thirty in the following order:

* Hippolytus (?), III century
* Novatian, 251
* Felix II, 355-365
* Ursicinus, 366-367
* Eulalius, 418-419
* Laurentius, 498-501
* Constantine II, 767
* Philip, VIII century
* Anastasius, 855
* Leo VIII, 956-963
* Boniface VII, 974
* John XVI, X century
* Gregory, 1012
* Sylvester III, 1044
* Benedict X, 1058
* Honorius II, 1061-72
* Guibert or Clement III, 1080-1100
* Theodoric, 1100
* Aleric, 1102
* Maginulf, 1105
* Burdin (Gregory VIII), 1118 <!--yyyhref="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01447a.htm">Anacletus II, 1130-38
* Victor IV, 1159-64
* Pascal III, 1164-68
* Calixtus III, 1168-77
* Innocent III, 1178-80
* Nicholas V, 1328-30
* Robert of Geneva (Clement VII), 20 September, 1378 to 16 September, 1394
* Amadeus of Savoy (Felix V), November, 1439 to April, 1449

 

[bpbasilphx]

I think it’s more because election procedures were changed to make it less likely there would be rival claimants–Pius XIII and Michael I to the contrary notwithstanding!

Don’t forget, the first antipope is actually a saint.

 

[giuseppeTO]

I think it’s more because election procedures were changed to make it less likely there would be rival claimants–Pius XIII and Michael I to the contrary notwithstanding!

Don’t forget, the first antipope is actually a saint.

Ah, Pope Michael I … now there is a piece of work.

We will never know why the Holy Ghost allows for the existence of antipopes, especially during the Great Western Schism. It is proof that although the Holy Ghost provides his wisdom to Popes, Bishops, and Cardinals, they have to choice to either accept it or not.

 

[JaMc]

It probably has something to do with the Council of Trent, which was called in response to the Reformation, and did a lot of “housekeeping” when it came to a lot of the problems in the Church. I am not sure if the election/conclave procedures were changed at that point, but it’s probably no small coincidence that we haven’t had a “real” anti-pope (i.e., someone not in the league of Emperor Norton I) since then.

 

[diggerdomer]

I have a discerning question on ANTI-POPES. Why is it that since the Reformation Period the Catholic Church has never had an Anti-Pope ? All a sudden for the last 500 years the Holy Spirit has blessed the Catholic Church with infallibility. Any thoughts ?

The Church’s “infallibility” as you call it is not something that arose in the past 500 years.

While there may not be any “official” anti-Popes since the Reformation as there were in earlier periods, there are many “false Popes” e.g. one example geocities.com/Area51/Lair/7170/ibio1.htm