Skip to main content

Has Chris Ferrara "Succumb to Bergoglio Derangement Syndrome"?

At times, I have found that the comments in the Catholic Monitor comment section are better than my post. This was true of one of yesterday's posts in which Justina wrote this comment:

"I think it is even worse than all that. In Frank Walker's headline at Canon 212, he said Ferrara stated that popes can make mistakes. If that was the full extent of the assertion, it wouldn't be so bad, because of course they can. Only Rex Mottram would deny it."

"But that is not what Ferrara said. In fact, his rhetorical question specified--Who says popes can't make mistakes when teaching about faith and morals?"

"This not only contradicts his own contention that permitting access to the Eucharist for the invalidly remarried is a disciplinary matter alone. It even contradicts Our Lord who, when entrusting the Keys to Peter, specifically linked them to Heaven as well as earth. It is He who guarantees, through the Holy Spirit, that popes cannot commit the errors to which Ferrara alludes. If they could, or if such errors may be downgraded to merely negotiable matters at will, then why be Catholic at all? I'd rather follow my own private judgment than someone else's, if that is all there is."

"If I have understood Ferrara and Marshall correctly, they sought to overcome this objection by citing popes like Honorius who did teach wrong things. The point these commentators fail to factor in is that such teachings were not tolerated by the Church. They were corrected, which apparently is exactly what Christopher Ferrara has now shown himself unwilling to insist upon."

"God is not mocked. It must be one way or the other. Either Bergoglio was never the Pope in the first place or, as Pope, he has deviated so severely from the Faith that Cardinal Burke's long-awaited Formal Correction must come to pass at last. For us all to succumb to Bergoglio Derangement Syndrome like poor Counselor Ferrara, voluntarily warping our view of reality itself rather than dealing with the possibility that we have an anti-pope on our hands, is no solution at all."
[http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2019/12/why-is-ferrara-saying-communion-for.html?m=1]

Finally, here is my post that hopefully helped inspire Justina in her comment:

Why is Ferrara saying Communion for Adulterers isn't "Doctrine, but a Disciplinary Permission" & Running away from Fr. Gruner's Teachings
On Dr. Taylor Marshall's YouTube channel Catholic lawyer Christopher Ferrera said that Francis's teaching that adulterers may receive Communion is "not really a doctrine, but a disciplinary permission."
(Dr. Taylor Marshall YouTube channel, "Is Pope Francis Against Fatima? with Christopher Ferrara, 42:57)

So it appears that according to Ferrera if Pope Paul VI instead of teaching contraception and abortion can never be permitted had taught that contraception and abortion can be permitted that would not be a heretical doctrine or teaching, but only a "disciplinary permission."

So it appears that according to Ferrara if Francis were to teach that pagan Pachamama idol worshipping in all Catholic churches is now permitted that would not be a heretical doctrine or teaching, but only a "disciplinary permission."

Moreover, in the YouTube show Ferrera said he "learned more about" theology from Fr. Nicholas Gruner than if he had went to a advance theological educational program.

But, as Ferrara knows Fr. Gruner agreed with canon law expert Br. Alexis Bugnolo on Pope Benedict XVI's resignation:

"Canon 17 requires that canon 332 S2 be read in accord with the meaning of canon 145 S1 and canon 41... [which] requires that ministerium and munus be understood as referring to two different things."
(From Rome, "Ganswein, Brandmuller & Burke: Please read Canon 17, February 14, 2019)

Why is Ferrara afraid to respond and running away from his great theological teacher Fr. Gruner's and Br. Bugnolo's reasonable canon law arguments about the apparent invalidity of Pope Benedict's resignation?

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Comments

Debbie said…
I would publically like to challenge Dr. Marshall to have a "Benedict is Pope" guest on his show.

