Were any of the Popes during the Renaissance righteous men?

[MartyrForJesus]

It makes me depressed reading books on the Papacy during the renaissance era. Some of them don’t seem like very holy men, in comparison to Popes such as St. Pius X and Blessed John Paul II.

For example, I just learned in a documentary about Pope Leo X that he ran out of money, owing money to almost every bank in Rome. He then sold indulgences on a mass scale to pay the debts and pay for St. Peters Basilica. The documentary also says that he was not the first Pope to sell indulgences. Sometimes I am cautious of documentaries though, because they often make mistakes concerning theology. The one I am watching now claims that the ‘papal indulgences’ forgave sins, which obviously they did not.

It also says things like: “the sale of salvation was a goldmine for the Pope”.

 

[MartyrForJesus]

Ok, stuff this documentary, I sense anti catholicism. It just claimed that the bull of excommunication against Luther condemned him to Hell.

Here is a link if you want to see what I mean:

youtube.com/watch?v=BmNbecu1V6I

Check out the scene at 41:00

 

[TrueLight]

I am reading a history of the Catholic Church by a Catholic and I am amazed at all the turmoil and nonsense that went on throughout the millennia. It was a bit discouraging at first and then I thought about the gates of He’ll and how they haven’t prevailed.

Thanks be to God.

 

[Young_Thinker]

Of course, there were righteous pontiffs during the Renaissance; take St. Pius V (r. 1566-1572) for example.

 

[Rdunbar123]

I think that once the popes lost the Papal states and secular power the holiness returned, as a result they actually have much greater influence in the world.

 

[Mungling]

In my first bout of world history I, too, was heavily discouraged by the actions of the Church during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. In a way, though, it`s only logical. The Church wielded immense power during the era and as a result was subject to immense corruption. Men and women would often enter the clergy for power and prestige rather than out of a desire to serve God. No one has ever claimed that the Church Militant would ever be immune to temptation, merely that temptation and sin would not bring about the end of the Church.

 

[Still_Hoping]

I think that once the popes lost the Papal states and secular power the holiness returned, as a result they actually have much greater influence in the world.

Good point. I use to think that Religion and State should be one, but I see that cannot work in a multi-ethnic countries. People must choose their faith religion out of love and obedience, not because the state says so.

 

[Still_Hoping]

In my first bout of world history I, too, was heavily discouraged by the actions of the Church during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. In a way, though, it`s only logical. The Church wielded immense power during the era and as a result was subject to immense corruption. Men and women would often enter the clergy for power and prestige rather than out of a desire to serve God.** No one has ever claimed that the Church Militant would ever be immune to temptation, merely that temptation and sin would not bring about the end of the Church.**

No church or institution is immune to corruption. But the true church will remain and be a constant force of good.

 

[LegoGE1947]

In my first bout of world history I, too, was heavily discouraged by the actions of the Church during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. In a way, though, it`s only logical. The Church wielded immense power during the era and as a result was subject to immense corruption. Men and women would often enter the clergy for power and prestige rather than out of a desire to serve God. No one has ever claimed that the Church Militant would ever be immune to temptation, merely that temptation and sin would not bring about the end of the Church.

What amazes me is that even during the Renaissance, the most corrupt Popes were kept from preaching heresy. In the Fr Barron series “Catholicism” it was said of one Pope that he was about to publish a " bad" translation of the Bible but before he was able to publish it he passed away!

 

[Soldier_Of_God]

At times, it can be a little shocking to see what has happened within the Church and its leadership over a 2,000 year history, especially in light of the Renaissance. Anti-Catholic distortions and presenter bias aside, some of what transpired isn’t indicative of Catholic teaching, and ultimately, the teachings of Jesus. However, one must be careful not to look through lens of our current worldview position and judge the past actions of others too harshly. There is a context to why certain things transpire and the Renaissance was quite a turbulent time for the Church.

In my view, it could be argued that in a couple hundred years, people will look upon back upon us 20th/21st century folks as maybe being the most vile, despicable and morally bankrupt people ever to exist. We’ve developed terrible weapons of mass destruction, polluted the world to an unprecedented level, damaged the Ozone layer, killed hundreds of millions people in wars and persecutions, abort children by the millions and allow hundreds of millions of people to go hungry despite having unparalleled wealth and means to assist when compared to our progenitors.

 

[Boulder257]

What amazes me is that even during the Renaissance, the most corrupt Popes were kept from preaching heresy. In the Fr Barron series “Catholicism” it was said of one Pope that he was about to publish a " bad" translation of the Bible but before he was able to publish it he passed away!

That is what gets me most about these stories. While some will use them as proofs against the Church, it’s the exact opposite that is true. It’s these exact examples that prove the infallability argument, the importance of the Chair of Peter, and the fact that even the gates of Hell cannot prevail against Holy Mother Church!

 

[ATeutonicKnight]

What amazes me is that even during the Renaissance, the most corrupt Popes were kept from preaching heresy. In the Fr Barron series “Catholicism” it was said of one Pope that he was about to publish a " bad" translation of the Bible but before he was able to publish it he passed away!

You’re thinking about Pope John Paul I, I believe.

 

[RPRPsych]

You’re thinking about Pope John Paul I, I believe.

Though Pope John Paul I did die tragically early, I don’t recall his proposing a Bible translation. Certainly, a lot of “liberal” Bible translations did come out before and after his death (the NAB, Christian Community Bible and - to a lesser extent - the New Jerusalem Bible), but I don’t think he had much to do with them directly.

I think the previous poster may have been alluding to Pope Sixtus V’s revision of the Vulgate, which reportedly contained several errors (though they were more errors in language than a deliberately “bad” translation, from what I can gather.) He died before it was officially released.

newadvent.org/cathen/14033a.htm

 

[LegoGE1947]

That is what gets me most about these stories. While some will use them as proofs against the Church, it’s the exact opposite that is true. It’s these exact examples that prove the infallability argument, the importance of the Chair of Peter, and the fact that even the gates of Hell cannot prevail against Holy Mother Church!

What Farther Barron was trying to bring out in his Catholicism series is exactly what you are saying in this post.

 

[LegoGE1947]

Though Pope John Paul I did die tragically early, I don’t recall his proposing a Bible translation. Certainly, a lot of “liberal” Bible translations did come out before and after his death (the NAB, Christian Community Bible and - to a lesser extent - the New Jerusalem Bible), but I don’t think he had much to do with them directly.

I think the previous poster may have been alluding to Pope Sixtus V’s revision of the Vulgate, which reportedly contained several errors (though they were more errors in language than a deliberately “bad” translation, from what I can gather.) He died before it was officially released.

newadvent.org/cathen/14033a.htm

The pope Father Barron was speaking of was Sixtus V and his revision of the Vulgate that contained several errors and who died before this revision could be published.

 

[LegoGE1947]

You’re thinking about Pope John Paul I, I believe.

I was thinking of Sixtus V who tried to publish a revision of the Vulgate that contained several errors but died before it could be released.

 

[LegoGE1947]

I think that once the popes lost the Papal states and secular power the holiness returned, as a result they actually have much greater influence in the world.

Quite a paradox here that when the popes lost their secular powers and returned to holiness they have since had greater influence in the world.