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

Author Topic: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?  (Read 31462 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
« Reply #70 on: October 21, 2019, 12:36:06 PM »
RomanTheo's post agrees with my thinking that UA concerns the legitimacy of the election.  It has nothing to do with orthodoxy/heresy.
.Agree totally, Sean.
.Stubborn, I didn't find where you dispelled this "theory".
Sorry, I posted the wrong link earlier, I should have posted this one.

Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
« Reply #71 on: October 21, 2019, 12:54:04 PM »
Does anyone here studied the details of the case below that can confirm Ann's conclusion?

https://www.barnhardt.biz/2019/10/20/q-if-we-cant-trust-the-church-to-tell-us-who-the-pope-is-doesnt-that-mean-the-church-has-defected/


That time St. Bernard of Clairvaux exposed and corrected Antipopes “morally unanimously accepted” by the College of Cardinals. Q: If we can’t trust the Church to tell us who the Pope is, doesn’t that mean the Church has defected?

Q:  If we can’t trust the Church to tell us who the Pope is, doesn’t that mean the Church has defected?

A: Well, apparently not, because Antipope Anacletus II was backed by a majority of Cardinals and the entirety of Rome with the exception of the Corsi family and illegitimately ruled EIGHT YEARS until his death.



Here’s the short version.  You can read the long versions at NewAdvent.org and Wikipedia.



Pope Honorious II dies, and in rules established by a predecessor (Nicholas II) and Honorious II, the election of Honorious II’s successor is left to a special commission of eight Cardinals.  They validly and canonically, albeit hurriedly and insistently, elect Pope Innocent II Papareschi the next day.


Later that same day, other Cardinals, backed by all the Roman noble families declare Pope Innocent II’s election invalid, except it WAS valid, as we will see, and instead elect their very corrupt boy, Cardinal Pietro Pierleone and name him Anacletus II.

Both men are crowned Pope/Antipope on the same day – the Antipope Anacletus II in St. Peter’s Basilica, and the true Pope Innocent II in Santa Maria Nuova (now called Santa Francesca Romana).



Antipope Anacletus II Pierleone, having the backing of most of the Cardinals, all of the Roman noble families except one (the Corsi), and all of the Roman populace, drives the true Pope Innocent II out of Rome and he flees to France where he resides for three years, whereupon he is escorted back to Rome by King Lothair of Germany, albeit with an insufficient calvary force of only 2000, and upon Lothair’s departure, Pope Innocent II has to flee Rome again to nearby Pisa, where he remains for four more years.



During these eight years, Antipope Anacletus II enjoys essentially unanimous support in Rome as he plunders the Church’s wealth and spends it lavishly to maintain support and popularity.



When Antipope Anacletus II dies after EIGHT YEARS uncontested and peacefully accepted by the Cardinals and Rome in January of ARSH 1138, an invalid conclave is called (because the True Pope Innocent II is still very much alive), and Antipope Victor IV Conti is “elected”.



This mess was resolved not by arms, but by A SAINT.  Enter Saint Bernard of Clairvaux, who had discerned that despite the essentially unanimous and peaceful recognition of Anacletus II as Pope by the College of Cardinals and the populace of Rome, that this was wrong, and Pope Innocent II was the true Pope, and had been all along.  St. Bernard went to Rome and by only the force of his eloquence in preaching to the people of Rome convinced the Church and the people of Rome of Innocent II’s legitimacy, so that upon Anacletus II’s death and the faux-election of Antipope Victor IV, Victor IV soon PRESENTED HIMSELF AS A PENITENT to St. Bernard, who immediately escorted him to Pope Innocent II, to whom Antipope Victor IV Conti repented and submitted, thus proving that Anacletus II had been an Antipope all along.  Because if Pope Innocent II was the Pope, then that HAD to mean that Anacletus never was. Because LOGIC.



So, the answer is clearly, emphatically YES, the College of Cardinals and Rome HAS ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY dropped the ball on who the Pope is, and for EIGHT YEARS, and clearly this did not constitute defection. The Church fully admits that Anacletus II, who reigned peacefully accepted by the College of Cardinals and Church of Rome, was an Antipope, and that Bernard who discerned this, was not only a Saint, but a Doctor of the Church.



So, we have YET ANOTHER powerful Saint to enjoin in our prayers for resolving today’s mess.


Saint Bernard of Clairvaux, PRAY FOR US!
It would be odd that this could be true, yet all subsequent approved and eminent theologians later declare universal acceptance an infallible guarantee of papal legitimacy.


Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
« Reply #72 on: October 21, 2019, 01:15:36 PM »
It would be odd that this could be true, yet all subsequent approved and eminent theologians later declare universal acceptance an infallible guarantee of papal legitimacy.

I think that there's SOMEthing to be said for Universal Acceptance, but it's on the front end, at the time of election, as Pax put it.  We have case studies where the Universal Church got it materially wrong down the road.

And, you know, it is possible for theologians to be in error.  They are not infallible.  For over 700 years, all theologians held the erroneous view of St. Augustine regarding the fate of unbaptized children ... and yet the Church subsequently overturned it.

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
« Reply #73 on: October 21, 2019, 01:47:43 PM »
The case of Anacletus II vs Innocent II is not like what we have today.  In that example, there were 2 different elections, by 2 different groups of Cardinals.  I don't know how anyone can say that it is an example of "universal acceptance". 
.
Not a single Cardinal disputes the election of JPII or Benedict.  (John XXIII, with the white smoke, and Francis, with Benedict's abdication are a different story).

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
« Reply #74 on: October 21, 2019, 01:52:33 PM »
Quote
You're living in a dream world if you have any notion that a holy pope will be universally peacefully accepted by the whole Church - if anything, he'll be universally violently rejected.  ...So that's the problem with the opinion of "all theologians" (of the last 100 years or so who hold this opinion) who make the universal peaceful acceptance the criterion for papal validity.

Stubborn, you're looking at this the wrong way.  Universal Acceptance (UA) is not a NECESSARY criterion for a papal election.  If it was, then a papal conclave would have to have a unanimous vote.  But a conclave only requires 2/3rds at first, and then after a few days, the majority needed declines.
.
But, UA is a POSITIVE aspect which shows the pope is the pope.  If a pope does not have UA, he could still be the pope; it depends on what the opposing side is disputing.  If they simply just don't like him, that's not a valid dispute.