You keep spewing this and yet when I ask you for evidence you go silent only to reappear over and over again. I have demonstrated to you that a judgment in the external forum implies a judgment of sin in the internal forum. Otherwise, the competent authority would have no basis to make the judgment in the external forum. Canonical delicts are based on the underlying sins. So please stop with acting as if you were the authority on this matter.
Just shut up you babbling moron and simply Google up how the Church does not judge the internal forum.
It's absolute bullcrap that the Church has no basis to make a judgment in the external forum simply because the Church does not judge the internal. Again, Pope Leo XIII,
Apostolicae Curae, simply the last of many that I recall. St. Robert Bellarmine teaches also quite clearly that we judge a man a heretic, plain and simple, by his outward actions only, and to not pretend we can determine internal forum considerations like whether he's "truly guilty before God", as if we can read souls. You don't know a darn thing about theology, clearly, in constantly claiming that the internal forum has any bearing on the judgment of manifest heresy.
There is an external forum criterion regarding pertinacity, but pertinacity simply refers to persistnece, where it wasn't a slip of the tongue, a fleeting misjudgment, quickly correct once alerted to it, etc. ... but that you cling to the false opinion, as generally indicated by saying it over and over again, emphatically, in a manner where they would not accept correction on it. Even in that case, however, the individual might in fact be absolutely convinced that his error is truth, that it can be reconciled with Church teaching somehow, and be persistent in the error in good faith before God, i.e. where he's not "truly guilty before God" for it. But the Church cannot and does not presume to sort that out.
Anyone who knows anything about theology understands this principle, but you keep bloviating about it simply because you have an agenda, which is to declare Bergoglio and Prevost non-popes outside the Church while somehow saving Ratzinger and Wojtyla for teaching the exact same things, and actually INVENTING the heresies that you claim causes Bergs and Prevost to lose office. In fact, if we're judging internal forum, I could simply declare the OPPOSITE of your judgment, namely, that because Wojtyla and Ratzinger were well educated before Vatican II and because they invented these heresies, they are FAR MORE "guilty before God" than Bergoglio or Prevost, since they should know better and they innovated the heresies in the first place, whereas Bergoglio might have just been mindlessly regurgitating the errors of his predecessors because he mistakenly thought they were popes. Of course, I don't know and can't prove that anymore than you can prove your version of events, but this is to illustrate that I don't know, and neither do you, that neither of us can judge the internal forum. PERHAPS Wojtyla was sincere. But PERHAPS he was an evil sinister crypto Jew and Communist agent who deliberately infiltrated the Catholic Church to destroy it. There is some evidence to suggest this. Meanwhile, Bergoglio is just a moron who regurgitates stuff he got elsewhere. Who's more guilty? But I don't now. AND YOU DON'T KNOW EITHER. You absolutely cannot judge popes based on some mystical judgment of yours that requires reading intenrnal forum.
Topic: Sedevacantism Proven Wrong by La Salette (Read 89641 times)