Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12

Author Topic: Is Francis the Pope?  (Read 8781 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline cassini

Is Francis the Pope?
« on: October 31, 2019, 06:35:22 AM »
A friend sent this on to me. It is a position I have held for many years. Material heresy and formal heresy have been involved in the Galileo case, a study I have devoted much time to. In the article the author says: 'As bishop Schneider points out, this question is unprecedented in the history of the Church.' Now this may be true as regards the overall behaviour of a pope, it is not regarding heretical popes. Pope Paul V in 1616 had defined heliocentrism formal heresy. Pope Pius VII in 1820 was conned into material heresy when allowing a heretical reading of Scripture. As this article records, no pope will be allowed by God to officially deny an official dogma or decree of a previous pope. When researching the Galileo case I found no such denial of the 1616 decree by any pope since 1616. Quite the opposite, even the Church of 1820 agreed it was papal and not reversible.

The following article will help many come to terms with the prevailing situation in the Churcvh.

[font=Segoe UI, Segoe UI Web (West European), Segoe UI, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, Roboto, Helvetica Neue, sans-serif]https://onepeterfive.com/is-francis-the-pope/[/font][/url]




Logged

Offline Quo vadis Domine

  • Supporter
Re: Is Francis the Pope?
« Reply #1 on: October 31, 2019, 07:01:20 AM »
I hold that the geocentric model is true, but can you please give me this reference: “ Pope Paul V in 1616 had defined heliocentrism formal heresy”?
Logged

Offline Mark 79

  • Supporter
Re: Is Francis the Pope?
« Reply #2 on: October 31, 2019, 12:51:03 PM »
"We say we want suffering, but whenever suffering comes that isn’t exactly the type we desire, we flee from it."


Prayer of St. Augustine

Before Thy eyes, O Lord, we bring our offences, and we compare them with the stripes we have received.
If we consider the evil we have wrought, what we suffer is little, what we deserve is great.
What we have committed is very grave, what we have suffered is very slight.
We feel the punishment of sin, yet withdraw not from the obstinacy of sinning.
Under Thy lash our inconstancy is visited, but our sinfulness is not changed.
Our suffering soul is tormented but our neck is not bent.
Our life groans under sorrow, yet mends not in deed.
If Thou spare us we correct not our ways; if Thou punish we cannot endure it.
In time of correction we confess our wrong-doing; after Thy visitation we forget that we have wept.
If Thou stretchest forth Thy hand we promise amendment; if Thou withholdest the sword we keep not our promise.
If Thou strikest we cry out for mercy; if Thou sparest we again provoke Thee to strike.
Here we are before Thee, O Lord, shameless criminals; we know that unless Thou pardon we shall deservedly perish.
Grant then, O almighty Father, without our deserving it, the pardon we ask for; Thou who madest out of nothing those who ask Thee. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.
Let us pray
O God, who by sin art offended and by penance pacified, mercifully regard the prayers of Thy suppliant people, and turn away the scourges of Thy wrath, which we deserve for our sins. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.
Logged

Offline cassini

Re: Is Francis the Pope?
« Reply #3 on: October 31, 2019, 12:57:29 PM »
Quote from: Quo vadis Domine on October 31, 2019, 07:01:20 AM
I hold that the geocentric model is true, but can you please give me this reference: “ Pope Paul V in 1616 had defined heliocentrism formal heresy”?

My reference to this Quo Vadis was to emphasise that MATERIAL heresy, mentioned in the above wonderful article, has a precedence with popes in history from 1820. Material heresy is not a deliberate rejection of a teaching, but one believed in ignorance. A pope guilty of material heresy cannot be accused of being a non-pope. There is no punishment due for material heresy on death.

I added this subject up in reply to those sceptics today who continue to accept the Galilean heresy in spite of being told the truth of the matter. When told many times I have been accused like this: " Are you saying popes since 1820 have been heretics. If so, we haven't had a true pope since 1820 at least." The Dimond brothers for example, who are illegal sedevacvantists, say since Vatican II all the popes are heretics so declared them non-popes to anyone reading their literature.

If they have to face heretical popes since 1820 then their conclusions become redundant. That is why the Dimond brothers and others reject the 1616 decree of Pope Paul V as binding, a decree that was confirned as absolute in 1633 by Pope Urban VIII and the Holy Office in 1820. Here is the reference to that decree issued through the Index on Feb 24th, 1616:

(1) “That the sun is in the centre of the world and altogether immovable by local movement,” was unanimously declared to be “foolish, philosophically absurd, and formally heretical [denial of a revelation by God] inasmuch as it expressly contradicts the declarations of Holy Scripture in many passages, according to the proper meaning of the language used, and the sense in which they have been expounded and understood by [all] the Fathers and theologians.”
Logged

Offline klasG4e

Re: Is Francis the Pope?
« Reply #4 on: November 01, 2019, 07:49:17 AM »
Quote from: cassini on October 31, 2019, 12:57:29 PM
There is no punishment due for material heresy on death.


Although, of course, we must not fail to recognize the administration of God's justice for culpable ignorance of certain things, if indeed culpable ignorance was existent.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12
« previous next »