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

Author Topic: Morrison's Call for an Imperfect Council  (Read 1856 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Johannes

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 613
  • Reputation: +92/-284
  • Gender: Male
Morrison's Call for an Imperfect Council
« on: November 19, 2024, 12:38:28 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Could certain bishops, cardinals hold a council to remove Francis as pope? - LifeSite

    I think Robert Morrison is an attendee of the SSPX - anyone know? Either way I thought his article was  interesting in a naive sort of way.
     
    Within he quotes St. Francis stating,

    "Now when [the Pope] is explicitly a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church must either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See."

    Then he goes on to discuss the problem of how the heretical hierarchy could themselves declare that Francis isn't pope because of his ipso facto fall from office when they themselves are heretics and cannot be trusted. A valid point how will the heretics denounce the heretic?

    He goes on to say, we need a "litmus test" of orthodoxy and of course that test would be renouncing all condemned errors, but he limits it to,

    "If we want a simple litmus test, any bishop who would not denounce the Synod on Synodality, Fiducia Supplicans, or the heretical view that God positively wills non-Catholic religions, no longer has the true Catholic Faith and should be excluded from participation in an imperfect council."

    That would never fix anything, as the root (VII and all the reforms) remain. It would only set the clock back 10 years, or more probably cause a "conservative" N.O. church to schism from the mainstream N.O. church officially.  

    In the end, I think the idea of a calling on the new bishops/cardinals to issue a declaration of loss of office for Francis is not only a pipedream but is also unnecessary and pointless at this stage of the game. It is akin to telling the weather man,

     "We know the sky is up and rain is wet, but you need to declare these things publicly to us all in order for us to be sure that what we already knew to be true is actually what it is - the sky is up, rain is wet, and Francis is a heretic, not the pope, and not a member of the Church!"

    IMO, If everyone just stopped acknowledging the N.O. as being the Church and Francis and the new bishops as having authority the whole thing would just die and disappear. But heresy is addictive and people get comfortable in their habits and perceptions and refuse to budge.

    Anyone else have a take on his article?