Who Was The Worst Pope??.......

[Tim Myers]

This post is in no way intended as a bash at the papal system of the Catholic Church, nor is it an attempt to mock or insult the R.C.C. itself......

I was simply reading some historical material regarding various popes who have reigned over the centuries who were, shall we say, "far from pious people".....at this website:

http://urbantitan.com/far-from-pious-people-who-have-been-pope-through-the-ages/

I do not know all that much about the character and actions of popes throughout history, but I thought I would submit this website's material as a post and see what any of you, especially those of you who have studied such things, had to say about it.........

"Catholic priests are increasingly being exposed and villified for being guilty of sexual misconduct but would anyone ever associate the figure of the Pope himself with such sinful acts? Maybe not when you look at today’s pontiff, but not all holders of the papacy were good guys. The truth is very far removed from the squeaky clean image we have of the highest office in Christendom, and some Popes were nothing more than murderers and rapists.

St. Damascus -366-384- was only elected after his men murdered 160 supporters of his main rival. Pope Sergius III (904-911) also became pope by murdering his rivals and then fathered several illegitimate children but he was a mild case compared to some that followed.

Steven VI 896 to 897 This [pope] had his predecessor, Pope Formosus, exhumed, then propped on a throne so it could be tried. The corpse was found guilty, stripped of its sacred vestments, deprived of three fingers of its right hand (the blessing fingers), clad in the garb of a layman, and quickly buried; it was then re-exhumed and thrown in the Tiber river.

JohnXII John XII – 955-964 became pope at 18 and was called a ‘Monster of Vice’, being into incest, rape and drunkenness. He turned the Vatican into a brothel, castrating rebellious cardinals and gouging out the eyes of protesting priests. It was the husband of one of his rape victims that killed him.

Benedict VIII (1012-1024) bribed his way into the job and Benedict IX (1033-1045) –youngest pope in history at only 12 years of age – was very soon committing murder and adultery on a regular basis.

Boniface VIII (1294-1303) got to power by murdering his predecessor and is said to have described adultery as ‘no more harmful than rubbing your hands together’.

Pope Urban VI – 1378 to 1389 Complained he did not hear enough screaming when his Cardinals were tortured, he launched a program of violence against those he thought to have been conspiring against him, imprisoning people at will and mistreating them brutally. Later historians have considered seriously that he might have been insane.

John XXIII (1495-1503) was probably the worst of them all – so bad that Catholics won’t acknowledge his existence. An ex-pirate from Naples, who fought his way into the church, having sex with at least 200 women whilst papal legate in Bologna, and running gambling and prostitution in the city at the same time. Deposed after five years, with 72 articles of sin being railed against him.

Clement VI During the 15th century – when the papacy was housed in Avignon in France for a while – Pope Clement VI opened a brothel to make extra money naming Jesus Christ as the owner.

Gay pope Paul II (1464-1471) was so camp that he spent nights frolicking with his young boyfriends in the papal palace, even dying of a heart attack while being sodomized by one of his favourites.

Leo X Leo X (1513-1521) was another homosexual pope who loved to throw 65 course banquets where naked young boys would burst out of great cakes. These were all men who knew how to have a great time with church money and holiness definitely wasn’t their thing.

Alexander VIThe late 1500’s saw the advent of Alexander VI – most notorious of all popes – who held orgies in the Vatican and insisted on deflowering virgin brides immediately after performing their wedding ceremonies. He even had a long-term incestuous relationship with his daughter Lucrezia."

 

[Yarddog]

Why do you assume that the source which you cite is factual when reporting about the past Popes?

 

[Tim Myers]

No, I assume that you will get to work researching the subject yourself so that you can prove it to be wrong...if that is what you believe.......

 

[Yarddog]

No, I'll let those who assume, assume. God will handle the rest.

 

[CryptoLutheran]

A number of the names listed, I believe, are anti-popes. John XXIII for example; the actual Pope John XXIII was the pope who called Vatican II.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Incariol]

No, I assume that you will get to work researching the subject yourself so that you can prove it to be wrong...if that is what you believe.......

No, that isn't how argumentation works. You have to actually prove your claims first.

 

[rockytopva]

Referring to my take on the seven churches...

http://www.christianforums.com/t7552716/



The Thyatirean was the fourth one and began when Charlemange was
crowned emperor of the Holy Roman empire in 800 AD.

