Do JPII teavhings disagree with previous Popes?


Having a discussion elsewhere and this was brought into the conversation …

… anybody care to offer any comments – one way or another?


Wow an Anti-Catholic site… they even got a domain to defame our Church…


Hi Sir,

All these “quotes” are taken out of context, and it would take a specialist dozens of hours to re-establish the context and refute each claim. Anyone quoting these things at you should have the onus of replacing them in context.

For the record, an infallible decision by one pope cannot be contradicted by an infallible decision by another pope. A pope can however clarify the decision of another pope or interpret it for new circumstances. He can also differ on matters of discipline.



I don’t know that this is exactly the case. Looks like more sedevacantist drivel to me. I wish I was holier than the Pope, like these people are.

Why is it there are so few vocations to the priesthood and religious life, but there seems to be no shortage of vocations to the Papacy ?


i’m not a sedevacantist but i can sympathize with them. There are many things which the post Vatican II popes have said and done that is hard to reconcile with the church’s treachings prior to Vatican II. For instance before Vatican II no pope ever took part in interfaith worship services like at assisi, pope pius IX called this apostacy. Also many quotes by the post Vatican II popes give the impression that protestants do not need the catholic faith and that there is salvation outside the church. That being said, i believe that the sedevacantist position is a tough one to hold becuase it effectivly makes each man the sole interpreter of scripture and tradition (just as protestantism does) and many sedevacantist churches have significant doctrinal dissagreements with one another.


I do think they are Anti-Catholic still and Schmatic…


Problem is that they contend that nothing is taken out of context and therefore there is nothing for them to place back into context.


Imagine how these people react when Pope JPII becomes a canonized Saints.

We pray not only for the recognization of his holyness, we also pray for those who are thinking ill/wrong of the Pope to see the truth.


Gratias et pax vobiscum,

I would agree that JPII (of blessed memory) holds apokatastasis as St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. Maximus the Confessor held which isn’t exactly Universalism but I would admit it might be questionable…

Your Thoughts?


I’ll take two of these into consideration (I am loathe to make this my life’s work, as I already have a job, but they are perhaps illustrative of the quality of the alleged charges of “heresy”. Both these examples are said to be from “CH” (Crossing the Threshold of Hope, 1994, Knopf)

Allegedly, JPII said -
3. Muslims worship the One True God.
CH:141, 1994

Yet on inspection of page 141, the word “Muslims” does not even appear.

13. Ecumenical Councils do not need to defend the truth.
CH:162, 1994

Truth is indeed mentioned on page 162, but nowhere is the statement alleged to have been made above even remotely appear. instead, what is stated is "… the Second Vatican Council differed from earlier councils because of its particular style. It was not a defensive style. Not once in the Council documents do the words anathema sit appear. It was an ecumenical style, characterized by great openness to dialogue, a dialogue described by Pope Paul VI as a “dialogue of salvation.” (italics in the original)

If these are representative of the scholarship of the site, then it seems clear to me that these folks have problems with honesty.


Hi Sir,

Problem is that they contend that nothing is taken out of context and therefore there is nothing for them to place back into context.

Not even Jesus could win over everybody. Shake the dust from your sandals and go to the next town… or person.



DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit