Francis Rebuked For Overt Heresy



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[s] on the Doctrine of Innocent III” say on Francis’s Heresy? 

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 []

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.” []

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. []

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[]

– 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. []

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.”[]- “If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?”:– “Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?”: –  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” []- 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”:– Tucker Carlson’s Conservatism Inc. Biden Steal Betrayal is explained by “One of the Greatest Columns ever Written” according to Rush: – A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020: 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?: and Epoch Times Show Crossroads on Capitol Incident: “Anitfa ‘Agent Provocateurs'”:
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



About abyssum

I am a retired Roman Catholic Bishop, Bishop Emeritus of Corpus Christi, Texas
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Francis Rebuked For Overt Heresy

  1. salliperson says:

    Unfortunate Jorge Bergolio and his group somehow have to be removed. There will be alot of openings for cardinals and bishop’s let alone many priests.

Comments are closed.