Skip to main content

Schneider's Opinion has next to Zero Merit when standing next to the Teaching of Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales

Turning the table on Bishop Athanasius Schneider's opinion that a heretical pope can't be deposed is easy.

Schneider said: "[N]o... universal... or... Papal Magisterium... would support the theories of the deposition of a heretical pope," but the exact same thing can be said of the bishop's opinion:

"[N]o... universal... or... Papal Magisterium... would support the theories of" not being able to depose "a heretical pope."

Schneider's opinion has next to zero authority or merit when standing next to the teaching of Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales:

[T]he Pope... when he is explicitly a heretic... falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church 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)

Schneider, also, apparently is implying sit on you hands and do nothing when he says:

"There is no historical case of a pope losing the papacy during his term of office due to heresy."

So is the bishop saying during the time of the Arian heresy because there was no historical case of the Catholic Church by universal and Papal Magisterium teaching explicitly the dogma that Jesus is God that the last faithful Catholics should have sat on their hands and done nothing.

Sorry, but St. Athanasius and mostly the laity didn't follow your advise. In fact, this historical case goes against your do nothing policy.

They demanded that the Church correct the Arian heretics, universally and papally proclaimed the new explicit dogma that Jesus is God and depose those bishops who refused to recant the Arian heresy.

In the past, when popes were in error it was a one time and minor heresy. Today as never before in the history of the papacy we have repeated errors and heresies from a pope.

The situation today between Francis and the heretical popes of the past is a difference between kind not degree.

In the past, the heretical popes were a matter of degree like minors degrees of burns that don't cause death.

Today, with Francis as compared to the past heretical popes there is a difference of kind such as the minor ailment of a common cold versus a ailment like deadly cancer.

We have Francis by means of Apostolic Exhortations, Encyclicals, AAS, the Catechism and papal statements teaching errors and heresies such as God wills "a diversity of religions," adulterers can receive Communion, the death penalty is "inadmissible" and the error list goes on.

Sorry, but like St. Athanasius we demand that the Church correct the Francis heretics, universally and papally proclaimed the new explicit dogma of deposing a heretical pope and depose those bishops who refuse to recant the Francis heresies.

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


Alexis Bugnolo said…
I find it bizarro that some people are claiming, after his Essay was published and after reading it, that he is a holy man. Evidently Bergoglians have a new definition of holiness: denying Catholic doctrine. and crafting a sophistic argument full of falsehoods and misrepresentations, while throwing a number of Saints and all of the Fathers of the Church under the buss. How demonic!
Justina said…
I agree with Fred's take and with Brother Bugnolo's post here. And I would add one further thought: we (the ones seeking to remain true to the Catholic Faith in all things) are flanked by idolators on both sides.

The Francis-Is-Pope conservatives would agree with us that the Pachamama splashdown was a great, good, and holy thing. But haven't they set up their own idols in people like Cardinal Burke and Bishop Schneider, deferring to these men in a way that verges on actual latria--just like Bishop Schneider is enjoining us to do with Jorge Bergoglio himself?
nazareusrex said…
Let's start from the beginning Monsignor Athanasius Schneider a non-Catholic cannot be a pope. You want to make us believe that Bergoglio became a pope by magic when in Argentina he was a public heretic, a schismatic and an apostate. And you want to make us believe that Bergoglio was a 'super man' who was exempt from being automatically excommunicated, to commit with impunity heresy, apostasy and schism, promote sacrilege, be a freemason, a Marxist and a gay activist and nothing happened to him.
If you believe that this kind of 'catholics immune to Ipso Facto excommunication' exists, then with what arguments do you persecute us the faithful Catholics? You have placed above the Magisterium and the Law of God a well-known heretic to impose a heretic on the Church. A stubborn heretic who continues to commit heresy apostasy in front of the whole world and has violated the first Commandment with the sin of Idolatry to Pachamama.
nazareusrex said…
Now that Bergoglio's heresy is manifest and formal, Monsignor Athanasius Schneider denies the dogma of Papal Infallibility, which states that a pope cannot teach heresy in his infallible Magisterium in matters of faith and morals. Since they can no longer deny that Bergoglio is a heretic then now he seeks to impose a well-known heretic on the Church, since Bergoglio already has two heretical documents that contradict the Magisterium of the Church: Amoris Laetitia and Querida Amazonian .
Remember Monsignor Athanasius Schneider that the Magisterium of the Church has dictated the automatic excommunication for those who collaborate with heretics.

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