Is The Pope Assuming Dictatorial Attitudes?

Is The Pope Assuming Dictatorial Attitudes?

[Does the pope still have the power to excommunicate and depose a sovereign ruler and release his subjects from their oath of allegiance to him so that they may legitimately resist or arise against him? The best known (and successful) case is that in 1076 of St. Gregory VII against the Holy Roman Emperor Henry IV concerning the investiture of bishops. Many of the emperor’s barons rebelled against him (for other reasons), and he ended up doing penance by kneeling in the snow and begging forgiveness from the pope at his palace in Canossa. The last well know case is St. Pius V’s 1570 papal bull “Regnans in Excelsis” against the Protestantizing and Catholic-persecuting Queen Elizabeth of England. If so, would FrankenPope do such against the Grand Knight of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta or against The Donald as the President of the United States?]


Let’s see now. There was the thinly-disguised manipulation of the two synods on the family during the past two years. There was his dismissal of the Pontifical Academy of Life. There was the heavy-handed treatment meted out to Cardinal Burke and others. There was him flat out telling Cardinal Muller “because I’m the pope” when the latter asked why he was ordered to dismiss three good priests from the CDF.

Now, in the wake of him trying to meddle in the internal affairs of a sovereign state, we see this from Catholic News Service. This commission claims their authority relates “to the authority he exercises directly and immediately over all baptized faithful, whether lay or clerical”.

There is no such authority, save for matters having to do with Catholic faith and morals. Are we bloggers obliged to submit to “investigations” owing to our concerns regarding Amoris Laetitia? Progressives tend to snoot and carry on about “freedom”, but when they assume positions of authority, they quickly abuse their powers; take the “politically correct” speech codes on liberal campuses for example. Also consider the draconian treatment meted out to Father Guarnizo almost five years ago by the Archdiocese of Washington. Progressives, since they really don’t adhere to the Faith and to the Author of that Faith, also acknowledge no moral bounds nor restraints upon their whims. Therefore they have no problem arrogating to themselves authority that isn’t their’s, while at the same time eschewing responsibility that is their’s.

We see that happening at the Vatican, all the way to the top. We laity do have rights that clergy do not have; thus we have responsibilities that they may not be able to exercise. Let’s do it.

Get AQ Email Updates

4 comments on “Is The Pope Assuming Dictatorial Attitudes?

  1. Here the analogy is imprecise. “The Donald” is not a Catholic, so he is not one if those that perceive or is peceived to be subject to Rome. Henry IV was a Catholic king. Morever, he was not an absolute king, because the Holy Roman Empire was more a confederation of German States. His power was limited and claimed legitimacy from the Church to keep him going. In the case of the order of Malta, their purpose of existing is dependant totally on its Catholic Mission of Charity. If ithe Order loses the Catholic endorsement, it may remain a separate entity, but it would be eventually secularized, or at least, nonCatholic in its goals.

    • Any person who is baptized – regardless of who does the baptizing, including non-Catholics (even atheists) as long as they have at least an implicit intention to do what the Church intends to do in Baptism, and regardless of what ecclesial body to which the baptised person belongs – is baptized into the Catholic Church and thus subject to the Pope as head of the Church. The Donald was baptized by Presbyterians whose form of Baptism the Church recognizes as valid; therefore, he is a member of the Catholic Church, although Canon Law exempts non-Catholic Christians from the observance of many but all obligations of Church law – an example of the latter is following those when marrying a Catholic. Thus, the Pope could theoretically excommunicate and depose him.

      • Tom,
        The problem is that, even if a baptism was valid, though you are a Catholic at the time of baptism, once you have attained the age of reason, the moment you make a public act of adherence to a false sect (e.g. Presbyterianism), you make yourself an apostate and/or heretic, and/or schismatic.
        Trump is not a Catholic. If he were, all Presbyterians (even adults) would have to be Catholics, also all Methodists, most other Protestants, and even any atheists, Jews, Muslims, etc. who happened to be validly baptized at some time in their life.

  2. The SMOM flap is all aimed at C. Burke, turning him into a leper. The message to Burke: anyone you befriend will find a pipe bomb in his mailbox. It’s the nastiest thing the Holy See could do to Burke. Demotion would be a favor. Further exile wouldn’t faze him. No. So you go after his associates. You know Burke is pained over this. What can he do? Resign? Then where does he go? Whoever welcomes him will receive a pipe bomb. Burke will suffer this in silence because there’s nothing he or anyone can do about it at this point.

Leave a Reply