Another person, let's say Mr B, commented on that "prayer," quoting from St Catherine of Siena:
«To the Florentines, who were rebelling against Pope Gregory XI: "Even if the Pope were Satan incarnate, we ought not to raise up our heads against him, but calmly lie down to rest on his bosom. He who rebels against the Pope, is condemned to death, for that which we do to him, we do to Christ: we honor Christ if we honor the Pope; we dishonor Christ if we dishonor the Pope. I know very well that many defend themselves by boasting, 'They are so corrupt, and work all manner of evil!' But God has commanded that, even if the priests, the pastors, and Christ-on-earth were incarnate devils, we must be obedient and subject to them, not for their sakes, but for the sake of God, and out of obedience to Him." — Saint Catherine of Siena in "St. Catherine of Siena," SCS, p. 201-202, p. 222.
«Another version: "He who rebels against our Father the Pope, who is Christ on earth, is condemned to death, for that which we do to him, we do to Christ in heaven – we honor Christ if we honor the Pope, we dishonour Christ if we dishonour the Pope.... I tell you that God wills, and has so commanded, that even if the priests and the pastors of the Church and the Pope, Christ on earth, were devils incarnate, He requires that we be obedient and subject to them, not for their sake, but for the sake of God, out of obedience to Him, for He wills that we should act thus."
«Another quote: "Know that the son is never in the right against the father, even if the father is ever so evil and unjust, for so great is the good which he has received from the father, that is, life itself, that he can never repay him for it. And we have received the life of grace from the Church, which is so great a benefit, that we can never, by any kind of homage or gratitude, pay the debt we owe." (From Anne Baldwin's "Catherine of Siena: A Biography")»
I wrote in reply: That is regarding bad, immoral popes, yet lawful, Catholic Popes, nonetheless. Being Pope does not grant impeccability. But what about Antipopes, and even more specifically, what about public and manifest Heretics and even more so, Apostates? There had been a series of Donatist and Novatian 'Popes' resident in Rome, until the Catholic Popes were able to persuade Emperor Constantine to forbid them from residing in Rome. And for about a week to a fortnight, the Vatican Basilica had been seized and occupied by Mahomettan Infidels in about 846 AD, converted it into a mosque, appointed an 'Imam.' Was that Imam, in 'lawful possession' of the Vatican, the 'true Catholic Pope'?
SILENCE SPEAKS LOUDER THAN WORDS!
In an apparent reply, Mr B removed his "comment" from Mr A's post. Searching, I found that his comment was, and remains, a post on his profile. There has been no reply by him to my question.
The following was condemned by Pope Alexander VII: "Although it is evidently established by you that Peter is a heretic, you are not bound to denounce him . . ." Condemned. (Denzinger 1105).
The Canon Law Commentary of Wernz-Vidal explains: "Finally, one cannot consider as schismatics those who refuse to obey the Roman Pontiff because they would hold his person suspect or because of widespread rumors, doubtfully elected." Wernz-Vidal, Iuris Canonicum, Rome, Gregorian Univ., 1937, Vol. II, p. 398.
"Finally, one cannot consider as schismatics those who refuse to obey the Roman Pontiff because they would hold his person suspect or, because of widespread rumors, doubtfully elected (as happened after the election of Urban VI), or who would resist him as a civil authority and not as pastor of the Church."
Wernz-Vidal, Ius Canonicum, Rome, Gregorian, 1937, 7:398.
No comments:
Post a Comment