Then (quite recently) came a bit of a 'Road to Damascus moment' which was not directly related to Francis. I became aware that I had a beam in my own eye which involved anger, a lack of peace, impatience, absolute certainty in my own opinions (on most subjects), readiness to take offence etc. etc. Ditto! Same here. Gigantic beam in my own eye. "Bear wrongs patiently." There is a God. And we are not it.
The thing that sent chills up my spine was an excerpt from the book , 'The Dictator Pope'. It states that from a very early age his parents simply stopped speaking to him. I just thought to myself, 'What is all that about?'.
Regarding the disputed quotation from St Francis, regarding a putative 'destroyer pope', it's being true or not does not exclude its possibility of being an inspiration to someone.
I am hoping and praying that the efforts succeed. I do note that in the beginning of the video, Cardinal Muller said that he is absolutely on the side of the Pope and the institution of the Papacy but he is opposing the error and sin.
I am not quite sure what saying , 'I am absolutely on the side of the pope', quite means in such circumstances'?. Heresy is , especially coming from a Pope, is the most wicked and evil thing imaginable. On the one had to accuse him of heresy and at at the same time to say that you're, 'on his side'? It just seems so bizarre. Imagine I was to accuse someone of, say robbing a bank and to go on to say, 'But I'm on his side'. What does that even mean? Matthew 5:37 All you need to say is simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ anything beyond this comes from the evil one. Either Pope Francis is a heretic or he is not a heretic. Heresy is evil. The one who commits heresy is evil. It's as simple as that. This, 'I'm on his side thing' , is totally, totally bizarre. Even if you were to say, 'Pope Francis dropped litter on the sidewalk and it was wrong' and to go on to say , 'But I 'm on his side'. Why would you feel the need to follow up by qualifying yourself like that? Better to say nothing at. It is rather like trying to ride two horses at the same time. Two horses racing off in totally opposite directions. Weird, Bizarre. Incomprehensible. Totally illogical.
One must make a distinction between the office of the pope and the person who occupies it at a particular moment. The more an individual abuses that office, the more one needs to defend it. A person who holds the office needs to be sided with just to the extent that he lives up to its demands. I imagine Pope Francis is still living up to his office adequately enough to ensure that Cardinal Muller does not feel it opportune to take upon himself the enormity of declaring him unworthy of support. Only Cardinal Muller can say how close he feels Pope Francis is to that tipping point. Perhaps he is very close. I don't think the repeated declarations of support a bad thing. That he has to make them so often and so publicly tells its own story, at least to those willing to hear. The football manager that receives outstanding praise and declarations of support from the owners of his club is usually out on his ear by the end of the week.
I think it is said out of fear of being called a schismatic. And I agree with you. It’s bizarre to do.
Pope Francis and material heresy vs formal heresy https://motheofgod.com/threads/pope-francis-and-material-heresy-vs-formal-heresy.18604/#post-390198 Cardinal Burke: A Pope Who Professes Formal Heresy Would Cease to Be Pope https://onepeterfive.com/cardinal-burke-a-pope-who-professes-formal-heresy-would-cease-to-be-pope/
@padraig. @"Quis ut Deus" We’re well past the stage here where anyone who questions whether Pope Francis may not be the true pope should be banned from the forum. Such would be very counterproductive to the reality we’re dealing with at this time.
