Author Topic: To Sedes: Time's Running Out to Elect a New Pope!!!  (Read 2551 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Stubborn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10844
  • Reputation: +4272/-654
  • Gender: Male
Re: To Sedes: Time's Running Out to Elect a New Pope!!!
« Reply #30 on: February 22, 2021, 05:53:02 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • No, I'm simply trying to determine why he believes a Pope cannot err on matters of faith and morals when he is not defining a doctrine.  
    I don't know if he's sede or not, but in a nutshell, the reason he believes that, is because he believes the opinions of some of the theologians from the last few centuries who taught basically that "the pope is always infallibly safe to follow". Like many, he believes those theologians' erroneous (at best) teachings are indeed true and authentic teachings of the Church and that V1's ex cathedra definition is lacking.  

    They just won't accept the obligation that that teaching imposes upon them. Instead of realizing that teaching is false, they decide the pope is false. Anyway, that's pretty much why he believes a pope cannot err on matters of faith and morals when he is not defining a doctrine ex cathedra in a nutshell.
    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man." - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 10844
    • Reputation: +4272/-654
    • Gender: Male
    Re: To Sedes: Time's Running Out to Elect a New Pope!!!
    « Reply #31 on: February 22, 2021, 05:55:58 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Reading anything from the Vatican II popes and Vatican II, should be forbidden to the laity, and kept behind lock and key at seminaries, and limited to rare use by clergy in the study of sophism/ambiguity/error/heresy.

    I keep repeating it - "Rat poison is 99% nutritious food". It's that 1% dispersed in every molecule of the nutritious food that will kill you just the same, no matter how nutritious and good it tastes.

    Totally agree. I would simply say; to be used by the clergy strictly as evidence. 
    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man." - Fr. Hesse


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 23800
    • Reputation: +13307/-3681
    • Gender: Male
    Re: To Sedes: Time's Running Out to Elect a New Pope!!!
    « Reply #32 on: February 22, 2021, 08:06:53 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Exactly!!!  

    Not only that, but they misunderstand Franzelin's teaching concerning infallible safety.  He didn't mean anything a Pope says is necessarily infallibly safe. What he meant is if a Pope teaches that a doctrine is safe to follow, it is infallibly safe to follow. 

    Nonsense, Walters.  Only some dogmatic sedevacantists hold that "anything a Pope says is necessarily infallibly safe."  What infallible safety basically means, however, and this is corroborated by a lot of Papal Magisterium, is that overall and, as a whole, the Magisterium cannot go badly off the rails on a substantial issue.  Here is Msgr. Fenton's articulation of infallible safety.  When Traditional Catholics claim that the Magisterium and Universal Discipline of the Church are so badly mistaken that we are effectively forced to sever communion with the putative hierarchy, then it's crossed the line.  You're setting up fake strawman and yourself misunderstanding infallible safety.  Infallible safety follows necessarily from the notion that the Church is indefectible in her mission.

    Msgr. Fenton:
    Quote
    To the Holy Father’s responsibility of caring for the sheep of Christ’s fold, there corresponds, on the part of the Church’s membership, the basic obligation of following his directions, in doctrinal as well as disciplinary matters. In this field, God has given the Holy Father a kind of infallibility distinct from the charism of doctrinal infallibility in the strict sense. He has so constructed and ordered the Church that those who follow the directives given to the entire kingdom of God on earth will never be brought into the position of ruining themselves spiritually through this obedience. Our Lord dwells within His Church in such a way that those who obey disciplinary and doctrinal directives of this society can never find themselves displeasing God through their adherence to the teachings and the commands given to the universal Church militant. Hence there can be no valid reason to discountenance even the non-infallible teaching authority of Christ’s vicar on earth.
    ...
    It is, of course, possible that the Church might come to modify its stand on some detail of teaching presented as non-infallible matter in a papal encyclical. The nature of the auctoritas providentiae doctrinalis within the Church is such, however, that this fallibility extends to questions of relatively minute detail or of particular application. The body of doctrine on the rights and duties of labor, on the Church and State, or on any other subject treated extensively in a series of papal letters directed to and normative for the entire Church militant could not be radically or completely erroneous. The infallible security Christ wills that His disciples should enjoy within His Church is utterly incompatible with such a possibility.



