Time for Bishops and Cardinals to Address a Crisis

It is long past time for Catholics to recognize that a heretical Pope has separated himself from the Church and thus does not possess the keys to the Kingdom and cannot head that of which he is no longer part. Nevertheless, only a Council of the Church can declare what is apparent to all. The "Pope" is a heretic on a number of doctrinal matters, including hell, the Immaculate Conception and the sanctity and inviolability of marriage. He has sewn confusion, division, and doubt on matters which Catholics regard as central to the deposit of faith; he routinely condemns the most faithful and observant Catholics for their "rigidity;" and he has acted like a crime boss in ignoring, lying about, excusing, and covering up widespread sin and corruption among the episcopacy and clergy. Before further damage is done to Church institutions and doctrine, we need to ask the bishops and the College of Cardinals to recognize and declare the Chair of St. Peter vacant so that a true shepherd of souls may right the ship and set the barque of Saint Peter on its true, God-given course.

The Church Fathers, previous Popes and Doctors of the Church thought it unlikely that such a state of affairs could come to pass, but prescribed how it should be addressed should the worst befall the papacy.  We are well past that point.

Question of an heretical pope 1 : Common Teaching of the Church about an heretical pope

Doctrina Communis

A public heretic cannot retain the papacy

List of most known authorities

The number and the weight of the theological authorities support the contention that a validly elected pope who committed a public and notorious act of heresy would automatically cease to be pope. The authors tell us that it is the “most common” teaching of the canonists and theologians or that they “commonly teach” it. Moreover, three doctors of the Church have taught it, none have taught contrary; the canonized theologians are unanimous; Bellarmine wrote that “this is the teaching of all the ancient Fathers

Saint Robert Belarmine

Important catholic principle :

When a teaching has been learned “everywhere, always and by everyone”, it belongs to the Revelation and is infallible. (See here about the Commonitorium of St Vincent de Lerins)

The Decretum Gratiani, also known as the Concordia discordantium canonum or Concordantia discordantium canonum or simply as the Decretum, is a collection of Canon law compiled and written in the 12th century as a legal textbook by the jurist known as Gratian. It forms the first part of the collection of six legal texts, which together became known as the Corpus Juris Canonici. It was used by canonists of the Roman Catholic Church until Pentecost (May 19) 1918, when a revised Code of Canon Law (Codex Iuris Canonici) promulgated by Pope Benedict XV on 27 May 1917 obtained legal force.

Gratianus

In the Decretum, jurist Gratian wrote a principle that was held “everywhere, always and by everybody” in the Church, hence it is an infallible Doctrine of the Tradition :

“Summa sedes a nemine iudicetur, NISI a fide devius inveniatur” :

“the Highest See cannot be judged by anyone,

unless he has been found deviating from the faith”

Jurist Raoul Naz states that it is not “judging” in strict sense but in the large sense: the Church (sain part of the teaching Church, the bishops who are not heretic) will not judge properly but the Church can note that a pope has deviated from the faith and by this fact IS fallen from the See.

Prof. Dr. Raoul NAZ

So stated a pope : Papa INNOCENTIUS III (CA. 1160-1216):

“The pope should not flatter himself about his power, nor should he rashly glory in his honor and high estate, because the less he is judged by man, the more he is judged by God. Still the less can the Roman Pontiff glory, because he can be judged by men, or rather, can be shown to be already judged, if for example he should wither away into heresy, because he who does not believe is already judged. In such a case it should be said of him:

‘If salt should lose its savor, it is good for nothing but to be cast out and trampled under foot by men.’” (Sermo 4)

Innocentius III

Others:

We shall first see the teaching of the Doctors of the Church, whose writings the Church directs us to in a special way as theological teachers.

Saint Antoninus (1389-1459): 

“In the case in which the pope would become a heretic, he would find himself, by that fact alone and without any other sentence, separated from the Church. A head separated from a body cannot, as long as it remains separated, be head of the same body from which it was cut off. A pope who would be separated from the Church by heresy, therefore, would by that very fact itself cease to be head of the Church. He could not be a heretic and remain pope, because, since he is outside of the Church, he cannot possess the keys of the Church.” 
(Summa Theologica. Quoted in Actes de Vatican I)


Read more at Scaturrex >>

Cardinal Eijk: The Church’s Ultimate Trial

Cardinal Willem Jacobus Eijk, Archbishop of Utrecht, Netherlands. (YouTube)

The German bishops’ conference voted by a large majority in favor of directives which entail that a Protestant married to a Catholic may receive the Eucharist after meeting a number of conditions: he must have carried out an examination of conscience with a priest or with another person with pastoral responsibilities; he must have affirmed the faith of the Catholic Church, as well as having wished to put an end to “serious spiritual distress” and to have a “desire to satisfy a longing for the Eucharist.” 

