His Holiness, Pope Francis, Supreme Pontiff of the Holy Catholic Church, still wears the tiara not literally but figuratively by the manner in which His Holiness exercises his power and authority by virtue of His high office.
The pope's proper title,
according to the Vatican's website,
is Bishop of Rome, Vicar of Jesus Christ, Successor of the Prince of
the Apostles,
Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church, Primate of Italy,
Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Roman Province, Sovereign of the
State of Vatican City, Servant of the Servants of God.
I find a bit of hypocrisy in pseudo-traditionalists crying crocodile tears because Pope Francis acts as the Supreme Pontiff of the Church by his actions. If Pope Benedict XVI or any other pope of a more conservative theology did so, His Holiness would be applauded. In fact many traditionalists were flummoxed that Pope Benedict did not impose as fully as His Holiness could have, the direction of the Liturgy that His Holiness modeled.
We see Pope Francis acting in a very pre-Vatican II papal way in terms of imposing His Holiness' agenda for the Church on those who are subject to His Holiness which is every Catholic in the world. It is not only in terms of Faith and Morals but governance as well. The Knights of Malta have learned this in the most difficult way and so have the bishops of the last two synods.
Synodality is advisory. The pope has the final world as His Holiness has had with Amoris Laetitia. His interpretation of the most controversial chapter is the one that stands contrary to others who might want a course direction or clarification. His Holiness is under no obligation to say more or less than what His Holiness has chosen to say or not say. That's the way it is. True traditional Catholics understood this quite well prior to Vatican II but not so much now because they are as much "coloring book Catholics" as so many liberals are.
The good thing about Pope Francis authoritarian bent is that His Holiness is recovering pre-Vatican II papal authority, a top down approach but couching it in a stealthy way as a bottom up sort of thing, which is really isn't if the truth be told. Thus in continuity with this recovered theology from the pre-Vatican II Church, a more conservative or traditionalist pope should take note.
I think that all pastors who have pastoral councils insist as Church law does, that these councils are advisory, but most pastors know how to work the system in a sort of lobbying way to get want they want despite the best efforts of councils to usurp his canonical authority. Pope Francis is a role model for these kinds of priests.
27 comments:
"We see Pope Francis acting in a very pre-Vatican II papal way in terms of imposing His Holiness' agenda for the Church on those who are subject to His Holiness which is every Catholic in the world."
That is not the Traditional understanding of exercising papal power. This kind of belief begins around the time of Pius IX. The Knights of Malta are a SOVEREIGN entity. The pope does not get to decide who stays or goes any more than he can tell the president of any country on earth that he should go or stay. And he has no authority to choose a new Grand Master. He is a bully. Why the Grand Master resigned is a bigger mystery than Benedict's resignation.
Something evil this way comes.
"I find a bit of hypocrisy in pseudo-traditionalists crying crocodile tears because Pope Francis acts as the Supreme Pontiff of the Church by his actions."
Or could it be that these "pseudo-traditionalists" perceive a difference between a benevolent pontiff and a self-centered controller?
In any event, Benedict XVI exercised less personal power, and Francis has exercised far more, than has been typical of past popes.
Do you write for the Onion occasionally?
From the rumours of some apparently in the know, Bergoglio was always a power freak, the "my way or no way" type, which he hides very well under his public image. I suppose much of life in South American countries is reduced to authoritarian politics the way he does. But I think he has to realise that the future of the Church is Africa which can be very "rigid" in its orthodox beliefs, and trying to water down Catholicism using sentimental pastoralism in West will bear little fruit.
Fr AJM
Either your post was heavily ironic, or you have lost the plot, and probably your marbles as well.
Popes 'pre-Vatican II' did not have a personal agenda for the Church; still less would they use their authority to impose one.
If Francis thinks he can get away with imposing his own opinions and predilections on the rest of us, he clearly does not understand the nature of the Petrine Office, and is heading for an almighty fall. More popes have been deposed than have voluntarily abdicated.
It's all coming to a head this year. Watch this space.
The Popes can eliminate all the "window dressing" that they please from the Papacy. That is, they can toss aside the Triple Tiara. They can toss aside the sedia gestatoria. They can trade a magnificent limo for heap.
But Popes possess God-given power and authority that cannot be watered down.
