Did the Pope commit heresy?

[The Liturgist]

AFAIK, that is impossible.

Pope Honorius I was anathematized post mortem by the Sixth Ecumenical Synod in Constantinople for teaching Monothelitism.

There have also been “anti-Popes” but in this case there isn’t a clear schism, but if Pope Francis isn’t careful, he could cause one with this kind of ill-considered remark, which he has made before.

 

[The Liturgist]

His comments in Singapore:

All religions are paths to reach God. They are — to make a comparison — like different languages, different dialects, to get there. But God is God for all If you start to fight saying 'my religion is more important than yours, mine is true and yours isn't', where will this lead us? There is only one God, and each of us has a language to arrive at God. Some are Sikh, Muslim, Hindu, Christians; they are different ways to God.​

​

Which is in direct contradiction of the Lord's own words in John 14:6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.

If no - why?

If yes - what should be done? Should he be censured or removed?

I cannot pronounce Pope Francis a heretic, because I am not a bishop, and he is not a member of my church, although obviously as the ecumenical relationship of Catholicism and Orthodoxy indicates, there are many Orthodox bishops who do regard Pope Francis as non-Orthodox.

Within the context of Roman Catholicism however I think Pope Francis has absolutely contradicted the historic doctrine of that church, in a manner not protected even by the First Vatican Council and its doctrine of Papal infallibility, which applies only to statements made ex cathedra, specifically, it is on record as having been used twice, to dogmatically define the doctrines of the immaculate conception (which we Orthodox disagree with for technical reasons) and the Assumption (which we Orthodox agree with).

I do think Pope Francis should have resigned years ago, following the controversy he caused at the Amazonian synod, and I have been critical of him for some time, for example, the unsolicited blow dealt by Traditiones Custodes to the pious and young laity in the Traditional Latin Mass community and the repeal by Pope Francis of the previous acts of Pope St. John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI concerning that, and also to a still greater extent the error concerning homosexuality that was propagated by Fiducia Supplicans, which Pope Francis did walk back, in part, but it was still a cause of great confusion and consternation.

 

[Fervent]

I think the statement, as worded, is clearly heretical...though whether or not it was intended in that way, or simply a well-meaning but poorly thought out statement of ecumenical consideration is not mine to judge. And the real theological question comes down to the importance we put on intellectual assent to a set of facts, compared to considering more mysterious paths to salvation. For example, a similar ecumenical sentiment that is far more in line with preserving the essential truth of Christianity is Kallistos Wares statement "I know where the church is, I don't know where it isn't." Which allows for some mysterious membership to the church beyond our immediate perception, without violating the exclusivity of Christian truth. So while the pope needs to be challenged for his statement, and it is a bad look for the Catholic Church for its leader to be expressing what appears to be a denial of the exclusivity of Christ, my stance is that such criticism should be offered in the hopes of leading to clarification that brings it into orthodoxy rather than trying to condemn the pope.

 

[The Liturgist]

my stance is that such criticism should be offered in the hopes of leading to clarification that brings it into orthodoxy rather than trying to condemn the pope.

I would agree with this statement in terms of seeking to avoid condemning the Pope, however, that being said, the fact that this is yet the latest of numerous instances where Pope Francis has done something like this, coming on the heels of the extreme confusion and righteous indignation engendered by Fiducia Supplicans last year, he should be urged to resign for the good of the church.

 

[Fervent]

I would agree with this statement in terms of seeking to avoid condemning the Pope, however, that being said, the fact that this is yet the latest of numerous instances where Pope Francis has done something like this, coming on the heels of the extreme confusion and righteous indignation engendered by Fiducia Supplicans last year, he should be urged to resign for the good of the church.

I would agree, though as I am not a Catholic it's not really my business who the pope is. And I don't think the mission of the Church depends on the PR of its officers no matter what level they attain, Christ will accomplish His purposes through His Church.