Monday, October 20, 2014

NO NEED FOR HYSTERIA ABOUT TODAY'S PAPACY

The papal conclave of 1492 and the pope that got elected, Pope Alexander VI, perhaps one of the most corrupt popes ever and I mean ever, saw no Second Coming of Christ and the Church merrily progressing to the Council of Trent almost 200 years later. So perspective is always welcomed in papal history and hysteria!

From Wikipedia: Papal conclave, 1492

There was change in the constitution of the College of Cardinals during the course of the fifteenth century-especially under Sixtus IV and Innocent VIII. Of the twenty-seven cardinals alive in the closing months of the reign of Innocent VIII no fewer than ten were cardinal-nephews, eight were crown nominees, four were Roman nobles and one other had been given the cardinalate in recompense for his family's service to the Holy See; only four were able career churchmen.[5]

On the death of Pope Innocent VIII on 25 July 1492, the three likely candidates for the Papacy were the sixty-seven year old Borgia,[5] seen as an independent candidate, Ascanio Sforza for the Milanese, and Giuliano della Rovere seen as a pro-French candidate. It was rumoured but not substantiated that Borgia succeeded in buying the largest number of votes and Sforza, in particular, was bribed with four mule-loads of silver.[11] Although this was portrayed in the Showtime TV series The Borgias (2011) it is a popular falsehood about Pope Alexander. Mallett shows that Borgia was in the lead from the start and that the rumours of bribery began after the election with the distribution of benefices; Sforza and della Rovere were just as willing and able to bribe as anyone else.[12] The benefices and offices granted to Sforza, moreover, would be worth considerably more than four mule-loads of silver. Johann Burchard, the conclave's master of ceremonies and a leading figure of the papal household under several popes, recorded in his diary that the 1492 conclave was a particularly expensive campaign. Della Rovere was bankrolled to the cost of 200,000 gold ducats by King Charles VIII of France, with another 100,000 supplied by the Republic of Genoa.[13] Borgia was elected on 11 August 1492, assuming the name of Alexander VI (due to confusion about the status of Pope Alexander V elected by the Council of Pisa).

In contrast to the preceding pontificate, Pope Alexander VI adhered initially to strict administration of justice and orderly government. Before long, he began endowing his relatives at the church's and at his neighbours' expense. Cesare Borgia, his son, while a youth of seventeen and a student at Pisa, was made Archbishop of Valencia, and Giovanni Borgia inherited the Spanish Dukedom of Gandia, the Borgias' ancestral home in Spain. For the Duke of Gandia and for Gioffre, also known as Goffredo, the Pope proposed to carve fiefs out of the Papal States and the Kingdom of Naples. Among the fiefs destined for the duke of Gandia were Cerveteri and Anguillara, lately acquired by Virginio Orsini, head of that powerful house. This policy brought Ferdinand I, King of Naples, into conflict with Pope Alexander VI, who was also opposed by Cardinal della Rovere, whose candidature for the papacy had been backed by Ferdinand. Della Rovere fortified himself in his bishopric of Ostia at the Tiber's mouth as Pope Alexander VI formed a league against Naples (25 April 1493) and prepared for war.[

My Final Comment: Things may be disconcerting today. But hey, these are great today when one looks at the history of things and how the Holy Spirit sees us through!





30 comments:

JBS said...

Yes, Pope Francis is a better leader than was Alexander VI.

rcg said...

The most direct and vehement responses to Pope Francis are less damning than faint praise. It makes him sound like a special needs Pope.

Anonymous said...

The issue with Pope Francis is not red shoes nd mozzettas but his refusal to teach clearly the Catholic Faith as it has always been taught. His duty as pope isn't to invent some new dogma but to preserve and pass on the truths of the Faith. To give the world the impression that sacrilegious communions and adultrey and sodomy are permisable is horrifying.

Alexander VI may have lead a scandalous personal life but he NEVER compromissed the teachings of the Faith. Everyone on this planet has personal sins. And most of these stories about Alexander VI are from the slandorous writtings of a diagruntled priest who was his master of ceremonies who didn't get his way. Oh......I think that is still going on today isn't it. Can we say Piero Marini.

And to try and down play the fact that the pope was pushing for the things written in the first relatio is also scandalous. Cardinl Burke and Pell and the others were correct to publicly correct the pope and tell him that he has no authority to change these things.

RSM said...

You forgot to mention the whole Reformation thing that was a result of a lax and immoral late medieval church let by such men as Alexander VI. Don't think it won't happen again.

Cameron said...

rofl rcg

Gene said...

The Pope said in his sermon/speech that, "God is not afraid of new things…." Now, just what kind of theology does such a statement reflect? Just what kind of Doctrine of God does that represent? And, who presents "new" things to God…things that, presumably, God was not aware of. If God is not "surprised," this posits the possibility that God could, indeed, be surprised, meaning that God is neither omniscient, omnipotent, nor self-sufficient. Yeah, and this from the Pope. More careless language…or, maybe he really believes it.

Marc said...

Here's the simple solution. I do not believe what the pope believes. Therefore, I am not in communion with him.

It's not that complicated.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Marc have you joined the Eastern Orthodox?

Gene said...

This Pope is a lot like Ignotus…we don't really know what he believes, we only get oblique comments and suggestive, progressivist language. I wonder if the Pope would refuse to answer the same question Ignotus refused to answer and on the same grounds…it is a trap.