    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 23800
    • Reputation: +13307/-3681
    • Gender: Male
    Re: To Sedes: Time's Running Out to Elect a New Pope!!!
    « Reply #33 on: February 22, 2021, 08:22:57 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I agree that such a person should be ignored, and I'm not defending Francis. I am not defending Francis of playing sick mental games. What I am doing is investigating the accusations objectively in order to determine what is true.  
    Did Francis approve contraception, as is claimed? Did he intentionally and deceptively make two true statements that gave the impression contraception was permissible, without actually saying it is permissible, which is another possibility? Or did advocates of contraception take his words taken out of context to promote their agenda?  I think we can rule out number 1.  

    You don't seem to understand Bergoglio's tactics.  He has been excoriated even by some EWTN radio personalities for deliberately creating confusion.  He bragged about causing chaos.  He amused himself about the thought of being a heretic and said he didn't care.  Bergoglio puts out a statement or allows a statement to be put out that CAN be interpreted in a completely non-Catholic or even heretical way.  Then some conservatives criticize it, and ask that the Vatican issue a clarification.  Bergoglio then REFUSES to make the necessary clarification to bring something in line with Traditional Catholic teaching.  His obvious intent is to promote and to allow the non-Catholic interpretations.  He did this most clearly with Amoris Laetitia.  His clear intent was to allow those German (and other) bishops who had been agitating to give Communion to divorced fornicators to do exactly that.  When that group of Cardinals intervened and objected to AL, asking for a clarification, he refused to respond, so they had to publish the letter.

    We had the quasi-journalist Scalfari attribute several clearly-heretical opinions to Bergoglio.  Had these been said of any orthodox Catholic, there would have been an immediate rejection of the claim:  "That is nonsense.  I believe no such thing."  Instead Bergoglio probably enjoyed watching people squirm and wondering whether he's a heretic.  He deliberately thumbs his nose at people who insist on doctrinal orthodoxy.

    Bergoglio has ears itching for novelty ... which is the hallmark characteristic of a heretic.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 23800
    • Reputation: +13307/-3681
    • Gender: Male
    Re: To Sedes: Time's Running Out to Elect a New Pope!!!
    « Reply #34 on: February 22, 2021, 08:27:52 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Evidence for Bergoglio being a heretic is overwhelming:
    https://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/catholicchurch/anti-pope-francis-heresies/

    [I do not endorse everything held by MHFM, but this is a very long list of Bergoglian heresy.]

    Just imagine a St. Pius X's reaction to this stuff.  He might personally come and beat Bergoglio with his own fists.  At the very least he would have him αrrєѕтed and revive the practice of burning at the stake.


    Offline Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 10844
    • Reputation: +4272/-654
    • Gender: Male
    Re: To Sedes: Time's Running Out to Elect a New Pope!!!
    « Reply #35 on: February 22, 2021, 08:30:58 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Nonsense, Walters.  Only some dogmatic sedevacantists hold that "anything a Pope says is necessarily infallibly safe."  What infallible safety basically means, however, and this is corroborated by a lot of Papal Magisterium, is that overall and, as a whole, the Magisterium cannot go badly off the rails on a substantial issue.  Here is Msgr. Fenton's articulation of infallible safety.  When Traditional Catholics claim that the Magisterium and Universal Discipline of the Church are so badly mistaken that we are effectively forced to sever communion with the putative hierarchy, then it's crossed the line.  You're setting up fake strawman and yourself misunderstanding infallible safety.  Infallible safety follows necessarily from the notion that the Church is indefectible in her mission.

