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

Author Topic: Feeney the nut job  (Read 32829 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 46813
  • Reputation: +27672/-5138
  • Gender: Male
Re: Feeney the nut job
« Reply #195 on: October 19, 2024, 12:34:39 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Your heretical soteriology is implicitly Calvinist, Ladislaus.

    Garbage.  You ignored the question about the child who dies unbaptized, such as an aborted child, or any child who dies before reaching the age of reason ... because it flies in the face of your Prot-like misinterpretation of 1 Timothy.  Your claim that God basically provides the means necessary for salvation by permitting a Pelagian ex opere operantis self-salvation is what's heretical.

    Offline NishantXavier

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 621
    • Reputation: +209/-531
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeney the nut job
    « Reply #196 on: October 19, 2024, 12:51:38 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • St. Augustine, St. Thomas and St. Alphonsus agree with me about the universal salvific will of God, as does every Catholic commentary on 1 Tim 2:4, so you are the Protestant and Calvinist. You apparently agree at least in part with the heretic John Calvin about limited atonement claiming that God died only for a few or does not really wish to save all men. The Scripture says all men, so we are talking about adults here. Read a theology manual sometime and you will know the state of the question about aborted infants. But we are talking about men, i.e. adults. God certainly give all men sufficient graces to save their soul. To deny that is heretical.

    Here is Fr. Haydock on 1 Tim 2:4: "All men to be saved. They contradict this, and other places of the Scripture, as well as the tradition and doctrine of the Catholic Church, who teach that God willeth only the salvation of the predestinated, of the elect, and as they say, of the first-begotten only: and that he died only for them, and not for all mankind. But if it is the will of God that all and every one be saved, and no one resists, or can frustrate the will of the Almighty, whence comes it that every one is not saved? To understand and reconcile divers places in the holy Scriptures, we must needs distinguish in God a will that is absolute and effectual, accompanied with special graces and assistances, and with the gift of final perseverance, by which, through his pure mercy, he decreed to save the elect, without any prejudice to their free will and liberty; and a will, which by the order of Providence, is conditional, and this not a metaphorical and improper will only, but a true and proper will, by which he hath prepared and offered graces and means to all men, whereby they may work their salvation; and if they are not saved, it is by their own fault, by their not corresponding with the graces offered, it is because they resist the Holy Ghost. (Acts vii. 51.)"


    Online Godefroy

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 629
    • Reputation: +664/-66
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeney the nut job
    « Reply #197 on: October 19, 2024, 12:58:05 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • When I converted around 15 years ago and was learning about the faith, I was told about baptism of desire. It may even have been from a conference of Mgr Lefebvre. I believed this for a long while and the consequence was, that I was quite reluctant to talk about the Church to others because I feared that if they knew too much and rejected it, it would be worse for them than had they never known. 

    It was only when I discovered the whole truth about Father Feeney, that I realised how wrong I had been. The concept of BOD, in my mind, is a satanic device to hold back any desire of evangelising. The plan fact is that someone is almost certainly damned when they die are outside of the Church, whether they knew about it or not, and even if they were perfectly nice. 

    Offline NishantXavier

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 621
    • Reputation: +209/-531
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeney the nut job
    « Reply #198 on: October 19, 2024, 01:01:33 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • When I converted around 15 years ago and was learning about the faith, I was told about baptism of desire. It may even have been from a conference of Mgr Lefebvre. I believed this for a long while and the consequence was, that I was quite reluctant to talk about the Church to others because I feared that if they knew too much and rejected it, it would be worse for them than had they never known.

    It was only when I discovered the whole truth about Father Feeney, that I realised how wrong I had been. The concept of BOD, in my mind, is a satanic device to hold back any desire of evangelising. The plan fact is that someone is almost certainly damned when they die are outside of the Church, whether they knew about it or not, and even if they were perfectly nice.
    It is good and holy to evangelize, but what you have said is in no way an implication of baptism of desire, even implicit. An implicit desire is defined as a desire that becomes explicit once the necessity of entering the Church is sufficiently known. It's like when you have an implicit desire to confess all your sins, but don't confess explicitly one mortal sin you did not recall. Once you know, you confess that sin. So also, only those who explicitly desire to enter the Church once that necessity is known had implicit desire. Catholics don't need to worry about anyone's internal forum but simply preach the gospel to all in our power. Once you have done that, pray for others and leave it to God.

