Skip to main content

De Mattei knows "Popes [can] be Deposed... for... Heresy" & be Corrected to the point of being Threatened with being Burned at the "Stake"; Why is he now Silent about it?

One Five publisher Steve Skojec has promoted Bishop Athanasius Schneider's claim that popes cannot be deposed for heresy which "puzzled" renowned historian and scholar Roberto de Mattei.

The renowned scholar apparently, also, has a different take on what "universal acceptance" means than Bishop Schneider promoter Skojec. It appears to means to the scholar that a heretical pope who (apparently was lawfully elected) could lose the papacy if he is not "accepted by the universal Church."

The 1P5 publisher seems to think "universal acceptance" is a "infallible fact" that a claimant for the papacy is definitely a pope even if his pontifical election was unlawful such as if he violated the conclave constitution of the previous pope for a lawful election.

De Mattei said he was "puzzled" by Schneider's claim that "popes cannot be deposed... for... heresy" because the bishop held a position contrary to Doctors of the Church, "great canonists and theologians":

"For as long as he [the heretical pope] is tolerated and accepted by the universal Church, the heretic will be true Pope, and in principle, his acts are valid... Schneider's position is somewhat acceptable... to avoid that crypto-sedevacantism... on the practical level... without excluding future scenarios, like that of a heretic Pope possibly losing the papacy."
(Catholic Family News, "Professor De Mattei Comments on Bishop Schneider's 'Heretical Popes' Text," March 20, 2019)

Moreover, de Mattei wrote that the Medieval "Sorbonne’s Chancellor, Jean Gerson [even] reached the point of threatening John XXII with the stake if he didn’t make a retraction":

"Among the most beautiful and mysterious truths of our faith is the dogma of the Beatific Vision of the souls in Heaven.The Beatific Vision consists in the immediate and intuitive  contemplation of God reserved for souls who have passed to the after-life in a state of Grace and have been completely purified of every imperfection. This truth of faith, enunciated in Holy Scripture and confirmed over the centuries by Tradition, is an unreformable dogma of the  Catholic Church. The new Catechism restates it in n.1023:”Those who die in God’s grace and friendship and are perfectly purified live forever with Christ. They are like God forever for “they see Him as He is” (1 John 3,2), “face to face” (1Corinthians 13,12)"

"At the beginning of the XIV century, a Pope, John XXII, contested this thesis in his ordinary magisterium and fell into heterodoxy. The most fervent Catholics of that time corrected him publically.  John XXII – Cardinal Schuster wrote –“has the gravest responsibilities before the tribunal of history (…) since “he offered the entire Church, the humiliating spectacle of the princes, clergy and universities steering the Pontiff onto the right path of Catholic theological tradition, and placing him in the very difficult situation of having to contradict himself.” (Alfredo Idelfonso Schuster o.s.b. Jesus Christ in Ecclesiastical History, Benedictine Publishing House, Rome 1996, pp. 116-117)...."

"... When the Pope tried to impose this erroneous doctrine on the Faculty of Theology in Paris, the King of France, Philip VI of Valois, prohibited its teaching, and, according to accounts by the Sorbonne’s Chancellor, Jean Gerson [even] reached the point of threatening John XXII with the stake if he didn’t make a retraction.  John XXII’s sermons totus mundum christianum turbaverunt, so said  Thomas of Strasburg, Master of the Hermits of Saint Augustine (in Dykmans,  op. cit., p. 10)."
[https://www.robertodemattei.it/en/2015/01/30/a-pope-who-fell-into-heresy-a-church-that-resisted-john-xxii-and-the-beatific-vision/]

If Chancellor Gerson were alife today would he with a correction have threatened Francis for his Communion for adulterers heresy with burning at the stake?

Why can't de Mattei follow the French Chancellor's example by issuing a correction to Francis for his Communion for adulterers heresy without the burning at the stake part?

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 the Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Comments

Praypraypray said…
This is a very interesting note sent in the “mailbag” to Barnhardt from a lawyer.
https://www.barnhardt.biz/2020/03/08/mailbag-a-lawyer-checks-in/
He warns about the next possible tactic of turning the burden of proof onto the lay people and I think he’s wondering if it will ever be enough for them to do anything about what’s going on in the Vatican.

I’m definitely not saying that anyone is saying/doing or not saying/doing anything for money. I don’t like to talk or write that way, especially since I do not know that to be true.

However, I’m just trying to figure out why they seem to be so afraid to look directly at the facts on Benedict XVI and his abdication, whether it’s valid or not and on Bergoglio’s nonsense and the writings of the saints on deposing a heretical “Pope”, etc., in their assessment of the Pontificate of Benedict XVI and the nonsense perpetuated by Bergoglio. It seems as if they use psychology, projecting, condescension, belittling comments, fear tactics, threats, and, (some have used), even personal attacks, rather than actually, seriously looking at the complete facts of the case. It’s as if they are avoiding the total truths of the case or sidestepping them out of some sort of fear...? Fear of what? Some talk about money, but I don’t think that’s it... at least not for many of them... Is it the diabolical confusion that we were warned about a while ago?

Sadly, I have some friends who were so poorly catechized that they simply refuse to look at the facts about Bergoglio, as if they’re afraid that they’d be excommunicated or violently struck by lightning for even thinking any bad thoughts about what’s going on in the Vatican. So they cope, psychologically, by ignoring the problem, sticking their heads in the sand, getting angry at anyone exposing the evil and wrongdoings, and looking for other like-minded people so they can prove that they are right in ignoring the problem and not facing facts.

There was a very good commentary on a YouTube video of Fr. Anthony Hannon in regard to the question, “Did Bishop Athanasius Schneider Refute Ann Barnhardt?”.
https://youtu.be/IRWJmTOECVk

We need to keep praying that Catholics will awaken completely to the truth and follow through with the correct actions.

Thank you, Fred Martinez.
Fred Martinez said…
Thank you, Praypraypray,

I lost your email address with had your address so I could send you my book. Could you email me it again? Sorry for the trouble. Thanks.
Praypraypray said…
Oh sure. No problem. God bless you for all that you do for the Holy Catholic Church.
Praypraypray said…
Thank you very much. ✝️

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