Yeah yeah yeah. People just love to put a date on things and say it happened 'Today'. Big problem with History 101 is it is long on '01' (as in simple) and short on history. The other problem is people love simple answers to complex questions, actually THINKING and LEARNING about things is way to painful for most sheep, err, people.
That act in 1383 was the final act in a long running play that started way back when the powers that be (read egos in Rome, Constantinople, and other centers of power) started using both the papacy and the Arch Bishopric as sources of political power. Remember the Pope only became the Supreme Pontiff in the west when he called on Charlemagne to save his pasty little white butt from people who didn't think he was as important as he thought he was. Once Charlemagne had invested his political chips (and military muscle) into pulling Leo III out of the fire it became necessary to invest some real authority in the office in order to justify Charlemagne's new position as "Holy Roman Emperor" (since Leo did do the crowning thing). Please note the Emperor in Byzantium DID NOT recognize either Charlemagne nor Leo's authority to invest Charlemagne as Emperor of anything. Needless to say, since he lived right down the block from the Emperor, the Arch Bishop did not recognize Charlie either. Also please note the number of men classified as "anti-popes" by the Church. The only reason they get classed that way is because in the end they didn't come out on top (remember the first duty of a revolutionary is to win).
Basically the Arch Bishop never really took his marching orders from Rome and the final declaration in 1383 only formalized a split that started way back in the 4th Century CE.
Also remember that the last "anti-pope" didn't lose his authority until 1449. And it is only since then that the Pope of the RCC can really claim to have unchallenged authority over the Roman Catholics of the World.
kisses
willowfall[/quote]
euuuhhh this is what i always thought:
Modern claimants to papacy
For further information, see Conclavism As well as antipopes, in the historical sense of the term, there have been and are people who, with a very limited following, ranging from very few to some hundred, claim to be Pope.
They thus do not fit the Encyclopaedia Britannica's definition of "antipope": "one who opposes the legitimately elected Bishop of Rome, endeavours to secure the papal throne, and to some degree succeeds materially in the attempt." Except by their followers, whose number is minuscule, they are not regarded as serious claimants.
They are usually religious leaders of breakaway Roman Catholic groups that reject the commonly recognized popes (sedevacantist groups). For this reason they are often called "sedevacantist antipopes". Claiming to have elected a pope in a "conclave" of perhaps half a dozen laypeople (conclavism), they hold that, because of their action, the See of Rome is no longer vacant, and that they are no longer sedevacantists.
A significant number of them have taken the name Peter II, owing to its special significance.
The Roman Catholic Church regards them as excommunicated schismatics, and in some cases as heretics.
Collinites
For further information, see the article Apostles of Infinite Love
* Michel Collin or Colin (Pope Clement XV), self-proclaimed (1950–1974) in France, founder of Order of the Mother of God (a name later changed to Apostles of Infinite Love)
* Jean-Gaston Tremblay, Gregory XVII (1968–present), in Canada
[edit] Palmarian Catholic Church
For further information, see the article Palmarian Catholic Church
* Clemente DomÃnguez y Gómez (Pope Gregory XVII), mystically self-proclaimed (1978–2005) in Spain
* Manuel Alonso Corral (Pope Peter II), succeeded Gregory XVII in 2005
The Palmarian Catholic Church regards Pope Paul VI, whom they revere as a martyr, and his predecessors as true popes, but hold, on the grounds of claimed apparitions, that the Pope of Rome is excommunicated and that the position of the Holy See has, since 1978, been transferred to the See of El Palmar de Troya.
Other examples
The following organised their elections by allegedly faithful Catholics, none of whom was a recognized cardinal. The smallest such "conclave" was attended by only three electors, the largest is claimed to have comprised more than sixty-one electors. Examples are:
* Mirko Fabris (Pope Krav I), (since 1978), elected in Zagreb, Croatia
* David Bawden (Pope Michael I), (since 1990) elected in Kansas, United States of America (see the article on him and the external links given there)
* Lucian Pulvermacher (Pope Pius XIII) (since 1998), elected in Montana, United States of America (called True Catholic Church)
* Raphael Titus Otieno (since 2004), third of the Legio Maria popes (since 1962) of western Kenya
* Joaquin Llorens (Pope Alexander IX), (since 2005), elected in Elx, Spain )
* Pope Leo XIV (2006). On 24 March 2006 a group of 34 episcopi vagantes elected the Argentine Oscar Michaelli as Pope Leo XIV. On his death on 14 February 2007, he was succeeded by Juan Bautista Bonetti, who took the name of Pope Innocent XIV, but resigned on 29 May 2007. Alexander IX was chosen in his place.
see wikipedia
Hans