Pope Benedict XVI imposed his God-given authority as he deemed fit. Nobody stopped Pope Benedict when he believed that his decision was Holy Ghost-inspired.
Nobody stopped him when he imposed Assisi III upon the Church. Pope Benedict XVI shared the stage with a witch-doctor who offered a hymn to his false god. Nobody stopped Pope Benedict XVI when he promulgated Summorum Pontificum.
Nobody prevented Pope Saint John Paul II from having imposed, according to his understanding, Holy Ghost-inspired reforms upon the Church.
Pope Blessed Paul VI pressed the Novus Ordo into our faces...and that was that.
Enraged Cardinals were helpless to have prevented Pope Saint John XXIII from having more forward with Vatican II.
Pope Venerable Pius XII awoke one morning, then declared that the Holy Ghost inspired the Ecumenical Movement. Pope Venerable Pius XII had launched the Catholic Church into the Ecumenical Movement...and that was that.
Pope Venerable Pius XII determined that the Latin Church was in need of radical liturgical reforms, which he imposed as he had deemed fit.
Nobody within the Church had the authority to overrule Pope Venerable Pius XII's radical liturgical reforms...and that was that.
All of Rome's ecumenical talk for decades about "finding a new way to exercise" the Papacy, and discarding of Papal "power" symbols have altered the fact that the Roman Pontiff governs the Church.
He promulgates this or that document...he imposes upon the Church this or that action...and that's that.
All the demands, petitions, and even full-page newspaper ads from certain Catholic groups designed to inform the Roman Pontiff that he WILL rescind this "heretical" Apostolic Exhortation, and that he and NewRome/New/Church will "convert" to that group's "traditional" understanding of the Faith are preposterous.
God has invested his Roman Pontiff with awesome power and authority to teach, govern, and sanctify the Holy People of God...and that's that.
A Catholic is called to accept that. That is what God demands of His Holy People.
Deo gratias, the Catholic Church proclaims without hesitation that "in the Apostolic See the Catholic Religion has always been preserved immaculate."
Pax.
Mark Thomas.
"But you, dearly beloved Sons, remember that in all that concerns the faith, morals, and government of the Church, the words which Christ said of Himself: “he that gathereth not with me scattereth” [Mt 12:30], can be applied to the Roman Pontiff who holds the place of God on earth.
"Ground your whole wisdom therefore, in an absolute obedience and a joyous and constant adherence to this Chair of Peter."
— Pope Pius IX, Apostolic Letter Per Tristissima.
Father
But he uses that power for the sole purpose of spreading heresy by nod, wink and bully boy tactics.
I don't hold Pope Francis responsible for all this, since it's clearer than ever now that he's merely a puppet controlled by the German bishops. Things will only get worse as his incipient dementia takes hold. It's very sad that things worked out like this.
'as so many liberals are. '
And where are the actions of this sort against liberal groups?
Victor:
“From the rumors of some apparently in the know”
“Rumors” of some “apparently” in the know are not evidence and propagating such “rumors” without evidence to support them may even be bordering on calumny. So, evidence please.
Mark Thomas:
Give it up, Mark. You forget: “Pope Benedict good; Pope Francis “baaaaaaad.”
“How many fingers am I holding up, Winston?”
Mark Thomas - yes a POPE can do all the things you say. But I do think believing in the Catholic Faith is kind of necessary for someone to be validly elected a pope. Trent taught de fide that the commandments of God are not impossible to follow. Does AL uphold that teaching? The bishops of Malta came out and clearly said the opposite and it was published in the Vatican newspaper. And there are the stories of collusion between cardinals to get Bergoglio elected. If any of these are true then the man we acknowledge is pope isn't pope.
Mark Thomas, Pope St John Paul II The Great and Pope Benedict XVI were two validly elected popes. I will leave you to read between the lines ...
Mark Thomas
No-one disputes that a pope has the authority to summon a General Council. Also, only the pope has the authority to change Canon Law - the canonists may decide what changes are necessary, but the pope has to authorize them. A pope may make changes to the Curia - it's his court after all. Administrative decisions are pragmatic, not Divinely inspired.
A pope does not have the authority to change or invent doctrine, and is bound to uphold Tradition. Benedict XVI (who, as cardinal, was sceptical of the Assisi business) might attend an inter-religious gathering, but in doing so is not 'imposing' anything.