https://abyssum.org/2022/09/19/francis-rebuked-for-overt-heresy/ Francis Rebuked For Overt Heresy Posted on September 19, 2022 by abyssum THE CATHOLIC MONITOR SEARCH Bishop Strickland, Bishop Gracida, Bishop Schneider & Bishop Mutsaerts “Rebuked [Francis] For Overt Heresy” & What “Bellarmine, Ballerini, St. Alphonsus & Gregory XVI [say]… bas[ing] their teaching on the Doctrine of Innocent III” say on Francis’s Heresy? September 19, 2022 Francis Rebuked For Overt Heresy Two events happened within the past few days. While they were disjointed from each other, both served to make evident the heresy that the current occupant of Peter’s chair is promulgating. Bergoglio erroneously stated that Pelosi and others, in their present state of mind, could be admitted to Communion. Several clcrgy and some prominent lay people spelled it out, utilizing Canon law, that Bergoglio uttered heresy. The letter can be read here. From theologians, Saints and Doctors of the Church throughout the centuries, we have reasonable basis to believe that even if Bergoglio’s election to the papacy was valid (and that is somewhat doubtful) that he has, by this heresy, forfeited the papacy. We of course must pray for his immortal soul as well as those whom he led astray. The other event revolves around Francis’ participation in this “Congress of World and Traditional Religious Leaders” gabfest a few days ago. The official purpose was the seeking of world peace. In reality, it’s all about the establishment of a one-world religion as part of the great reset. Of course this “religion” would be solely focused on the world as we see it, with nary a thought about eternity beyond the grave. They believe not in an afterlife, nor do they believe in any supreme being, let alone the One True God. The Masonic pawprints are all over this as well. – Restore-DC-Catholicism[http://restore-dc-catholicism.blogspot.com/2022/09/francis-rebuked-for-overt-heresy.html] LifeSteNews reported that “Bishops, priests and scholars correct Pope Francis’ statement on Holy Communion… extensively quoting from the Council of Trent’s documents, the signatories also make it clear that such teachings as presented in Pope Francis’ document have already been condemned as heresy. “The claim,” they write, “that faith is the only requirement for worthy reception of the Holy Eucharist was condemned by the Council of Trent as a heresy”: They explain: The Catholic Church has always taught that in order to receive the Holy Eucharist worthily and without sin, Catholics must receive sacramental absolution, if possible, for any mortal sins they may have committed and obey all other laws of the Church concerning reception of the Eucharist (as, for example, the laws concerning fasting prior to reception of the Eucharist). If a sacramental confession is not possible, but the reception of Holy Communion urgent (such as for a priest celebrating Mass), the Sacrament of Penance has to be sought as soon as possible afterwards, and the penitent must have perfect contrition for his mortal sins. By extensively quoting from the Council of Trent’s documents, the signatories also make it clear that such teachings as presented in Pope Francis’ document have already been condemned as heresy. “The claim,” they write, “that faith is the only requirement for worthy reception of the Holy Eucharist was condemned by the Council of Trent as a heresy.”https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/...ct-pope-francis-statement-on-holy-communion/] What do the teachings of “Pope Gregory XVI, St. Robert Bellarmine, St. Alphonsus Liguori, Pietro Ballerini, and others as well… bas[ing]on the[ir] teachings of Pope Innocent III” mean and say according to Fatima expert Fr. Paul Kramer on Francis’s heresy?: It cannot mean that a true and valid pope can be judged by his inferiors in the case of heresy, because then, contrary to the dogma of the Primacy, the supreme and infallible judge would be judged by an inferior and fallible judge. Even a century before the solemn definition of the Primacy, Ballerini was explicit on this point that a true and valid pope can never be judged by a council, explaining, “undoubtedly the right of the primacy always remains in reality with a true and legitimate Pontiff, who always, being superior to the whole Church and whatever council by this right of the primacy, is removed from the jurisdiction of those others.” (De Potestate Ecclesiastica Summorum Pontificum Et Conciliorum Generalium, Auctore Petro Ballerinio Presbytero Veronensi, Augustæ Vindelicorum (Augsburg), 1770, p. 132) If the pope could be judged by a council, there would either be two heads (Alfonso Maria de’ Liguori, Vindiciae pro suprema pontificis potestate adversus Iustinum Febronium, Torino, 1832, p. 164.) judging against each other; or, if the council were supreme in such a case by way of exception, then then the dogma which defines that the judgment of all disputes in matters of faith is reserved exclusively to the pope would be erroneous. Thus, in accordance with the teaching of Bellarmine, Ballerini, St. Alphonsus and Gregory XVI — all of whom based their teaching on the doctrine of Innocent III — it would not be a true pope who would be judged a heretic and deposed by his inferiors; but it would be a false pope, who for reason of his evident heresy, would be judged by the Church to be