A corporal work of mercy.

A corporal work of mercy.
Click on photo for this corporal work of mercy!

Sunday 3 December 2017

Francis officially promulgates the heresy within Amoris Laetitia - Where are the Cardinals?

Perhaps you thought that Advent was only going to be videos of the real music of Advent as the secular world has already begun celebrating "money-mess," how can we ever use the word, Christmas for what they have done to the glorious feast of the Word of God becoming a little baby.

Alas, the world goes on and the horror which is Jorge Bergoglio must be made known.

As is being reported, the infamous letter to the bishops of Buenos Aires that their interpretation of Amoris Laetitia, -- that Holy Communion may be given to those living in adultery - divorced and civilly remarried with no Decree of Nullity that there was no prior marriage -- is the correct interpretation has now been published in the Act Apostoliicae Sedis, giving it official and potentially, "magisterial" status.

From OnePeterFive, we have these comments by Marco Tossatti:
[T]he “private” letter of Pope Francis to the Argentine bishops was published in the October 2016 edition of Acta Apostolicae Sedis, after they had issued directives for the application of chapter 8 of Amoris Laetitia (the chapter with the famous footnotes on giving communion to the divorced and remarried). Directives which, as has been noted and emphasized here, are anything but clear.
The publication of this letter in the Acta is accompanied by a brief note from the Secretary of State, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, together with an official rescript from a papal audience in June 2017, announcing that the Pope himself wanted the two documents — the guidelines and the letter — published on the website of Acta Apostolicae Sedis.
The announcement can only serve to further fuel the confusion and uncertainty surrounding the controversial apostolic exhortation as well as the Pope’s way of doing things, which yet again appears to be a far cry from the clarity and straightforwardness that many of the faithful would expect [from the Holy Father]. He has given no response to the dubia Cardinals, no response to the letters, petitions and other initiatives written by scholars, theologians, and ordinary faithful people who have been confused by the deliberate ambiguity of the document. Yet, at the same time, he has given a veneer of officiality to one letter sent to one member of one bishops’ conference.
To what end? To obligate all to give religiosum obsequium [religious assent] to a magisterium expressed in oblique and ambiguous forms, or to respond without committing himself in a direct response which would express the mind of the Pope in an unequivocal manner to the doubtful and perplexed? One is given the feeling that the only thing this does is cause the simple believer annoyance with the Pope’s comportment, which may be defined as a “pretext” in the worst sense of that term.
And further, if what we have learned from two different sources is true, this annoyance extends to the Vatican. A cardinal of great renown, a former diplomat, who has served an impressive career at the head of Congregations and in high offices in the Secretariat of State, is said to have reproved the Pope for his actions [as Pope], saying to him essentially, “We elected you to make reforms, not to smash everything.” News of this conversation — if it can be called a conversation — has spread through the Vatican, because it took place at a high decibel level, which carried through the fragile barrier of the doors and walls. The cardinal in question was one of those who supported the candidacy of Jorge Mario Bergoglio in the conclave of 2013.
The debate will now begin as the Catholics with their heads in the sand and deny reality try to spin that it is only magisterial if he commands it be taught. Look, a letter from a pope, private correspondence leaked to the media and published months back on the Vatican's own website is now published in the Official Acts of the Apostolic Seat. That is magisterial. Did Bergoglio not say that he speaks every day and everything he says is "magisterial?"

Doubt no longer.

A pernicious and filthy heretic is sitting on the Chair of Peter, Is it up to the few remaining Catholics to call him out as a heretic? 

The Cardinals must now begin the formal process. He must be called out and warned to recant it, given time and it must be done again.

If he refuses, he must be formally declared a heretic and that in itself, causes him to lose the Chair of Peter because a heretic cannot be Pope!



TLM said...

As I've said on a few other sites: The ball is now in Cardinal Burke's court and the court of ALL of our 'Bishops'. This is the moment of TRUTH!

Anonymous said...

Apostasia total

Ana Milan said...

Maybe ++s Brandmuller & Burke knew this heretical action was in the pipeline & delayed issuing the correction until it was publicly announced. IMO it provides them with a golden opportunity for calling an immediate imperfect council to declare PF a manifest heretic & to begin the process of electing his successor, this time in deference to the Holy Ghost's wishes. By making this announcement official PF is trashing Holy Matrimony & defiling the Holy Eucharist. God will not be mocked & neither will his faithful followers. The silent Cardinals will have to show their hand & join the two remaining Dubia Cardinals in announcing that PF has now formally excommunicated himself from the True Faith & ceases to be pope. If quick action is taken it could prevent our cathedrals & churches from being usurped by these malefactors. Christ has promised to remain with His Church until the End Times & that the Gates of Hell will not prevail against Her. Our lady said the pope would consecrate Russia to Her Immaculate Heart & a period of peace would prevail. We are all in this together in defence of Holy Mother Church, the Bride of Christ.