Seven members of the German bishops’ conference voted against these directives and sought the opinion of some dicasteries of the Roman Curia. The consequence was that a delegation from the German bishops’ conference spoke in Rome with a delegation from the Roman Curia, including the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

The response of the Holy Father, given through the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to the delegation of the German Conference, that the Conference should discuss the drafts again and try to achieve a unanimous result, if possible, is completely incomprehensible. The Church’s doctrine and practice regarding the administration of the Sacrament of the Eucharist to Protestants is perfectly clear. The Code of Canon Law says about this:

“If the danger of death is present or if, in the judgment of the diocesan bishop or conference of bishops, some other grave necessity urges it, Catholic ministers administer these same sacraments licitly also to other Christians not having full communion with the Catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and who seek such on their own accord, provided that they manifest Catholic faith in respect to these sacraments and are properly disposed.” C.I.C./1983, can. 844 § 4 (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) no. 1400).

This therefore applies only to emergencies, especially where there is a risk of death.

Intercommunion is, in principle, only possible with Orthodox Christians, because the Eastern Churches, although not in full communion with the Catholic Church, have true sacraments and above all, by virtue of their apostolic succession, a valid priesthood and a valid Eucharist (CCC no 1400, C.I.C./1983 can. 844, § 3). Their faith in the priesthood, in the Eucharist and also in the Sacrament of Penance is equal to that of the Catholic Church.

However, Protestants do not share faith in the priesthood and the Eucharist. Most German Protestants are Lutheran. Lutherans believe in consubstantiation, which implies the conviction that, in addition to the Body or Blood of Christ, bread and wine are also present when someone receives them. If someone receives the bread and wine without believing this, the Body and Blood of Christ are not really present. Outside this moment of receiving them, there remains only the bread and wine and the body and blood of Christ are not present.

Obviously, the Lutheran doctrine of consubstantiation differs essentially from the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation, which implies the faith that what is received under the figures of bread and wine, even if administered to someone who does not believe in transubstantiation and even outside the moment of administration, remains the Body or Blood of Christ and that it is no longer the substances of bread and wine.

Because of these essential differences, communion should not be administered to a Protestant, even if married to a Catholic, because the Protestant does not live in full communion with the Catholic Church and, therefore, does not explicitly share faith in her Eucharist. The differences between faith in consubstantiation and that of transubstantiation are so great that one must really demand that someone who wishes to receive Communion explicitly and formally enters into full communion with the Catholic Church (except in case of danger of death) and in this way explicitly confirms his acceptance of the faith of the Catholic Church, including the Eucharist. A private examination of conscience with a priest or with another person with pastoral responsibilities does not give sufficient guarantees that the person involved really accepts the faith of the Church. By accepting it [the Eucharist], the person can, however, do only one thing: enter into full communion with the Catholic Church.

The draft directives of the German bishops' conference suggest there are only a few cases of Protestants, married to Catholics, who would like to receive Communion by making use of these directives. However, experience shows that in practice these numbers will generally increase. Protestants who are married to Catholics and see other Protestants married to Catholics receiving Communion will think they can do the same. And in the end even Protestants unmarried to Catholics will want to receive it. The general experience with this type of adjustment is that the criteria are quickly extended.  

Now the Holy Father has informed the delegation of the German episcopal conference that it must discuss again the draft proposals for a pastoral document on, among other things, administering Communion, and try to find unanimity. Unanimity about what? Assuming that all members of the German bishops’ conference, after having discussed them again, unanimously decide that Communion can be administered to Protestants married to a Catholic (something that will not happen), will this — while being contrary to what the Code of Canon Law and the Catechism of the Catholic Church say in this regard — become the new practice in the Catholic Church in Germany? The practice of the Catholic Church, based on her faith, is not determined and does not change statistically when a majority of an episcopal conference votes in favor of it, not even if unanimously. 

What the Code of Canon Law and the Catechism of the Catholic Church say should have been the reaction of the Holy Father, who is, as the Successor of Saint Peter “the perpetual and visible principle and foundation of unity of both the bishops and of the faithful” (Lumen Gentium no. 23). The Holy Father should have given the delegation of the German episcopal conference clear directives, based on the clear doctrine and practice of the Church. He should have also responded on this basis to the Lutheran woman who asked him on November 15, 2015 if she could receive Communion with her Catholic spouse, saying that this is not acceptable instead of suggesting she could receive Communion on the basis of her being baptized, and in accordance with her conscience. By failing to create clarity, great confusion is created among the faithful and the unity of the Church is endangered. This is also the case with cardinals who publicly propose to bless homosexual relationships, something which is diametrically opposed to the doctrine of the Church, founded on Sacred Scripture, that marriage, according to the order of creation, exists only between a man and a woman. 