no pope, because the Church infallibly recognizes the heretic for what he is: an alien, an outsider, an impostor, who is not their shepherd but a heretic. [https://www.facebook.com/CatholicPrayersAndTheRosary1/posts/d41d8cd9/510104040765059/] – The Church’s teaching on papal heresy, and the authority of a council when there exists positive doubt about the validity of claims on the papal munus have been elaborated by Pope Gregory XVI, St. Robert Bellarmine, St. Alphonsus Liguori, Pietro Ballerini, and others as well. Their teachings are based on the teachings of Pope, Innocent III, St. Thomas Aquinas, and on the rulings of the popes on the question of papal heresy (which I have quoted verbatim in my two volumes*). I have explained their teaching on these points with ample verbatim quotations in my volumes on papal heresy and the case against Bergoglio… In Ch. 9 no. 5 of De Potestate Ecclesiastica, etc., Ballerini sums up the canonical rulings of the Church, saying that popes, cannot be judged for any crime, except those who would deviate from the faith into heresy, because they would fall from the papacy and lose the primacy by the heresy itself ipso facto: “In sacris canonibus … numquam vero judicio cujusquam subjiciendos indicant, nisi forte sint a fide devii. Quæ hæresis exceptio ea de causa fit, quia ob hæresim ipso facto a pontificatu decidentes, primatus jurisdictionem amitterent”. Ballerini, whose doctrine on the primacy formed the basis of the dogmatic pronouncement in Chapter III of Pastor Æternus, explains that the canonical exception for judging heretic popes exists precisely because a heretic pope would by the heresy itself fall from office ipso facto. Gregory XVI comments on Ballerini, saying that the judgment would not be made against the pope, “but only against the person, who was before adorned with papal dignity”… Vol. I – To Deceive the Elect – The Catholic Doctrine on the Question of a Heretical Pope; Vol. II – On the True and the False Pope – The Case Against Bergoglio by Fr. Paul Kramer B.Ph.,S.T.B., M. Div., S.T.L (Cand.)** Gregorio XVI, Il trionfo della santa chiesa contro gli assatti dei novatori, Venezia 1832, Capo[https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2022/04/why-dont-you-mr-ferrara-in-2022-again.html] Con’t
Con’t – Indeed, the pope is the standard of unity — so much so, that St. Alphonsus, St. Robert Bellarmine, Pope Gregory XVI, Don Pietro Ballerini, all state and explain why it is impossible for a true and valid pope to become a formal heretic. All of the great theologians were in agreement on this point; Don Curzio Nitoglia lists the principal ones, Fr. Francesco Bordoni listed some in his 1648 work, and he quotes Bishop Martino Bonacina who in the 1400s named even more notable theologians of this opinion. St. Thomas, although aware of the question, did not even accord it the dignity of mentioning it. After Pastor Æternus (1870), it became the virtually unanimous opinion of theologians that a pope cannot become a formal heretic; and those theologians after the 1890s who treated upon the question of loss of office due to heresy regarded it as a “mere hypothesis” (to use the expression of Ballerini), because the wording of Pastor Æternus can be seen to imply the exclusion of such a possibility of a pope falling into formal heresy. Heresy, St. Thomas explains (and later Pius XII in Mystici Corporis), is a sin that separates a man from membership in the body of the Church (if it is a public sin committed with pertinacity). It is not a matter of “official heresy” (as you term it) vs. personal heresy. It is the public personal sin of pertinacious heresy that severs a man from membership in the Church “suapte natura” — i.e. by its very nature. It is the same for a pope or a street sweeper: there is no double standard for what kind of heresy separates one from membership in the Church. Pertinacity does not have to be persistent, as Bordoni, a qualificator of the Holy Inquisition explained in his authoritative 1648 work, but heresy must only be committed with full knowledge and deliberation to be pertinacious. I have explained the matter fully in my volume one. If the sin (i.e. both the matter and its pertinacity) is “public” (as defined in canon law), then the heretic’s separation from the body of the Church is objecively a visible separation (even if the majority are too confused to grasp it, as I have fully explained in volume two). Since, as Bellarmine explains, the “form of the papacy” consists in the pope’s visible formally orthodox profession of faith (a pope who errs heretically only materially remains in the papacy), if he would fall into visible formal heresy, he would “straightaway fall from the papacy”. Thus the heretic’s separation from the papacy woyld not be invisible, because the deprivation of the form of the papacy would be visible. Ballerini pointed out that such a fall from office was the position adopted by Pope Innocent III, although Innocent, like Bellarmine, Ballerini, de Liguori, and many others, held that such a fall into formal heresy, whether public or private, cannot actually happen, because the promise that the faith of Peter’s successor cannot fail was made “simpliciter”. Hence, if a man is a “doubtful pope” for reason of heresy, and it is subsequently verified that he is indeed a formal heretic, it is certain that