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 933 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline roscoe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7611
  • Reputation: +617/-404
  • Gender: Male
GWS And Anti-popes
« on: August 10, 2009, 11:35:11 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Is there anyone here who  thinks that the French faction of Popes during GWS are anti-popes?

    There Is No Such Thing As 'Sede Vacantism'...
    nor is there such thing as a 'Feeneyite' or 'Feeneyism'


    Offline CM

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2726
    • Reputation: +1/-0
    • Gender: Male
    GWS And Anti-popes
    « Reply #1 on: August 13, 2009, 04:13:13 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Better question, Roscoe:  Do you believe that there was more than one pope at a time?


    Offline roscoe

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7611
    • Reputation: +617/-404
    • Gender: Male
    GWS And Anti-popes
    « Reply #2 on: August 13, 2009, 01:28:47 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • You know the answer to that already.
    There Is No Such Thing As 'Sede Vacantism'...
    nor is there such thing as a 'Feeneyite' or 'Feeneyism'

    Offline CM

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2726
    • Reputation: +1/-0
    • Gender: Male
    GWS And Anti-popes
    « Reply #3 on: August 13, 2009, 03:35:44 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • You do!  But that doesn't make any sense at all.

    The Council of Constance was convoked in 1414 by the antipope John XXIII, one of three rival claimants to the papal throne, the other two being Gregory XII and Benedict XIII. The Council was called to resolve all doubts as to the true successor of Peter, and end the Great Schism. John agreed to resign if his rivals would do the same, then he fled the city. In the absence of a papal convenor, the Council enacted Haec Sancta, which purported to subject even papal authority to the authority of the Council. John was brought back and deposed for scandalous conduct. Gregory convoked the Council anew, rejected all its prior proceedings (including Haec Sancta, which is below), and then resigned. The Council acquiesced in these actions, passed decrees on reform, condemned the heresies of Hus and Wyclif and, after deposing Benedict, elected Martin V, under whom unity was restored to the Church.

    While no council, not even Ecuмenical, has authority to depose a pope, the two men who were deposed were both antipopes. The true pope was Gregory XII, who resigned rather than being deposed. He it was who authorized the sessions beginning on 4 July 1415, and declared all previous sessions (the first thirteen) null and void. Martin V ratified the succeeding sessions at the conclusion of the Council.


    The famous Haec Sancta decree contradicting the Vatican Council on papal primacy/infallibility.

    [Decrees of the council, concerning its authority and integrity, which had been abbreviated by cardinal Zabarella at the preceding session, against the wishes of the nations, and which are now restored, repeated and confirmed by a public decree]

    In the name of the holy and undivided Trinity, Father and Son and holy Spirit. Amen. This holy synod of Constance, which is a general council, for the eradication of the present schism and for bringing unity and reform to God's church in head and members, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit to the praise of almighty God, ordains, defines, decrees, discerns and declares as follows, in order that this union and reform of God's church may be obtained the more easily, securely, fruitfully and freely.

    First it declares that, legitimately assembled in the holy Spirit, constituting a general council and representing the Catholic Church militant, it has power immediately from Christ; and that everyone of whatever state or dignity, even papal, is bound to obey it in those matters which pertain to the faith, the eradication of the said schism and the general reform of the said church of God in head and members.

    Next, it declares that anyone of whatever condition, state or dignity, even papal, who contumaciously refuses to obey the past or future mandates, statutes, ordinances or precepts of this sacred council or of any other legitimately assembled general council, regarding the aforesaid things or matters pertaining to them, shall be subjected to well-deserved penance, unless he repents, and shall be duly punished, even by having recourse, if necessary, to other supports of the law.

    Next, the said holy synod defines and ordains that the lord pope John XXIII may not move or transfer the Roman curia and its public offices, or its or their officials, from the city of Constance to another place, nor directly or indirectly compel the said officials to follow him, without the deliberation and consent of the same holy synod. If he has acted to the contrary in the past, or shall in the future, or if he has in the past, is now or shall in the future fulminate any processes or mandates or ecclesiastical censures or any other penalties, against the said officials or any other adherents of this sacred council, to the effect that they should follow him, then all is null and void and in no way are the said processes, censures and penalties to be obeyed, inasmuch as they are null and void. The said officials are rather to exercise their offices in the said city of Constance, and to carry them out freely as before, as long as this holy synod h being held in the said City.