    Offline NishantXavier

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 621
    • Reputation: +209/-531
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeney the nut job
    « Reply #199 on: October 19, 2024, 01:06:34 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Catechism of Pope St. Pius X: "16 Q. Is Baptism necessary to salvation?
    A. Baptism is absolutely necessary to salvation, for our Lord has expressly said: "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God."

    17 Q. Can the absence of Baptism be supplied in any other way?
    A. The absence of Baptism can be supplied by martyrdom, which is called Baptism of Blood, or by an act of perfect love of God, or of contrition, along with the desire, at least implicit, of Baptism, and this is called Baptism of Desire."


    Here you have Anti-Modernist Pope St. Pius X the great teach us about baptism of desire. Earlier in this thread, in purely a schismatic and shocking manner, Ladislaus said he thinks Pope Pius XII should be anathematized. If that's not publicly schismatic, then nothing is. What next? Will he anathematize Pope St. Pius X too? Christ said, "He who hears you, hears Me", and Pope Pius XII applies this to what the Roman Pontiffs teach by their ordinary teaching authority, as Pope St. Pius X does here. Therefore, through the Holy Father St. Pius X, Christ Himself assures us bod is true.



    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46813
    • Reputation: +27672/-5138
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeney the nut job
    « Reply #200 on: October 19, 2024, 01:34:59 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Garbage.  You ignored the question about the child who dies unbaptized, such as an aborted child, or any child who dies before reaching the age of reason ... because it flies in the face of your Prot-like misinterpretation of 1 Timothy.

    ... as you continue to ignore.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46813
    • Reputation: +27672/-5138
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeney the nut job
    « Reply #201 on: October 19, 2024, 01:39:27 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • It was only when I discovered the whole truth about Father Feeney, that I realised how wrong I had been. The concept of BOD, in my mind, is a satanic device to hold back any desire of evangelising. The plan fact is that someone is almost certainly damned when they die are outside of the Church, whether they knew about it or not, and even if they were perfectly nice.

    Correct.  See my previous posts about the fruits of BoD.  If I'm wrong and God has chosen to save some by BoD, then glory to Him.  If the BoDers are wrong, they've done a lot of damage to EENS dogma, to incentivizing people to become Catholics and receive Baptism (and as Father Feeney said even undermine their desire for Baptism as being, well, optional or not entirely necessary), extending BoD to those other then individuals who explicitly intend to join the Church, leads inexorably to Vatican II ecclesiology.

    NO GOOD comes from BoD, and its fruits are rotten, and therefore we know it's false due to the rotten fruits.  BoD was gradually extended to all manner of non-Catholics to the point that it has gutted EENS and the necessity of the Sacraments for salvation (as taught dogmatically by Trent).  You can pretend all you want that in some magical / mystical / unknowable / inscrutable / anonymous way, the Sacrament of Baptism is still required, but in the translation for the common man, it's not anymore.  Similarly, when Father Feeney was excommunicated, the message sent to the world was that the Catholic Church now believed that salvation was in fact possible outside the Church ... since the 50 pages of theological nuances are lost on 95% of the world, both faithful and non-faithful.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46813
    • Reputation: +27672/-5138
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeney the nut job
    « Reply #202 on: October 19, 2024, 01:43:03 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Here you have Anti-Modernist Pope St. Pius X the great teach us about baptism of desire.

    Early editions of the Catechism, before revisions after his death, did not contain any reference to BoD.  People have posted scans of the early copies.

    Apart from that, yeah, so what?  He's not infallible, it is possible to articulate a version of BoD that is not heretical and not Pelagian, as did St. Robert Bellarmine ... but it's obvious you don't believe the non-heretical version, since you promote the heresies of Suprema Haec that non-Catholcs.  BoD is only for souls who are otherwise Catholic and lack only the Sacrament of Baptism itself.

