Skip to main content

LifeSite: Why ‘universal and peaceful acceptance’ doesn’t prove Francis is pope.."Billot..& other theologians who express UPA..[say] if a true pope were to fall into heresy..would cease to be pope..a pope who once possessed UPA would cease to possess it"

Why ‘universal and peaceful acceptance’ doesn’t prove Francis is pope

Comments

Renato said…
St. Robert Berllarmine's argument speaks of the eventuality of a "heretical Pope", who would cease to be "ipso facto" the Supreme Pontificate, from which he himself deposes to cease to be also a Christian and a member of the Church. Therefore, in this case, the Church would not be judging a Pope, but an illegitimate Pope. The Church would only be removing from the Chair of St. Peter a man who does not have the office of Pope, of the Supreme Pontiff, which is precisely to defend the Catholic faith, and not to betray it.

And the argument for a “universal acceptance” among Catholics, because with this probable heretical man, who would occupy the Chair of St. Peter, as the article correctly shows, would obviously come to an end.

Therefore, in the case of Bergoglio, he clearly demonstrates that he is not Pope and has appointed 130 cardinals, 92 of whom have the right to vote in the next conclave.
But the "Universi Dominici Gregis" makes it clear that nothing can be changed in Rome after the death of the Roman Pontiff, in the example of the appointment of cardinals, which is inferred, in a situation also of total impediment to the office of the legitimate Pope, in articles 76 and 77; because Benedict XVI does not abdicate the office (“munus petrinum”) makes it clear that the conclave of 2013 was invalid.

It follows that the problem is not so much this usurper in the Chair of St. Peter who utters continual heresies, for he is only the consequence of a cause of an invalid election, but a probable non-continuity of a legitimate pontificate that he is going to provoke.

Because Catholics, especially legitimate cardinals, must understand that if there is no faith in Rome, then the cause was not the legitimate popes with doctrinal errors, but the cause is a clear occupation within Rome, which caused the apex with Bergoglio, in a planning that was finally completed.

Thus the Church would be in danger of no longer electing popes (something will not happen), with the necessary cardinals from the last legitimate pontificates, for valid conclaves.

Wouldn't this be their main intention with this (Bergoglio plans a successor who already calls him "John XIV"), to replace the Church with a world religion, according to these latest heresies uttered by him?
6:30 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?

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...
6 comments
Read more

A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020

10:01pm November 3, 2020, a hour which will live in infamy, the United States of America presidential electoral integrity was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the forces of the Democrat Machine and some corrupt collaborators within the Republican Party. It will be recorded that "under the pretense of COVID, executive branch officials across a number of key battleground states violated election procedures passed by the legislative branches of those states in a number of ways that opened up the process to fraud on a massive scale, never before seen in the history of this country" which makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks before. During the time before and after the attack the Democrat Machine and its corrupt collaborators in the Media have deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.  The attack on United States has caused severe damage to the Ameri...
Post a Comment
Read more

Could Francis be an Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?

Is it possible for someone to be an antipope even though the majority of cardinals claim he is pope? The case of Antipope Anacletus II proves that it is possible for a majority of cardinals to claim a man is pope while he, in reality, is an antipope. In 1130, a majority of cardinals voted for Cardinal Peter Pierleone to be pope. He called himself Anacletus II. He was proclaimed pope and ruled Rome for eight years by vote and consent of a absolute majority of the cardinals despite the fact he was a antipope. In 1130, just prior to the election of antipope Anacletus, a small minority of cardinals elected the real pope: Pope Innocent II. How is this possible? St. Bernard said "the 'sanior pars' (the wiser portion)... declared in favor of Innocent II. By this he probably meant a majority of the cardinal-bishops." (St. Bernard of Clairvaux by Leon Christiani, Page 72) Again, how is this possible when the absolute majority of cardinals voted for A...
3 comments
Read more