Posted on 10/11/2024 6:39:56 PM PDT by ebb tide
Even Peter was chastised by Paul.................
https://www.papalencyclicals.net/bon08/b8unam.htm
*****
Something a lot of Roman Catholics run from or try to dismiss.
Yet, we see the daily posts against the duly elected pope of the RCC by you.
This strongly says you are not being subject to the pope.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio says just watch me.
Ping
That’s correct.
What then shall we say of Pope Francis?
After reading this article, I can only conclude that bears are Catholic and popes crap in the woods.....................
The world is also downside up.
... nor even Catholic but a heretic in truth.
Well, SOMEBODY erred big time hiring this dude.
In short, Bergoglio has indeed professed heresy and is therefore not the Pope. The Church is in crisis.
So if this headline is true, then Catholics have no excuse for rejecting their current pope, Francis.
seems to me we’re well into heresy country with this Pope
Sounds right to me.
This guy is creating his own religion!!!!!!
He must be vacated.
Pretty similar to weather forecasters, heresy being denial of climate change. ;)
IOW - if a “Pope” commits heresy, it ain’t really heresy - just like the “Christian” leaders way back when who accused and killed others for doing what they were doing themselves.
The “Church” has a history that rivals the Muslims...
So how is heretical Bergoglio judged and punished by the Church, aside from laity essentially acting as evangelicals are to (insofar as making the validity and veracity of modern church teaching subjecting to their judgment of conformity with past church teaching), and a few traditional prelates?
It’s important to point out that the foregoing statements by the Church Doctors and theologians are not theological opinions but reflect the continuous teaching of the Church. If anyone would doubt this, let them consider the 1559 Papal Bull Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio by Pope Paul IV.
Which also states,
(ii) Anysoever who (which may God, in His clemency and goodness to all, deign to avert) shall in the future so deviate or fall into heresy, or incur schism, or shall provoke or commit either or both of theseWhich presumes in Catholicism that there is a judge who determines who has fallen into heresy, or incured schism, or provokes or commit either or both of these.
Papal Bulls do not contain opinions but are formal and authoritative proclamations containing weighty and indisputable truths.
Which, perhaps to the delight of some here, would include Ad extirpanda, a papal bull promulgated on May 15, 1252, by Pope Innocent IV, which explicitly authorized (and defined the appropriate circumstances for) the use of torture by the Inquisition for eliciting confessions from heretics.
Yet, "Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent." - PIUS XII, HUMANI GENERI. Which presumes you have a pope to submit to, in order to obey such past papal teaching on submission such as:
'the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors," "to suffer themselves to be guided and led in all things that touch upon faith or morals by the Holy Church of God through its Supreme Pastor the Roman Pontiff," "of submitting with docility to their judgment," with "no discussions regarding what he orders or demands, or up to what point obedience must go, and in what things he is to be obeyed... not only in person, but with letters and other public documents ;" and 'not limit the field in which he might and must exercise his authority, " for "obedience must not limit itself to matters which touch the faith: its sphere is much more vast: it extends to all matters which the episcopal power embraces," and not set up "some kind of opposition between one Pontiff and another. Those who, faced with two differing directives, reject the present one to hold to the past, are not giving proof of obedience to the authority which has the right and duty to guide them," "Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent." (Sources http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3578348/posts?page=14#14)
Thus the question remains, just who is the living pope that you submit to while an elected pope sits on his throne? This absence is not like that of the interregnum period btwn popes, but one in which the college of cardinals has elected one, without a rival papacy by another college (aside from the likes of a (late) pope Michael - elected in a small conclave in Kansas in 199) as in the Western Schism. I presume that since "100% of the cardinals who entered the conclave in 2013 were named cardinals by St. John Paul II or Pope Benedict XVI and they elected Pope Francis" then they would be considered to be invalid by the TradCath sedevacantist magisterium.
As would be any such replacement since "if a conclave were held Dec. 9 and no cardinal elector dies before then, almost 79% of the cardinals entering the Sistine Chapel would be clerics given their red hats by Pope Francis." - https://www.usccb.org/news/2024/statistically-speaking-how-popes-choices-change-college-cardinals
Sounds like another Schism by a minority, not that I do not sympathize with them, as one of the sedevacantists who also make the validity and veracity of modern church teaching subjecting to their judgment of conformity with past church teaching, but that being the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (which is Scripture, in particular Acts through Revelation, which best shows how the NT church understood the gospels) in which distinctive Catholic teachings are not manifest.
Yes, which even led others astray, (Galatians 2:11-13) but as you know, papal infallibility is restricted in scope and subject criteria, and does not mean impeccability.
Which is why the validity of Bergo is attacked.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.