Is Pope Francis a Heretic?

 

I want to call your attention first to this from respected Vatican journalist Edward Pentin:

The well-known and respected Dominican theologian Father Aidan Nichols has put his name to an historic open letter to bishops claiming Pope Francis is guilty of heresy and calling on them to formally correct him.

The letter, released on April 30, the feast day in the traditional calendar of St. Catherine of Siena — the 14th century saint famous for her criticism of Pope Gregory XI — states that Francis has on occasions “knowingly and persistently” denied what he knows is divinely revealed Church teaching.

Such words and actions, the signatories continue, “amount to a comprehensive rejection of Catholic teaching on marriage and sexual activity, on the moral law, and on grace and the forgiveness of sins.”

They add that they have taken this measure “as a last resort to respond to the accumulating harm caused by Pope Francis’s words and actions over several years, which have given rise to one of the worst crises in the history of the Catholic Church.”

The signatories call on bishops to investigate the claims they put forth, and then correct Pope Francis by calling on him “to reject these heresies.”

If he should “persistently refuse,” they call on the bishops to declare that Francis has “freely deprived himself of the papacy.”

Pope Francis has not been without controversy over doctrine during his papacy. From his encyclical letter on stewardship of the environment, Laudato Si, to his post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation on marriage and the family, Amoris Laetitia, to his interviews with the Italian atheist Eugenio Scalfari, Pope Francis has seemed to want to live up to what he infamously told a small group of friends: “It is not to be excluded that I will enter history as the one who split the Catholic Church.”

In questioning the Pope on doctrine, we first had the dubia, a set of five questions from 4 Cardinals of the Church asking for clarification on some points of doctrine in Amoris Laetitia. Then came a letter from clergy and scholars to the college of cardinals of the Church pointing out the “heresies” the authors found in Amoris Laetitia. Then came a filial correction letter to the Pope, expressing grave concern about many papal pronouncements, but stopping short of claiming heresy.

But this newest letter is different:

“We limit ourselves to accusing him of heresy on occasions where he has publicly denied truths of the faith, and then consistently acted in a way that demonstrates that he disbelieves these truths that he has publicly denied,” the authors state.

They clarify that they are not claiming Pope Francis has “denied truths of the faith in pronouncements that satisfy the conditions for an infallible papal teaching.”

“We assert that this would be impossible, since it would be incompatible with the guidance given to the Church by the Holy Spirit,” they state.

In light of this situation, the authors call upon the bishops of the Church to take action since a “heretical papacy may not be tolerated or dissimulated to avoid a worse evil.”

Pope Francis may just ignore this as he has ignored all that has proceeded, but it is hard to see how he can.

Stay tuned.

Published in Religion & Philosophy
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 47 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Keith Rice (View Comment):
    While I believe that the Catholic Church has become so corrupt as to be virtually in league with Satan, I don’t believe that the doctrine should be easily dismissed.

    The reality is that without radical change, every single institution is subject to entropy, and after 18 centuries the Church is deeply entropic. The only question I have is: Is Francis contributing or combating?

    One of original twelve was arguably in league with Satan, but that didn’t mean the entire Church was corrupt. If I were a devout Catholic, the thing I could not accept would be a pope changing 2000+ years of Church teaching. At that point, short of Divine Intervention, I’d wash my hands of it completely and consider becoming a Jew.

    • #31
  2. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Vance Richards (View Comment):
    Serious question. If the Pope goes way off on core doctrine, what is the process to resolve that? Is there some sort of RC Mueller investigation or a recall vote (“Oh I see a puff of white smoke being sucked back down the chimney . . .”)?

    Not really. No one gets to sit in judgment of the pope except succeeding popes. Pope Honorius I was declared a heretic and was anathematized, so it’s happened before. But, for those of us in communion with the Church it’s a waiting in patience, penance, and lamentation game. I suppose that’s what’s meant by “practicing” the faith.

    • #32
  3. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    Vance Richards (View Comment):
    Serious question. If the Pope goes way off on core doctrine, what is the process to resolve that? Is there some sort of RC Mueller investigation or a recall vote (“Oh I see a puff of white smoke being sucked back down the chimney . . .”)?

    Ha!  That image made me laugh.

    As to your question, there isn’t one.  The Council of Constance ended the Great Western Schism when there were 3 rival popes/anti-popes by paving the way for the election of a new pope, but technically one of the 3 resigned — so there’s still an ongoing debate over whether even an Ecumenical Council has the authority to depose a pope.

