Renowned philosopher signs petition calling on bishops to investigate Pope for heresy

[Sabertooth]

A sitting Pope as far as I know cannot “trump” or change previous infallible teachings.

Wouldn't that constraint make subsequent Popes increasingly fallible, then...?

 

[mark kennedy]

I still can't figure out what thois infamous heresy actually is.

 

[chevyontheriver]

I followed the link and two links IN the link and still don’t know what the “heresies” are. They refer to sexual sins - is this regarding the Pope’s protection of child molesters and sexual abusers?

The 20 page letter of last week spells it out. Part of it does regard the pope's actions concerning sexual abusers, part his statement about Islam being ordained by God, part of it about his promotion of clerics in favor of LGBTQWERTY issues, but mostly about allowing second marriages for those already once validly married. That is precisely what the Dubia were about. The deeper significance is whether sexual morality matters or whether it's all OK now.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Lol I’ve been tracking but probably not as closely as you have.

You in particular are not a typical Protestant.

And yes, I have been tracking this, and even somewhat vocal about it for a few years now. Something has got to happen.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Reading the letter (see link at post 2), they address various statements of the Pope which are in tension with previous still standing infallible council or prior Popes teachings.

A sitting Pope as far as I know cannot “trump” or change previous infallible teachings.

I’ll defer to @chevyontheriver for this.

I would have to defer to cardinal Robert Bellarmine from the 16th century. His opinions were touched on at the end of last week's 20 page letter.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Post #2 has the actual letter.

Without reading the letter it will make little sense. But without seeing it in the context of the Dubia, the Vigano letters, the Filial Correction, and the Wienandy letter, it won't make much sense either. It's coming to a boil ever so slowly.

 

[lambofgod43985889]

pope isn't the agent of god in the earth, he can be ambiguous

 

[chevyontheriver]

pope isn't the agent of god in the earth, he can be ambiguous

Is the pope Argentinian?

 

[friend of]

The deeper significance is whether sexual morality matters or whether it's all OK now.

Why would it be OK now?!?!

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Pope Francis probably is going to ignore the letter and the charges. Why respond when only a minority of Catholics even know about this?

 

[FireDragon76]

If the Pope is infallible, then it seems like those acting in opposition to him would be in the wrong by default. Seems it would thus be impossible for a Pope to commit a heresy.

Why neither the Pope, nor the body of Bishops, can commit heresy

Most Catholics aren't Ultramontanists anymore, especially when "their guy" is not in charge, and the fever of the Counter-Reformation has died down and the RCC has finally entered modernity.

 

[Norbert L]

Most Catholics aren't Ultramontanists anymore, especially when "their guy" is not in charge, and the fever of the Counter-Reformation has died down and the RCC has finally entered modernity.

I have to wonder about what constitutes most Catholics because it's a world wide institution. It could just as likely look similar to what goes on in the United Nations.

Basically there could be a significant divide between the westernized churches who have entered modernity and the other RC churches in nations that don't share what this modernity looks likes.

 

[FireDragon76]

I have to wonder about what constitutes most Catholics because it's a world wide institution. It could just as likely look similar to what goes on in the United Nations.

Basically there could be a significant divide between the westernized churches who have entered modernity and the other RC churches in nations that don't share what this modernity looks likes.

The squabbles in Catholicism in some ways aren't unlike what happens in the Anglican Communion. Papal infallibility is a power now days on paper only, the Pope simply doesn't wield the kind of power he used to in practical terms between all the various factions of Catholics.

 

[Norbert L]

The squabbles in Catholicism in some ways aren't unlike what happens in the Anglican Communion. Papal infallibility is a power now days on paper only, the Pope simply doesn't wield the kind of power he used to in practical terms between all the various factions of Catholics.

He does have the power of ex cathedra. It's still there and likewise hasn't been used to much considering the historical length of time the RCC exists within. I imagine it's like having the launch codes for nuclear weapons. It's not some abstract idea that's been discarded. Whether it gets used is another question.

 

[FireDragon76]

He does have the power of ex cathedra. It's still there and likewise hasn't been used to much considering the historical length of time the RCC exists within. I imagine it's like having the launch codes for nuclear weapons. It's not some abstract idea that's been discarded. Whether it gets used is another question.

