Look, there have been several reports whereby Pope Francis in an interview claimed that evil souls would be annihilated. The original report came if I'm not mistaken from an interview with E Scalfari. You can check this out yourself. The problem remains that papal interviews containing alleged heresies are never corrected. Clearly nobody cares so the papal heresies remain completely believable and credible.
You are incorrect. The charge of formal heresy belongs to the successors of the Apostles. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07256b.htm#REF_X
For example, we know as a matter of fact, that the pope openly praises Luther, a Church-condemned heretic. Since Luther was officially condemned by the Church, no one can say that the pope does this out of ignorance. (i.e., a material heretic). Thus the pope becomes a manifest formal heretic himself. St. Francis de Sales, "The Catholic Controversy" "...a pope who is a manifest heretic by that fact ceases to be pope and head, just as he by that fact ceases to be a Christian and a member of the body of the Church; wherefore he can be judged and punished by the Church. This is the judgment of all the early fathers, who teach that manifest heretics immediately lose all jurisdiction." "If God permitted a pope to be notoriously heretical and contumacious, he would then cease to be pope, and the Apostolic Chair would be vacant." St. Alphonsus de Liguori, "The Truths of the Faith" "An heretical pope necessarily ceases to be head of the Church, for by his heresy he is no longer a member thereof: in the event of his still claiming the Roman see a general council, improperly so-called because without the pope, could remove him. But this is not deposition, since by his own act he is no longer pope."
“notoriously heretical and contumacious” and “manifest heretic” are just other ways of saying “formal heretic.” Believe me, I’m not that far in my private unguarded off the record opinions on this matter from you or AT. But I’m not about to cross that line into declaring him an antipope or his papacy invalid - either publicly or privately - because I know my faith well enough to step back from that precipice. Not everybody does, and on the forum we have an obligation to talk them back from that edge, for the good of their souls. It’s ok to have grave reservations, and in fact they may keep us from despair, by being a relief valve of sorts, but we have to stay back from private interpretations of subjects the Church insists it is only hers to decide.
And so the sedevacantism spreads. As I said it is like a weed and once it is allowed to take root it will take over and choke out the good fruit.
I understand that, but I don't have a better term. It is in essence a version of sedevacantism as they refuse submission to the Pope. It is some new schismatic belief. It will become full sedevacantism as soon as Benedict dies. Whatever we call it, it is poison and it is spreading.
It is happening where I live. They purchased a Catholic Church that closed and opened their chapel. The Bishop has forbidden Catholics here to attend their TLM under pain of mortal sin!!
A Question......If a catholic sincerely believes with good reason that his first marriage was invalid and he applies for an anullment but He can't wait around for years while some church tribunal didders and dodders, and as a catholic he must protect himself/herself from spiritual harm caused by this waiting and especially from the opinions and statements uttered by anybody and especially uttered by ordained clergy irrespective of their position in the church hierarchy so,......... is this person dispensed from the normal rules of obedience that a parishioner would give the PP? and does this give a catholic the right to overrule the church tribunal diddering and doddering on his annullment application?
You may be correct but a charge is not a verdict. In the internal forum some people will arrive at verdicts and that can not be avoided . Marriage concerns two people not one. Therefore to protect both spouses from injustice the tribunal decision must be awaited. [Pope Francis is also busy destroying the strict criteria of justice required in the annulment process] Therefore in the matter of a person deciding in the internal forum that another catholic is a formal heretic the only person directly and necessarily affected by that decision is the person who makes it. The Catholic who is decided about is not necessarily affected. In marriage one of the spouse is necessarily affected by the decision of the other to decide prematurely that the marriage is void. The cases as presented in your argument are entirely different and the comparison therefore fails.
I know the one you mean. I think it is in Oakland? It is such a shame people can be deluded in this way If it weren't for that one sin of rejecting the Pope they would be good and fervent Catholics It is a BIG sin though...
I have attended both forms of the mass Latin and N.O. The Latin mass was the ONLY mass for a couple of hundred years until the 1960s, It was loved by many. For any bishop to express a hatred or antipathy for that mass, a mass permitted under church law, would indicate to me that such bishop is not a Catholic and that members of his flock are therefore dispensed from any obligation of obedience. In addition such a bishop has no longer any authority to inflict any ecclesiastical penalty or to bind in the matter of sin.
No one said anything about the bishop hating the Traditional Latin Mass Anthony. We have the Latin Mass here and it is wonderful. We were talking about a schismatic group that bought a Church here and does not recognize the Pope and is not a part of the Church.
Thank you for the clarification. Even though I do not attend the TLM there appears to be an antipathy to it in certain quarters. What a mess. Now the mad men in the Vatican are seeking to make changes both to it and the Novus Ordo rite again. Fortunately I understand the essence of the Mass for the most part so these many ongoing unnecessary liturgical changes I have seen continue to have little effect on me other than to cause irritation and resentment . I believe the dialogue mass will wither. It was tried before and withered which is why altar servers responding on behalf of the congregation were first introduced. A far more sensible arrangement.
That's exactly what it is. The same thing we are seeing here. The mentality of "My discernment over the Church". They think they are more Catholic that the rest of us, but they are really just schismatics.
For the first time since the Catholic Church was founded there now exists two men officially holding the title of Pope. Therefore issues arise that have never arisen before. Your entire position concerning these difficulties has been one of excoriation and condemnation. Shame on you.
you do not know anything about church history because there have already been two popes, and not a Pope and a Emeritus Pope.
