Theologians accuse Pope Francis of heresy

chevyontheriver said:

I tend to really respect Jimmy Akin. On this one I have to read the whole letter first. Sorry Jimmy. No disrespect intended.

Something's gotta happen. Best would be for pope Francis to finally figure out the scandal he has caused, to clarify the odd things he has said, and to begin to govern like a faithful Catholic, and to promote people like archbishop Chaput rather than the sort of folks he has been promoting.

Click to expand...

OK. I finished reading the letter. It makes it's point. The allegations are not in themselves proofs, but look to be more like indictments. They are not trial judge and jury, but a sort of grand jury. They have referred the matter to the bishops.

Pope Francis is either what they say he is, or else, trying to put the best possible face on it, he is in way over his head and the cabal is using him for their nefarious purposes. I've been praying for him.

The stakes are high. For the whole Church and for me. Seven years ago I could not have imagined this outcome. I am still blessed to have been allowed to be a Catholic. Now I have to chart a course for myself that keeps me clear of heresy AND schism. Closing my eyes won't do.

Fr Peter Morello noted that ... "last night Raymond Arroyo's World Over played devil’s advocate citing prohibiting canons to any challenge to a Roman Pontiff. Fr Fessio SJ posed a simple question, What if a pope were to convert to Islam? And remain in office. Fr Fessio’s question begs an answer."

I listened to Jimmy Aiken's response the other day via podcast. I too generally hold Aiken in high regard. It seems to me that perhaps the biggest thing is the refusal to respond to the Dubia. There is no doubt that was properly filed and submitted.

The whole McCarrick thing is just plain uncomfortable.

I generally give people the benefit of the doubt but it boggles my mind that he didn't reply to the Dubia.

The only thing I can come up with even in the most charitable sense is that the Pope knows there'll be many people who take the leeway of ambiguity and pastoral action to go further than the Church allows.

And he does not want to give a firm answer to cut those people off. Perhaps he views it as merciful or staying out of pastoral decisions with some kind of view of collegiality. But none of those hold up.

The Dubia was proper, respectful, and asked the proper questions. Under Church law there's no reason it shouldn't have been answered.

And it would have avoided all of this.

The Church will not likely benefit from leadership from behind. I am happy to cut any pope a wide berth when it comes to off-the-cuff statements, but he has had plenty of time to provide a ton of clarity instead of letting things linger in the press and in our hearts.

Davidnic said:

And it would have avoided all of this.

Click to expand...

So this is a totally avoidable totally unneeded, totally unwarranted crisis that pope Francis had the power to avoid with one word per question of the dubia? Frustrating. What good does it serve?

Romans 13:3 said:

The whole McCarrick thing is just plain uncomfortable.

Click to expand...

And it's not just him.

For my sanity I'm going to have to go do something else for a while. The whole thing makes me ill.

Michie said:

Theologians, cardinals defend pope's theology in wake of heresy charge

Click to expand...

The signers will be drummed out of every position they hold. It's not a surprise that many will close ranks and protect the incumbent in power. That's just natural for any bureaucracy.