Regarding the liturgy, it is clear that by the year 2000 Ratzinger was questioning whether the pope really had the authority to make liturgical changes; see the chapter on 'Rite' in 'Spirit of the Liturgy' (p159 et seq.) Summorum Pontificum reinforces this as it is based on the fact that the Roman Rite (or any orthodox Rite) cannot be abrogated. In 1969 it was simply assumed that Paul VI could do this, and certainly Pius XII had set an example in the Bugnini-inspired Holy Week Ordo. Benedict XVI was careful not to 'impose' anything.
If only one pope in the long history of the papacy can be shown to have embraced and taught heresy, then your entire argument collapses, since the Holy Ghost cannot contradict Himself.
In the event its of interest, please see my Apologia for the orthodoxy of Amoris Laetitia. https://reducedculpability.blog/2017/01/19/amoris-laetitia-an-apologia-for-its-orthodoxy/
"We see Pope Francis acting in a very pre-Vatican II papal way in terms of imposing His Holiness' agenda for the Church on those who are subject to His Holiness which is every Catholic in the world."
What could be further from the truth? The idea of a pope having a personal agenda to impose on the Church is a strictly post-Vatican II concept.
And any idea of a pope speaking for the Holy Spirit is simply blasphemy--the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit? No human being, pope or pauper, has a private pipeline to God.
Mark Thomas said... "God has invested his Roman Pontiff with awesome power and authority to teach, govern, and sanctify the Holy People of God...and that's that.
A Catholic is called to accept that. That is what God demands of His Holy People."
Then why do you accept Pope Formosus as a valid pope?
His Holiness Pope Stephen VI declared him to be an antipope. So did the Roman Pontiff Sergius III.
Pope Formosus was an antipope. Two popes have so ruled. A Catholic is called to accept that. That is what God demands of His Holy People.
The conditions required for ex cathedra(Infallible) teaching are mentioned in the decree by Vatican I which formally defined Papal Infallibility:
>The pontiff must teach in his public and official capacity as pastor and doctor of all Christians, not merely in his private capacity as a theologian, preacher or allocutionist, nor in his capacity as a temporal prince or as a mere ordinary of the Diocese of Rome. It must be clear that he speaks as spiritual head of the Church universal. (The Pope is not infallible when taking disciplinary actions or in his administrative decisions.)
>Then it is only when, in this capacity, he teaches some doctrine of faith or morals that he is infallible.
>Further it must be sufficiently evident that he intends to teach with all the fullness and finality of his supreme Apostolic authority, in other words that he wishes to determine some point of doctrine in an absolutely final and irrevocable way, or to define it in the technical sense (see DEFINITION). These are well-recognized formulas by means of which the defining intention may be manifested.
>Finally for an ex cathedra decision it must be clear that the pope intends to bind the whole Church.
The Pope is also said to be infallible when he canonizes a person and therefore officially proclaims that person a saint.
Canonization is the final and irreformable judgment of the Church, and therefore we are bound, as her dutiful children, to believe that saints duly canonized are in heaven.
There are different levels of Church teaching.
"De fide" and "Fides ecclesiastica" are the highest level and are infallible teachings.
Sententia certa -Church teachings which the Magisterium clearly decided for, albeit without claiming infallibility.
sententia communis -teachings which are popular but within the free range of theological research.
sententia probabilis-teachings with low degree of certainty.
John Nolan said..."Benedict XVI (who, as cardinal, was sceptical of the Assisi business) might attend an inter-religious gathering, but in doing so is not 'imposing' anything."
Part 2 of 2 continued:
2. As the SSPX noted in 2011 A.D., the following motive, which is linked to the United Nations, also pertains to the manner in which Catholics, in line with Pope Benedict XVI declarations, are to understand Assisi:
http://archives.sspx.org/district_news/2011/renewing_the_assisi_scandal_fr_cacqueray-9-13-2011.htm
The SSPX declared:
"The motive: the civic peace promoted by the United Nations.
"In 1986, John Paul II invited all the religions “in this year 1986, designated by the U.N. as the Year of Peace, to promote a special gathering to pray for peace in the city of Assisi.”