    Msgr. Fenton:

    To the Holy Father’s responsibility of caring for the sheep of Christ’s fold, there corresponds, on the part of the Church’s membership, the basic obligation of following his directions, in doctrinal as well as disciplinary matters. In this field, God has given the Holy Father a kind of infallibility distinct from the charism of doctrinal infallibility in the strict sense. He has so constructed and ordered the Church that those who follow the directives given to the entire kingdom of God on earth will never be brought into the position of ruining themselves spiritually through this obedience.
    Now that we all know this, who among us will be the first to abandon the true faith for the new faith?
    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man." - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Last Tradhican

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4789
    • Reputation: +2492/-1411
    • Gender: Male
    Re: To Sedes: Time's Running Out to Elect a New Pope!!!
    « Reply #36 on: February 22, 2021, 08:51:14 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • The difference is that the SSPX admits they believe violating a law promulgated by a Pope is permitted in circumstances circumstances, such as the present crisis. The sedevacantists insist that it is not permitted, and then do it anyway.  
    LOL, that's a good real world example of "the pot calling the kettle black". That's funny. No insult intended. Maybe because I am a spectator on the sidelines I see it for what it is?

    I don't follow these threads on RR vs Sede vs N.O. indult, but I assume what is going on here is that the sedes are calling the SSPX hypocrites for accepting the pope and then disregarding him to consecrate bishops, and the SSPX is calling the sedes hypocrites for consecrating bishop when they teach that you can't do that. Anyhow, the sedes believe there is no pope and so they can consecrate bishops.
    The Vatican II church - Assisting Souls to Hell Since 1962

    For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. Mat 24:24

    Offline MyrnaM

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6165
    • Reputation: +3558/-334
    • Gender: Female
      • Myforever.blog/blog
    Re: To Sedes: Time's Running Out to Elect a New Pope!!!
    « Reply #37 on: February 22, 2021, 10:45:58 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • God cannot deceive or be deceive, but men can. The Pope is man, not God.  The problem with sedevacantism is that they tend toward deifying the Pope, and then naturally reject any Pope who does not live up to their God-like expectations.  

    When you pray the Act of Faith next time, pay attention to the words, it does not say men can be deceived by the Pope, because he is just a man.

    It says:  I believe these and all the truths which the Holy Catholic Church teaches because Thou hast revealed them, Who canst neither deceive nor be deceived. Amen.  Vatican II deceives, it is not the Church nor does it contain the four Marks of the Church.  If Francis is a neo-pope from VII, so be it, for VII is not the One, Holy Catholic Church, it does not possess the Marks of the Church and it certainly is deceiving.  

    Furthermore:  Regarding the legitimacy of the consecration of traditional Catholic bishops 
    by Bishop Mark A. Pivarunas, CMRI
    The purpose of this article is to present objective evidence to demonstrate the legitimacy of the consecration of traditional Catholic bishops during this time of an extended interregnum (vacancy of the Holy See) which has occurred since the spiritual devastation caused by the Second Vatican Council. The evidence presented will show the historical precedent for such episcopal consecrations, the distinction between divine law and ecclesiastical law in this realm, and the historical precedent of supplied jurisdiction granted to such bishops.
    I. Historical Precedent
    During the interregnum from the death of Pope Clement IV on November 29, 1268, to the ɛƖɛctıon of Blessed Gregory X on September 1, 1271, twenty-one vacancies occurred in various dioceses. During this time bishops were consecrated without papal mandate to fill these vacancies because of the spiritual necessity of the faithful and the impossibility of having recourse to the Holy See.
    According to the document “Hierarchia Catholica Medii Aevi” by Fr. Conrad Eubel, O.F.M., S.T.D., printed in 1913, the following bishops were elected and consecrated during the period of the above-mentioned vacancy.

     
    Diocese of Avranches, France
    Radulfus de Thieville 
    Consecrated November 1269

    Diocese of Aleria, Corsica 
    Nicolaus Forteguerra 
    Consecrated in 1270

    Diocese of Antivari, Greece
    Caspar Adam O.P. 
    Consecrated in 1270

    Diocese of Auxerre, France,
    Erardus de Lesinnes 
    Consecrated in January 1271

    Diocese of Chalons sur Saorie, France
    Potius de Sissey
    Consecrated in 1269

