The Christian Discussion Thread X: Originally there were 15

[Lower Nubia]

Those were political schisms however, this would be a pope promoting heresy. Similar but new territory. If the highest office promotes heresy it adds strong evidence to invalidate Catholicism.

How many antipopes have there been?

A lot. There’s a list.

[Lower Nubia]

Those were political schisms however, this would be a pope promoting heresy. Similar but new territory. If the highest office promotes heresy it adds strong evidence to invalidate Catholicism.

It adds evidence to invalidate Catholicism to those that already think Catholicism is invalidated. If you haven't noticed, the majority of Catholics here have expressed they would still be Catholic. Once again, this is a stupid hypothetical that isn't going to happen.

No, it adds evidence to invalidate Catholicism for everyone. If the highest office can enter into heresy it calls into question the Magisterium’s ability to keep the faith of the apostles. Even if an assortment of orthodox bishops elected another Pope there would be no guarantee that that pope too could not fall into heresy - including, potentially, there ex cathedra statements. It would also mean the fall of the Vatican, I believe the Vatican is the property of the Holy See, which if the conclave, relevant commissions, and the Pope agree to a heretical document would still maintain their ownership of that see, the fall of Rome to a validly elected, but heretical, Pope is definitely bad optics for the Catholic Faith.

I believe it opens a flood gate on the legitimacy of the office which is validated by Vatican I, which is cause for concern even for the most die hard Catholic - what guarantee could there be for the Catholic Faith being true? Besides the assumption that the Holy Spirit protects her? because it would now be a possibility that the Bulwark of the See of Rome can falter as any other see, whose bishop is to be disposed, otherwise it would allow the keys of saint peter to pass to someone who is a heretic, something that cannot happen in the One True Church.

I don’t believe Francis would legitimise this synod, and her potential heresy, but that doesn’t mean we cannot discuss the hypothetical.

[Ghost in the Shell]

Not sure where this claim that a heretical pope invalidates the legitimacy of the Papacy comes from. History shows us that heretical popes are a possibility, and we were never promised that we wouldn't have a heretical Pope. Various Popes in the past have warned of the possibility of heretical popes in the future anyway.

Even if an assortment of orthodox bishops elected another Pope there would be no guarantee that that pope too could not fall into heresy - including, potentially, there ex cathedra statements.

Heresy would excommunicate them latae sententiae which would mean they've ceased being Pope.

I don’t believe Francis would legitimise this synod, and her potential heresy, but that doesn’t mean we cannot discuss the hypothetical.

The hypothetical has been discussed. Does Heretic Honorius ring a bell?

[Lost Memories]

I'd rather discuss the hypothetical of a single united christian faith on the whole world.


@Nubia apostolic succession is very branched and interconnected, it is when focusing only on the succession of popes, and it's even more so when keeping in account the whole clergy, which is all linked by it. And while not having executive power, tradition runs through the whole of the christians too.
In a figurative sense, the pope is just the tip of an iceberg, the failure of even a top figure as a pope doesn't invalidate the structure which raised him and gave him his role, as the tradition is so much bigger.

What you're talking about is the mediatic exposure of a failure. The higher in the gerarchy the person failing is, the more buzz it generates.
There has never been immunity to failure in any human organization, not even in the catholic church, what keeps things running is the ability to recover and react, to be lively and spirited, which is where the Holy Spirit plays a role in the church, fueling the virtue of Hope.

[Lower Nubia]

Not sure where this claim that a heretical pope invalidates the legitimacy of the Papacy comes from. History shows us that heretical popes are a possibility, and we were never promised that we wouldn't have a heretical Pope. Various Popes in the past have warned of the possibility of heretical popes in the future anyway.

Then you need to tell Vatican I.

Even if an assortment of orthodox bishops elected another Pope there would be no guarantee that that pope too could not fall into heresy - including, potentially, there ex cathedra statements.

Heresy would excommunicate them latae sententiae which would mean they've ceased being Pope.

You misunderstand my point, my point is that it produces a lack of confidence in the office. Evidence for the papacy lacking legitimacy, not proof.