    Besides that, your SH-rooted ecclesiology is identical to that of Vatican II ... making you a heretic and schismatic for rejecting Vatican II.


    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14753
    • Reputation: +6088/-907
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeney the nut job
    « Reply #203 on: October 20, 2024, 06:26:49 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The best part is that there was a Saint who died without baptism and they were turned back from entering heaven and brought back to life and were baptised.
    I always loved the story from our own day, that of John Wayne being baptized and receiving the traditional Last Rites on his death bed! THIS is the Divine Providence loud and clear! All for the greater Glory of God!  We can be pretty dog gone certain he is spending his eternity in heaven and we glorify God for it!

    God Provided what John Wayne desired for his eternal salvation. That is the way of Divine Providence.

    The way of Divine Providence is the same whether one is a native on an deserted island, standing in front of a firing squad, driving down the road, stranded in the desert or lying on your death bed. You *will* get that which is necessary for salvation if you sincerely desire it because nothing is impossible to God.

    But a BOD has no Divine Providence - the fact is, a BOD is not possible WITH Divine Providence. The only way it can possibly hope to work, is WITHOUT Divine Providence. 
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    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 NishantXavier

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 621
    • Reputation: +209/-531
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeney the nut job
    « Reply #204 on: October 20, 2024, 07:31:45 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Suprema Haec is not heretical, you Feeneyite nutjob. Msgr. Fenton praised it up and down as a brilliant expression of the authoritative Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church. I am done with trying to talk sense into your obstinate head. You are a deluded schismatic in extremely blind self-deception. I suggest you repent and return to the Church.

    You are yet to publicly apologize and publicly recant your publicly schismatic and heretical statement that Pope Pius XII should be anathematized. This places you outside the Catholic Church as a self-condemned heretical schismatic.

    Here is Archbishop Lefebvre: "We must say it clearly: such a concept is radically opposed to Catholic dogma. The Church is the one ark of salvation, and we must not be afraid to affirm it.  You have often heard it said, “Outside the Church there is no salvation”--a dictum which offends contemporary minds. It is easy to believe that this doctrine is no longer in effect, that it has been dropped. It seems excessively severe.
    Yet nothing, in fact, has changed;  nothing can be changed in this area. Our Lord did not found a number of churches: He founded only One.  There is only one Cross by which we can be saved, and that Cross has been given to the Catholic Church. It has not been given to others.  To His Church, His mystical bride, Christ has given all graces.  No grace in the world, no grace in the history of humanity is distributed except through her.
    Does that mean that no Protestant, no Muslim, no Buddhist or animist will be saved? No, it would be a second error to think that. Those who cry for intolerance in interpreting St. Cyprian's formula, “Outside the Church there is no salvation,” also reject the Creed, “I confess one baptism for the remission of sins,” and are insufficiently instructed as to what baptism is. There are three ways of receiving it: the baptism of water; the baptism of blood (that of the martyrs who confessed the faith while still catechumens) and baptism of desire.
    Baptism of desire can be explicit. Many times in Africa I heard one of our catechumens say to me, “Father, baptize me straightaway because if I die before you come again, I shall go to hell.” I told him “No, if you have no mortal sin on your conscience and if you desire baptism, then you already have the grace in you.”
    The doctrine of the Church also recognizes implicit baptism of desire.  This consists in doing the will of God. God knows all men and He knows that amongst Protestants, Muslims, Buddhists and in the whole of humanity there are men of good will. They receive the grace of baptism without knowing it, but in an effective way. In this way they become part of the Church.


    https://www.sspxasia.com/Docuмents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/OpenLetterToConfusedCatholics/Chapter-10.htm

    Offline AnthonyPadua

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2351
    • Reputation: +1196/-233
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeney the nut job
    « Reply #205 on: October 20, 2024, 07:44:59 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Suprema Haec is not heretical, you Feeneyite nutjob. Msgr. Fenton praised it up and down as a brilliant expression of the authoritative Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church. I am done with trying to talk sense into your obstinate head. You are a deluded schismatic in extremely blind self-deception. I suggest you repent and return to the Church.