"During his message for peace of January 1, 2011, the date on which he announced the gathering at Assisi on October 27, 2011, Benedict XVI signed these revealing lines:
"Without this fundamental experience [of the great religions] it becomes difficult to guide societies towards universal ethical principles and to establish at the national and international level a legal order which fully recognizes and respects fundamental rights and freedoms as these are set forth in the goals — sadly still disregarded or contradicted — of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights…
"All this is necessary and consistent with the respect for the dignity and worth of the human person enshrined by the world’s peoples in the 1945 Charter of the United Nations…"
====================================================================
3. On the 20th Anniversary of Assisi I, Pope Benedict XVI declared that we are also to understand Assisi in light of Sacred Scripture:
"Despite the differences that mark the various religious itineraries, recognition of God's existence, which human beings can only arrive at by starting from the experience of creation (cf. Rom 1: 20), must dispose believers to view other human beings as brothers and sisters.
"Yet, when the religious sense reaches maturity it gives rise to a perception in the believer that faith in God, Creator of the universe and Father of all, must encourage relations of universal brotherhood among human beings."
========================================================================
There you have it. Pope Benedict XVI imposed upon us that in regard to Assisi-related gatherings:
-- We are to understand Assisi gatherings as representing the "maturity" of our "religious sense" as Catholics, based upon Romans 1:20. In turn, that will inspire the Church to establish Assisi gatherings, which, in turn, promote "universal brotherhood among human beings."
-- We are to understand that Assisi gatherings are linked to Vatican II (Nostra Atate).
-- We are to understand that Assisi gatherings are linked to the United Nations Organization. That is, Assisi gatherings are linked to the goals set forth by the 1948 A.D. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as well as, the 1945 A.D. Charter of the United Nations.
That is what Pope Benedict imposed via Assisi III.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mark Thomas said... "God has invested his Roman Pontiff with awesome power and authority to teach, govern, and sanctify the Holy People of God...and that's that.
A Catholic is called to accept that. That is what God demands of His Holy People."
DJR said..."Then why do you accept Pope Formosus as a valid pope?"
1. What does that have to do with the fact that God has authorized His Holiness Pope Francis to teach, govern, and sanctify the Holy People of God?
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Jan said..."Mark Thomas, Pope St John Paul II The Great and Pope Benedict XVI were two validly elected popes. I will leave you to read between the lines ..."
Jan, rather than read between the lines, I will leave you to read the following lines from the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass:
"Most merciful Father, we humbly pray and beseech Thee, through Jesus Christ Thy Son, Our Lord, to accept and to bless these + gifts, these + presents, these + holy unspotted Sacrifices, which we offer up to Thee, in the first place, for Thy Holy Catholic Church, that it may please Thee to grant her peace, to preserve, unite, and govern her throughout the world;...
"...as also for Thy servant Francis, our Pope...
"...and for all orthodox believers and all who profess the Catholic and Apostolic faith.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mark Thomas said... "God has invested his Roman Pontiff with awesome power and authority to teach, govern, and sanctify the Holy People of God...and that's that.
A Catholic is called to accept that. That is what God demands of His Holy People."
DJR said..."Then why do you accept Pope Formosus as a valid pope?"
1. What does that have to do with the fact that God has authorized His Holiness Pope Francis to teach, govern, and sanctify the Holy People of God?
Wasn't Pope Formosus authorized in the same manner?
And weren't Popes Stephen VI and Sergius III also authorized in the same manner?
Do you obey the rulings issued by the Sovereign Pontiffs Stephen VI and Sergius III regarding the fact that Formosus was an antipope?
DJR
Formosus (891-896) was not an antipope. To be listed as such your reign must coincide with that of a valid pope. The last antipope was Felix V (1439-1449) who was elected by the Council of Basle in opposition to Eugenius IV (1431-1447). Felix submitted to Eugenius's successor Nicholas V (1447-1455). He was made a cardinal and died in 1451.
If Benedict XVI were to announce that his resignation was invalid (for example if it were made under duress), then his successor's election could be declared uncanonical and on Benedict's death the See would become vacant. In this unlikely event, Francis could then be officially listed as an antipope.
Mark Thomas:
"That is what Pope Benedict imposed via Assisi III."
Really? Did he really impose anything? What he did was to conduct an ecumenical prayer service with participants from other faiths. Nothing was imposed that I can see.
DJR said..."Pope Formosus was an antipope. Two popes have so ruled. A Catholic is called to accept that. That is what God demands of His Holy People."