I don’t believe Francis would legitimise this synod, and her potential heresy, but that doesn’t mean we cannot discuss the hypothetical.

The hypothetical has been discussed. Does Heretic Honorius ring a bell?

Seeing as there is definitely a desire to see the papacy as an exception in Church history, that would be in terms of heresy.

I’m not Catholic, Honorius to me had heretical beliefs. That’s primarily becomes I’m abivelent to the issue.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Not sure where this claim that a heretical pope invalidates the legitimacy of the Papacy comes from. History shows us that heretical popes are a possibility, and we were never promised that we wouldn't have a heretical Pope. Various Popes in the past have warned of the possibility of heretical popes in the future anyway.

Even if an assortment of orthodox bishops elected another Pope there would be no guarantee that that pope too could not fall into heresy - including, potentially, there ex cathedra statements.

Heresy would excommunicate them latae sententiae which would mean they've ceased being Pope.

I don’t believe Francis would legitimise this synod, and her potential heresy, but that doesn’t mean we cannot discuss the hypothetical.

The hypothetical has been discussed. Does Heretic Honorius ring a bell?

The Pope, by definition, cannot commit heresy according to Vatican I, because they are the supreme judge on dogma that no body can pass judgement on. Stop believing everything Tars says about heretical popes being deposed, we've even had an actual priest tell him that he runs dangerously close to heresy by saying that.

[Tarsonis]

Not sure where this claim that a heretical pope invalidates the legitimacy of the Papacy comes from. History shows us that heretical popes are a possibility, and we were never promised that we wouldn't have a heretical Pope. Various Popes in the past have warned of the possibility of heretical popes in the future anyway.


Heresy would excommunicate them latae sententiae which would mean they've ceased being Pope.


The hypothetical has been discussed. Does Heretic Honorius ring a bell?

The Pope, by definition, cannot commit heresy according to Vatican I, because they are the supreme judge on dogma that no body can pass judgement on. Stop believing everything Tars says about heretical popes being deposed, we've even had an actual priest tell him that he runs dangerously close to heresy by saying that.

A heretical Pope deposed himself, just like a heretical church deposes itself.

[Lower Nubia]

I'd rather discuss the hypothetical of a single united christian faith on the whole world.

That’s easy: the End has come.

@Nubia apostolic succession is very branched and interconnected, it is when focusing only on the succession of popes, and it's even more so when keeping in account the whole clergy, which is all linked by it. And while not having executive power, tradition runs through the whole of the christians too.

I’m aware that Apostolic runs this way, but the Traditions of the Catholic Church includes the executive, if the executive Tradition fails I don’t see how that wouldn’t also invalidate the Catholic Church. Just as if the Tradition of the Church’s baptism (for whatever reason) failed it would call into question the entire Church, even if the other Traditions are still perfectly sound.

In a figurative sense, the pope is just the tip of an iceberg, the failure of even a top figure as a pope doesn't invalidate the structure which raised him and gave him his role, as the tradition is so much bigger.

It would if the Pope is the heir of Saint Peter, from which the Church was given keys to loose and bind.

What you're talking about is the mediatic exposure of a failure. The higher in the gerarchy the person failing is, the more buzz it generates.

I’m talking about evidence of system failures in maintaining valid doctrine. I know that once a Pope produces heresy they are automatically not the “Pope” but that’s clearly a get out of jail free mechanism, based on the assumption the pope won’t commit to heresy anyway and therefore an idea that need not be thought of too much.

There has never been immunity to failure in any human organization, not even in the catholic church, what keeps things running is the ability to recover and react, to be lively and spirited, which is where the Holy Spirit plays a role in the church, fueling the virtue of Hope.

[/quote]

I believe that the Church is a divine institution with human participants. Which becomes quite clear seeing as the Church isn’t donatist in it’s understanding of human failures to the Church’s workings. Regardless, the Traditions of the Church are protected by the Holy Spirit, which includes the executive of the Catholic Church.

