Skip to main content

Why do Cowardly Anti-Open Letter Catholics & Sedevacantists Reject the Teachings of Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales?

All the Conservative and Traditionalist anti-Open Letter Catholic commentators and all the Sedevacantists are united in rejecting or ignoring the teaching of Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales:

"[T]he Pope... when he 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."
(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)

The Sedevacantists reject the Doctor of the Church's teaching that the Church "must... declare him [the explicit heretic Pope] deprived, of his Apostolic See" because like Neo-Protestants they, the Sedes, get to "declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See" not the Successors of the Apostles who Jesus Christ put in authority.

The Sedes love quoting that the explicitly heretical Pope "falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church," but then dishonestly ignore or deliberately leave out the second part of the sentence.

The anti-Open Letter Catholics, however, are in some ways more cowardly in that they ignore St. Francis de Sales' teaching altogether.

They over and over again talk about the "speculation" of St. Robert Bellarmine while they are either ignorant or choose to ignore for the sake of their strawman arguments not the "speculation" of this Doctor of the Church, but his straight forward explicit teaching about deposing a Pope.

The favorite strawman arguments of the anti-Open Letter Catholics are the mantras of schism and recently "counciliarism" to avoid the hard discussion of the teaching of a Doctor of the Church.

Why are these anti-Open Letter commentators afraid of engaging St. Francis de Sales?

Do they honestly think they can use their strawman mantras of schism and "councilarism" against him?

Are they calling a Doctor of the Church a schismatic and a "councilarist" heretic?

Remember that the "counciliarist" heresy came about before the time of St. Francis de Sales so he would be a explicit heretic if what he taught above had anything to do with it.

Do they honestly think that the Church makes schismatics and heretics into Doctors of the Church?

Anti-Open Letter Catholics stop being ignorant or cowards.

Overcome your ignorance or fear and honestly engage St. Francis de Sales' teaching about deposing a heretical Pope.

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church.




Comments

Fr. VF said…
I think the word is "conciliarism."
Why debate the matter of whether Bergoglio is a heretic? He was never a valid pope to begin with! How can he ever be deposed as if he ever was one?
mark wauck said…
Why didn't you give Bellarmine his proper title: Doctor of the Church? Anyway, de Sales appears to agree with Bellarmine: he states quite clearly that the heretic bishop of Rome IPSO FACTO falls out of the Church. IOW, whether or not other bishops declare that this has happened is irrelevant to the fact that it HAS happened, since in de Sales' own words it happens IPSO FACTO rather than upon the declaration of other bishops. He says they "must" declare it, but if they defy their duty and fail to do so, the fact remains a fact.
Fred Martinez said…
Please read the whole sentence. It says:

"The Church must... deprive him, or... declare him deprived."

It doesn't say Sedes get to say "if they defy their duty and fail to do so" then Sedes can reject or ignore the Doctor of the Church's teaching and the Saint's word "must" and whole context of his sentence.

Nandarani said…
http://www.traditionalcatholicpriest.com/2019/05/21/ending-cognitive-dissonance/ I loved this. St. Francis de Sales with the quote is mentioned, missing its second half. Speaking as a convert like the writer Mr. Jonathan Byrd is, I think (for once and for a change I get simpler and simpler I am glad to see!): the current Church is defying its duty as Mark Wauk says in the comment to which Mr. Martinez replies.

Popular posts from this blog

"Exorcist Fr. Ripperger is asking everyone to say this Prayer until the Election is Resolved"

A good friend of the Catholic Monitor got this from a group message. She said "exorcist Fr. Chad Ripperger is asking everyone to say this prayer until the election is resolved": Prayer of Command In His Name and by the power of His Cross and Blood, I ask Jesus to bind any evil spirits, forces and powers of the earth, air, fire, or water, of the netherworld and the satanic forces of nature.  By the power of the Holy Spirit and by His authority, I ask Jesus Christ to break any curses, hexes, or spells and send them back to where they came from, if it be His Holy Will.  I beseech Thee Lord Jesus to protect us by pouring Thy Precious Blood on us (my family, etc.), which Thou hast shed for us and I ask Thee to command that any departing spirits leave quietly, without disturbance, and go straight to Thy Cross to dispose of as Thou sees fit.  I ask Thee to bind any demonic interaction, interplay, or communications.  I place N. (Person, place or thing) under the protectio

High-profile Lawyer Barnes: Amy Coney Barrett would be a Disaster

High-profile trial lawyer Robert Barnes who deals in civil, criminal and constitutional law reported on Twitter that Amy Coney Barrett would be a disaster. The Barnes Twitter report shows that Coney Barrett has " sid[ed] with the government on the lockdowns, on uncompensated takings, on excusing First Amendment infringements & Fourth Amendment violations... [and] exclaimed the benefits of Jacobson, the decision that green-lit forced vaccines & carved out an emergency exception to Constitutional protection in "public health" or "emergency" cases used to justify forced sterilizations & detention camps... [and] hid behind precedent... to prohibit pro-life activists from exercising their free speech ." The Avvo.com lawyer directory reports that attorney "Robert Barnes embraces the challenge to defend the little guy and stand up for what is right. This is why he left the prestigious Yale Law School, whom publicly stated their unwill

If Kamala Harris' Father is part White & part Jamaican African and her Mother is Asian-Indian then is she really Black?

  Is Joe Biden's running mate really Black? If Kamala Harris' father is part white and part Jamaican African and her mother is Asian-Indian then is she really Black? Reason.com tries to figure it out: Kamala Harris, Joe Biden's pick to be the Democratic Party's vice-presidential nominee, is the daughter of an Indian immigrant mother and a Jamaican immigrant father. Her father, as I understand it, has ancestors of both European and African origin. [Welcome new Volokh readers. FYI, I've been working on a book on the American Law of Race, with this forthcoming article the first relevant output. My own opinion is that Ms. Harris should be deemed American, period, but there is no such box on government forms, and if you decline to state your race, someone will decide for you… First things first. There is no multiracial or mixed-race category in American law in any jurisdiction. Nor is there an Indian category. So Harris cannot be legally Indian, nor can she b