Prominent clergy, scholars accuse Pope Francis of heresy in open letter

Here's a video of Charles Coulombe talking about the letter. He says that, given the character and reputation of some of the men who signed the letter, the only conclusion he can come to is that they concluded the situation was so bad that doing nothing would be worse than writing the letter. He says that most of them have knowingly destroyed their own reputations and will likely never work again. He hazards a guess that the letter is connected with the Pope's intention to ordain women deacons, an act which would destroy the ministerial priesthood. He says that it is an extremely serious situation for the Church.

 

So the rumors about a female diaconate seem to be true. If he does this, it’s a line that once crossed will finally wake up anyone still willing to be woke to the gravity of error we face.

 

He didn't seem to know for sure but that was his best guess. He said that he knows some of the signatories and the only conclusion he could come to was that whatever prompted them to act now had to be extremely grave and hazardous for the Church (I'm paraphrasing). My next Mass and Holy Communion will be offered for the signatories because it must have taken great courage and a lot of prayer and soul searching for them to write this letter. That's the kind of courage we all are called to have when the faith is challenged but very few actually have when it comes to the push. I'm not sure I would have their courage. I know this sounds crazy but I believe that in some respects martyrdom would probably be an easier choice because it's a straight either/or choice and comes with a guarantee of Heaven. Those men could have remained silent and kept their jobs and standing in academic circles. It's most likely now that they will be treated like lepers. Imagine the pressure which will be put on their superiors to exact some kind of vengeance on them (all in the name of mercy of course).

The priests are Dominicans. I learned recently (can't remember whether from something I watched or read) that the reason the Pope wears white is that Pope St. Pius V was a Dominican and he continued to wear his Dominican habit during his short reign as Pope. He was Pope during the battle of Lepanto and his feast day was last Tuesday, April 30. He was the kind of Pope we sorely need now: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Pius_V
The Dominicans have given us great saints, among them St. Dominic, St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Catherine of Siena, St. Vincent Ferrer, St. Rose of Lima and St. Martin dePorres. Thank God the order has at least two more who are willing to make real sacrifices for the faith.

 

Catholic philosopher: Why I signed the open letter accusing Pope Francis of heresy
Peter Kwasniewski

https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/...e-open-letter-accusing-pope-francis-of-heresy

Shutterstock.com
May 2, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) – Catholics who have been paying any attention to the words and deeds of Pope Francis over the past six years are aware of the mounting problems of this pontificate. It is hardly necessary to go into details here; those who care to know either already know or can easily find out. The Open Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church that was signed by a number of scholars and pastors, including me, furnishes clear evidence of heretical (not just erroneous) statements that may be found in the approved writings of Pope Francis, as well as evidence—in the form of repeated acts and omissions of governance—that he is fully aware of what is he promoting.

Many people have been asking: What’s the good of taking a step like this? Will it not further polarize the situation? Will it not offer excuses to the Bergoglio party to intensify their confinement and persecution of Catholics? Is it not overwhelmingly likely to be ignored? Can anyone do anything about a wayward pope—mustn’t we just wait until God sorts it out for us? And besides, aren’t the signatories lacking in sufficient theological qualifications?

READ: Prominent clergy, scholars accuse Pope Francis of heresy in open letter

This document is good and valuable for three reasons.

First, it documents instances of heresy that cannot be denied, taking the textual evidence together with supportive actions. The truths at stake are not minor ones, nor are they hazy, debatable propositions. We are dealing with truths taught directly by Sacred Scripture, confirmed in de fide pronouncements of popes and ecumenical councils. Saying so may not help take away the scales from the eyes of those who refuse to see, but it seems like the next logical step after the Correctio filialis, which had argued that Francis supported or did not oppose heresies. This new document goes a step further: he is "guilty of the crime of heresy" and can be judged as such by those who are competent to govern the Church of God, namely, the bishops, who are not Vicars of the Pope, but true and proper rulers of their own portion of the Lord’s flock, with (as Vatican II teaches) a responsibility for the well-being of the entire Church.

Second, it is a step that we are taking for the historical record, for posterity. It will be seen clearly that Catholics in our day were willing to call out not only sins of clerical abuse, but also sins of heresy, which are worse in kind because they more directly oppose God Himself. The worst sin, teaches St. Thomas Aquinas, is that of infidelity or lack of faith; and this lack of faith is manifested in a denial of any truth of the Catholic Faith.