Joe Potillor said...

If we're perfectly honest with what happened, Anon is right, the Pope (through the person of Cardinal B) got caught with his hands in the cookie jar trying to bypass Church teaching...Bishops' blew back and said no...insert the about face and backhanded insults (Pope Francis' closing statement) all totally predictable.

God have mercy on us.

Pater Ignotus said...

Pin/Gene - I am happy to be compared to Pope Francis, a man chosen for leadership by the action of the Holy Spirit.

I am happy to be compared to a man who doesn't give into the temptation to give simplistic answers to complex questions, who isn't cowed by pressure from those who despise him, who knows his own mind AND the mind of the Church.

I am pleased to be compared to a man of great intelligence who clearly loves the Church - not the caricature of the Church that some want to construct, but the true Church that was given to us by Christ.

You honor me, despite yourself. Thank you.

Marc said...

Not yet.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Stick with the SSPX, they are MOT in schism!

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

NOT NOT MOT!

Marc said...

Unfortunately for the SSPX, the Church's doctrine did not begin at the Council of Trent. They have their own problems. Anyway, being in "schism" from the pope is the entire point since he is (stated politely) incorrect about many things.

Chris Rawlings said...

So, Father, what then is the faithful Catholic response to this Pope and the events of the last few weeks? I agree that it is not the Eastern Orthodox, but what is it?

Marc said...

I agree that "going Eastern Orthodox" is not an appropriate response to this particular synod, especially considering the Orthodox Church allows for divorce (and did so even before the schism). So becoming Orthodox over this synod would make no sense.

The greater question, for me, has to do with the nature of the papacy and whether the papal claims are true. One should spend time researching the history and the doctrine of the Church Fathers on that question.

Perhaps questioning how such a controversial institution as the papacy can be said to be a source of unity is a good response to this synod. Or one might respond by questioning whether the "big tent" of allowable doctrinal views in modern Roman Catholicism is consistent with meaningful communion given the Church's history.

Gene said...

Ignotus, there is nothing complex at all about the question another blogger asked you: "Do you believe in the Real Presence and the bodily resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth?" You were unable to give a simple yes or no answer, rather you complained that the question was a "trap" and beneath you to answer. Any believing Priest or Catholic anywhere in the world would not hesitate to answer, quite simply, "yes." Liberals like you love to make simple questions into tortured nonsense…"what do you mean by "believe," what do you mean by "resurrection," etc, etc. Your refusal to answer that simple, fundamental question about belief forever names you for what you are. Others on this blog understand that, as well. So, keep on. Blog readers need to know the enemy, for he is legion...

George said...

Chris:
The faithful response is to stick with the Holy Roman Church. We have God's word to us that "the Gates of Hell will not prevail against it."
Now prevail is an interesting word.
The Allies prevailed over the Axis powers but it took a number of years
and was a long, difficult, painful and destructive slog against determined and resourceful enemies.

Pater Ignotus said...

Pin/Gene - Even if I answered the Q, you'd reject my reply. Though I have said I believe all that the Church teaches to be revealed by God, that's not enough for you. So, yes, it's not just a simple question.

Blog readers also know that since you call President Obama the "HNIC" - "Head N----r In Charge", that you call the bishops "Communists", that you calls African Americans a "feral minority", that you say bishops should be ignored - your views are not worth the proverbial bucket of warm spit.

Gene said...

Remember, Ignotus, the question was not mine. It came from another blogger…and anyone can mouth the words "I believe." Even the Devil can quote Scripture, n'est ce pas…your behavior on this blog is evidence enough of your true colors. I stand by my views and the contexts in which they were stated. I have never denied that I was a sinner…nor have I ever denied that I was a believer. I find you as completely reprehensible as any creature conjured from some primeval slime.

Anonymous 2 said...

This is a good post to help keep matters in perspective. I seem to recall an earlier thread several months ago about Saint Thomas More. Well, didn’t More remain faithful to the Church despite its many glaring weaknesses and abuses and its obvious need for reformation? Why should it be any different for us?

Joe Potillor said...

The answer is of course to stay in the Church...however if the Pope is following a path towards hell, do not follow :D

Gene said...

"On this scaffold
Thomas More lies dead,
Who would not separate
The Body from the Head."

Pater Ignotus said...

Pin/Gene - Do tell us what context excuses your calling the President the "HNIC" - the "Head N----r In Charge."



JBS said...

Pater Ignotus,

Please stop delving into that racist comment. We all know he was wrong to say it, that you were right to identify it, and that Father McDonald was right to delete it.

Jdj said...

Father, good post and thought-provoking.
I for one, though, would ask that you not allow through that evil "HNIC" commenting. It is totally off-subject not to mention tasteless and sinful. Thanks.

Gene said...

Ignotus, I am glad you are highlighting my reference to the person in charge. It is commonly used among many intelligent and perceptive people I know and with whom I work. It is humor with a sharp edge…others may find it a useful acrostic during this last year of his reign.

Gene said...

Ignotus, LOL!

rcg said...

Marc, as a thought, I might be drawn to the Church by a particular Pope but we stay for a Different One. I have been asked about worshiping Mary, etc. we know the answer to that, and it is the same for any Pope.