[United Muscovite Nations]

The Pope, by definition, cannot commit heresy according to Vatican I, because they are the supreme judge on dogma that no body can pass judgement on. Stop believing everything Tars says about heretical popes being deposed, we've even had an actual priest tell him that he runs dangerously close to heresy by saying that.

A heretical Pope deposed himself, just like a heretical church deposes itself.

Who decides that the Pope is a heretic?

[The Archregimancy]

A heretical Pope deposed himself, just like a heretical church deposes itself.

Who decides that the Pope is a heretic?

The Orthodox Church

I jest, I jest.

[The Archregimancy]

Those were political schisms however, this would be a pope promoting heresy. Similar but new territory. If the highest office promotes heresy it adds strong evidence to invalidate Catholicism.

How many antipopes have there been?

Writing more seriously....

That depends on how you count. I believe that according to the official count in the Catholic Church's Annuario Pontificio, there are about 40 antipopes, the last (Felix V) in the mid-15th century.

However, that doesn't include a variety of fringe figures across time, including some current ones (like the American Pope Michael) who've made dubious claims to the Papacy, and whose following has often been vanishingly small.


Also note that I assume we're talking about antipopes of Rome; I haven't attempted to enumerate Coptic antipopes of Alexandria.

[Lost Memories]

How many antipopes have there been?

Writing more seriously....

That depends on how you count. I believe that according to the official count in the Catholic Church's Annuario Pontificio, there are about 40 antipopes, the last (Felix V) in the mid-15th century.

However, that doesn't include a variety of fringe figures across time, including some current ones (like the American Pope Michael) who've made dubious claims to the Papacy, and whose following has often been vanishingly small.


Also note that I assume we're talking about antipopes of Rome; I haven't attempted to enumerate Coptic antipopes of Alexandria.

What about orthodoxy? (as protestants don't have clearly defined central figures)
Has there ever been an anti-patriarch? Or is it even possible to have one?

Oh wait, all the ukranian-russian issue over the autonomous church of ukraine sort of resembles a case of competing patriarches.
Has there been more?

[The Archregimancy]

Writing more seriously....

That depends on how you count. I believe that according to the official count in the Catholic Church's Annuario Pontificio, there are about 40 antipopes, the last (Felix V) in the mid-15th century.

However, that doesn't include a variety of fringe figures across time, including some current ones (like the American Pope Michael) who've made dubious claims to the Papacy, and whose following has often been vanishingly small.


Also note that I assume we're talking about antipopes of Rome; I haven't attempted to enumerate Coptic antipopes of Alexandria.

What about orthodoxy? (as protestants don't have clearly defined central figures)
Has there ever been an anti-patriarch? Or is it even possible to have one?

Oh wait, all the ukranian-russian issue over the autonomous church of ukraine sort of resembles a case of competing patriarches.
Has there been more?

The Ukraine issue is one of territorial jurisdiction, not one about monarchical primacy, so it isn't really comparable.

Historically the patriarchates have also been subordinate to the ruling political power rather than secular rulers in their own right; so whereas the Pope was ruling a territorial state, the Patriarch of Constantinople (for example) could be deposed by the Byzantine Emperor or Ottoman Sultan rather than facing competition from another faction in the College of Cardinals. And if a Patriarch was deposed by the political power, he typically didn't go on claiming to be Patriarch in opposition to the new Patriarch. Though several deposed Patriarchs were subsequently restored; under the Ottomans, this deposition and restoration could happen several times for one individual; Cyril I Lucaris was restored five times, in one confusing spell alternating - and at least once directly succeeding - Cyril II. Moscow even went without any patriarch for over 200 years; Peter the Great abolished the patriarchate entirely, replaced it with a synod, and it wasn't re-established until 1917.

The Orthodox Church has also never attempted to formally define and categorise 'antipatriarchies'

So apples and oranges.

