Is it possible for someone to be an antipope even though the majority of cardinals claim he is pope? The case of Antipope Anacletus II proves that it is possible for a majority of cardinals to claim a man is pope while he, in reality, is an antipope. In 1130, a majority of cardinals voted for Cardinal Peter Pierleone to be pope. He called himself Anacletus II. He was proclaimed pope and ruled Rome for eight years by vote and consent of a absolute majority of the cardinals despite the fact he was a antipope. In 1130, just prior to the election of antipope Anacletus, a small minority of cardinals elected the real pope: Pope Innocent II. How is this possible? St. Bernard said "the 'sanior pars' (the wiser portion)... declared in favor of Innocent II. By this he probably meant a majority of the cardinal-bishops." (St. Bernard of Clairvaux by Leon Christiani, Page 72) Again, how is this possible when the absolute majority of cardinals voted for A...
Comments
The notion that only members of the hierarchy are allowed to excercise the faculties of intellect and will given to them by God is a cult-like--not Catholic--conviction. During the time of the Arian crisis, should lay people have restricted themselves to a studied neutrality about the subject of Christ's divinity, until the crisis was over? No! Lay people cannot declare doctrine or remove an antipope, but they don't have to pretend not to know what they do know, in the meanwhile.
It is deeply disturbing that people seem ready to pit rationality against the Faith, as though being a good Catholic means being prepared to blind yourself to observation and reflection. This goes completely against the essence of Catholicism, not to mention contradicting the witness of countless saints and converts who have studied the Faith, or studied themselves into it.
Where will it end? If the "Synod" declares what we think it might, will podcasters tell us we have no right to an opinion on such matters, either?
It’s a good thing that St. Catherine knew the faith!
Bishop Fulton Sheen said that the LAITY will save the Church.
Catholics have a DUTY to proclaim the truth and call out the hierarchy to DO THEIR JOB and uphold the unchanging Truths of the Faith!
Why is Sammons the pharisee blaming even his bishop?
Why is Sammons the pharisee not blaming his Bergoglio-seems-to-be-a-pope-because-he-seems-to-be-universally-accepted-whatever-that-might-have-to-mean?