    You are yet to publicly apologize and publicly recant your publicly schismatic and heretical statement that Pope Pius XII should be anathematized. This places you outside the Catholic Church as a self-condemned heretical schismatic.

    Here is Archbishop Lefebvre: "We must say it clearly: such a concept is radically opposed to Catholic dogma. The Church is the one ark of salvation, and we must not be afraid to affirm it.  You have often heard it said, “Outside the Church there is no salvation”--a dictum which offends contemporary minds. It is easy to believe that this doctrine is no longer in effect, that it has been dropped. It seems excessively severe.
    Yet nothing, in fact, has changed;  nothing can be changed in this area. Our Lord did not found a number of churches: He founded only One.  There is only one Cross by which we can be saved, and that Cross has been given to the Catholic Church. It has not been given to others.  To His Church, His mystical bride, Christ has given all graces.  No grace in the world, no grace in the history of humanity is distributed except through her.
    Does that mean that no Protestant, no Muslim, no Buddhist or animist will be saved? No, it would be a second error to think that. Those who cry for intolerance in interpreting St. Cyprian's formula, “Outside the Church there is no salvation,” also reject the Creed, “I confess one baptism for the remission of sins,” and are insufficiently instructed as to what baptism is. There are three ways of receiving it: the baptism of water; the baptism of blood (that of the martyrs who confessed the faith while still catechumens) and baptism of desire.
    Baptism of desire can be explicit. Many times in Africa I heard one of our catechumens say to me, “Father, baptize me straightaway because if I die before you come again, I shall go to hell.” I told him “No, if you have no mortal sin on your conscience and if you desire baptism, then you already have the grace in you.”
    The doctrine of the Church also recognizes implicit baptism of desire.  This consists in doing the will of God. God knows all men and He knows that amongst Protestants, Muslims, Buddhists and in the whole of humanity there are men of good will. They receive the grace of baptism without knowing it, but in an effective way. In this way they become part of the Church.


    https://www.sspxasia.com/Docuмents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/OpenLetterToConfusedCatholics/Chapter-10.htm
    It's really amazing how you have ignored everything in this thread that goes against your brainwashing. The only one here at risk of schism is you, due to you inconsistency in your beliefs, the same beliefs which are compatible with vatican 2, which you seemingly reject.


    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4750
    • Reputation: +2897/-667
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeney the nut job
    « Reply #206 on: October 20, 2024, 09:09:55 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Suprema Haec is not heretical, you Feeneyite nutjob. Msgr. Fenton praised it up and down as a brilliant expression of the authoritative Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church. I am done with trying to talk sense into your obstinate head. You are a deluded schismatic in extremely blind self-deception. I suggest you repent and return to the Church.

    You are yet to publicly apologize and publicly recant your publicly schismatic and heretical statement that Pope Pius XII should be anathematized. This places you outside the Catholic Church as a self-condemned heretical schismatic.

    Here is Archbishop Lefebvre: "We must say it clearly: such a concept is radically opposed to Catholic dogma. The Church is the one ark of salvation, and we must not be afraid to affirm it.  You have often heard it said, “Outside the Church there is no salvation”--a dictum which offends contemporary minds. It is easy to believe that this doctrine is no longer in effect, that it has been dropped. It seems excessively severe.
    Yet nothing, in fact, has changed;  nothing can be changed in this area. Our Lord did not found a number of churches: He founded only One.  There is only one Cross by which we can be saved, and that Cross has been given to the Catholic Church. It has not been given to others.  To His Church, His mystical bride, Christ has given all graces.  No grace in the world, no grace in the history of humanity is distributed except through her.
    Does that mean that no Protestant, no Muslim, no Buddhist or animist will be saved? No, it would be a second error to think that. Those who cry for intolerance in interpreting St. Cyprian's formula, “Outside the Church there is no salvation,” also reject the Creed, “I confess one baptism for the remission of sins,” and are insufficiently instructed as to what baptism is. There are three ways of receiving it: the baptism of water; the baptism of blood (that of the martyrs who confessed the faith while still catechumens) and baptism of desire.
    Baptism of desire can be explicit. Many times in Africa I heard one of our catechumens say to me, “Father, baptize me straightaway because if I die before you come again, I shall go to hell.” I told him “No, if you have no mortal sin on your conscience and if you desire baptism, then you already have the grace in you.”
    The doctrine of the Church also recognizes implicit baptism of desire.  This consists in doing the will of God. God knows all men and He knows that amongst Protestants, Muslims, Buddhists and in the whole of humanity there are men of good will. They receive the grace of baptism without knowing it, but in an effective way. In this way they become part of the Church.