     

    • #33
  4. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge
    Fake John/Jane Galt
    @FakeJohnJaneGalt

    Sadly the Church is the Pope and the Pope is the Church.  Thus the Church now holds that things I thought of as sins are now acceptable.  Homosexuality, Adultery, Fornication, things I was taught were sins are now practiced by the clergy.  The Church has now moved on.  While I have not.  It now seems that I am the heretic, even though my values and beliefs have not changed.  Thus the world moves on and I go to hell.

    • #34
  5. Keith Rice Inactive
    Keith Rice
    @KeithRice

    Manny (View Comment):

    Keith Rice (View Comment):
    While I believe that the Catholic Church has become so corrupt as to be virtually in league with Satan, I don’t believe that the doctrine should be easily dismissed.

    Goodness gracious. There are certainly human problems, but in league with Satan? What exactly leads you to something that??? And before you answer, are you Catholic?

    In that I don’t believe in Satan I tried to explain how institutions become corrupt, self serving and increasingly distant from the original mission. Over the centuries, the Church has gone perhaps 180 degrees off from its mission.

    • #35
  6. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    Keith Rice (View Comment):
    Over the centuries, the Church has gone perhaps 180 degrees off from its mission.

    And what is its mission?

    • #36
  7. Scott Wilmot Member
    Scott Wilmot
    @ScottWilmot

    Analysis: Serious and unserious allegations of papal heresy

    The arguments advanced by the 19 authors of an open letter to the bishops of the world, argues (canon lawyer) Ed Condon of CNA, do not appear to make a legal, or consistent, argument against the Holy Father regarding the specific charge of canonical heresy.

    On April 30, a group of 19 Catholics released an open letter to the bishops of the world, accusing the pope of heresy and demanding that the college of bishops act to make him “adjure.”

    According to the letter’s signers, which include a handful of prominent academics, Pope Francis has committed the canonical crime of heresy, which entails publicly and obstinately doubting or denying credenda teachings – those Catholics are required, according to canon law  “to believe with divine and Catholic faith.”

    But despite the letter’s strident claims, the arguments advanced by its authors do not appear to make a legal, or consistent, argument against the Holy Father regarding the specific charge of canonical heresy.

    Despite the insistence that the pope has committed the “canonical delict of heresy,” the letter’s authors appear unable to distinguish between the crime of heresy and what their letter actually appears to allege – material heresy.

    Material heresy describes a situation in which a person has, in word or deed, manifested an opinion in doubt of or contradiction to a truth to be believed by divine and Catholic faith. Such a situation should, of course, be corrected by the Church. But the “evidence” presented in the letter appears, to many initial critics, to amount to little more than inferences open to interpretation.

    Committing the canonical crime of heresy requires the obstinate doubt or denial of a credenda teaching, and like any crime, has to be clearly manifested in the external forum and not merely inferred to be a person’s inner disposition.

    Legally, the criterion of obstinacy is demonstrated when a legitimate correction or warning is demonstrably rejected. The letter’s authors insist that the pope’s obstinacy – or “pertinacity” as they prefer – is demonstrated ipso facto by statements from the pope which he should, by his education experience and office, know better than to make.

    • #37
  8. Scott Wilmot Member
    Scott Wilmot
    @ScottWilmot

    https://twitter.com/PetriOP/status/1123751333067206657

    Can. 1372 A person who makes recourse against an act of the Roman Pontiff to an ecumenical council or the college of bishops is to be punished with a censure.

    Can. 1373 A person who publicly incites among subjects animosities or hatred against the Apostolic See or an ordinary because of some act of power or ecclesiastical ministry or provokes subjects to disobey them is to be punished by an interdict or other just penalties.

    • #38
  9. Scott Wilmot Member
    Scott Wilmot
    @ScottWilmot

    Jimmy Akin defines many of the terms in use regarding this discussion and after laying out his case sums things up thusly:

    The Open Letter has many other flaws, but its chief one is that it fails to make the case that the present pope is guilty of heresy. To do that, it would need to show the following:

    1. The Magisterium has infallibly defined some specific truth
    2. It has infallibly defined that this specific truth is divinely revealed, creating a dogma
    3. The pope has been baptized (that’s easy)
    4. The pope’s words or actions indicate that he refuses to believe the dogma
    5. His words or actions cannot be understood in a way consistent with the dogma
    6. He does so obstinately

    If you can’t do those things, then don’t waste the public’s time.

    In particular, don’t waste our time citing irrelevant documents that don’t prove your point, and don’t waste our time—as the signatories of the Open Letter do—with loopy charges regarding a pastoral staff that the pope has carried or a cross he has worn.

