How does one excommunicate a Pope

[cam100]

A Pope can certainly be excommunicated and deposed by a Synod/Council if ever there’s a need to do so.

I’d like to see the documentation you use to substantiate this claim. In reality, a pope cannot be deposed, even by a general council. A number of theologians have thought, however, that a pope who becomes a manifest heretic would cease to be pope. Theoretically, a council could then depose him because he would no longer be a pope. However, even the leading theologian of this school, St. Robert Bellarmine, seems to have believed that this situation would never be permitted by Our Lord.

 

[jkatpc]

Maybe God would call him home to discuss the matter in person.

 

[catharina]

I assume that a new Pope must either do it or an Ecumenical Council be called. Can this be done while the heretic Pope is still alive.

holden, as always, I have to wonder WHY you pursue questions that undermine your faith? There is so much that can help to strengthen your faith. Do you recognize that?

 

[Irish_Saints]

The closest I could find was the case with Pope Urban VI. He was what we in theological circles like to refer to as a grade A nut-burger!

Due to some of his shenanigans, not least of which was an intractable and hair-trigger temper, he was placed under an interdict. Short of an excommunication, it’s the biggest slap on the piddies you can get, especially as a clergy member.

 

[ProVobis]

many also has some meaning before all, and separate from all…

sorry…guess the early morning braincells (all 3 of them) were focused on the pro multis thing…

Well, I didn’t want to bring it up but…

 

[ProVobis]

No, you can of course seek information from lots of sources that oppose Church teaching, but perhaps if you want to know what the Church actually says about a specific matter it would be more beneficial to get your info from those sources that accept the authority of the Church. For those that refuse to accept the Church’s authority, likewise refuse to accept the authority of Christ Himself, who gave His authority to the Church. God bless.

What you say doesn’t always work in practice. My point was, though, that the same teaching that tells you what the liturgy should be (Vatican II) is not necessarily what we know today as the Novus Ordo. Unless you subscribe to different teachings.

 

[I_Believe]

Not to stray off topic, but the fish eaters site is far and away not the best place to be getting information on the Church. By enlarge they reject Vatican II and the Novus Ordo Mass. God bless.

Have you read what some in the Hierarchy have said about the NO, including our Holy Father ? I’m not going to post the quotes, because I’ve recently decided that it isn’t in the best interest of the Church to do so. Knowing that there are those in todays Curia who share the concerns of the traditionalists is enough for me.

But my point is, to reject FE site as a whole, because of the general thoughts towards the No, is also to reject the opinions of some in Rome. That said, to whom do we turn ?

The “wolves” our Holy Father mentioned at his inaugural Mass ?

 

[cothrige]

The Pope can not be a heretic… never has been, never will be.

I think this is wrong, and goes beyond anything the Church teaches regarding the Pope. Yes, he is protected from teaching error under very limited and rare circumstances, but that doesn’t mean that he actually cannot be a heretic. One simply does not follow from the other.

Pope Honorius was not defining a dogma of the faith… and thus was not speaking infallibly.

Pope Honorius was not speaking as head of the Church … and thus was not speaking infallibly.

Pope Honorius was not speaking with a clear intention to bind the entire Church… and thus was not speaking infallibly.

I will refrain from questioning whether Pope Honorius was guilty of heresy or just failing to do his job, but none of what you say above really addresses that. Just because the Pope has not taught heresy “infallibly” (I use quotes since it would not be infallible if he did it) does not mean that he is not a heretic, or that he cannot be one. We must resist confusing papal infallibility with all the many other issues which are completely unrelated to it.

Can a Pope be a heretic? Well, there is nothing I have ever heard of in the teaching of the Church saying he cannot be. This means that he can be, and I think given the long line of men in the position there have likely been more than a few. I won’t presume to judge or try to figure out who, and since it would seem that so far the Church has avoided any huge public scandals from false teaching I don’t think it has been a real issue.

Under current law, as I understand it, any bishop who becomes a heretic certainly separates himself from grace, but not his office. At least not until he is oficially sentenced. That means that if your bishop were to start teaching that the Eucharist is only a symbol he would not automatically cease to be your bishop. Only the Pope, or perhaps a council, could depose him from his office. Of course, with a Pope it is harder since no office has the authority to sentence or depose him, which would seem to mean that it would not be possible to remove him once elected, regardless of his errors. But, I am no expert in canon law, and may be wrong in that understanding.

Patrick

 

[I_Believe]

holden, as always, I have to wonder WHY you pursue questions that undermine your faith? There is so much that can help to strengthen your faith. Do you recognize that?

What is wrong with someone asking a question such as Holden’s ? Is an understanding of this topic taboo ?

Usually, on topics such as this, someone will help us understand the truth of the matter. We are long past the Dark Ages.

 

[I_Believe]

Maybe God would call him home to discuss the matter in person.

I noticed you are in Iraq. Thank you for your service of your country. I’ll remember you in my prayers.

 

[catharina]

What is wrong with someone asking a question such as Holden’s ? Is an understanding of this topic taboo ?

Usually, on topics such as this, someone will help us understand the truth of the matter. We are long past the Dark Ages.

Hello to you too.

The Dark Ages? What a leap.

holden is a convert. Many posters have asked him why he feels a need to question things that need never even enter his mind. He’s been in ongoing discussions with the orthodox as to whether ‘they are right or Rome is right.’ I and many other posters truly loathe it when a young convert sets out to become an apologist while he is still learning the faith. He “preaches” things that he later must contradict. It’s too sad. I see from his profile today that he changed his religious status from Catholic to Catholic inquirer. At other times, he’s stated he’s ‘Catholic but maybe really orthodox,’ to paraphrase his words.