The last time that I checked, the Church of Rome listed Pope Formosus as a Pope. That is good enough for me.
That said, I have it on good authority that the following folks were not Popes:
-- Biff Binger...born and raised aboard a garbage scow. Claimed to have been Pope. Turned out that he had only met the Pope. A Pope. Pete Pope of Peoria.
-- Mrs. Edna May-Mae May of Maymay, Massachusetts...was born on a May day. Credited with having coined the term "Mayday." Received a phone call one day in May 1954 from Pope Venerable Pius XII.
"Hello. Edna?"
"May...I ask who's calling?
"No."
"Why?"
"Edna, you're not Pope."
"Bah!"
Edna then took up knitting and said, I'll show that Pius XII!.". Edna knitted a triple tiara. Knitted a sedia gestatoria. Knitted a Church. Knitted a Monsignor Bugnini. Knitted empty pews. Knitted her way out of the Pope business.
Finally, from yhe always accurate, never wrong, second-most-read international traditional Catholic blog...they love and respect the hierarchical Church and...(brace yourself...don't laugh too hard)...the...ummm...Pope.
I, of course, am talking about that wonder traditional Catholic blog...
Rorotting Chili.
-- "Pope" Francis...never Pope. "Pope" Francis became "Pope" when he teamed with the Illumanati, Trilateral Commission, Bilderbergers, Bohemian Grove, New World Order, George Soros, the Jews, Monsignor Bugnini's relatives, the Jews, Rockefellers, the Jews...did I mention the Jews?...
...Cardinal Danneels, Monsignor Ricca, the Jew...oh, I mentioned them...Monsignor Pinto, Cardinal Kasper, the International Left, Planned Parenthood, and...
...Willie "Woodstock" Williams...never mind about him!
...to blackmail Pope Benedict XVI, The Real Pope, to resign the Papacy.
Big, bad "Pope" Francis keeps Pope Benedict XVI, The Real Pope, drugged.
BREAKING!!! EXCLUSIVE TO ROROTTING CHILI...
Report from Rorotting Chili source who just visited Pope Benedict XVI, The Real Pope...our source had to disguise himself as a pretzel to sneak past the heavy security designed to keep The Real Pope prisoner.
Source: "No doubt about it. Pope Benedict XVI, The Real Pope, is drugged daily. Just look at his eyes! He's drugged, I tell you! He's drugged! Look at his eyes! Look at his eyes!"
=======================================================================
There you go. A list of false Popes. As far as "Pope" Francis being a false Pope...never, ever doubt Rorotting Chili. Never!
Pax.
Mark Thomas
P.S. The "look at his eyes, look at his eyes...he's drugged I tell you...he's drugged...just look at his eyes...look at his eyes!" nonsense is based upon a comment that I had actually read on a popular traditional Catholic blog following a public appearance last year by Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI.
"He's drugged, I tell you. He's drugged. Look at his eyes! Look at his eyes!"
It is incredible that adult Catholics who believe such nonsense.
Mark Thomas, I reiterate that Pope St John Paul II The Great and Pope Benedict were two validly elected Popes. Benedict XVI is on record as saying that when he resigned he didn't resign or relinquish the spiritual side of the papacy only the day to day administration of the papacy. In that case, there may be people who may privately insert Benedict's name into that part of the Mass or, indeed, pray for his intentions at the beginning of the rosary. Thankfully, Rome cannot censure Catholics for what is unspoken, despite the evidence that there is a crackdown on any negative comments of this papacy, including excommunication. It seems we are under the same situation that St Athanasius endured until such time as the pope of the day recanted his heresy.
Mark Thomas
You really do read a lot of garbage, then filter it through your own warped imagination before spewing it onto the pages of this blog. How old are you? 17?
If you had half a brain you would see that Rorate Caeli is quite a serious forum and has some distinguished and well-informed contributors. You don't have to agree with each and every comment; as with all media one is obliged to apply one's critical faculties. It closed its combox shortly after Bergoglio's election, due to the large number of negative comments.
I suspect you have a framed copy of Gregory VII's 'Dictatus Papae' on your desk, since you obviously believe that the pope is 'set above nations' and 'ruler of the world'. It wasn't true then, and is even less true now. The first pope to wear the triregnum was an Avignon pope who did the bidding of the French crown.
Pox
John Nolan
Post a Comment