    Diocese of Cagli, Italy,
    Jacobus 
    Consecrated September 8, 1270

    Diocese of Le Mans, France,
    Geoffridus d'Ass 
    Consecrated in 1270

    Diocese of Cefalu, Sicily
    Petrus Taurs (Pepers)
    Consecrated in 1269

    Diocese of Cervia, Italy
    Theodoricus Borgognoni, O.P.
    Consecrated in 1270

    Diocese of Civita Castellana, Italy
    Johannes Magnesi O.P.
    Consecrated in 1270

    Diocese of Evreux, France
    Philippus de Chaourse 
    Consecrated in February 1270

     
    Diocese of Forlimpopoli, Italy
    Ravaldinus 
    Consecrated in 1270

    Diocese of Lismore-Waterford, Ireland
    Johannes de Rupe (Roche) 
    Consecrated in 1270

    Diocese of Lucca, Italy
    Paganellus 
    Consecrated in 1269

    Diocese of St. Jean de Maurienne, France
    Petrus de Gualis 
    Consecrated in 1270

    Diocese of Meaux, France
    Johannes de Garlande
    Consecrated in 1269

    Diocese of Metz, Germany
    Laurientius von Leisteberg
    Consecrated in 1269

    Diocese of Sion, Switzerland
    Raudulfus de Valpelline
    Consecrated in June, 1271

    Diocese of Tolouse, France
    Bertandus de Lisle Jourdain
    Consecrated October 20, 1270

    Diocese of Troyes, France
    Johannes de Nanteuil 
    Consecrated June of 1269

    Diocese of Abril, Spain
    Petrus Urg 
    Consecrated November 3, 1269

     
    Commentary: Some misinformed Catholics have claimed “no pope, no bishops” and have thus rejected those traditional Catholic bishops who have been consecrated during the present crisis in the Church which has followed the Second Vatican Council. During the interregnum between Pope Clement IV and Blessed Gregory X which lasted under three years, bishops were consecrated without a papal mandate. Therefore, a fortiori (from the stronger argument) during this extended interregnum of today, the longest in the history of the Church, bishops can be consecrated for the spiritual needs of the faithful and for the common good of the Catholic Church.
    For more about this subject you can on your own time read it here:  https://cmri.org/articles-on-the-traditional-catholic-faith/historical-precedents-supporting-the-consecration-of-bishops-during-vacancy-of-the-holy-see/


    Offline Yeti

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 863
    • Reputation: +385/-131
    • Gender: Male
    Re: To Sedes: Time's Running Out to Elect a New Pope!!!
    « Reply #38 on: February 22, 2021, 03:05:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • All this says is that Catholics should not limit their obedience to their pastors to the acceptance of Catholic dogmas.  Notice that he is not speaking only of the Pope, but to all pastors.    Just as this teaching does not prove that other pastors are unable to error on faith or morals, neither does it prove that a Pope is unable to error in faith or morals when he is not defining a doctrine.
    .
    Fair enough. So do you give obedience to Francis and his pastors even in things that are not a dogma of faith, as this says you must? And we agree that Catholics must accept the teachings of their pastors, even in things that are not dogmas of faith, and not even just to the pope but also to other pastors. So before we even get into the question of whether a pope can err in such a matter, I think it's important to ask if you accept that you owe obedience -- and in fact give such obedience -- to Francis and his teachers in the way described here.
    .

    Quote
    Once again, this does not say a Pope is unable to error when he is not defining a doctrine.  What this quote is saying is that the magisterium was instituted so that deposit of faith could be perpetually retained by a body of living men, who could present them to men of all ages, and define dogmas when necessary to preserve it from the attacks of heretics.

    .
    Well, to be precise, he is saying the teaching authority of the Church is exercised through the pope and the bishops who are in communion with him. So, if there is no pope at the moment, there can't really be any bishops in communion with the pope anyway. I'm not saying that definitely the case, as there are various opinions on whether that's the case or not and I admit the matter is very obscure, but I can point out as an obvious fact that none of the bishops in the Novus Ordo Church, that I am aware of, uphold the Catholic Faith. And before you say this is impossible, there are numerous theologians that have said the Church can exist for many years without a pope without any violation of the promises Our Lord made to St. Peter. And they said this long before Vatican 2.
    .