    Next, that all translations of prelates, or depositions of the same, or of any other beneficed persons, officials and administrators, revocations of commendams and gifts, admonitions, ecclesiastical censures, processes, sentences and whatever has been or will be done or accomplished by the aforesaid lord pope John or his officials or commissaries, since the beginning of this council, to the injury of the said council or its adherents, against the supporters or participants of this sacred council, or to the prejudice of them or of any one of them, in whatever way they may have been or shall be made or done, against the will of the persons concerned, are by this very fact, on the authority of this sacred council, null, quashed, invalid and void, and of no effect or moment, and the council by its authority quashes, invalidates and annuls them.

    Next, it declares that the lord pope John XXIII and all the prelates and other persons summoned to this sacred council, and other participants in the same synod, have enjoyed and do now enjoy full freedom, as has been apparent in the said sacred council, and the opposite has not been brought to the notice of the said summoned persons or of the said council. The said sacred council testifies to this before God and people.

    Offline roscoe

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7611
    • Reputation: +617/-404
    • Gender: Male
    GWS And Anti-popes
    « Reply #4 on: August 13, 2009, 03:56:47 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • As posted several times previously-- Acc to Prof von Pastor, one of the conditions of the settlement of the GWS was as follows.

    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.

    One convenience of this is that if, one day Urban VI(6?)  and Boniface IX(9?) are declared anti-popes, there will be another true Pope so the chair of Peter will not have been vacant.

    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.
    There Is No Such Thing As 'Sede Vacantism'...
    nor is there such thing as a 'Feeneyite' or 'Feeneyism'


    Offline CM

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2726
    • Reputation: +1/-0
    • Gender: Male
    GWS And Anti-popes
    « Reply #5 on: August 14, 2009, 01:16:21 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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?

    Offline roscoe

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7611
    • Reputation: +617/-404
    • Gender: Male
    GWS And Anti-popes
    « Reply #6 on: August 14, 2009, 08:39:25 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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
    There Is No Such Thing As 'Sede Vacantism'...
    nor is there such thing as a 'Feeneyite' or 'Feeneyism'

    Offline CM

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2726
    • Reputation: +1/-0
    • Gender: Male
    GWS And Anti-popes
    « Reply #7 on: August 14, 2009, 10:57:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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!


    Offline roscoe

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7611
    • Reputation: +617/-404
    • Gender: Male
    GWS And Anti-popes
    « Reply #8 on: August 14, 2009, 11:49:39 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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.  

    There Is No Such Thing As 'Sede Vacantism'...
    nor is there such thing as a 'Feeneyite' or 'Feeneyism'

    Offline CM

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2726
    • Reputation: +1/-0
    • Gender: Male
    GWS And Anti-popes
    « Reply #9 on: August 15, 2009, 01:05:23 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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.

    Offline CM

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2726
    • Reputation: +1/-0
    • Gender: Male
    GWS And Anti-popes
    « Reply #10 on: August 15, 2009, 01:39:20 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: [url=http://www.archive.org/stream/historyofthepope11pastuoft/historyofthepope11pastuoft_djvu.txt
    The history of the popes from the close of the Middle Ages: drawn from the secret archives of the Vatican and other original sources[/url]]A Nicola Farnese in the service of the Antipope Clement VII...

    VII. [Robert of
    Geneva], Anti-
    Pope, 16 n. i.


    It refers to him as an antipope, not as a true pope.  There is no mention at all of Benedict XIII, Alexander V, or John XXIII.

    Roscoe, I see no logical reason at all to say that there were ever two legitimate popes reigning at the same time.

    Don't you see how ridiculous that is?  That is saying that the body of Christ on earth has two heads.  Or that saying there are two bodies of Christ on earth.

    Very interesting disciplinary teaching of the Holy Catholic Church:

    Quote from: Lateran Council IV
    We altogether forbid one and the same city or diocese to have more than one bishop, as if it were a body with several heads like a monster. But if for the aforesaid reasons urgent necessity demands it, the bishop of the place may appoint, after careful deliberation, a catholic bishop who is appropriate for the nations in question and who will be his vicar in the aforesaid matters and will be obedient and subject to him in all things. If any such person behaves otherwise, let him know that he has been struck by the sword of excommunication and if he does not return to his senses let him be deposed from every ministry in the church, with the secular arm being called in if necessary to quell such great insolence.