And unto the angel of the church in Thyatira write; These things saith the Son of God, who hath his eyes like unto a flame of fire, and his feet are like fine brass; I know thy works, and charity, and service, and faith, and thy patience, and thy works; and the last to be more than the first. - Revelation 2:18, 19

1. First of all the Roman Catholic church was not all bad. There were monks, nuns, and priests who done good service to the kingdom of God.

Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols. And I gave her space to repent of her fornication; and she repented not. -Revelation 2:20, 21

2. Fornication -Our God is a jealous God! Therefore all prayers should be directed to the Father in Jesus name! There is no profit in praying to the saints or the Holy Mother! They will not be heard! They did not die on the cross or do anything worthy to atone for your sins!
3. The spirit of Jezebel is to control and to dominate, in which the Catholic church in its time was ruthless.

Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds. And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works. - Revelation 2:22, 23

4. Adulterous affairs I believe brought on the black death of 1348! In which case many Europeans blamed the Jews! The pope of the time of the plague was Clement IV, who was devoted to lavish living, and the treasury which he inherited made that lifestyle possible. Upon election as pope he exclaimed as he looked forward to a reign of regal self-indulgence, "My predecessors did not know how to be pope". He claimed to have "lived as a sinner among sinners", in his own words. Petrarch added that Clement VI occasionally rode around the city "...not in the midst of a marvelling crowd, but to insults and sneers ... he is the head of pompous processions, mounted on a white horse, feigning holiness. Before him goes his staff dressed in bright attire, making gestures to attract attention, trumpets sounding and banners fluttering in their hands." Petrarch speaks of the inordinate amount of time and effort Clement VI spent preparing for his parades, and "on his horse he was in constant fear lest the wind should disarrange his perfumed garb".

But unto you I say, and unto the rest in Thyatira, as many as have not this doctrine, and which have not known the depths of Satan, as they speak; I will put upon you none other burden. - Revelation 2:24

5. Referring to the works of Dante Alighieri

He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches. - Revelation 2:29

Sexually Active Popes

 

[BaconSammich]

Your mom.

 

[Martinius]

From reading several histories of Christianity and the Catholic Church, I think it is generally accepted that there were some periods where simony, nepotism, greed, murderous intrigues and sexual license were the norm within the papacy and the hierarchy of the church. Even the Catholic Encyclopedia says that the Church had to "uproot the evil of simony so prevalent during the Middle Ages". Several attempts to reform the Church were tried but usually failed (or were short-lived). The fact that at times there was more than one pope and some are called anti-popes speaks to the battles that were occurring between the factions, some wanting to keep their temporal wealth and powers, and those who were trying to re-align the church with Gospel values and teachings.

I cannot speak to all the claims made in the original post; some of it may be exaggerated or based on hearsay, not on documented facts. But there is enough historical documentation from within the church to show that many evils did occur.

The question of who was the "worst" pope is fruitless and seems to be just another not so subtle attack on the Catholic Church in the guise of asking a question...a "Have you stopped beating your wife?" kind of question. Let's admit that there have been some "bad apples" in the papacy, while also agreeing that there have been many good and saintly popes.

 

[Darwin FTW]

I'd say that whichever pope was in power during the destruction of all Pagan temples is by far the worst. One of these pagan temples that they finished off which had been attacked, and damaged before was the Great Library of Alexandria which contained information on the circumference of the earth and many things that weren't discovered until over a thousand years later. Because of Christianity causing this and the dark ages we lost well over 1000 years of scientific progress.

 

[CryptoLutheran]

I'd say that whichever pope was in power during the destruction of all Pagan temples is by far the worst. One of these pagan temples that they finished off which had been attacked, and damaged before was the Great Library of Alexandria which contained information on the circumference of the earth and many things that weren't discovered until over a thousand years later. Because of Christianity causing this and the dark ages we lost well over 1000 years of scientific progress.