    Quote
    So, my question to you is, where is this teaching authority today?  Where is the body of “bishops who are in communion with” the Roman Pontiff that this papal teaching says will exist forever?

    .
    No, you misread the quote. It says, "For the teaching authority of the Church, which in the divine wisdom was constituted on earth in order that revealed doctrines might remain intact for ever, and that they might be brought with ease and security to the knowledge of men..." It's the revealed doctrines that will remain intact forever. And they have, among traditional Catholics of all kinds, while they have not all remained intact among members of the Novus Ordo Church, who believe in large numbers that abortion, contraception, divorce, etc. are not sins, and many of whom do not believe in transubstantiation, to name just a few examples.
    .

    Quote
    No where does this say a Pope cannot error in faith or morals when he is not defining a doctrine.  And just as the 72 disciples from Luke 10:16, to whom Jesus said, “He who heareth you, heareth me,” were not infallible, neither is the Pope infallible when he exercises his ordinary teaching authority.

    .
    Okay, so do you accept the encyclical letter Amoris Laetitia, which says that divorced and remarried people can receive Holy Communion? The quote I provided says that you can't say, "I don't have to accept something in an encyclical because the pope is not using the supreme power of his teaching authority."
    .

    Quote
    All this says is if two Popes issue contradictory directive, the one currently in force is to be obeyed, and cannot be disobeyed in favor of the latter.  What it doesn’t say is that a Pope cannot err in faith or morals when he is not defining a dogma. 
    .
    Well, I don't know exactly what your position is since I don't believe I've discussed stuff like this with you before, but a lot of people say that they need not accept the errors of Vatican 2 popes since they go against what prior popes have taught. This quote says that one may not "set up some kind of opposition between one Pontiff and another. Those who, faced with two differing directives, reject the present one to hold to the past, are not giving proof of obedience to the authority which has the right and duty to guide them."
    .
    To answer your questions as to why sedevacantists go against some provisions of the 1917 code of canon law, in general, there is a principle of law that it does not bind when it becomes harmful to souls. So, Catholics would be deprived of bishops and eventually of priests if they could not consecrate without the permission of the pope, since there isn't any pope to grant that permission, and therefore because of the necessity of having bishops they apply that principle and consecrate bishops to maintain episcopal orders.

    Offline Emile

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 307
    • Reputation: +185/-29
    • Gender: Male
    Re: To Sedes: Time's Running Out to Elect a New Pope!!!
    « Reply #39 on: February 22, 2021, 03:14:02 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I agree that such a person should be ignored, and I'm not defending Francis. I am not defending Francis of playing sick mental games. What I am doing is investigating the accusations objectively in order to determine what is true.  
    Did Francis approve contraception, as is claimed? Did he intentionally and deceptively make two true statements that gave the impression contraception was permissible, without actually saying it is permissible, which is another possibility?  
    Thank you for the clarification W.
    That's how modernists and their master operate. For example the serpent in the garden of Eden didn't go up to Adam and Eve and say " Howdy, my name is Satan, and I'm here to try to drag you and your offspring to Hell."
     It's the same with the modernists, they use deception and leave wiggle room in what they say. The words of these people must not be separated from their actions even in a friendly debate.
    Patience is a conquering virtue. The learned say that, if it not desert you, It vanquishes what force can never reach; Why answer back at every angry speech? No, learn forbearance or, I'll tell you what, You will be taught it, whether you will or not.
    -Geoffrey Chaucer

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 23800
    • Reputation: +13307/-3681
    • Gender: Male
    Re: To Sedes: Time's Running Out to Elect a New Pope!!!
    « Reply #40 on: February 22, 2021, 06:22:06 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • When we profess to believe all the truths that the Church teaches, what we are professing to believe is the rule of the ecclesiastical magisterium, which consists of the body of truths that the Church has taught as de fide (of the faith) over the centuries; and all the truths that the Church has proposed as de fide are infallibly true.


    So are you a follower of Drew?