He’s only been online at this site since JAN 2008. I feel like I’m quite free to say his chosen direction makes me feel very sorry for him. It seems to me a pity to witness this and not speak up about it. However since I wasn’t addressing you, why does it concern you? The post that brought your objection (Dark Ages?) clearly indicates I’ve had some history with him.

 

[I_Believe]

Hello to you too.

The Dark Ages? What a leap.

holden is a convert. Many posters have asked him why he feels a need to question things that need never even enter his mind. He’s been in ongoing discussions with the orthodox as to whether ‘they are right or Rome is right.’ I and many other posters truly loathe it when a young convert sets out to become an apologist while he is still learning the faith. He “preaches” things that he later must contradict. It’s too sad. I see from his profile today that he changed his religious status from Catholic to Catholic inquirer. At other times, he’s stated he’s ‘Catholic but maybe really orthodox,’ to paraphrase his words.

He’s only been online at this site since JAN 2008. I feel like I’m quite free to say his chosen direction makes me feel very sorry for him. It seems to me a pity to witness this and not speak up about it. However since I wasn’t addressing you, why does it concern you? The post that brought your objection (Dark Ages?) clearly indicates I’ve had some history with him.

Well, I’d judge by the name of this website, Catholic Answers, that questions about catholicism are welcome. Even the ones about the topics that are not comfortable to discuss.

And you have indeed replied to me in the past when I was replying to someone else, so your double standard doesn’t cut it.

I’ll let Holden address your judgement of the state of his soul himself.

Btw, welcome to the internet, where everything we post can be viewed by the whole world. If one posts on a meesage board, one cannot dictate who can reply.

Harsh ? Yes, I know the feeling

 

[EasterJoy]

Concerning the thread’s title: unless that person be the Pope himself, in effect excommunicating himself by publicly rejecting the Church and voluntarily abdicating his place in it, I think that we would agree that “one” does not excommunicate a pope. There is not another single individual with that authority. The action of a synod would be required.

 

[cothrige]

Concerning the thread’s title: unless that person be the Pope himself, in effect excommunicating himself by publicly rejecting the Church and voluntarily abdicating his place in it, I think that we would agree that “one” does not excommunicate a pope. There is not another single individual with that authority. The action of a synod would be required.

But, does any synod have any real authority to do this either? I don’t think we can really say that it does.

Patrick

 

[catharina]

Well, I’d judge by the name of this website, Catholic Answers, that questions about catholicism are welcome. Even the ones about the topics that are not comfortable to discuss.

And you have indeed replied to me in the past when I was replying to someone else, so your double standard doesn’t cut it.

I’ll let Holden address your judgement of the state of his soul himself.

Btw, welcome to the internet, where everything we post can be viewed by the whole world. If one posts on a meesage board, one cannot dictate who can reply.

Harsh ? Yes, I know the feeling

Whatever. Really … whatever.

Can’t say that I remember you but I doubt if we’ve had exchanges very often. You can’t seem to grasp what I’m saying and that’s fine with me. Too often, converts and returnees seem to get themselves into hot water by their adamance and insistence. It would seem to me to be far more profitable to pray more, read more, sevre more and not seek out logs in others’ eyes, the usual. Again your wording: you’ll “let Holden” respond to me.

???

I say (“as usual”) that I have concerns for holden. (He knows that.)

You say you’ll ‘allow him’ to speak for himself.

Quite a big difference, huh?

Why does my comment to HOLDEN matter to YOU?
Never mind … . Whatever.

 

[holdencaulfield]

Not to stray off topic, but the fish eaters site is far and away not the best place to be getting information on the Church. By enlarge they reject Vatican II and the Novus Ordo Mass. God bless.

On the contrary the best place to is the Fish Eaters forum. They aren’t filled with this Novus Ordo rubbish. I have yet to meet one person there who rejects Vatican II and the Novus Ordo.

 

[holdencaulfield]

I believe that a Pope could be excommunicated by another Pope afterwards, or a Council could excommunicate them. Pope Honorius was excommunicated guys. I like most people here have no understanding of the First Vatican Council.

 

[holdencaulfield]

Hello to you too.

The Dark Ages? What a leap.

holden is a convert. Many posters have asked him why he feels a need to question things that need never even enter his mind. He’s been in ongoing discussions with the orthodox as to whether ‘they are right or Rome is right.’ I and many other posters truly loathe it when a young convert sets out to become an apologist while he is still learning the faith. He “preaches” things that he later must contradict. It’s too sad. I see from his profile today that he changed his religious status from Catholic to Catholic inquirer. At other times, he’s stated he’s ‘Catholic but maybe really orthodox,’ to paraphrase his words.

He’s only been online at this site since JAN 2008. I feel like I’m quite free to say his chosen direction makes me feel very sorry for him. It seems to me a pity to witness this and not speak up about it. However since I wasn’t addressing you, why does it concern you? The post that brought your objection (Dark Ages?) clearly indicates I’ve had some history with him.

Actually when I was considering Orthodoxy I had my profile set to Catholic/Orthodox Inquirer. I recently by the grace of the Holy Ghost understood that Orthodoxy is wrong, so I changed my profile to Catholic Inquirer to show that I am not yet Confirmed into the Church, yet I am planning on being as soon as possible.

 

[holdencaulfield]

Concerning the thread’s title: unless that person be the Pope himself, in effect excommunicating himself by publicly rejecting the Church and voluntarily abdicating his place in it, I think that we would agree that “one” does not excommunicate a pope. There is not another single individual with that authority. The action of a synod would be required.

Yes, good point, however by “one” I meant the Church really. I would guess that a later Pope could excommunicate the previous Pope. Or a synod or Council would work as well.

 

[holdencaulfield]

But, does any synod have any real authority to do this either? I don’t think we can really say that it does.

Patrick

Perhaps, an Ecumenical Council would however.