    It’s one thing to ask for clarifications, voice concerns or express disagreement, but making charges of heresy is another matter.

    It’s gravely reckless and irresponsible to charge anyone with an ecclesiastical crime as serious as heresy if you can’t prove it, and it’s even worse to do so with regard to the pope, given the scandal, confusion, and risk of individual schism that it will create for the faithful.

    • #39
  10. Scott Wilmot Member
    Scott Wilmot
    @ScottWilmot

    Hmmm, I just pasted from an article in my previous comment and this is missing for some reason – at least I see a large blank area that should contain this:

    The Magisterium has infallibly defined some specific truth

    It has infallibly defined that this specific truth is divinely revealed, creating a dogma

    The pope has been baptized (that’s easy)

    The pope’s words or actions indicate that he refuses to believe the dogma

    His words or actions cannot be understood in a way consistent with the dogma

    He does so obstinately

    • #40
  11. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    I thought TnT ably addressed these complaints against the letter, starting at about 50 minutes.

    To summarize:

    “Many cohabiting couples have the grace of matrimony.” — Francis

    Akin et al didn’t defend adulterous couples receiving Eucharist. AL defenders said Francis didn’t say they should receive. Now they’re saying there’s an “orthodox” way to interpret what Francis said in AL. Weaponized ambiguity. 

    Francis did publish his approval of the Argentinian bishops’ heretical understanding of AL as “the only correct one.” 

    “I think the intentions of Martin Luther were not mistaken. He was a reformer. Perhaps some methods were not correct. And today, Lutherans, Catholics, Protestants, all of us agree on the doctrine of justification. On this point, which is very important, he did not err.” — Francis

    He seems to persist in this heresy as evidenced by placing a statue of Luther in the Vatican and issuing a stamp portraying Luther before the crucifix. 

    “We are profoundly grateful for the spiritual gifts received through the Reformation.” — Francis, Bishop of Rome

    Luther’s rebellion, denial of the sacraments (signs instituted by Christ for the imparting of grace), canonical redactions, subsequent religious wars and destruction of souls wasn’t schism, but young Catholics who attend TLM are schismatics? Francis is supposed to defending the faith! Not teaching heresy.

    Francis’s “defense” is to stay quiet. Although he appears to persist in these errors (four filial corrections including the dubia unanswered), his silence is the passive form of weaponized ambiguity and allows defenders to continue attacks on his critics. It seems diabolic to me. But, God has a plan and I have to believe He will bring good out this. If the Church can be born out of the Crucifixion of our Lord, it can certainly survive Francis. 

     

    • #41
  12. Scott Wilmot Member
    Scott Wilmot
    @ScottWilmot

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):
    I thought TnT ably addressed these complaints against the letter, starting at about 50 minutes.

    Haven’t had a chance to listen yet. Thanks for posting the video.

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):
    Francis’s “defense” is to stay quiet.

    And to let his minions and sycophants carry out the agenda.

    • #42
  13. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Scott Wilmot (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):
    I thought TnT ably addressed these complaints against the letter, starting at about 50 minutes.

    Haven’t had a chance to listen yet. Thanks for posting the video.

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):
    Francis’s “defense” is to stay quiet.

    And to let his minions and sycophants carry out the agenda.

    Yep. TnT aren’t in agreement with calling Francis a heretic. They think that was a mistake to put that accusation in the first paragraph of the letter. Instead, they’re staying faithful to the Church and its teachings while “resisting” Francis’s heretical ideas. Who knew we’d be calling ourselves The Resistance??

    • #43
  14. Scott Wilmot Member
    Scott Wilmot
    @ScottWilmot

    Well, at least he hasn’t lost his base.

    • #44
  15. Scott Wilmot Member
    Scott Wilmot
    @ScottWilmot

    Those crazy whacky Germans again. When will Pope Francis do his job of defending the faith and call these nut jobs heretics?

    #DefendTheFaith

    • #45
  16. Keith Rice Inactive
    Keith Rice
    @KeithRice

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    Keith Rice (View Comment):
    Over the centuries, the Church has gone perhaps 180 degrees off from its mission.

    And what is its mission?

    Represent the Body of Christ in the world.

    • #46
  17. Scott Wilmot Member
    Scott Wilmot
    @ScottWilmot

    Dorothy Cummings McLean has a good roundup of those who support, have reservations about, and strongly oppose the Open Letter accusing the pope of heresy:

    Leading Catholics react to Open Letter accusing Pope Francis of heresy

    • #47
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.