Day's Links - 2017-10-05

Novus Ordo Watch has a good article on Pope John XXII, showing that accusations of him having committed heresy are dubious since the issue he brought up was open to theological debate. Pope John XXII is often used by those who want to assert that a pope can fall into heresy as an example of this case, and many are drawing parallels to him and Bergoglio.

Apart from the fact that he deviated from the faith on one point, whereas Bergoglio seems to reject all of the faith - excluding from the authority that comes with his chair - the very fact that St. Bernard of Clairvaux held the same opinion and had already been canonised is well worth noting, and shows that he cannot be bunched together with Novus Ordo popes who have deviated from well-accepted doctrines and practices. In this, Bergoglio is not alone, although he seems to be in a class of his own given the sheer volume of his errors, impieties and heresies.

The general point they make is one that I share: We seem nowadays to far too easily judge popes of the distant past while doing everyting to avoid criticism of recent popes. It is a most bizarre situation since those popes are worthy of the same protection that current popes have, if we accept that a pope should be above criticism. There is no logical reason why we should be allowed to criticise popes after their death when they can cause no harm while we are supposed to allow them to spread all kinds of errors - when I write them I mean only recent popes - when those errors actually count the most.