    Offline MyrnaM

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6165
    • Reputation: +3558/-334
    • Gender: Female
      • Myforever.blog/blog
    Re: To Sedes: Time's Running Out to Elect a New Pope!!!
    « Reply #41 on: February 22, 2021, 06:48:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • There’s no mention of the Pope in the act of faith.  

    When we profess to believe all the truths that the Church teaches, what we are professing to believe is the rule of the ecclesiastical magisterium, which consists of the body of truths that the Church has taught as de fide (of the faith) over the centuries; and all the truths that the Church has proposed as de fide are infallibly true.
     


    A papal mandate was not required during the days of Clement IV and Gregory, but it is today.  That's the point.  He is rejecting the present law in favor of a past law, which is precisely what Leo XIII forbids.

    In past centuries, the Pope permitted Patriarchs and even secular princes to appoint bishops and consecrate them (or have them consecrated in the case of a secular prince) without explicit permission from Rome.  They only had to notify Rome after the fact.  That law was abandoned after the Council of Trent, and for the past four centuries a papal mandate has been required.

    So, contrary to what Bishops Pivarunas would like his readers to believe, the interregnum between the papacy of Clement and Gregory had nothing do with the legitimacy of the episcopal consecration that took place at the time. They were legitimate because they were legal - in accord with ecclesiastical law.

    But there’s more to it than that.

    When bishops were (lawfully) consecrated without a papal mandate in past centuries, they were immєdιαtely appointed to an episcopal see that had been legitimately established by a Pope.  They weren’t illicitly consecrated to be vagus bishops with no authority or canonical mission, who then established mass centers where they illicitly administered the sacraments.   This has always been a no no.

    Listen to what Cardinal Billot wrote about those who administer the sacraments without a canonical mission and hence illicitly.
     
     
    I know there is no mention of the word Pope, you are the person who injected that word into my response to you.
    As far as the mandate it is brought out "FORTIORI"   


    • The Latin term a fortiori is used to refer to an argument made from a previously made argument or previously proven fact. The original argument is considered to be stronger, or to come from a stronger basis than the second argument, therefore, the arguer presents the original claim to support his own, weaker claim.
    • In other words, you do not believe we are living in apostasy and requires an emergency situation when an invalid ɛƖɛctıon was wrought, you believe God's enemies can elect His Vicar and God MUST not be given the benefit of the doubt in order for the Church to continue, although smaller.  



    Offline Emile

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 307
    • Reputation: +185/-29
    • Gender: Male
    Re: To Sedes: Time's Running Out to Elect a New Pope!!!
    « Reply #42 on: February 22, 2021, 06:52:27 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0


  • But there's a difference between ambiguous partial truths and heresy, and in the current crisis, when the distinction is not made, it ends in disaster.  



     
    Would you elaborate more? Seriously asking BTW not just looking for an argument.
    Patience is a conquering virtue. The learned say that, if it not desert you, It vanquishes what force can never reach; Why answer back at every angry speech? No, learn forbearance or, I'll tell you what, You will be taught it, whether you will or not.
    -Geoffrey Chaucer

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 23800
    • Reputation: +13307/-3681
    • Gender: Male
    Re: To Sedes: Time's Running Out to Elect a New Pope!!!
    « Reply #43 on: February 22, 2021, 07:17:44 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • But there's a difference between ambiguous partial truths and heresy, and in the current crisis, when the distinction is not made, it ends in disaster.  

    Bergoglio's heresies are too numerous to recount.

    But if you want to sum it up, it all boils down to religious indifferentism and the denial of EENS.

    JP2 and B16 shared these, but Bergoglio adds moral heresies (whereas JP2 held the line on morals).

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 23800
    • Reputation: +13307/-3681
    • Gender: Male
    Re: To Sedes: Time's Running Out to Elect a New Pope!!!
    « Reply #44 on: February 22, 2021, 07:20:44 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • In any case, I've never based the sedevacantist hypothesis on individual heresies of the papal claimants.  It's based on the same Major that Archbishop Lefebvre articulated, that this degree of systematic destruction is not compatible with the promise that the Holy Spirit would guide the papacy and, though the papacy, the Church.


     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16