What is the RCC's excuse for not deposing the heretic Francis?
Albion Wilde:
Because he is not a Formal heretic in the strict sense. What Dogma has publicly rejected that Canon Law. So I will take your question as an honest question. Canon 751 is clear on what it takes to be a formal heretic. Now, has the pope made errors in some of his public speeches, yes, has he done some things in his Authoritative Magisterium [Canon 752] that I Disagree with? Yes, I agreed with Pope Benedict XVI on his Decree on celebrating the older form of the Roman Rite [so called Tridentine Mass/Liturgy] “Summorum Pontificum”. Pope Francis issued Traditione Custodes, well within his authority, but I don’t agree with that approach.
But that does not make him a heretic.
Now you raised a question, if a Pope were to teach something in his Magisterium as heretical, and not recant before death. Who decides if a Pope was heretical. Ultimately only a future Pope can decide that this side of heaven. The first See [Rome] is judged by no other Church. So a future Pope would have to call a Council and review all the writings of a previous Pope and then decide to censure a previous Pope.
The closest 2 examples of Popes being censured were Pope Honorius and Pope John XXII. But I will not go into those 2 issues here. Neither was condemned formal heretics, but Pope Honorius failed in his role expected as Bishop of Rome, successor of Saint Peter and allowed the Monothelite heresy to spread without squashing it. Pope John XXII taught erroneously on the Beatific Vision and was told some 5 times by Theologians, his own council of Cardinals and theological advisors. He recanted before he died and next Pope Defined Dogmatically precisely what the Beatific Vision is and what is to be believed.