Observing that the bishops and, above all, the Successor of Peter fail to maintain and transmit faithfully and in unity the deposit of faith contained in Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, I cannot help but think of Article 675 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

“The Church’s ultimate trial

Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers. The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth will unveil the ‘mystery of iniquity’ in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth.”

+Willem Jacobus Cardinal Eijk

Archbishop of Utrecht, Netherlands

Utrecht, 5 May 2018

My Letter to the Bishop of Charleston

Today on the Feast of Saint Joseph, Patron of the Church, I sent the following letter to the Bishop of Charleston.  The linked "Open Appeal to the Catholic Bishops of the World" is self-explanatory and involves what I believe to be one of the greatest crises ever to confront Christendom.  I hope you will consider contacting your own bishop and forwarding this appeal.  Contact information for bishops is usually found on the diocesan website.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Your Excellency:

Catholic World Report has recently published "An Open Appeal to the Catholic Bishops of the World" which I would respectfully recommend to you.  It is an urgent appeal to avert a spiritual crisis which has been foisted on the Church by corruption and heresy emanating from the very top.  The letter contains four specific recommendations as to how our spiritual shepherds can preserve and promote the Christian deposit of faith.  I prayerfully hope that you will consider acting on these recommendations.

The heretical teachings being promoted under a "new paradigm" are as old as the devil who inspires them and we have already seen the ruin they have brought to the Anglican communion.  I assure you of my prayers and eagerness to help in any way you may see fit in preserving the teachings of our Church, handed down to us by the Apostles.

Very respectfully yours in Christ,

Daniel J. Cassidy
A parishioner of St. Peter's Church, Columbia

Philip Lawler with Raymond Arroyo on the Bergoglio Apostasy

PHILIP F. LAWLER, editor of Catholic World News and author of the new book "Lost Shepherd: How Pope Francis is Misleading His Flock".

Pro-life Leaders from 13 Countries Accuse Pope Francis of Failing to Uphold Church Teaching

Pope Francis speaks during a weekly general audience at the Paul VI audience hall (Getty Images)

One signatory accused the Pope and other members of the hierarchy of spreading errors

Leaders of pro-life organisations from across the world have signed a letter accusing Church leaders, including Pope Francis, of undermining their movement through ambiguous statements and actions contrary to Catholic teaching.

The letter says that over the past 50 years the pro-life movement has “relied in a particular way on the immutable teaching of the Catholic Church, which affirms the moral law with the greatest clarity.”

However, the signatories say that in recent years that teaching has increasingly been replaced by “ambiguity, and even by doctrines directly contrary to the teaching of Christ and the precepts of the natural law”.

 Read more at Catholic Herald >> 

"Pope" Francis, Subversive Agent -- Priest Calls for Resistance

Pope Francis recently released his Apostolic Exhortation, Amoris Laetitia. Here a Priest speaks up and condemns the text and calls for Catholics to resist. 

The audio in this video is taken from a sermon entitled "Peter has No Need of Our Lies or Flattery" uploaded to Regina Prophetarum (http://reginaprophetarum.org) on April 24, 2016. 

We encourage you to listen to the entire homily, but here are some quotes from the video related to Pope Francis:

 "With his latest document, namely Amoris Laetitia, The Joy of Married Love, our Pope has largely joined in the sexual revolution, embracing worldly ways, being a sign of compromise as opposed to the sign of contradiction and the world is applauding." 

"It is time to recognize a threat and to resist." 

"No matter what anyone tells you, Pope Francis does put forth the notion of Sacraments being available for those Catholics involved with public habitual adultery. One can now outwardly violate the Divine Law itself, yet find acceptance and even communion without need for change or purpose of amendment." 

"Pope Francis not only embraced dangerous revolutionary ideas, but he has become a subversive agent of radical change." 

"On at least three occasions the Holy Father purposefully misquotes, misuses, and abuses previous Church texts in order to mislead and push forward his agenda. He has become a sign of contradiction not to the world, but to the Church and to Tradition." 

"Instead of embracing his Petrine vocation to build up the Church, Pope Francis seems to be working towards the goal of tearing down and destroying. In such a situation the Holy Father does not need our applause and flattery, but rather - resistance." 