Third, it is a step we take before God, as a testimony of our conscience. Perhaps there are others who can sleep like babes without raising a voice of protest to the autodemolition of the Faith and the misleading of countless souls; who see what the Pope is saying and doing, but who shrug their shoulders and figure that it won’t redound to lasting damage. I am not such a person, and I think the same is true of the other signatories.

WATCH: Ignatius Press bosses suggest Rome reply to open letter accusing Francis of heresy

Those who have dismissed this document (and others like it, such as the Correctio filialis) have shown an astonishing lack of seriousness to engage the numerous grave issues the authors have brought forward, preferring to take refuge in comforting sentiments of papal allegiance and boilerplate generalities recycled from scholastic manuals. In this way, although they believe themselves to be putting out fires and calming irrational fears, they are in reality paving a broad path for the triumph of the modernist-narcissist despots who currently dominate high ecclesiastical offices. In the end, those who clear away obstacles from the progress of despots will be no less liable to judgment. Battles are won not by generals only, nor by soldiers only, but also by the cowardice, obliviousness, and complicity of their opponents.

The signatories have been taunted as “lacking in sufficient theological qualifications.” This is false, since several signatories are highly trained theologians of good reputation. But it is also somewhat irrelevant. One does not have to be a medical doctor in order to recognize a compound fracture or a bleeding jugular vein; in like manner, one does not have to be a professional theologian to know when basic truths of the Faith are being contradicted outright. The fool who says “there is no God” is a fool and can be identified as such. Similarly, the man, no matter who he is, who says that those who are already married but living more uxorio with another partner may be admitted to Holy Communion is denying truths of natural law, divine law, and ecclesiastical law, established in both Scripture and Tradition. Such a one is dissenting from the truth of the Faith.

As the last three pages of the Letter explain—and I highly recommend that those who have not yet read the Letter to the end read these last pages without delay—a broad consensus of Catholic authors allow for the possibility of the pope being confronted by his fellow bishops and then, if he persists in heresy, to be declared deposed in the sight of God and the faithful by the very fact of his having fallen into heresy. As canonists teach, a heretical pope is deposed through the simple fact of being recognized as a public formal heretic by those who are competent ex officio to identify and proscribe heresy. This position was argued without demur by the recent and well-respected ecclesiologist Cardinal Charles Journet:

The action of the Church [towards the wayward pope] is simply declarative; she manifests that there is an incorrigible sin of heresy: then the authoritative action of God is exerted to sever the papacy from a subject who, persisting in heresy after admonition, becomes, according to Divine Law, unfit to hold the office any longer. So by virtue of the Scripture, the Church designates and God deposes. (L’Eglise du Verbe incarné. Essai de Théologie spéculative, 2:266)

Finally, the despairing and cynical comment: “What good is it?” deserves a response.

The fact that God is ultimately in charge of everything has never been taken as an excuse to do nothing. Would the Roman world have been converted to Christianity if no one had ever preached? Would the pagan world have come to know Christ without missionaries journeying to the ends of the earth? The quietists among us would seem to think that it is enough to “leave it to God”; let Him preach if He wants the world, let Him journey to its remotest corners. Obviously that is absurd. We must do all that we can for Christ and the Church, in whatever station we occupy, knowing that God will bless with fruitfulness any efforts that derive from His inspiration, correspond to His will, and promote His glory.

The question “What good is it?” sounds eerily like Pontius Pilate’s “What is truth?” True Christians have never been proportionalists or consequentialists. Their motto has been Mother Teresa’s famous remark: “God does not ask us to be successful; He asks us to be faithful.” Even so, we find supernatural success only among those who are faithful. David did not take a look at Goliath and say “Forget about it; outclassed by a few cubits.” He whipped out his little slingshot, picked up the five smooth stones, and let fly into the Philistine’s forehead. The giant was ultimately despatched with his own sword, to show that evil consumes itself—but only when human valor is at hand.

From those to whom more has been given, more will be expected. If we have been given to see a wolf in shepherd’s clothing, we are expected to do something about it. We will cry “Wolf!” to the vulnerable sheep, and pray fervently that other true shepherds will come to the rescue, in ways that we cannot. If they fail to do so, that is not our problem, but theirs to answer for.

Watch The John-Henry Westen Show, LifeSite’s new weekly commentary on the most important news in the Church and culture. Subscribe here to get an update every Tuesday when we release a new episode. You can watch the latest episode below, or listen to it here.





.