A couple points:

1) There were several occasions that caused considerable harm to the Library, a fire accidentally destroyed (partially) the Library during Julius Caesar's conquest of Ptolemaic Egypt, Plutarch writes:

"In this war, to begin with, Caesar encountered the peril of being shut off from water, since the canals were dammed up by the enemy; in the second place, when the enemy tried to cut off his fleet, he was forced to repel the danger by using fire, and this spread from the dockyards and destroyed the great library;" - Plutarch, Life of Caesar 49.6

Secondly, during the revolt of Queen Zenobia of Egypt in the 3rd century CE, Aurelian and his army hit Egypt hard and this resulted in the destruction of much of the Library's great works,

"In it were libraries of inestimable value; and the concurrent testimony of ancient records affirm that 70,000 volumes, which had been collected by the anxious care of the Ptolemies, were burnt in the Alexandrian war when the city was sacked in the time of Caesar the Dictator." - Ammianus Marcellinus, Roman History, Book XXII, 12.13

Thus, prior to the Constantinian Shift in the 4th century much of the Library's contents had already been destroyed, though certainly not all.

Now, when Theodosius became emperor in 391, he outlawed Paganism, decreed the closure of all pagan temples and formally made Christianity (specifically Nicene Christianity) the official religion of the Roman Empire, as part of this decree that which was left of the Library did suffer, in part, because it was located on temple grounds,

"At the solicitation of Theophilus bishop of Alexandria the emperor issued an order at this time for the demolition of the heathen temples in that city; commanding also that it should be put in execution under the direction of Theophilus. Seizing this opportunity, Theophilus exerted himself to the utmost to expose the pagan mysteries to contempt. And to begin with, he caused the Mithreum to be cleaned out, and exhibited to public view the tokens of its bloody mysteries. Then he destroyed the Serapeum, and the bloody rights of the Mithreum he publicly caricatured; the Serapeum also he showed full of extravagant superstitions, and he had the phalli of Priapus carried through the midst of the forum. The pagans of Alexandria, and especially the professors of philosophy, were unable to repress their rage at this exposure, and exceeded in revengeful ferocity their outrages on a former occasion: for with one accord, at a preconcerted signal, they rushed impetuously upon the Christians, and murdered every one they could lay hands on. The Christians also made an attempt to resist the assailants, and so the mischief was the more augmented. This desperate affray was prolonged until satiety of bloodshed put an end to it. Then it was discovered that very few of the heathens had been killed, but a great number of Christians; while the number of wounded on each side was almost innumerable. Fear then possessed the pagans on account of what was done, as they considered the emperor’s displeasure. For having done what seemed good in their own eyes, and by their bloodshed having quenched their courage, some fled in one direction, some in another, and many quitting Alexandria, dispersed themselves in various cities. Among these were the two grammarians Helladius and Ammonius, whose pupil I was in my youth at Constantinople." - Socrates Scholasticus, Church History, Book V.16

However, here, the goal was not to destroy the wealth of information that might have been left in the Library, and in fact Paul Orosius writes in the 5th century,

"So perished that marvelous monument of the literary activity of our ancestors, who had gathered together so many great works of brilliant geniuses. In regard to this, however true it may be that in some of the temples there remain up to the present time book chests, which we ourselves have seen, and that, as we are told, these were emptied by our own men in our own day when these temples were plundered—this statement is true enough—yet it seems fairer to suppose that other collections had later been formed to rival the ancient love of literature, and not that there had once been another library which had books separate from the four hundred thousand volumes mentioned, and for that reason had escaped destruction" - Orosius, History Against the Pagans, Book VI, 15.32

Finally, in the 7th century, the Muslim armies may have been what finally did whatever might have been left of the Library in that day,

"Therefore having written a letter to Omar, he told him what John said, and a letter was brought to him from Omar, in which he (Omar) wrote, “About the books of which you have made mention: if there is contained in them what agrees (conveniat) with the book of God, in the book of God is what is sufficient, without them; but if (quodsi) in them there is what the book of God rejects, by no means is the material in them for us, order them to be taken away.” Therefore Amr ibn al-As ordered to disperse them among the baths of Alexandria, and to burn them for heating; so in the space of six months they were consumed. Listen to what was done, and marvel." - Bar Hebraeus (Here, for a bit more information on this and the tentativeness of this rendering of the Latin text).

2) None of this can be attributed to any Pope, in the singular case of the imperial decree of Theodosius, the Bishop of Rome had nothing whatsoever to do with the matter, the Alexandrian Pope, Theophilus, did however; but the See of Rome and the See of Alexandria are quite different things.

