CathInfo.com

You know, my question to you was sincere. The bolded was unnecessary.  

The whole world holds that CÖVÌD 19 is an existential threat to the human race.  The whole world holds that the vaccines are safe.  The whole world holds that Catholic doctrine can evolve and even contradict what was previously believed.  No one is disputing that the Novus Ordo sect contradicts traditional Catholic doctrine.  So the burden of proof is on you to prove that a true pope can overthrow Catholic doctrine.  All the doctors of the Church say it is not possible.  You have to prove that all the doctors are wrong.  St Robert is not on your side.  He believed that God would never allow a true pope to fall into heresy.  But he admitted that if he were wrong about that, a heretical pope would ipso facto lose his office.  But no doctor or father of the Church ever believed or taught that a manifest heretic could be ELECTED to the Roman See.  That's insanity.  Almost as insane as you calling Whoregαy, "Your Holiness".  So you have to argue either a) Whoregαy isn't heretical or b) all the doctors of the Church were wrong when they taught that a heretical pope would ipso facto lose office.  (See St Robert, St Alphonsus and St Francis de Sales among others).  But how are you going to prove that a manifest heretic could be ELECTED to the Roman See?  Or that once elected, the heretic's claim on the Roman See is a dogmatic fact?  The gig is up, Sean.  The notorious Siscoe and Salza are sunk.  For the sake of your own sanity, you need to break out of the Stockholm Syndrome attitude that has entangled you with a disgusting perverted heretic who claims the Roman See.  His claim is no more believable (nay, less believable) than Pope Michael's claim in Kansas.  Anyone who thinks Whoregαy is the pope is certifiable.