Is Pope Francis crazy??, or even worse.. is he evil??

[Miriam_M]

God is allowing this invisible yet totally crushing chastisement as a punishment and to test those of us who think we have faith.

I disagree with one aspect of the otherwise very well-crafted article by John Zmirak.  I think there are a few possibilities that exist that would explain the situation without eroding one iota the infallible claims of the Church, including those pertaining to the Petrine office.

First, Francis is an anti-Pope.  A straight up usurper.  Perhaps the College violated the laws governing the election of the Pope, perhaps Francis was canonically irregular, perhaps Benedict (despite his apparent protestations) was pressured to the extent that his abdication was a not by his own free will.

Second, Francis at some point after a legitimate election abdicated either privately, through one of his many absurd statements, through his refusal to invoke the Office, etc.

Third (the worst in my opinion and, in my view, the most likely): Francis was canonically elected and assumed the Office.  He remains the Pope. However, he actively denies his duty of office and actively resists it.  He cleverly implies actions as official, when in fact they are motions of an ape imitating the real.  In so doing, he confuses even the most faithful, scandalizes those with strong good will, and shatters the institutional Church.

Like the devil the Garden, this entire papacy has been one of half truths, nice sounding ideals and practical pursuits, all mixed with an ill intent to overturn the rightly balanced tables of God.

I share your view, including the proposing of these 3 possibilities and your noted preference.

Still, as Laramie said, chilling.

[Irishcyclist]

Yes.  The Office is the Lord's Prime Minister on Earth.   The person of the Pope is a fallen man.  Because past popes fornicated and probably committed sodomy does not destroy the Office.  So there is a demarcation.  The key point, from logic, is that the holder of the keys must be Catholic.  If he is not Catholic, then he loses the office.

The Office will remain.
But unfortunately the incumbent can remain in that office as well.

The Church would do well to consider how to formally remove an incumbent who is not Catholic and who does not respect the clearly defined duties and responsibility of that office.

[Roland Deschain2]

Yes.  The Office is the Lord's Prime Minister on Earth.   The person of the Pope is a fallen man.  Because past popes fornicated and probably committed sodomy does not destroy the Office.  So there is a demarcation.  The key point, from logic, is that the holder of the keys must be Catholic.  If he is not Catholic, then he loses the office.

The Office will remain.
But unfortunately the incumbent can remain in that office as well.

The Church would do well to consider how to formally remove an incumbent who is not Catholic and who does not respect the clearly defined duties and responsibility of that office.

Unfortunately this is a theological impossibility as it now stands. Even if every bishop on earth met together in Council they cannot "depose" a pope in the strict sense. All they can do is state that he has ipso facto fallen from his office and elect a true pope.

[james03]

The theological opinions I've read state that bishops can charge the person holding the office formally with heresy.  They then can declare him non-Catholic.  I believe that it was Pius V who stated that a person who is an heretic can not become Pope.  No one deposes the Pope.  He loses the office, or never had it.

[Irishcyclist]

Yes.  The Office is the Lord's Prime Minister on Earth.   The person of the Pope is a fallen man.  Because past popes fornicated and probably committed sodomy does not destroy the Office.  So there is a demarcation.  The key point, from logic, is that the holder of the keys must be Catholic.  If he is not Catholic, then he loses the office.

The Office will remain.
But unfortunately the incumbent can remain in that office as well.

The Church would do well to consider how to formally remove an incumbent who is not Catholic and who does not respect the clearly defined duties and responsibility of that office.

Unfortunately this is a theological impossibility as it now stands. Even if every bishop on earth met together in Council they cannot "depose" a pope in the strict sense. All they can do is state that he has ipso facto fallen from his office and elect a true pope.

What is a theological impossibility?

[Roland Deschain2]

Yes.  The Office is the Lord's Prime Minister on Earth.   The person of the Pope is a fallen man.  Because past popes fornicated and probably committed sodomy does not destroy the Office.  So there is a demarcation.  The key point, from logic, is that the holder of the keys must be Catholic.  If he is not Catholic, then he loses the office.

The Office will remain.
But unfortunately the incumbent can remain in that office as well.

The Church would do well to consider how to formally remove an incumbent who is not Catholic and who does not respect the clearly defined duties and responsibility of that office.

Unfortunately this is a theological impossibility as it now stands. Even if every bishop on earth met together in Council they cannot "depose" a pope in the strict sense. All they can do is state that he has ipso facto fallen from his office and elect a true pope.

What is a theological impossibility?

To depose a sitting pope. He can only be declared to have lost his office. Short of that there is nothing any Ecclesiastical authority can do.

[Non Nobis]

...

Even if every bishop on earth met together in Council they cannot "depose" a pope in the strict sense. All they can do is state that he has ipso facto fallen from his office and elect a true pope.

... which is to "depose" a pope in a loose sense?  Aren't the final results the same?

Or are you in fact saying that such a pope would be ipso facto deposed, but this would be by God, and not by the Church:  the Church would only recognize it (and elect a true pope).

A short bit from St. Robert Bellarmine  (see the full text: http://www.cmri.org/02-bellarmine-roman-pontiff.html for better context): "it is proven with arguments from authority and from reason that the manifest heretic is "ipso facto" deposed"

I am not a sedevacantist and have no expertise on the subject.  But some of it rubs off on me.

[Irishcyclist]

I think that the Church needs to have a tangible, observable, transparent, procedure for the removal of an incumbent.

[Roland Deschain2]

I think that the Church needs to have a tangible, observable, transparent, procedure for the removal of an incumbent.

The Church does. It would be the college of Cardinals, or a General Council of the bishops of the World declaring that Francis had ipso facto lost his office based on manifest heresy X,Y and Z and then elect a true pope.


I'm not holding my breath, though.

[Roland Deschain2]

...

Even if every bishop on earth met together in Council they cannot "depose" a pope in the strict sense. All they can do is state that he has ipso facto fallen from his office and elect a true pope.

... which is to "depose" a pope in a loose sense?  Aren't the final results the same?

Or are you in fact saying that such a pope would be ipso facto deposed, but this would be by God, and not by the Church:  the Church would only recognize it (and elect a true pope).

A short bit from St. Robert Bellarmine  (see the full text: http://www.cmri.org/02-bellarmine-roman-pontiff.html for better context): "it is proven with arguments from authority and from reason that the manifest heretic is "ipso facto" deposed"

I am not a sedevacantist and have no expertise on the subject.  But some of it rubs off on me.

The bolded is correct. Since only God can judge the pope the Church can only recognize and ratify the judgement.

[Irishcyclist]

I think that the Church needs to have a tangible, observable, transparent, procedure for the removal of an incumbent.

The Church does. It would be the college of Cardinals, or a General Council of the bishops of the World declaring that Francis had ipso facto lost his office based on manifest heresy X,Y and Z and then elect a true pope.


I'm not holding my breath, though.

OK. Thanks for that clarification.

And you're dead right, I wouldn't be holding my breath either!