I sense that the laity campaign of Rosaries around the borders has brought everything to a head & should be globally followed. I pray that Canada & the rest of Europe will join very promptly. The hour is late. Our Lady specified the necessity of praying Her Rosary & performing acts of penance & denial. They are the only armoury we lay people have against such Apostasy & we must keep going at all costs staying faithful to Christ Our King.

Justina said...

Anathema sit

TLM said...

Ana...go on to Life Site News and you will see the great 'Rosary Petition' is already in the works for both the U.S. and Canada to pray it together! To take place on Dec. 12th, the feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe, the Empress of the Americas. If we can all participate either by joining in person at the points of prayer or by joining in at home, we will indeed be STORMING HEAVEN in a HUGE way!! The Rosary 'Captains' are asked to post the times they will be praying the Rosary for the Church, so all can join in either in person or at home. At least we are following Poland in this quest. I am praying for success in this quest!

Barbara Jensen said...

Thank you, Vox,for telling it as it really is. As the Church hierarchy continues to talk and talk and talk some more, the confusion spreads like a roiling flood. Souls are being misinformed and the bishops remain quiet. Politics trumps the truth of Christ. Let us pray for Holy Mother Church.

Dorota Mosiewicz-Patalas said...

As Bergoglio explained, it is not Catholic to say "this or that" is true, a Catholic says "this and that". From the beginning of his pontificate he has been deliberate in bringing about a mess and chaos, changing things amidst it - gradually. After a period of uncertainty regarding his letter to Argentinian bishops (where one group took it as encouragement, and the other, the legalistic one, as reason to live in denial of reality) the time has come to make it official. The novelty of the obvious heresy has worn off sufficiently. If not, perhaps Bergoglio is not delivering the demolition of the Church as quickly as was originally planned, and it is high time to push the agenda a little farther.

I remember very well that Bergoglio promised the Holy Communion to divorced and "remarried" to his niece or some other family member living with a man other than her husband - in the very beginning of his iron fist rule. He also stated that most Catholic marriages are invalid. In his opinion some not married couples have a real marriage, while many married in Church do not. People don't know what they are promising - he said. Therefore he denies any role for the Holy Spirit, only an ability or inability of couples to be content enough to want to be together (as long as love lasts). If they don't, it means that there was no marriage. Marrage exists only, when people want to stay together.

It is clear that Bergoglio does not really put any relevance on the holy sacrament of marriage. He does not see any role for the Holy Spirit in a valid Catholic marriage. He might sometimes say that he does, but other times, he claims the opposite. It is this AND that - allegedly - the Catholic way.

Tom A. said...

Maybe Burke needs to stop his resistance and assent to his Pope's teaching. That is, afterall, how things are done in the Catholic Church.

JTLiuzza said...

Is Papal infallibility not in play here? I'm not a canonist but doesn't Papal infallibility eliminate the possibility of a Pope declaring a heresy as part of the authentic magisterium, as Bergoglio just did?

Either Vatican I was in error in declaring Papal infallibility, or Bergoglio is not and never was Pope. I would respectfully disagree with Ana Milan above. This is not about Bergoglio "ceasing to be Pope" and electing a successor. It is about declaring once and for all that he was never Pope to begin with, and that there is no need to elect a successor yet, because the real Pope has always been Joseph Ratzinger.

I look forward to reading the thoughts of those way more learned than I am on these issues. Talk about "hagan lio"? I cannot see how this man can possibly be Pope.

Dorota Mosiewicz-Patalas said...


I am not responding as more learned which I definitely am not.

It is very hard to love the Church and at the same time to acknowledge errors in Her teaching. Once we do this, we must acknowledge that Bergoglio's innovations might simply be corrections of past errors. We must become like the Protestants.

We are in a lose - lose situation. Either popes are not infallible, which means that there are false dogmas taught by the Church, or they are infallible (ex cathedra, of course), which means that infallibility contains a possibility for error, which offends a faithful Catholic, one who accepts reason and logic, and with it, the principle of non-contradiction.

We really are in trouble here. Either we refuse to pick and choose from what the Church has infallibly taught, to fit our preferences, or we accept an obvious contradiction as being logically correct. This is Bergoglio's modus operandi.

He has never been the Pope.

I say that he has not been duly elected. He has not been the Pope for any amount of time. Additionally, we know that during the conclave and many years before, he did not accept all teachings of the Catholic Church and even of our Lord Jesus. Therefore, according to what the Church has always taught, he was not a Catholic, not as a fake bishop in Argentina, not as the fake Pope.

Ana Milan said...

I have seen this article & have commented on it. I am sincerely hoping that Spain, France Portugal etc. will follow suit. I believe it is this show of commitment that Heaven wants.

Ana Milan said...