    https://www.sspxasia.com/Docuмents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/OpenLetterToConfusedCatholics/Chapter-10.htm

    I wouldn’t categorize this (in red) as heretical, but it is schismatic. If it is true that he believes this, it seems he is no longer part of the Mystical Body. Can you give me the reference?

    R&R people might accuse us sedevacantists ( anti John XXIII - Bergoglio variety) of being schismatic, but there is ample evidence of suspecting their election and/or their Catholicity. I give some leeway to those who believe that John XXIII was a true pope and those who believe that Paul VI lost his office during or after the promulgation of Vatican II.

    As for rejecting Pope Pius XII, what these foolish people are doing is selecting things that THEY believe don’t line up to THEIR perception of what the Church teaches. They put their opinions above and set themselves as more knowledgeable than any pope, saint, or theologian. Obviously, this is extremely dangerous.

    Stubborn is an example of this in the R&R realm.
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline NishantXavier

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 621
    • Reputation: +209/-531
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeney the nut job
    « Reply #207 on: October 20, 2024, 11:49:58 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Yes, Quo. https://www.cathinfo.com/fighting-errors-in-the-modern-world/feeney-the-nut-job/150/ Post 150 here:

    "Pius XII was a scandal, both in his "doctrine", his toleration of Modernism, and even of his suspicious/scandalous fraternization with the "Popessa".  If he isn't anathematized after the Church is restored, then the Church owes Honorius an apology.

    He's directly responsible for Vatican II."

    Ladislaus can't stomach the fact that his heretical doctrine has been directly condemned by the Church as very harmful to those both inside and outside the Church. Ladislaus is a false teacher leading souls straight to hell.


    "From what has been said it is evident that those things which are proposed in the periodical <From the Housetops>, fascicle 3, as the genuine teaching of the Catholic Church are far from being such and are very harmful both to those within the Church and those without." https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/letter-to-the-archbishop-of-boston-2076 The Holy Office declarations means the Feeneyite doctrine is dangerous both to Catholics and non Catholics. To Catholics because it falsely causes arrogance, pride and bitter zeal as we see in the Dimonds and in Ladislaus, and as Archbishop Lefebvre for e.g. did not have, and to non-Catholics because it discourages prospective converts by terrorizing them and preaching a heretical false Calvinist god who supposedly predestines many billions of people to hell for no fault of their own. Such opinions have been condemned by multiple Popes of the Church.

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4750
    • Reputation: +2897/-667
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeney the nut job
    « Reply #208 on: October 20, 2024, 01:26:43 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Yes, Quo. https://www.cathinfo.com/fighting-errors-in-the-modern-world/feeney-the-nut-job/150/ Post 150 here:

    "Pius XII was a scandal, both in his "doctrine", his toleration of Modernism, and even of his suspicious/scandalous fraternization with the "Popessa".  If he isn't anathematized after the Church is restored, then the Church owes Honorius an apology.

    He's directly responsible for Vatican II."

    Ladislaus can't stomach the fact that his heretical doctrine has been directly condemned by the Church as very harmful to those both inside and outside the Church. Ladislaus is a false teacher leading souls straight to hell.


    "From what has been said it is evident that those things which are proposed in the periodical <From the Housetops>, fascicle 3, as the genuine teaching of the Catholic Church are far from being such and are very harmful both to those within the Church and those without." https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/letter-to-the-archbishop-of-boston-2076 The Holy Office declarations means the Feeneyite doctrine is dangerous both to Catholics and non Catholics. To Catholics because it falsely causes arrogance, pride and bitter zeal as we see in the Dimonds and in Ladislaus, and as Archbishop Lefebvre for e.g. did not have, and to non-Catholics because it discourages prospective converts by terrorizing them and preaching a heretical false Calvinist god who supposedly predestines many billions of people to hell for no fault of their own. Such opinions have been condemned by multiple Popes of the Church.


