Definitely not.
There have been a number of scandalous Popes( like Alex6 ,for one) and I think it is a sign of the Divine origin, protection and guidance of the Church that the Popes and clergy have been unable to destroy the Church and shipwreck the Bark of Peter when far better people have started churches that have been shipwrecked or have gone extinct long ago.
The sinfulness,stupidity,follies etc of varied popes do not destroy the charism of the Infalliblity of the Church,Scripture and Tradition or the Extraodinary Magisterium exercise of Papal Infallibility( which is not sinlessness but preservation from error in faith and morals in particular ways and circumstances)
There have been many saints who were popes and many mediocre and visionless ones but Christ is still the Everlasting Head of the Church and the Catholic Bishop of Rome is His Vicar or Chief Steward as Successor of St Peter.
2007-10-10 14:28:23
·
answer #1
·
answered by James O 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
No there were false popes. There have been several periods of time in the history of the Church where more than one person claimed to be Pope at the same time. Those individuals who were not legitimately elected are called anti-Popes (false Popes) and there have been about 17 of them. The first was about the year 252 after the persecution by Roman Emperor Decius. Once the persecution ended a dispute arose about whether those who had denied their faith could be readmitted to the Church. Pope Cornelius and Bishop Cyprian of Carthage taught that bishops could grant God's forgiveness even for serious sins, like apostasy, even though the penances were long and severe. A party of rigorists, headed by the Roman priest Novatian, advocated permanent exclusion of all apostates from the Church. Claiming that Pope Cornelius had betrayed his trust, Novatian had himself elected as Pope by his followers.
The most memorable period lasted from 1378 to 1417 and is known as the great western schism. During this period of time, Western Christendom was torn between two, and at times three, rival claimants to the papacy. Each of the rival claimants reflected national interests with the division initially taking place shortly after the death of Pope Gregory XI and the election of Urban VI as his successor. The disputes were finally resolved at the Council of Constance (1414-1417)
2007-10-10 21:11:51
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
You said:
>> All bishops are ordained into apostolic succession and ordain priests to share in their authority. <<
And I would agree. Padrecito mio, you are making a good Orthodox (and dare I say "Anglican") point with that statement!!
All Bishops ARE equal! That was the way of the Early Church. Even the venerable East only goes as far as to perhaps call the Bishop of Rome "The First Amongst Equals".
Notice St. Ignatius of Antioch says: "Wheresoever the bishop appears, there let the people be, even as wheresoever Christ is, there is the Catholic Church."
N.B. "The Bishop". NO mention of a Pope. Nor, specifically of the Bishop of Rome.
One could certainly make the argument that Antioch, Jerusalem, Philippi and Alexandria had Chief Bishops prior to the City of Rome.
2007-10-10 21:17:40
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Unfortunately, no, but not surprisingly.
Christ promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against His Church - but He never promised tha sinless people would lead it.
2007-10-10 21:09:50
·
answer #4
·
answered by SpiritRoaming 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
no, not always. But the church remains in spite of some.
I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. -Matthew 16:19.
2007-10-10 21:44:28
·
answer #5
·
answered by great gig in the sky 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I don't need to look up your site, but in Medieval times, the "throne of Peter" was available for a price or favoritism. The practice was "simony", named after the sorcer in the N.T. who wanted to buy entrance into heaven.
One Simonite was a wealthy pirate. Think he was John XXIII. Ladies were afraid to go to Mass as they may be dragged to his bed chamber.
A second pope was elected to replace John, but he claimed infallibility and refused to resign. Then another pope was elected. And all three threw curses at each other calling the other Antichrist.
Such is the facade of papal infallibility but this charade was predicted in Bible prophecy that identifies Antichrist. See http://abiblecode.tripod.com
Shalom, peace in Jesus, Ben Yeshua
2007-10-10 21:08:47
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
5⤋
All have sinned and fall short the glory of God.
2007-10-10 21:15:18
·
answer #7
·
answered by 777 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
thank you for posting this.
2007-10-10 21:01:12
·
answer #8
·
answered by Midge 7
·
1⤊
0⤋