Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: GWS And Anti-popes  (Read 1333 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline CM

GWS And Anti-popes
« Reply #5 on: August 14, 2009, 01:16:21 AM »
Quote from: roscoe
Since there was no heresy and no homos from 1378-1415, it was decided that one was left free to call either the Fr or IT Pope the real Pope. If you have a problem with that, take it up with von Pastor.


I don't have a problem with that.  One was free to follow either the Avignon line or the Roman   But the fact is that no Council has the authority to depose a pope, so after the depositions took place, it is clear that even though a person may have lawfully chosen to follow one of those who would be deposed, since they had no way to know he was not the true pope (invincible ignorance in the truest sense), retrospectively, they would have to admit that they had been following an antipope.

Quote from: roscoe
If Boniface IX(9?) was trying to revive the legacy of the anti-pope who it can be argued was the cause of the GWS, then he would be an anti-pope himself.


What are you talking about?

GWS And Anti-popes
« Reply #6 on: August 14, 2009, 08:39:25 PM »
Which council are you accusing of deposing a Pope? NO POPE WAS DEPOSED AT THE SETTLEMENT OF THE SCHISM. I guess it has to be repeated.........

Acc to von Pastor, one of the conditions of the settlement of the schism was the one was left free to call either faction the true Pope. So yes, it can be said that there was more than one Pope in a couple of instances.

Re: the second second question-- I have no idea how to make any clearer what has been said. ciao


Offline CM

GWS And Anti-popes
« Reply #7 on: August 14, 2009, 10:57:52 PM »
Catholic Encyclopedia: "After many conferences, projects, discussions (oftentimes violent), interventions of the civil powers, catastrophes of all kinds, the Council of Constance (1414) deposed the suspicious John XXIII, received the abdication of the gentle and timid Gregory XII, and finally dismissed the obstinate Benedict XIII."

It's wrong and von Pastor is right?  Who is von Pastor?  What is his book called?  When did he write it?  What credibility does he have?  WAS HE CATHOLIC?

And as to the second question, you can make it more clear by doing a great many things.  You can answer these questions, for example:

FIRST OF ALL:  
Quote from: roscoe
IF Boniface IX was...


Well was he roscoe, or wasn't he?  And what support do you have for this?

SECOND OF ALL:  
Quote from: roscoe
...trying to revive the legacy of the anti-pope...


What does this mean?  What legacy?  Was he trying to get people to submit to the antipope again?  Why would he do that if he was pope himself?  Do you not realize how obscure and ambiguous your sentence was?

Quote from: roscoe
then he would be an antipope himself.


Why?  Because he was heretical somehow?  Or was submitting himself to a person who was now known as an antipope?

CLARITY MAN!  CLARITY!  Bring it!

GWS And Anti-popes
« Reply #8 on: August 14, 2009, 11:49:39 PM »
Which Catholic Encyclopedia are you referrring to?-- most likely v2

Prof von Pastor was commisioned by Pope Leo XIII to write a History of Popes which begins at the death of Boniface and ends at 18 Brumaire and the death of Pius VI. It is 40 vols and I am fortunate to be in possession of 30 of them. Many of the vols can be accessed at Wikipedia and if censored they at least advise you as such.

An anti-pope is one who has been invalidly elected or commits an act/pronounces a heresy showing himself to be non-Catholic or both( which is usually the case).

Re: Boniface IX== I am only speculating but we do know that Pius X deposed Boniface 6 and 7. There is at least one more to go and IF and I say IF Boniface IX was trying to revive the legacy of 8 then he will be another.

I admit being somewhat unfamiliar with his papacy and having no other reason to suspect him.  


Offline CM

GWS And Anti-popes
« Reply #9 on: August 15, 2009, 01:05:23 AM »
Quote from: roscoe
Which Catholic Encyclopedia are you referrring to?-- most likely v2


How dare you! :nunchaku:

This one, as a matter of fact (article from 1912).

As for the rest of your response, thank you for elaborating.  I appreciate it.  I'll look into it.