he is not a valid pope. Whether such a one ever was a valid pope who fell from office, or never validly held office would have no bearing on determining the fact that the heretic, being an “incapable subject of the papacy” (as the authors explain) is no pope. The papal canonical rulings on the “exception” for judging a heretical pope, are based on this principle, namely, that a heretic is incapable of holding the papal office, but they only declare that such a heretical pope can be judged, in the sense that he is judged to be a heretic and therefore no pope, without judgung the question of whether or not such a papal heretic would have fallen from office, or have never validly held office in the first place. Thus, that a public heretic would fall from the papacy is true and certain as a hypothesis which is upheld by the canonical tradition of the Church; but what is not a hypothesis, but is simply true and theologically certain, is that a man who is certainly a formal heretic is certainly not a valid holder of the Petrine office. Although some Catholics still hold to the archaic belief that this is a question open to legitimate theological dispute, I have amply demonstrated that it is theologically certain that a formal heretic is incapable of holding the papal office, and that the contrary opinion is proximate to heresy. [https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2022/04/why-dont-you-mr-ferrara-in-2022-again.html] Pray an Our Father now for the sins of Francis’s Amoris Laetitia. Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He wants you to do now and next. In this silence remember God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost – Three Divine Persons yet One God, has an ordered universe where you can know truth and falsehood as well as never forget that He wants you to have eternal happiness with Him as his son or daughter by grace. Make this a practice. By doing this you are doing more good than reading anything here or anywhere else on the Internet. Francis Notes: – Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation:“[T]he Pope… WHEN he 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.”(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)Saint Robert Bellarmine, also, said “the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church.”[https://archive.org/stream/Silveira...ions of New Missae and Heretic Popes_djvu.txt]- “If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/12/if-francis-is-heretic-what-should.html– “Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/03/could-francis-be-antipope-even-though.html – LifeSiteNews, “Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial weight behind communion for adulterers,” December 4, 2017:The AAS guidelines explicitly allows “sexually active adulterous couples facing ‘complex circumstances’ to ‘access the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'”- On February 2018, in Rorate Caeli, Catholic theologian Dr. John Lamont:”The AAS statement… establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense.”- On December 2, 2017, Bishop Rene Gracida:”Francis’ heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters magisterial documents.”Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church by the bishops by the grace of God.Election Notes: – Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: “212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted…Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden” [http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/intel-cryptanalyst-mathematician-on.html?m=1]- Will US be Venezuela?: Ex-CIA Official told Epoch Times “Chávez started to Focus on [Smartmatic] Voting Machines to Ensure Victory as early as 2003”: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/will-us-be-venezuela-ex-cia-official.html– Tucker Carlson’s Conservatism Inc. Biden Steal Betrayal is explained by “One of the Greatest Columns ever Written” according to Rush: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/tucker-carlsons-conservatism-inc-biden.html?m=1 – A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020:http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/01/a-hour-which-will-live-in-infamy-1001pm.html?m=1 What is needed right now to save America from those who would destroy our God given rights is to pray at home or in church and if called to even go to outdoor prayer rallies in every town and city across the United States for God to pour out His grace on our country to save us from those who would use a Reichstag Fire-like incident to destroy our civil liberties. [Is the DC Capitol Incident Comparable to the Nazi Reichstag Fire Incident where the German People Lost their Civil Liberties?: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/is-dc-capital-incident-comparable-to.html?m=1 and Epoch Times Show Crossroads on Capitol Incident: “Anitfa ‘Agent Provocateurs'”:http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/epoch-times-show-crossroads-on-capital.html?m=1] Pray an Our Father now for the grace to know God’s Will and to do it. Pray an Our Father now for America. Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary
Unfortunately this is, IMO, where we find ourselves at this time. I could very well be mistaken and would gladly like to be proven wrong. Going forward , how do we deal with this?