Who Is the Priest Speaking? Though the name of this Priest is now known to us, we respect the policy of Regina Prophetarum to purposefully withhold the name and here will do the same. Note - The imagery of the video is of our choosing and was not part of the original audio file. It consists primarily of news clippings related to Pope Francis which are relevant to the Priest's words. 

Please also see - THE RIGHT & DUTY TO RESIST A POPE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFBrN... 

SAINT BASIL THE GREAT - "Unbelievers laugh at what they see, and the weak are unsettled; faith is doubtful, ignorance is poured over their souls, because the adulterators of the word in wickedness imitate the truth. Religious people keep silence, but every blaspheming tongue is let loose. Sacred things are profaned; those of the laity who are sound in faith avoid the places of worship, as schools of impiety, and raise their hands in solitude with groans and tears to the Lord in heaven."

Lord, in Your mercy, send us a conclave!

Don Minutella and the "Pope Francis" Regime

Don Minutella is an Italian Catholic Priest from Sicily who has become nationally known for his open righteous criticism of Pope Francis, Amoris Laetitia, and the False Church of modernism.

Because of his outspoken defense of the Catholic faith, Father Minutella was officially removed from his parish and forbidden to celebrate Mass, administer the Sacraments, and preach. He was ordered to remain silent for a period of nine months. He obeyed. Father Minutella has been, and continues to be, unjustly and viciously attacked by the Italian media, including a mean-spirited exposé program called "The Hyenas", a satirical TV show based on Argentinian telecast "Caiga Quien Caiga" and well known for its underhanded and devious journalistic practices. 

After the Curia informed him that he would receive a "double excommunication" if he did not make public acts of fidelity to Pope Francis on social networks, Father Minutella recorded the video above as a response. 

TRANSCRIPT OF ENGLISH TRANSLATION AT: https://thewildvoice.org/minutella-pope-francis-regime/

Ex-Bishops’ Doctrine Chief Says Darkness Coming to Light Under Francis

Capuchin Father Thomas Weinandy, a former chief of staff for the U.S. Bishops' Committee on Doctrine and a current member of the Vatican's International Theological Commission, has written Pope Francis to say the pontiff is causing "chronic confusion," appointing bishops who "scandalize" the faithful, and prompting ordinary Catholics to "lose confidence in their supreme shepherd."

A former chief of staff for the U.S. bishops’ Committee on Doctrine, and a current member of the Vatican’s International Theological Commission, has written Pope Francis to say that his pontificate “has given those who hold harmful theological and pastoral views the license and confidence to come into the light and expose their previously hidden darkness,” which, one day, will have to be corrected.

While expressing loyalty to Francis as the “Vicar of Christ on earth, the shepherd of his flock,” Capuchin Father Thomas Weinandy nevertheless charges that the pope is:

• Fostering “chronic confusion.”
• “Demeaning” the importance of doctrine.
• Appointing bishops who “scandalize” believers with dubious “teaching and pastoral practice.”
• Giving prelates who object the impression they’ll be “marginalized or worse” if they speak out.
• Causing faithful Catholics to “lose confidence in their supreme shepherd.”

“In recognizing this darkness, the Church will humbly need to renew itself, and so continue to grow in holiness,” Weinandy wrote in the letter, which is dated July 31, the feast of St. Ignatius Loyola, founder of the pope’s Jesuit order.

Read more at Crux >> 

 

 

Lost Shepherd: How Pope Francis is Misleading His Flock

An important new book by Catholic journalist Philip F. Lawler

 

Faithful Catholics are beginning to realize it’s not their imagination. Pope Francis has led them on a journey from joy to unease to alarm and even a sense of betrayal. They can no longer pretend that he represents merely a change of emphasis in papal teaching. Assessing the confusion sown by this pontificate, Lost Shepherd explains what’s at stake, what’s not at stake, and how loyal believers should respond.

Lost Shepherd: How Pope Francis is Misleading His Flock Hardcover – February 12, 2018

by Philip Lawler (Author)

---

See all 2 formats and editions

Log In To Amazon For The Best Deal

• Kindle
  $19.99 Read with Our Free App
• Hardcover
  $26.99 1 New from $26.99 

If the Dubia Go Unanswered, the Consequences Could Be Catastrophic

From The Catholic Herald (UK)
By Father Alexander Lucie-Smith

It is dangerous to the credibility of the Church, that what should be considered good in Germany should be considered wrong in Poland

The Four Cardinals show no sign of giving up, and neither should they. It might at this point be useful to present a chronology of the Four Cardinals and the dubia. It goes like this.

• On 19^th September 2016, four Cardinals – Caffarra, Burk, Brandmueller and Meisner – present 5 dubia or requests for clarification to the Pope concerning certain ambiguities in Amoris Laetitia.
  