To speak ex cathedra, per Vatican II, he must be in agreement with the consensus of the bishops of the Catholic Church. It's not quite like nuclear launch codes. It's more like a rubber stamp.

The Pope is now something like a representative of a giant transnational religious bureaucracy. He's more like an executive of Apple or Google than a monarch who can just declare things by fiat.

 

[Norbert L]

To speak ex cathedra, per Vatican II, he must be in agreement with the consensus of the bishops of the Catholic Church. It's not quite like nuclear launch codes. It's more like a rubber stamp.

The Pope is now something like a representative of a giant transnational religious bureaucracy. He's more like an executive of Apple or Google than a monarch who can just declare things by fiat.

I would say that it's hard to predict what the consensus of the bishops looks like at the moment. What do Popes do when they loose a consensus? These things have a way of brewing over time.

Besides when it comes to CEO's, Prime Ministers or Presidents, they are like little modern day monarchs wielding real power to make decisions that affect larger populations of people. The names/titles have changed to become more palatable for our modern consumption. You say rubber stamp, I still see it as like having access to the nuclear codes.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Why would it be OK now?!?!

Why did it ever get to be OK for the Episcopalians and a chunk of Lutherans and a bunch of other groups? There are societal forces at work, so it is natural to be challenged by them and to confront them. The Catholic Church has done well in resisting and confronting them rather than to be swayed by them. But even if you stood firm yesterday you have to stand firm today. Is pope Francis doing that? Maybe. It does not always look like it.

 

[FireDragon76]

Why did it ever get to be OK for the Episcopalians and a chunk of Lutherans and a bunch of other groups? There are societal forces at work, so it is natural to be challenged by them and to confront them. The Catholic Church has done well in resisting and confronting them rather than to be swayed by them. But even if you stood firm yesterday you have to stand firm today. Is pope Francis doing that? Maybe. It does not always look like it.

Is standing firm the sina qua none of discipleship? That notion rests more on Greco-Roman philosophical assumptions about the Good than it does anything explicitly biblical.

 

[mark kennedy]

I'm still kind of puzzled what he did or said that was actual heresy. While I haven't really studied the letter in depth, it seems to me there are seven major points it makes:

1. A justified person has not the strength with God’s grace to carry out the objective demands of the divine law.
2. A Christian believer can have full knowledge of a divine law and voluntarily chose to break it in a serious matter, but not be in a state of mortal sin as the result of the action.
3. A person is able, while he obeys a divine prohibition, to sin against God by that very act of obedience.
4. Conscience can truly and rightly judge that sexual acts between persons who have contracted a civil marriage with each other, although one or both of them is sacramentally married to another person, can sometimes be morally right, or requested or even commanded by God.
5. It is false that the only sexual acts that are good of their kind and morally licit are acts between husband and wife.
6. Moral principles and moral truths contained in divine revelation and in the natural law do not include negative prohibitions that absolutely forbid particular kinds of actions, inasmuch as these are always gravely unlawful on account of their object.
7. God not only permits, but positively wills, the pluralism and diversity of religions, both Christian and non-Christian.

(Open Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church. Easter Week, 2019)

I may not really understand this but the first one seems to be saying God's grace is insufficient to obey divine law post conversion (aka justification). Ok, that could be dismissed as awkward wording. The second one, the believer could have full knowledge of a divine law, break it and not be guilty of mortal sin. The question becomes, how? I don't know.

I'll skip the others, this one really doesn't sound Roman Catholic to me. The seventh complaint that 'God not only permits, but positively wills, the pluralism and diversity of religions'. I don't know that many Protestants that would buy into that one, let alone Catholics.

I really don't know if this is heresy but I can see why some have a problem. Anyway, I was having trouble figuring out what kind of heresy he is being accused of here, so I listed the summary in case I'm not the only one.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[chevyontheriver]

Is standing firm the sina qua none of discipleship? That notion rests more on Greco-Roman philosophical assumptions about the Good than it does anything explicitly biblical.

Standing firm vs falling over. Standing firm in the faith of the apostles would be better. And that conclusion is not Greco-Roman unless Peter and Paul were Greco-Roman more than disciples of Jesus.