In 1300 the papacy suffered two major setbacks: the era of “antipopes” and the “Babylonian Captivity”. In 1305 through influence of king Philip of France, a French archbishop was elected and crowned at Lyon as Pope Clement V. Clement moved the papal court from Rome to Avigon in 1309. The papacy remained in France during the reign of seven Popes, and this greatly reduced the prestige of the papacy. This period was known as “Babylonian Captivity” it ended in 1377 when Pope Gregory XI returned the papal throne to Rome.
This development made the papacy to be a subject of intense rivalry among Catholic countries. Unfortunately, it degenerated into the era of rival Popes, in other words, known as “anti-popes.” An anti-pope was he who has been improperly elected a pope. He sets himself in opposition to the pope who has been regularly chosen in accordance with canon law. The first anti-pope usually noted was Hippolytus; the last anti-pope was Felix. This schism divided the church for almost 60 years. As if the Church was recovering from it, subsequent popes posed a problem to the Church. Having obtained their election by bribe, they lived shamefully.
This was exemplified in the pontificate of Alexander VI. Alexander involved himself in the political maneuvering which characterized Italy of 1492 – 1503. The career of Alexander VI and some other Popes of the era demonstrated that they were typical Renaissance Princes occupied with Italian politics often to the neglect of their spiritual duties, thus bringing disgrace to the Church and the papacy into disrepute.
As an aftermath of this degenerative papacy, many Church leaders cried out for reforms. These cries continued unheeded until Martin Luther came forth. He was a Catholic Priest and a monk. In his 95 theses he denounced many things in the Church especially the indulgence. But let it be said here that even before Luther, Pope Boniface IX in 1392, Martin V in 1420 and Sixtus IV in 1478 had repeatedly condemned the misconception and abuses of indulgence. Luther’s concerns were legitimate. Some believe that his way of going about it was wrong, others believe otherwise. This debate continues.
In response to this protestant reformation, the Church called the Council of Trent, which met from 1545 – 1563. This Council re-affirmed the Catholic doctrines.
It needs to be said, and I do hereby say it that the personal immoralities of priests or popes do not nullify the divine character of the Church, the purity of its doctrines or the graces and spiritual powers it transmits.
All in all, though the Catholic Church was founded by Christ, it is manned by sons of Adam susceptible to human frailties.
On papal infallibility and the document signed by the Pope:
Maybe we did not fully comprehend infallibility as we were taught in Catechism as kids. The teachings have not changed. The pope is as fallible as the man next door and susceptible to committing sin. He has his confessor and goes to confession as often as required. If he were sinless, he would not have a need for that. Infallibility comes into play when he makes pronouncements in matters of faith, usually in union with the cardinals and the bishops. Even the recent document on blessings does not fall within the issue at hand. What he signed is akin to practice direction for lawyers to priests.
Afriquecast
In 1300 the papacy suffered two major setbacks: the era of “antipopes” and the “Babylonian Captivity”. In 1305 through influence of king Philip of France, a French archbishop was elected and crowned at Lyon as Pope Clement V. Clement moved the papal court from Rome to Avigon in 1309. The papacy remained in France during the reign of seven Popes, and this greatly reduced the prestige of the papacy. This period was known as “Babylonian Captivity” it ended in 1377 when Pope Gregory XI returned the papal throne to Rome.
This development made the papacy to be a subject of intense rivalry among Catholic countries. Unfortunately, it degenerated into the era of rival Popes, in other words, known as “anti-popes.” An anti-pope was he who has been improperly elected a pope. He sets himself in opposition to the pope who has been regularly chosen in accordance with canon law. The first anti-pope usually noted was Hippolytus; the last anti-pope was Felix. This schism divided the church for almost 60 years. As if the Church was recovering from it, subsequent popes posed a problem to the Church. Having obtained their election by bribe, they lived shamefully.
This was exemplified in the pontificate of Alexander VI. Alexander involved himself in the political maneuvering which characterized Italy of 1492 – 1503. The career of Alexander VI and some other Popes of the era demonstrated that they were typical Renaissance Princes occupied with Italian politics often to the neglect of their spiritual duties, thus bringing disgrace to the Church and the papacy into disrepute.
As an aftermath of this degenerative papacy, many Church leaders cried out for reforms. These cries continued unheeded until Martin Luther came forth. He was a Catholic Priest and a monk. In his 95 theses he denounced many things in the Church especially the indulgence. But let it be said here that even before Luther, Pope Boniface IX in 1392, Martin V in 1420 and Sixtus IV in 1478 had repeatedly condemned the misconception and abuses of indulgence. Luther’s concerns were legitimate. Some believe that his way of going about it was wrong, others believe otherwise. This debate continues.
In response to this protestant reformation, the Church called the Council of Trent, which met from 1545 – 1563. This Council re-affirmed the Catholic doctrines.
It needs to be said, and I do hereby say it that the personal immoralities of priests or popes do not nullify the divine character of the Church, the purity of its doctrines or the graces and spiritual powers it transmits.
All in all, though the Catholic Church was founded by Christ, it is manned by sons of Adam susceptible to human frailties.
On papal infallibility and the document signed by the Pope:
Maybe we did not fully comprehend infallibility as we were taught in Catechism as kids. The teachings have not changed. The pope is as fallible as the man next door and susceptible to committing sin. He has his confessor and goes to confession as often as required. If he were sinless, he would not have a need for that. Infallibility comes into play when he makes pronouncements in matters of faith, usually in union with the cardinals and the bishops. Even the recent document on blessings does not fall within the issue at hand. What he signed is akin to practice direction for lawyers to priests.
By admin
186 views