It is the Church that has the decisive authority to impose the reality on the consciences of all Catholics. However, this does not preclude the faithful from making a private judgment corresponding to the reality, and having their own consciences bind themselves prior to the Church's judgment. Nonetheless, the reality is the reality. The fact is the fact. The Church herself has stated (e.g., Canon 188.4 of the 1917 Code) that an office is lost by tacit resignation based on the FACT of public defection. This FACT is evident in regards to Jorge Beroglio. The Church simply needs to enforce that which is evident by removing Jorge Bergoglio. He sitting in the Chair is purely accidental (i.e., accidental in the predicable sense), whereas matter and formal constitute the essence of a thing.
Fr. Kramer quotes St. Robert Bellarmine in the passages I have provided in which the saint states that all jurisdiction is lost by the public heretic. The public heretic has no claim to the office, materially or formally.
You admitted both elements, that there's a judgment about reality and then a decision by the Church. That's precisely where the formal and material aspects come in. Whether you want to admit it or not, there's a role for the Church to play ... or else any bozo could wake up one morning and claim that the See is vacant. That's the beauty of the Thesis (sedeprivationism), where it finds the balance between
ipso facto deposition and the removal from office. That principle is already there in the teaching of Pope St. Celestine, as cited by St. Robert Bellarmine. Pope St. Celestine refers to Nestorius as 1) having lost his authority and 2)
excommunicandus ... someone who SHOULD be excommunicated (but hasn't yet). Otherwise, at John of St. Thomas pointed out in developing his position, the Church could devolve into chaos.
But here's the thing you're missing in arguing about the personal heresy of Jorge Bergoglio. You're missing THE CORE ISSUE, which is that the Conciliar Church lacks the marks of the True Church of Christ. THAT is the actual problem here, not quibbling about whether Ratzinger or Bergoglio "really meant it" when they taught the exact same heresies. Fr. Kramer decides that Bergoglio really means it, whereas Ratzinger didn't really mean it. That is utterly preposterous. Well, I and many others say that Ratzinger really meant it to, that he's every bit the pernicious heretic that Bergoglio was, and even more dangerous due to the facade of quasi-Traditionalism he put up and that Fr. Kramer has fallen for. Who's right, Fr. Kramer or we ... and who decides?
If Vatican II and the post V2 Magisterium and the NOM had never happened, and we were talking about just the persona heretical ramblings of Jorge Bergoglio, say to Scalfari or on the Pope-Plane to reporters, none of this would matter. It would not be our problem, but it would be up to the Cardinals and bishops to deal with him.
Problem is the CONCILIAR CHURCH, and Kramer's focus on the personal heresy of Bergoglio is a distraction from the actual problem here and is tacticly endorsing Vatican II, Montini, Wojtyla, and Ratzinger. Consequently, you and Fr. Kramer (if you're not the same person) are enablers of the Conciliar Revolution and the AntiChurch. Wake up already.
PS -- I wish you'd stop your slavish worship of Fr. Kramer and citing him as your ultimate authority and rule of faith. Do you have an independent throught of your own, or are you Fr. Kramer himself?
Topic: BREAKING: Archbishop Viganò Summoned to Vatican Tribunal on Charge of Schism (Read 28539 times)