Did Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) say that Francis is a heretic ? On June 3, 2003 the then Cardinal Ratzinge r (and future Pope Benedict) , head of the Congregation for the Faith, said that the endorsement of " homosex civil unions" was against Catholic teaching, that is heterodoxy : "Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimatization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil... The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions ." (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Considerations Regarding Proposals to give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons," June 3, 2003) Gloria.tv reported: " Francis made on October 21 his latest declaration in sup...
Comments
Here we show the necessity of analyzing the Universi Dominici Gregis in depth, although some see it superficially or reject it altogether.
This Apostolic Constitution of Pope John Paul II proves that Bergorglio is not a legitimate Pope. She herself clarifies this simply with this fact: if Pope Benedict XVI did not abdicate the Munus petrinum, then his direct successor does not have the Munus petrinum.
So this "for a good connoisseur, half a word is enough", according to a popular saying in my country. But let us continue to delve deeper into the same Constitution.
If the same Constitution is devoted to rules for the election of a legitimate Roman Pontiff, then the solution is an election of a legitimate Roman Pontiff; Bergoglio would suffer a proper canonical punishment because of it.
All this means that it is the only alternative to which divine providence has placed us in front of a possible lack of consensus on how to resolve this crisis that could take years of existence.
But let's dive deeper into this objectivity, which is clear.
Articles 76 and 77 clearly state that the acts are null and void of Benedict's right successor because there is no need, by confirmation of any high authority of Rome, not to obey this pontificate without Munus.
This leads us to think that it is an urgent appeal to which divine providence tries to show us.
It is something extraordinary beyond common understanding, for example:
1 - Which is found in Catechism 675 of the Church;
2 - That it is consistent that Bishop Fulton J. Sheen says that "there will be a mystical body of the antichrist that will be similar in all its external parts to the mystical body of Christ";
3 - Which corroborates the then Cardinal Wojtyla at the Eucharistic Congress in Philadelphia in 1976.
All of this recalls an important warning about the fate of the Church in the Marian apparitions of the last century in Fatima, Portugal.
Thus we understand more deeply what Sister Lucy meant when she said this: "Either we are with God, or we are with the Devil."
Universi Dominici Gregis means, in this context all presented here, whoever still remains in the other Church that reveals itself to be apostate, will be eternally condemned.
So there's no time for rambling.
The rest is to trust in the same divine providence that will once again be favorable to us