3) As far as the circumference of the earth goes, that information was preserved through the middle ages, learned Christians of late intiquity and the middle ages were quite aware that the earth was round and such information was preserved in works of classical literature which filtered from the late Classical world toward the Orient, specifically Arabia, Persia and India and which was carried back again into Western Europe. The notion that we lost a thousand years of knowledge is, to be frank, pure nonsense; a product of the modern mind without real basis in real historical fact. The Dark Ages are fundamentally so called because Roman civilization fell in the West (though it survived in the East into the early Renaissance period as Byzantium). This, however, did not kill scholarship, philosophical inquiry or technological advancement; it may have slowed down in Western Europe (though it continued quite well in Arabia, India and China) it did not perish.

The Dark Ages are, in a very real sense, a modern myth. The Middle Ages were most definitely a period of intense transition and turmoil for Western Europe, a vacuum was left by the effective fall of Rome in the West and was filled mostly by competing Germanic coalitions such as the Visigoths on the Iberian penensula, the Frankish kingdom(s), the Ostrogoths, Lombards, and so forth; but these were not dumb, barbaric savages. Many of them attempted in their own ways to maintain Rome's influence, codes of law and customs and the various factors of this political climate were the driving forces that formed what we know of as medieval Europe and the Western World was forever influenced and shaped by these people.

This was perhaps overly winded, but I wanted to deal with several points of common misconception in addition to pointing out the very simple point that the Bishop of Rome had absolutely and couldn't have had any influence or part to play in the destruction of the Great Library of Alexandria.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Tim Myers]

"The question of who was the "worst" pope is fruitless and seems to be just another not so subtle attack on the Catholic Church in the guise of asking a question....."

First of all, you are totally wrong about the intent and purpose of the OP......

Second, your persecution complex is betraying you......

 

[Martinius]

"The question of who was the "worst" pope is fruitless and seems to be just another not so subtle attack on the Catholic Church in the guise of asking a question....."

First of all, you are totally wrong about the intent and purpose of the OP......

Second, your persecution complex is betraying you......

That was my quote, and note that I said "seems to be". When someone dredges up dirty laundry from centuries ago and lists the worst of the worst, what should a reader think? It may have been much more productive to ask why these things happened, how could they have been allowed to occur, why were most of the attempts to stop them unsuccessful, did these have an influence on the schisms and divisions of the Reformation, what has changed since then, etc. Or if you had asked, "did these really all occur?".

I was certainly not defending the Catholic Church and the evils that occurred at any time within the Papacy and the hierarchy. My point was simply that asking about the "worst" or "best" of anything is totally subjective, a matter of opinion. Although I think most would agree that within the list of Popes you gave there are some bottom dwellers.

I am not sure what you are referring to by saying I have a "persecution complex". Perhaps you have me mixed up with another poster?

 

[aniello]

I've heard that Lucretia's (Borgia) cooking was legendary.

 

[No Swansong]

While I believe this could be a very beneficial discussion. In my experience over the years at CF I haven't seen one that didn't descend into a circular, name calling, flame fest. I will stick around a bit to see if this one can be handled better.

 

[Martinius]

While I believe this could be a very beneficial discussion. In my experience over the years at CF I haven't seen one that didn't descend into a circular, name calling, flame fest. I will stick around a bit to see if this one can be handled better.

I think it already "flamed" out.

 

[Monseigneur_Gentilhomme]

*eyes rolling* Somebody's been reading too much Jack Chick.

 

[Standing Up]

This post is in no way intended as a bash at the papal system of the Catholic Church, nor is it an attempt to mock or insult the R.C.C. itself......

I was simply reading some historical material regarding various popes who have reigned over the centuries who were, shall we say, "far from pious people"

You might check out Pope Callistus for doctrine and morals (or lack thereof).

Here's a start.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Callixtus_I

 

[garysibio]

John XXIII (1495-1503) was probably the worst of them all – so bad that Catholics won’t acknowledge his existence. An ex-pirate from Naples, who fought his way into the church, having sex with at least 200 women whilst papal legate in Bologna, and running gambling and prostitution in the city at the same time. Deposed after five years, with 72 articles of sin being railed against him.

This John XXIII, as opposed to the real one who reigned in the mid-20th century, was not really a pope. He was not properly given the position and is considered to be an antipope.

 

[St. Paul]

Why do you assume that the source which you cite is factual when reporting about the past Popes?

The catholic church has been involved in sexual deviance for a long time. Just look at the situation now. The sitting pope who is a joke and embarrasment to christianity actually was knee deep in the sexual molestation cover up. I don't know about you, but if my church supported sex with children, I'd change churches pretty fast.