[ultima ratio]

"The Pope is fully orthodox on teachings of the faith. He has not derogated one iota from the teachings of the Real Presence, the sacrifics of the Mass or the dogmatic teachings of the Council of Trent."

He is orthodox on most dogmatic truths in writing but not in practice. You say he has "not derogated one iota from the teachings of the Real Presence"--yet his papal Masses are the scenes of widespread liturgical abuses and blasphemies involving the Blessed Sacrament. Nor has he prevented these occurances by a change in procedure in any way. He claims to reject indifferentism and syncretism--yet his actual practices belie such claims. In fact his actions are heterodox--and even some of his encyclical writings are pretty doubtful. Redemptor Hominis is certainly heterodox--and even shocking--in many ways, expressive of a faith that owes more to secular humanism than to Catholic theology.

[ndkos]

In fact his actions are heterodox--and even some of his encyclical writings are pretty doubtful. Redemptor Hominis is certainly heterodox--and even shocking--in many ways, expressive of a faith that owes more to secular humanism than to Catholic theology.

If you doubt the Pope's teaching on matters of faith and morals, then you are a heretic, not just a schismatic.

Pius XII, in Humani generis: "Nor must it be thought that the things contained in Encyclical Letters do not of themselves require assent on the plea that in them the Pontiffs do not exercise the supreme power of their Magisterium. For these things are taught with the ordinary Magisterium, about which it is also true to say, 'He who hears you, hears me.'"

[Romish_Papist]

What is this about elevating a cardinal who denies the Ressurection and the Gospel miracles? I'd not heard of this. May I request a source for this?