Ann Barnhardt
Mark Docherty
Br. Bugnolo
Fr. Nix

Anyone else tired of the very Protestant "Recognize and Resist" crowd who won't engage? I know I am. THEY are helping Satan and Bergoglio destroy the papacy!
Islam_Is_Islam said…
@Debbie: This is an excellent idea! Have you laid this challenge at either Dr. Marshall's or Timothy Gordon's youtube channels?
Either in their live chats or in the comment sections? Dr. Marshall replied ONCE to one of my comments only to insist that Munus and Ministerium have the same meaning. In light of Mr. Ferrara's recent recognition of Fr. Gruner's role in his own life, perhaps we could 'seed' the comments under his recent interview with Fr. Gruner's unburied video observations from Nov 2014?

https://vimeo.com/228833627
Debbie said…
I rarely listen to Dr. Marshall's YouTube videos, even before Tim Gordon left, and I've never listened to Gordon's. I'm blocked on Marshall's twitter, but I've asked several times on threads he's part of. On the rare occasion I listen to Marshall I always ask him to explain if he committed the grave sin of schism for assisting at Fr. Nix's private Mass this past August. Marshall made public his attendance at this Mass. Father commemorates Benedict. Marshall owes the public an explanation.
I'm wondering how you "Benedict-is-Pope" folks respond to the charge that you're rushing to plunge headlong over the cliff into the abyss of permanent sedevacantism?
If you're right, you'll have no hope of getting a new, valid pope after Benedict dies. For if Francis has never been a true pope, none of the cardinals he has appointed (now more than half the College) are true cardinal electors. So whoever gets elected at the inevitable conclave following Francis' death will not, in your view, be a true and valid pope. Moreover, if you're right, the Church is ALREADY in jurisdictional chaos, with hundreds of dioceses left without true shepherds. For on your terms none of the bishops appointed by Bergoglio (e.g., three of the four diocesan bishops here in Missouri) has any right to rule his diocese and expect obedience from the faithful living there. Fr. Brian Harrison, O.S., St. Louis, MO.

Popular posts from this blog

Taylor Marshall finally admitted that "Francis teaches HERESY," now, the question is will he do a Skojec & a Schneider Cop Out

    Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation: "[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) Taylor Marshall finally admitted that "Pope Francis teaches HERESY: Pope Pius XII condemned the heresy of Francis": Pope Francis on Feb 2 2022, taught, "that in Christ no one can ever truly separate us from those we love because the bond is an existential bond, a strong bond that is in our very nature...who have denied the faith, who are apostates." Pope Pius XII taught the exact opposite when he wrote of those: "who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or b

Wernz-Vidal: "One cannot consider as Schismatics those who Refuse to Obey the Roman Pontiff because they would hold his person Suspect or, because of Widespread Rumors, Doubtfully Elected"

    Pope Francis is tottering on the precipice of Hell. None of this means he isn't the pope, and such talk among the laity is scandalous in its own right. Not a single cardinal in that 2013 conclave has come out and said the election was rigged and Bergoglio isn't the pope, that he is in fact an anti-pope . If he is, a future pope can declare that, when Jorge Bergoglio will no longer be a pope. But if the very men gathered in conclave haven't made that public accusation,  anyone who is suggesting that better take into account that they too will have to give an account of themselves to Almighty God when they die . Such talk adds to the scandal of the "little ones," the simple, even potential converts, who, when they hear big-mouth Catholics on social media saying he's not really the pope, draw back from approaching the Church. Do any of us desire to stand in front Our Blessed Lord as the Supreme Judge and explain why, in our desire for more c

The Nuremberg Trial-like Excuse which Cardinal Burke has so Staggeringly, so Stereotypically Proffered on the Promised “Formal Correction”

Does Cardinal Burke think Francis is an antipope? On at least five occasions, Cardinal Burke has rejected the magisterial nature of official papal teaching (in one case, pre-emptively dismissing a hypothetical official teaching of the Magisterium): Cardinal Burke has rejected the official teaching of Pope Francis in the new Apostolic Constitution Episcopalis Communio concerning the possibility that a pope can raise the final synodal document to the level of ordinary magisterium, if the pope chooses. (We covered the Episcopalis Communio here .) The whole apostolic constitution on the Synod is problematic. … This idea that either the Pope on his own or the Synod together with the Pope can create some new Magisterium [i.e. a new teaching of the ordinary Magisterium], is simply false. The Synod is a consultative body, to help the Pope to see how best to present the Church’s teaching in time. It’s not able to create ordinary Magisterium. As a canon lawyer, Cardinal Burk