The Pope is very clever -- he often skirts along the path of heresy -- I think several Bishops says the above statement is heretical -- But the Pope does not say 'faith alone' which is in the Trent document. The wedding garment of faith can also be interpreted as being justied through baptismal regeneration through grace -- I the rite of baptism for adults, the priest says, “N., you have become a new creation and clothed yourself in Christ. Receive this baptismal garment and bring it unstained to the judgment seat of our Lord Jesus Christ, so that you may have everlasting life,” and likewise in the rite for infants: “N., you have become a new creation and have clothed yourself in Christ. See in this white garment the outward sign of your Christian dignity. With your family and friends to help you by word and example, bring that dignity unstained into the everlasting life of heaven.” In Revelation 19 where the saints are described as arrayed in wedding type garments - 'for the wedding of the Lamb has come, and his bride has made herself ready, Fine linen, bright and clean, was given her to wear. Then the angel said to me, “Write this: Blessed are those who are invited to the wedding supper of the Lamb!” And he added, “These are the true words of God.” In other words the 'wedding garment of faith' is not the same as 'faith alone' as in protestant error. But again I say he skirts the line here.
The "wedding garment of faith," received at valid Baptism, can become (and usually does become) stained and muddied by post-Baptismal sins. That is why the Sacrament of Penance must be validly received by those who fall into mortal sin after Baptism, before they can validly receive Holy Communion. Contradicting that requirement is the heretical change that the current occupier of the Roman See has made. He has stated that Catholics, like Biden and Pelosi, who formally promote the legality and availability of abortion (and "promotion" per se is definitely a mortal sin according to perennial Catholic teaching) DO NOT NEED TO VALIDLY RECEIVE THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE before presenting themselves for Holy Communion. Instead, all these people need in order to receive Holy Communion according to the author of Desiderio desideravi is the "wedding garment of faith that comes from hearing of his Word." The earlier Apostolic Exhortation by Bergoglio called Amoris Laetitia (in its infamous footnote) implied the same thing about divorced and re-married Catholics receiving Holy Communion. That is why Cardinal Burke (and others) asked the current occupier of the Roman see for clarification (the Dubia) back in 2016. To this day, the current occupier of the Roman See has ignored the request for clarification on that matter. Another gospel is being preached as St. Paul warned about in 2 Corinthians 11: 1 Would to God you could bear with some little of my folly: but do bear with me. 2 For I am jealous of you with the jealousy of God. For I have espoused you to one husband that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. 3 But I fear lest, as the serpent seduced Eve by his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted, and fall from the simplicity that is in Christ. 4 For if he that cometh preacheth another Christ, whom we have not preached; or if you receive another Spirit, whom you have not received; or another gospel which you have not received; you might well bear with him. [...] 13 For such false apostles are deceitful workmen, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. 14And no wonder: for Satan himself transformeth himself into an angel of light. 15Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers be transformed as the ministers of justice, whose end shall be according to their works.
Who knows the timing of all of this? I think Cardinal Muller is proceeding with due caution. Much prayer needed now.
Very carefully and deliberately. I think it is best to do what we have been doing all along. We have watched what is taking place and prayed over it. I believe we are given the graces each day to know what to do that day. “Sufficient unto the day are the evils thereof.” I don’t think we can plan on anything with this issue. Events take place one day at a time. Many people are involved. God knows the whole picture. I think the outcome of the action taken by Bishop Strickland and his supporters will be of importance for what happens next. All this imho. Edit I noticed in your links, Brian, it was suggested to stop and pray Our Fathers for the intentions mentioned. It’s powerful if everyone did that. That was the author’s suggestion. Rinse and repeat. The answers have to be forthcoming.
I agree with you with regard to Amoris and Biden et al I was just making the point that in that particular instant with regard to the garment of faith quote he could be read in an orthodox manner.