 

Wednesday, May 1, 2019
Episcopal Action Needed to Solve Papal Crisis
By David Martin
http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com

Aside from his having abetted anti-life forces, betrayed the underground Church in China, sacked loyal priests, empowered homosexuals, rewarded abortionists, praised Luther, blessed adultery, and denied the miracle of the loaves, Francis more than once has professed heresy.

For instance, on February 4, 2019, he signed a joint statement with the head of Egypt’s al-Azhar Mosque, which states that "diversity of religions" is "willed by God."
1https://onepeterfive.com/schneider-christian-god-willed/

While the previous popes since John XXIII had committed some slighterrors, such perfidy had never been expressed by them.

Francis vs. His Predecessors

The primary difference between Francis and his immediate predecessors is that the former were surrounded by wicked cardinals who were driving the radical agenda and who tried to coerce these popes into complying with it, which when they didn't, were persecuted for their resistance. Whereas with the present pontificate, it is Francis who is driving the radical agenda, and he does this in harmonic accord with those who surround him, many of whom he has appointed. Unlike the previous popes, it is Francis who persecutes tradition-minded Catholics who resist change and who hold to the Old Mass and teachings, while it was Popes John Paul I, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI who tried to bring back the Traditional Latin Mass.

There is even evidence showing that Pope John Paul I was murdered after it was discovered that he had plans to expose the Vatican Freemasons by name and to universally bring back the Latin Tridentine Mass. Note that his reign lasted only 33 days, which providentially alludes to the murderous cult of the Freemasons that operates in 33 degrees.

While we cannot allege that Francis is an initiated Freemason, we can state as fact that the Freemasons haven't ceased from praising Francis since the day of his election. For instance, on March 13, 2013, the day of Francis’ election, the Virtual Grand Lodge of Italy, GLVDI, published a statement of Grand Master Luciano Nistri concerning the election of the new pope.

“A message that Freemasonry itself perceives a sharp break with the past and one which is turned now to listening to the poor, the marginalized and the weakest. To the new Pontiff we send our best wishes for his good work for years to come. Luciano Nistri, Grand Master GLVDI.” https://onepeterfive.com/freemasons-love-pope-francis/


The Emergence of true Shepherds

With the crisis intensifying with each passing day, it should encourage Catholics to see that there are faithful prelates like Cardinals Burke and Sarah and Archbishop Viganò who have come forward to defend the Church against Francis. What is needed is for a committee of bishops to respectfully present Francis with an ultimatum to either clarify or recant his erroneous statements or be deposed if he isn’t willing to voluntarily resign.

Theologians argue that such action requires that a pope first profess formal heresy, which is apparently why he often makes his avant-garde statements in an informal context to avoid censure, but does this not make him all the more worthy of rebuke? What is worse, a heretic or a deceiver?


One Bishop’s Opinion

Episcopal action is needed to correct the current Petrine debacle.And while many look to Bishop Athanasius Schneider for direction in this matter, his March 20 statement, "On the Matter of a Heretical Pope," leaves little or no room for effective action,since it denies the Church’s that a pope can lose his papacy ipso facto through the profession of formal heresy and that the Church can
declare him deposed on account of it. Bishop Schneider states:

"A pope cannot be deposed in whatsoever form and for whatever reason, not even for the reason of heresy."


This doesn’t stand next to the teaching of St. Francis de Sales, Doctor of the Church.

"Now when [the Pope] is explicitly a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church must either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See." — St. Francis de Sales, The Catholic Controversy


St. Robert Bellarmine, Doctor of the Church, likewise states:

"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.” — St. Robert Bellarmine, On the Roman Pontiff

Here the saint makes it clear that a pope can be "punished by the Church" for having excommunicated himself ipso facto, yet Schneider disagrees, saying that “the loss of his office ipso facto because of heresy – is only a theological opinion, that does not fulfill the necessary theological categories of antiquity, universality, and consensus.”

So, were the saints and doctors of the Church wrong? Cardinal Raymond Burke made it clear in an interview with Catholic World Report (CWR) in December 2016 that if a pope were to “formally profess heresy he would cease, by that act, to be the Pope.”

Burke was reiterating Church teaching, as expressed by famed canonist Franz Wernz in his Ius Canonicum: “In sum, it needs to be said clearly that a [publicly] heretical Roman Pontiff loses his power upon the very fact.”

(cont.)

 

Inquisition into Francis’ Election

A committee of bishops also needs to look into the matter of Francis’ election, since the 2013 conclave contained multi-violations against Pope John Paul II’s Apostolic Constitution Unversi Dominici Gregis, which governs papal elections. The pope makes it clear in his Constitution that political vote canvassing on the part of cardinal electors renders the election “null and void.”

