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
The pontificate of Pope Francis, if he recognizes himself as a legitimate Roman Pontiff, must have a definitive sentence on the part of the Church, according to St. Thomas Aquinas, in order to be pointed out as a heretic: "In fact, heretics, schismatics and excommunicated persons are deprived of the exercise of their powers by a sentence of the Church (Summa Theologiae, Tertia Pars, Quaestio 82, Articulus 9, co.)".
Therefore, if some believe that this Pope is a heretic, but is a Pope, then one must still expect such a sentence. Unfortunately, they must continue in due "obedience to the Roman Pontiff" (Code of Canon Law, 751). That is, they must abide, for example, to "Amoris Laetitia". No one has the authority to judge him or disobey him, for that would be an act of schism against a Pope. Because that would prove to be rebellion and an unchristian attitude.
But this also reveals another big problem. The Church has defined papal infallibility, a definitive dogma by Pope Pius IX, and if Bergoglio is sentenced as a stubborn heretic, this would obviously be contradictory to this dogma; The article, however, does not have this problematic possibility.
The solution to get out of these impasses, in what was defined by the Church, is in the Declaration of Benedict XVI. And Bergoglio does not have the munus (office) obviously. Therefore it should be noted that what is written in the "Universi Dominici Gregis", in its articles 76 and 77. Because these articles authorize Catholics not to obey this non-legitimate Pope, since it is said that it is not necessary for a sentence from the Church.
The problem itself is not heresies of this pontificate, but that this pontificate has never been legitimate from the beginning. The solution proposed by the article is inconsistent, as it should be logical. All possibilities must be coherent in the face of a legitimate and real good Christian conscience, because all this must be addressed so that there is coherence with the truth.