    :facepalm:   As I’ve said in the past: he’s a Luther in the making.
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46813
    • Reputation: +27672/-5138
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feeney the nut job
    « Reply #209 on: October 20, 2024, 02:22:18 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • As often happens, bad will and resistance to the truth leads to stupidity.  St. Thomas taught that the intellect naturally tends to truth ... except when obstructed by bad will.

    You are both at once ignorant of Church history and struggle with reading comprehension, and this is compounded by what can rightly be called a popolatry.

    Honorius was anathematized by the Third Council of Constantinople, an anathema that was confirmed and ratified by Pope Leo II, who then added the explanation that it wasn't for pertinacious adherence to heresy himself but for neglect, a failure to condemn, allowing heresy to flourish and thus to be used as a tool of Satan for the spread of heresy.  Honorius' failure was trivial compared to the failures of Pius XII, his failure to condemn Modernism, giving it countenance in many areas, and appointing one Modernist heretic after another to episcopal Sees.  Honorius was anathematized 40 years after his death.  Whether or not the same fate befalls Pius XII, if you were possessed of any reading comprehension, you'd see that I said that if Pius XII isn't anathematized then it owes an apology for Honoroius, which expression means that the Church saw fit to anathematize Honorius for MUCH less that Pius XII did.  It's similar to the expression that "if God doesn't destroy the United States [or Tel Aviv], then He owes an aplogy to Sodom and Gomorrha".  It's a rhetorical expression that evidently you are too dense and blinded by your exaggeration of papal infallability and impeccability to properly comprehend.

    In any case, take a look again at the Cadaver synod as well, where Formosus was disinterred, condemned, thrown into the Tiber, the proceedings having been presided over and approved by another Pope, Stephen VI.  But then Formosus' body somehow floated shore, and so a popular uprising removed and imprisoned that Pope.  Then two subsequent Popes annulled the cadavers synod, reinterred Formosus, annd condemned Stephen VI.  But then ANOTHER Pope came along, one who had voted to condemn Formosus at the original synod, and reaffirmed the condemnation of Formosus, having inscribed words of praise on the tomb of Stephen VI.

    So, it's the example of Honorius that Cardinal Franzelin uses as a caution to avoid exaggerating the scope of papal infallibility.

    Unfortunately, in reacting against R&R, who have effectively gutted the Church's indefectibility by reducing the protection of the Holy Ghost over the Church and the Papay to the one-or-twice-per-century solemn dogmatic definition, the SVs have exaggerated the scope of papal infallibility to the point of absurdity, and to an extent that NO THEOLOGIAN between Vatican I and Vatican II ever taught.  Many popes made errors, even in the docuмents they promulugated as Pope (vs. private theologian).  There was much debate about whether Honorius' letter to Sergius was meant as an ex cathedra pronouncement.  Another famous case had Innocent II proclaming, in a Magisterial docuмent, that the Mass was valid even if a priest merely thought the words of consecration.  St. Thomas took him to task for that error.

    Finally, the SVs engage in confirmation-bias-driven appeal to authority, where they puff up the authority of docuмents they like (that promote things they agree with) but then simply ignore the ones they don't like.  So, for instance, a teaching of the Holy Office clearly taught that explicit belief in the Holy Trinity and Incarnation are necessary by a necessity of means for salvation, but that doesn't stop most SVs (ignoring that ruling) from continuing to claim that infidels who believed merely in the "Rewarder God" can be saved.

    Apart from the CMRI, the rest of SVs reject the Holy Week Rites promulgated by Pope Pius XII because they were defective, tainted with Modernism, etc. ... despite from the other side of their mouths preaching that Popes are infallible in doctrine and discipline pretty much every time they pass wind.

    This self-serving confirmation-bias-based filtering leads to self-contradiction and inconsistency, aka hypocrisy.