Jump to content
An Old School Catholic Message Board

Pope and heresy


Extra ecclesiam nulla salus

Recommended Posts

To answer your question... I don't know of any...

But I found this interesting... Maybe Cam will jump on this with his Canon law experience... from catholic.com, whole article [url="http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2001/0103fea1.asp"]here[/url]

[quote]In any case, canon law makes it clear that such a pope will not lose his power to govern the Church validly, not even by public expressions of heretical doctrine. In the 1917 Code, we find that apostates and heretics incur latae sententiae (ipso facto) excommunication (canon 2314 §1), but we need to consider other canons in order to see how excommunication relates to loss of ecclesiastical office.

Canon 2263 states that an excommunicated person, as we would expect, "is forbidden to exercise ecclesiastical offices or duties"—the first among which is, of course, the papacy. However, the next canon (2264) affirms the following: "An act of jurisdiction carried out by an excommunicated person, whether in the internal or the external forum, is illicit; and if a condemnatory or declaratory sentence has been pronounced, it is also invalid, without prejudice to canon 2261 §3; otherwise it is valid." (The other canon cited here, 2261 §3, makes an exception to this invalidity when it is a case of an officially excommunicated priest giving absolution to someone in danger of death.)

These last four words—"otherwise it is valid"—are highly significant. Let us assume that this pope, the validity of whose election no one disputes, refused to admit he had fallen into heresy. Since no other earthly person or authority—not even all the rest of the bishops gathered in an ecumenical council—would be competent to pass a condemnatory sentence against this pope or to declare that he has incurred excommunication, it follows from the Church’s law that, if he refuses to resign, all his acts of jurisdiction would remain valid, even though they would be illicit. So while this pope would offend God gravely by exercising his office while under an (undeclared) excommunication, all his official acts still would be juridically valid and binding on the Church’s members.[/quote]

[quote]2. A pope who began his pontificate as an orthodox Catholic but became a formal heretic or apostate during his pontificate would thereby legally incur excommunication. However, even if his heresy or apostasy should become publicly discernible, the absence of any competent authority on earth who could lawfully declare his excommunication would mean that, if he refused to resign and continued to insist on carrying out acts of papal authority, those acts, though illicitly exercised, would still be valid. In other words, he would still be juridically the true pope whom we would have to recognize and obey in all things but sin, even though at the inner level at which grace operates he might well be totally separated from the mystical body of Christ.[/quote]

[quote]On the basis of twentieth-century canon law (found in both the 1917 and 1983 Codes), a pope who fulfilled the canonical requirements for heresy—that is, who pertinaciously doubted or denied one or more truths to be believed with divine and Catholic faith (cf. 1983 Code 751; 1917 Code 1325 §2)—would not have the moral right before God to be pope. Therefore, his remaining in office would be illicit. Still, if he refused to resign, he would truly be the pope in the sense that his acts of papal governance would still be valid before God and the Church. It should go without saying that divine providence would never permit him to define his heresy ex cathedra. The dogma of papal infallibility assures us this can never happen.[/quote]

Edited by rkwright
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, Sam, it has never happened. There has never been a pope who has taught heresy. Look to what rkwright posted, it is a good summary to the legal side of things.

If you'd like to see the closest it has ever been, I would suggest that you read a biography on the antipopes St. Hippolytus and Novatian.

They are the clearest examples of what you are asking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Extra ecclesiam nulla salus

so theoretically its very possible for a pope to be able to Teach Heresy (not as Doctrine or Dogma of course) but it just hasn't happened?


God Bless,


Sam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Jan 15 2006, 07:05 PM']so theoretically its very possible for a pope to be able to Teach Heresy (not as Doctrine or Dogma of course) but it just hasn't happened?
God Bless,
Sam
[right][snapback]856977[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

No, he cannot teach heresy. You are misreading what is being said. What is being said is that a pope who fulfilled the canonical requirements for heresy—that is, who pertinaciously doubted or denied one or more truths to be believed with divine and Catholic faith (cf. 1983 Code 751; 1917 Code 1325 §2)—[b]would not[/b] have the moral right before God to be pope.

Divine providence would never permit him to define his heresy ex cathedra. The dogma of papal infallibility assures us this can never happen. He cannot teach heresy. If a pope did, it would be an illicit teaching.

All the CIC (both 1917 and 1983) is saying is that if he were legitimately ascended to the throne of Peter, he would still hold the office insofar as he had the temporal right, however, he would have no moral right to be pope.

Any pope who taught heresy would incur excommunication. It really isn't that hard to understand.

Are you phishing for something here Sam? Say, the documentation of Vatican Council II or perhaps looking to defame the encyclicals of Pope John Paul II? What is your impotice for asking such a question?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Laudate_Dominum

well, there have been popes who held heretical beliefs and I can think of two instances where a pope came pretty darn close to teaching serious error. but yeah, I agree with Cam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Extra ecclesiam nulla salus

Cam,

I don't appreciate you telling me "its not that hard to understand". I just think that it is unessecary to say that. No I am not fishing for anything, nor am i looking for a debate. i am Just looking for an answer.


sam

Edited by Extra ecclesiam nulla salus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Jan 15 2006, 07:43 PM']Cam,

I don't appreciate you telling me "its not that hard to understand". I just think that it is unessecary to say that. No I am not fishing for anything, nor am i looking for a debate. i am Just looking for an answer.
sam
[right][snapback]857030[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

And......?

Why didn't you just post it on the Q&A then, if you don't want a debate on the debate board........ummmm......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Extra ecclesiam nulla salus

Because i would like to be able to respond to the answer because this subject confuses me, and i would like to see if any non-church scholar had anything to add.

I am not a liar.

i really don't understand why you have to question my actions and respond rudely to my question. With all due respect i think that you need to be more charitable. Several people have mentioned it just today.


i am still confused about this question:

I know that if a pope who was a heretic Became Pope, and was excommunicated wouldn't that make him a false pope? I read that somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Jan 15 2006, 07:56 PM']Because i would like to be able to respond to the answer because  this subject confuses me, and i would like to see if any non-church scholar had anything to add.

I am not a liar.

i really don't understand why you have to question my actions and respond rudely to my question. With all due respect i think that you need to be more charitable. Several people have mentioned it just today.
i am still confused about this question:

I know that if a pope who was a heretic Became Pope, and was excommunicated wouldn't that make him a false pope? I read that somewhere.
[right][snapback]857046[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Who said you were a liar?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Extra ecclesiam nulla salus

your claiming that im trying to start a debate when i cleary am not and said that i was just looking for answers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Jan 15 2006, 07:59 PM']your claiming that im trying to start a debate when i cleary am not and said that i was just looking for answers.
[right][snapback]857052[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

No, I simply asked a couple of questions, based upon your past history......

Let's not start on the Charity thing, Sam......straightforwardness is not being uncharitable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Extra ecclesiam nulla salus

I will not discuss charity any longer as you wish, because i have made my opinion known.

unless anyone else has anything to add this thread should be closed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In this thread there's some on Popes and heresies:

[url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=15046&st=0"]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?s...opic=15046&st=0[/url]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...