The difference between St. John Bosco and you is that he spoke chiefly out of true love and concern for lost souls rather than largely from anger at their “hard hearts” and intoletance of their “ridiculous views”.
Many Jews had more hatred than those they denounced. Read the Gospels.
So the whole point is to convince others of the truth, correct?
I cannot and will not buy into the the thought that the only ones qualified to denounce the pope are the Bishops and Cardinals. I think the man could and should submit to secular authority if he were found to break any law.
What does that mean?
you forgot to bold the next few words, “IF he were found to break any law”
Lutheranteach,
A few counter points:
And, of course, civil justice authorities of any country or countries where His Holiness is alleged to have participated in any criminal conspiracy re child abuse.
Brother JR,To answer the original question, the Catholic traditon is to condemn and denounce actions and non-values, not people. When you denounce or condemn anyone by name, you are violating a moral principle.
As to whether or not the pope can or should be put on triabl by a secular government, there is an ancient regulation here that applies to all Catholics. No pope is ever subject to any temporal authority. Therefore, any Catholic who sustaines this point of view is reducing the papacy and the person to holds the office to a subject of another temporal leader. Only the subject of a temporal authority can be judged by a temporal authority. Popes are not subjects of temporal authorities. They are Vicars of Jesus Christ, which places them at the head of the Church on earth and above all temporal authorities.
The only way that a Catholic can morally approve of putting a pope on trial would be for the person who holds the office to abdicate. Then he would no longer be pope. He returns to the ranks of the College of Bishops. As long as he is pope, his superior to the College of Bishops.
Another way of understanding it is this, the pope is the Vicar of Jesus Christ. Jesus is not subject to any temporal authority unless he chooses to be. As he said to Pilate, “You have authority over me, because it has been given to you from above.” The same applies to Peter. Only authority that has been assigned from above can judge Peter, since Peter is the visible head of the Mystical Body. You can’t place the head on trial without placing the body. To place a pope on trial is to place the Mystical Body on trial, since he is the temporal head of that body, with Christ as it’s true head, of course. But he is the temporal head by Divine design, not human design.
Can a pope be made to retire or resign? No, never. If he is canonically elected, the bishops cannot ask for his resignation, even if he were the worse criminal in the world. He remains the Vicar of Jesus Christ and is answerable to no one in the Church. He is not even accountable to Church law, because he is the Law-Giver. He is only accountable for his soul, as is every other sinner. Like every other sinner, he is not accountable to the world for his sins, only to God and the Church, through his confessor, not outside of confession.
Let’s just assume that all of the allegations against Pope Benedict were true, he remains the Vicar of Jesus Christ. His authority is indisputed. His teachings on faith and morals continue to be infallible, because he cannot teach error. He continues to be the Law Giver and he continues to have the power and the Divine Right to demand obedience of Catholics.
A pope’s sins do nothing to diminish his office and his power. Ironically, he can even excommunicate another person for the same sin that he may have committed and the excommuncation is valid and binding, until lifted by another pope.
To close, you cannot denounce or condemn people, only behaviors and non-values. We cannot submit the Vicar of Christ to temporal authorities, because as Vicar of Christ he is no one’s subject except Christ’s. He cannot be deposed by anyone, because there is no authority that can judge him. The only way out, would be for a council to declare that he is not a valid pope. Then he returns to the ranks of the bishops and has to submit to all the authority that any bishop must submit to.
I hope this helps.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
Hitchens and Dawkins could use a lecture on this.Well-said, JReducation
No one may judge the First See - this is found in the 1917 Code of Canon Law, #1556. I do not know what the 1983 Code says about this, but a jurisdictional judgment cannot be laid against he who has no temporal superiors - the pope. He is not merely the head of some church council or board of trustees, but the Vicar of Christ.
We may judge and condemn actions, even bad actions of a pope (and there have been plenty of those in the Church’s history), but no one may render a legal judgment against the Vicar of Jesus Christ Himself. To do so is not just an offense against the Church and the One who established it, but it is to jeopardize the entire Church and make it inferior to secular authorities. If those who run the Church are made inferior to secular authorities, the Faith will become inferior to secularism.
He’s using the devil’s own trick on you. “If you are X, and Y has occurred, then you must do Z” Do not fall for it. Sin is individual, and all husbands, wives, plumbers, firefighters, soldiers, teachers, youth counselors, attorneys, engineers and priests will either be absolved of their sin or answer to Christ Himself for those sins. Since he is an atheist, ask upon what grounds he even objects to child abuse. It’s certainly not condemned in the atheist’s holy book - what ever that is. He is using divine law to condemn sin, a concept to which he probably does not hold. Hypocrite!
Again, it’s a cheap trick. He assumes that the Pope had knowledge and made a conscious decision to allow it to continue. Ask for evidence of his wild accusation, if not proof. He has none, other than gossip.
No catch 22 at all! The Pope does not approve either. Should he then condemn himself because of what someone else did? I think you might be paying too much attention to the so-called “mainstream media”, like atheists do. I advise you not to participate in the media outside of Catholic radio and EWTN. You will be happier, know more of your faith, and be much better informed.
The Papacy has been under attack as long as it has existed. The evil one is behind each and every attack, at some level. Before you condemn someone, shouldn’t they be guilty of something? Should the president be condemned when a US soldier under his command commits a crime?
This can be a dangerous thought pattern to entertain. You pose a hypothetical question. I dislike them, because they do not represent reality.
Why would you want to do that? . .
Basically, it comes from a faith community of lay persons, who are subject to every other lay person on earth under secular law. A Lutheran opinion, as honestly and forthrightly as it is put forth, simply does not apply to an Apostolic organization. They have no Apostolic successors in their organization, and may have difficulty relating to an organization which does.
First of all, what’s the point in befriending someone destined for eternal torture in the presence of the Lamb with fire and brimstone, unless you hope to bring them into communion with the mystical body of Christ, our church?
Well said! Especially the last part
Better to pray for him than argue to the point of no benefit.The code of 1983 makes the same statement. It’s just another number. I can’t recall that number. But it says that there is not recourse past the pope. If there is no recourse past the pope, then there is no authority above the pope. If there were a recourse past him, it would imply that there is another rung of authority above him.Well-said, JReducation
No one may judge the First See - this is found in the 1917 Code of Canon Law, #1556. I do not know what the 1983 Code says about this, but a jurisdictional judgment cannot be laid against he who has no temporal superiors - the pope. He is not merely the head of some church council or board of trustees, but the Vicar of Christ.
We may judge and condemn actions, even bad actions of a pope (and there have been plenty of those in the Church’s history), but no one may render a legal judgment against the Vicar of Jesus Christ Himself. To do so is not just an offense against the Church and the One who established it, but it is to jeopardize the entire Church and make it inferior to secular authorities. If those who run the Church are made inferior to secular authorities, the Faith will become inferior to secularism.