That said, there were a couple of Byzantine examples that bear some sort of resemblance to a late classical or early medieval antipapacy. The Photian schism of the 860s, which related to the contested deposition of Ignatius and installation of Photius is one such example (here 'schism' refers to a temporary rupture with the Papacy caused by the removal of Ignatius rather than an internal schism within the Byzantine church). You could also potentially see the two Arian-sympathising Patriarchs who served inbetween the three separate 4th-century terms of Paul I as 'antipatriarchs' installed by Arian-sympathising emperors in opposition to the small-o orthodox Paul; though this was early enough that technically Paul was still an Archbishop of Constantinople rather than a Patriarch.

Anyway, short version is that we tend to see our patriarchs as deposed and restored when there's a competition for power rather than the situation of an antipope in simultaneous opposition to a recognised Pope.

[Diopolis]

Both. They also teach the Virgin Mary is present in the Eucharist.
There’s a much tamer, but more pathetic, antipope in Kansas.

> Kansas
...Of all places? Really? There's like 3 Catholics in the entire state.

He lives in his mother’s basement and was elected by a conclave of six people, one of whom was a woman. Seriously.

[Diopolis]

Those were political schisms however, this would be a pope promoting heresy. Similar but new territory. If the highest office promotes heresy it adds strong evidence to invalidate Catholicism.

How many antipopes have there been?

If you mean serious contenders with a significant following, a couple dozen. If you mean any rando who up and claimed to be pope one day, a lot more.

[Salus Maior]

> Kansas
...Of all places? Really? There's like 3 Catholics in the entire state.

He lives in his mother’s basement and was elected by a conclave of six people, one of whom was a woman. Seriously.

Who was also his mother, and his father voted for him too.

IIRC, he also got to vote for himself.

[Ghost in the Shell]

Today is the beginning of Cardinal Raymond Burke and Bishop Athanasius Schneider's crusade of fasting and prayer against the heresies contained in the Amazon Synod documents. Pray the rosary daily and fast at least once a week for these intentions.

Here is the document they put out at the end of August. It criticises pantheism, pagan superstition, intercultural dialogue as a meaningful alternative to evangelisation, an erroneous concept of sacramental ordination, an "integral ecology" that downgrades human dignity, and a tribal collectivism that undermines human uniqueness.

[Tarsonis]

He lives in his mother’s basement and was elected by a conclave of six people, one of whom was a woman. Seriously.

Who was also his mother, and his father voted for him too.

IIRC, he also got to vote for himself.

He was also kicked out of the SSPX seminary.

[Diopolis]

Who was also his mother, and his father voted for him too.

IIRC, he also got to vote for himself.

He was also kicked out of the SSPX seminary.

That just goes without saying for those kinds of nut jobs imo.

[Tarsonis]

He was also kicked out of the SSPX seminary.

That just goes without saying for those kinds of nut jobs imo.

When you’re so nutty, the nutjobs kick you out. Smh

[Diopolis]

That just goes without saying for those kinds of nut jobs imo.

When you’re so nutty, the nutjobs kick you out. Smh

Several of them got kicked out of the sspx(or otherwise left on bad terms) and were subsequently expelled from the non-sedevacantist fringe groups that tend to take the ex-sspx priests.

[Tarsonis]

When you’re so nutty, the nutjobs kick you out. Smh

Several of them got kicked out of the sspx(or otherwise left on bad terms) and were subsequently expelled from the non-sedevacantist fringe groups that tend to take the ex-sspx priests.

So this level of nutty then

[Diopolis]

Several of them got kicked out of the sspx(or otherwise left on bad terms) and were subsequently expelled from the non-sedevacantist fringe groups that tend to take the ex-sspx priests.

So this level of nutty then

Or worse. There was one who was expelled with williamson(and every sspx priest I’ve talked to has said good riddance), then got kicked out by williamson, started his own group, and they benched him for being a nut.
Sometimes, you don’t need soap operas.

[Dylar]

Brothers and sisters, can you please pray for me while I try and figure out what my vocation is? For a while I thought that I wanted to be a priest, but now I'm not so sure. So, for now, I'm gonna spend the next year visiting and researching different religious orders and seeing if that's something that God wants me to be part of.

[Diopolis]

Loving the new interview with Fr. Pagliarani.