On Saturday, June 26, 2021, 02:38:41 PM EDT, Raymond Antonini <email@example.com> wrote:
Dear Bishop Gracida,
Thank you for posting on your site that a pope that would embrace formal heresy would fall ipso facto from the Papal Office without a declaratory sentence being necessary as stated by St. Robert Bellarmine, St. Alphonsus de Liguori and the Dominican theologian St. Antoninus, Pope Innocent III and in the 1917 Code of Canon Law section 188.4.
I’ll include some links to those citations below from an archived version of my former web site, but first I would ask you to consider the possibility that Bergoglio, and other claimants to the papacy since 1958, were formal heretics BEFORE election to the papacy.
Did heresy suddenly infect Bergoglio after leaving Argentina and arriving in Rome or was he heterodox in his beliefs during his entire career? Did the syncretism of religions in his ‘Abrahamic Religions Temple’ spring up suddenly or had it been there all along? A certain former Jesuit in his book, “The Encounter” called for this exact heresy back in 1970.
Fr. Kolvenbach, the Superior General of the Society of Jesus in the 1990s, while not addressing this particular delict of heresy, wrote to Karol Wojtyla upon the latter’s nomination of Bergoglio to the episcopacy and warned him that Bergoglio was a sociopath and told him not to elevate him.
If Bergoglio or others were formal heretics, schismatics or apostates BEFORE election to the papacy then under Divine Law and Ecclesiastical Law as codified by Pope Paul IV to guard against this exact situation of infiltration by heretics into the hierarchy of the Church, in his Apostolic Constitution “Cum Ex Apostolatus Officious” (February 15, 1559) he decreed:
“6. …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 consent of all the Cardinals, shall be null, void and worthless;”
Pope Paul IV then continues in Section 6 to override every other possible objection to the nullity of the election and this claimant’s papacy such as universal assent, elapse of time, not partially valid such as in the later formal vs. material argument of des Lauriers, etc.
In Section 7 Pope Paul IV decrees that no allegiance of any sort is binding upon Catholics to the heretical claimant and if the heretic will not leave on his own, that the civil governments can be enlisted by Catholics to forcibly remove him. Does not specify a council being necessary.
Cum Ex Apostolatus Officiohttps://web.archive.org/web/20100413163652/http://home.earthlink.net/~saintmarychapel/ceao.htm
Please note that all of this further solidifies the principle that a heretic either before election by absolute nullity or after by his own act, ipso facto, would fall from the Office of the Papacy, and no council of bishops or cardinals would be necessary to first declare the See vacant.
Please also note that this IS the position of St. Robert Bellarmine and not what someone occasionally incorrectly posts in items to your site.
St. Robert Bellarmine, St. Francis de Sales, St. Alphonsus de Liguori, St. Thomas Aquinas:
Pope Innocent III and also Code of Canon Law (1917) section 188.4 (Note this section was intentionally not included in the 1983 Code of the heretical Vactican 2 sect!):
St. Antoninus and other citations:
Fr. Wernz, Superior General of the Society of Jesus, (ob. 1914) in his five volume work “Ius Canonicum” affirming St. Robert Bellarmine’s position of ipso facto vacancy without judgement or declaration as the teaching of the Church. Citation from (after the implementation of the 1917 Code) 1938 edition by Fr. Vidal, S.J.:
1882 essay by Fr. O’Reilly on a prolonged vacancy of the Holy See:
In either case before or after election to the papacy, formal heresy, the criteria for which has most certainly been met, renders the claimant by his own act outside of Christ’s Church, completely severed from the Mystical Body, and thus permanently incapable of being its head.
We can take comfort in the fact that Our Lordpermitted this to happen only by heretical infiltrators to the Chair and not by one who fell from it. Thus just as their claims to the papacy are null, void and worthless, so were all their acts from calling for the Council to the imposition of false worship displeasing to the Sight of God to whatever is the current apostate ignominy uttered by the current claimant.
I will leave those citations for another time.
In Christ, Raymond Antonini