The mere fact that Cardinal Godfried Danneels confessed on video in September 2015 that he and several cardinals were part of the notorious “St. Gallen’s Mafia” that had conspired for the ouster of Benedict XVI and the election of Cardinal Bergoglio is every reason to consider that the 2013 election conferred no right on Francis.

Austen Ivereigh's book, The Great Reformer, brings to light how Cardinal Murphy O'Connor along with several key cardinals had spearheaded an intense lobbying campaign, through which they garnered pledges from up to 30 cardinals to get Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio elected as pope.

https://fromrome.wordpress.com/2014...mer-francis-and-the-making-of-a-radical-pope/ This directly contravened John Paul II’s Constitution where it states:

“The Cardinal electors shall further abstain from any form of pact, agreement, promise or other commitment of any kind which could oblige them to give or deny their vote to a person or persons.” (81)

Section 76 of the Constitution states:

“Should the election take place in a way other than that prescribed in the present Constitution, or should the conditions laid down here not be observed, the election is for this very reason null and void, without any need for a declaration on the matter; consequently, it confers no right on the one elected.” (76)

Aside from Cardinal Bergoglio’s collusion with St. Gallen’s Mafia before being elected pope, there is the question of his errant background as bishop and cardinal, which could have nullified his elevation to the papacy. Francis has a history of involvement with the Charismatic sect, and also Liberation Theology, which is Marxist-driven and loaded with heresy.

Consider this excerpt from the Apostolic Constitution Cum Ex Apostolatus, which was issued ex-cathedra on February 15, 1559, by His Holiness Paul IV.

“[By this Our Constitution, which is to remain valid in perpetuity We enact, determine, decree and define:] that if ever at any time it shall appear that any Bishop, even if he be acting as an Archbishop, Patriarch or Primate; or any Cardinal of the aforesaid Roman Church, or, as has already been mentioned, any legate, or even the Roman Pontiff, prior to his promotion or his elevation as Cardinal or Roman Pontiff, has deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into some heresy:

(i) “the promotion or elevation, even if it shall have been uncontested and by the unanimous assent of all the Cardinals, shall be null, void and worthless.” (6:1)

Naturally, it would take an episcopal committee to depose Francis for past heresy, though such an action would not render him deposed but would simply make official what already is the case, namely, that Cardinal Bergoglio would have automatically lost his bishopric upon the profession of heresy, thus nullifying his election as pope.

This is not to mention the many heresies he has professed as pope, which, if done formally, would have excommunicated him ipso facto had his election been valid.

It only behooves the Church’s episcopal body to take a closer look at the 2013 papal election, since we may very well be witnessing the fulfillment of the prophecy of St. Francis of Assisi concerning a false shepherd.

"At the time of this tribulation, a man, not canonically elected, will be raised to the Pontificate, who, by his cunning, will endeavor to draw many into error…. Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it under foot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Jesus Christ will send them not a true pastor, but a destroyer." (1226)

(Taken from Works of the Seraphic Father St. Francis of Assisi, R. Washbourne Publishing House, 1882, pp. 248-250, with imprimatur by His Excellency William Bernard, Bishop of Birmingham)

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/bishop-schneider-on-how-to-handle-a-heretical-pope

1. At the General Audience of April 2, Francis appeared to offer a clarification by saying that God “permissively” wills other religions, but his explanation has generally been dismissed given the context in which his February 4 statement was made: ”The pluralism and the diversity of religions, colour, sex, race and language are willed by God in His wisdom.” Francis obviously meant that diversity of "colour, sex, race and language are willed by God" in the ordained sense, which they are, so we can only infer that he meant "diversity of religions" the same way.

AMDG

 

I am afraid that there is not a lot we can do about the Pope apart fro praying and doing penance for him. The Pope and and the Vatican will ignore these scholars just as they have ignored the Cardinals and Bishops who have complained in the past.

I have found a very great deal of peace in trying not to think of Pope Francis and his various goings on. As the Serenity Prayer goes;

'God, give me grace to accept with serenity
the things that cannot be changed,
Courage to change the things
which should be changed,
and the Wisdom to distinguish
the one from the other.

Living one day at a time,
Enjoying one moment at a time,
Accepting hardship as a pathway to peace,
Taking, as Jesus did,
This sinful world as it is,
Not as I would have it,
Trusting that You will make all things right,
If I surrender to Your will,
So that I may be reasonably happy in this life,
And supremely happy with You forever in the next.'

