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

The Catholic Monitor

Search This Blog