  
• On 19^th November 2016, having received no answer, the four Cardinals publish their dubia.
  
  
• On April 25^th 2017, the four Cardinals write to the Pope asking for an audience, enclosing an “audience sheet” setting down what they wish to discuss with him.
  
  
• On June 19^th 2017, the letter of the four Cardinals, which has received no response, is published.
  
  

So what is going on here? It is really very simple. The Pope does not want to answer the five dubia, all of which are simple yes or no answers. The reason for this is equally simple. If the Pope answers one way, he contradicts the Magisterium of his predecessors. If he answers another way, he effectively destroys what he has tried to do with Amoris Laetitia, that is, introduce a change of practice in the Church which per se means a change of doctrine. So, the Pope continues to sit on the fence, trying to have it both ways, while the four Cardinals try to push him off it, one way or another, hoping, or knowing, that if forced off the fence there is only one possible way for him to jump.

Interestingly, by refusing to answer the dubia, the Pope has in a certain sense given an answer of sorts. His refusal to answer effectively means that he is not endorsing, at least not officially, the guidelines of the Maltese bishops and others. What the Maltese bishops say remains a local pronouncement, not official Church teaching, even if it may have been published in the Osservatore Romano. What the Maltese bishops teach in their guidelines can be nullified by the Pope or his successors in the Chair of Peter.

But here we run into the chief concern of the Four Cardinals. It is confusing, indeed more than confusing, it is intolerable, for it is dangerous to the credibility of the Church, that what should be considered good in Germany should be considered wrong in Poland. This is not Catholicism, it is rather national churches on the Anglican or Orthodox model. If this ambiguity is allowed to continue, the consequences will be catastrophic.

Furthermore, it simply cannot be the case, for it has never been the case before, that one Pope can contradict the Magisterium of his predecessors. Amoris Laetitia has to be read in continuity with Familiaris Consortio and Veritatis Splendor. If it somehow “replaces” Familiaris Consortio and Veritatis Splendor, are people like me, whose teaching in seminary was based on those two documents, now to “unlearn” them? Have they been corrected? Were they for a time only? Or were they of permanent significance? But if Amoris Laetitia is to replace the previous magisterial documents, then what may replace Amoris Laetitia twenty years from now?

As the dubia make clear, one interpretation of Amoris Laetitia strikes at the heart of Catholic moral teaching as everywhere and always understood. In a sense there can only be one answer to the dubia, and that is that the traditional teaching must stand, and that Amoris Laetitia must be read in the light of that teaching alone.

Anyone who has been reading what I have written on this subject knows by now that I stand with the four Cardinals. So do many others, Cardinals, bishops, priests, deacons and laity.

Holy Father, answer the dubia! For the good of the Church, and for the good of the papal office, please answer the dubia!

 

Alexander Lucie-Smith is a Catholic priest, doctor of moral theology and consulting editor of The Catholic Herald. On Twitter he is @ALucieSmith

Jesus was a Reformed Racist, Says Anglican Church of Canada

From The Telegraph
By Damian Thompson

The Anglican Church of Canada (ACoC) has published a Lenten reflection that portrays Jesus as a racist who saw the error of his ways after being challenged by the Canaanite woman in Matthew's Gospel. The ACoC was long ago taken over by politically correct bores but, as Anglican Samizdat notes, this "reflection" turns Jesus into a sinner - in Christian terms, a pretty basic heresy. Here's the reflection. Sick-bags at the ready:

“… a Canaanite woman from that region came out and started shouting, ‘Have mercy on me, Lord, Son of David; my daughter is tormented by a demon.’ He answered, ‘I was sent only to the lost sheep of the houseof Israel.’ But she came and knelt before him, saying, ‘Lord, help me.’ He answered, ‘It is not fair to take the children’s food and throw it to the dogs.’ She said, ‘Yes, Lord, yet even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.’ ” - Matthew 14:22-27

This not a story for people who need to think that Jesus always had it together, because it looks like we’ve caught him being mean to a lady because of her ethnicity. At first, he ignores her cries. Then he refuses to help her and compares her people to dogs.

But she challenges his prejudice. And he listens to her challenge and grows in response to it. He ends up healing her daughter. What we may have here is an important moment of self-discovery in Jesus’ life, an enlargement of what it will mean to be who he was. Maybe we are seeing Jesus understand his universality for the first time.

Or maybe not. Maybe someone has been on a "racism awareness course" and decided to redefine the divinity of Jesus in a way that flatters ethnic sensibilities. How very Anglican. How very Canadian.