I am afraid as far as Pope Francis goes he is one of the things that I cannot change..at least by human means. The Cardinals and Bishops will be accountable to God for what they have or have not done. We as laypeople have no power to act and so will not.

If God were to give me the power and ask me to act I would be happy to do so. But He has not.

It is God's Church , His Bride and I am sure He will act in His own good time for He loves it a billion, billion times more that we ever could.

Peace in the Spiritual Life is such a huge thing. I am glad to find myself in a better place with all this. I suspect that the time is fast coming when there will be no more Vatican, no more Rome and the then Pope will be hiding up in the hills somewhere. The only way the good God can cleanse the filth in the Vatican is with fire and the sword things have gone so far.

Till then, I am happy to leave them too it.

 

My sentiments exactly. I just pray. It's all outside my control and so many faithful Catholics do as they always did. They pray, go to Mass and sacraments as often as they can and pray for the church. It's so important to keep your peace , joy and hope and try and be a light

 

The worst crisis in church history (Matt)

 

To me this was the defining moment of this papacy:

 

Yeah, gross.

But then there have been so many gross things over the course of thi9s Papacy I have lost count.

I believe God will burn the place down. I can't see any other way of Him doing it. Pope Francis has appointed too many Cardinals and Bishops in his own image sadly.

I believe God will zap the place.

 

Matt nails it, it is revolution.

 

Dolours, This is a great video, thank you posting it. I found this discussion to be very open and honest, it's very good.

This video is a must watch, imo, they even touch on some prophecy on the end times.

The point that Charles Coulombe brings up that these signatories may never work again should also remind us that there are probably many more theologians, priests and even canonists who would speak up if there were no consequences for doing so but we have already witnessed that there is absolutely consequences for speaking up similarly to the way that they have.

I just posted Jimmy Akin's analysis of this letter on the Vatican Has Fallen thread and it did occur to me that he is probably treading very gently for this reason and also because he appears to be more concerned of the letter causing more damage than good to the Church. Although, Mr. Akin does state that the objective of the letter, the charge of heresy, is not accurate; he does say that we should continue to "ask for clarifications, voice concerns or express disagreement".

I also like the way that this video ends - suggesting that we need to pray more and that we should not be fearful because we are believers in Jesus Christ.

Both Vincent Frankini and Charles Coulombe feel that our faith should grow stronger as result of what is occurring.

Mr. Coulombe reminds us...




I want to mention that last weekend, the movie "Signs" was on television and re-watched it twice. I have not seen it in a long time and I had forgotten a lot of the movie. I remembered that I liked the movie and that it was a little scary and that it is about an alien invasion but the movie is really about having faith that God exists.

Mel Gibson's character reminds us that in times of crisis those who believe in God have hope and those who do not have fear. Here is a short clip from the movie.

 

Thanks for posting, Blizzard.
Very valuable video

 

Blizzard..this too was the momentum that sealed it for me.....it is still the incident that I have no tolerance for....and there was no ...no...excuse for his behavior towards her. Pope Francis should have expressed more mercy towards the babies this evil woman murdered! Instead he calls her a forgotten great? I’m sorry...please, I don’t want to hear ANY excuse for this one...at all.

 

Agree!

 

My thoughts exactly. This poor lady was Italy’s most vocal abortion proponent but she was pretty much forgotten. The current pope brought her back from limbo. The result was this:

https://www.lifesitenews.com/mobile...eaks-at-catholic-church-pro-life-protesters-k

 

Yes, Pope Francis brought her back to life!
Look at the bio of the woman Pope Francis called a “forgotten great”!

Between her abortion activism and being an abortionist herself, Bonino is directly or indirectly responsible for
the deaths of roughly six million Italian babies
between 1968 and today.

Bonino has worked to liberalize Italian divorce laws, legalize recreational drugs, ban a national nuclear energy program, and has promoted nudism, same-sex “marriage,” transgenderism, the abolition of the armed forces, disbanding of NATO, the liberalization of porn laws, and mandatory sex education.

This is outrageous! How could anyone catholic, let alone the pope, call this evil woman “great”?


There she is with that evil, vile Soros! Satan and the Satanist! Come on folks....evil is staring us right in our face! What is there to get here that isn’t evident already?

 

Exactly

 

Can you imagine any pope, even the vilest ones, doing anything like this?