Earlier to-day I commented on Cognitivegateway.wordpress.com which coincides with your stated opinion here & which I have always held as regards PF & the dual papacy left us by PBXVI. I don't like to keep repeating myself as I don't want to sound like a broken record, but people who know me from comment boxes will also know I have been blocked for daring to say so.

Irenaeus said...

Hello JTLiuzza,

Papal infallibility is only invoked when the pope explicitly declares something infallible. When he does, we are duty bound as the Faithful to follow it. He has to link his statement with the previous popes ("WE"), and actually enunciate the word infallible in his statement, as in "WE infallibly declare that [so on and so forth]..." In other instances, the pope speaks as fallibly as the rest of us.

Francis was elected pope by his brother cardinals and is the pope by virtue of that election. We can listen to the theories that go on about it and make our own decisions as such: but the fact remains - the former Pope Benedict XVI has stated Francis is his successor, and in many respects, Francis is.

The problem in this present day is that our pontiff has elevated his approval of the progressive interpretation of AL - one admitted in a private correspondence - to the same rank as a apostolic letter. He has not declared that elevation infallible. All the same, it is troubling.

Irenaeus said...

Addendum to my comment: The pope also has to speak from the chair when he makes an infallible statement. That is, he has to sit in the Papal Throne and speak ex cathedra.

Thank you to Dorota for reminding me of that element.

JTLiuzza said...

Iranaeus, if you can illustrate to me where the Church has proclaimed what you put forth with regards to Papal infallibility, I would love to see it. The documents of Vatican I which declared the dogma include nothing of what you say. With respect, I believe you are way off.

Thanks for your remarks Ana Milan and I always enjoy your commentary.

And Dorota, I cannot disagree with any aspect of your conclusions.

The coming days are going to be very interesting. I believe without question in my mind that we are living in the time of an antipope. I'll look forward to whatever other information I can gather going forward as is all of our duty. I will also wait to hear from our shepherds and, of course, pray.

Anonymous said...

Infallibility is *not* in play here. Just because it's in AAS doesn't mean it's infallible.

Stephen Lowe said...

Troubling is the understatement of the year or decade. I have got a hangnail, that is troubling...this is more like a open gaping wound that is infected. Troubling my butt.

TLM said...


Whether or not this is an 'Apostolic letter' that is 'infallible' or NOT, Bergoglio and Co. will DECLARE it as such and act on it as such. This is their M.O. Heads are going to roll for not adhering to HIS HERESY!!

Tom A. said...

Which shepherds? 99% are modernists and most of the 1% left want to be recognized as Catholic by the modernists. I am afraid there are no shepherds readily apparent.

Michael Dowd said...

Does it not follow that the Church is now on the threshold of schism and in the state of sedevacant? What are the implications for the Church?

Anonymous said...

Vox: "If he refuses, he must be formally declared a heretic and that in itself, causes him to lose the Chair of Peter because a heretic cannot be Pope!"

Unfortunately there is no mechanism in place for this. Without such a mechanism the above statement is problematic. When would it be invoked? When the Copts left because we rejected the Robber Baron Council which they say is legitimate? When the other 4 Eastern Catholic patriachates abandoned Rome in the Great Schism? When half of Europe left the faith in the Reformation? We can argue that "we kept tradition but they departed so we're right" but that's what they say too and there is no objective way to arbitrate between the two sides except the Papacy. That's why I'm Catholic and not Orthodox even though there is a lot to love about Orthodoxy. It's also why Cardinal John Henry Newman converted.

And even if you can declare the Pope is a heretic (I believe a mechanism exists that makes it possible), that in itself says nothing about him losing the Chair of Peter. The most is means is that his heresy must be rejected and we must hold to the Authentic Magesterium, but he is still the Pope in all other matters. Since Pope Francis is a petty, little excuse of a man, anyone who attempts such a declaration will be punished with the full weight of his dictatorial power, both within and outside the Church and may even be given the Cardinal Pell treatment (I don't know if the charges are true, but given his strong support of Orthodoxy so close to the seat of Pope Francis, fabrication by the very people in charge of the gay/pedophilia network is a very real possibility).

I do not envy the position of Cardinals and Bishops at this moment, and I don't know know what I would do in that position other than teach the faith unwaveringly and ignore the Saul Alinsky tactics of the modernists. I strongly suspect I would try to find a way to transfer into the FSSP or Eastern Catholic Church so I could speak and act with more protection even though that act in and of itself might make me a target.

One thing is for sure, if we get a Cardinal Burke or Cardinal Sarah or even a Cardinal Muller as a Pope, his first task must be to create a mechanism for heresy to be denounced outside the Papacy without consequences. It could be as simple as enshrining an updated Denzinger as the official list of doctrines and allowing Cardinals, Bishops and Priests to cite official Vatican documents as proof of the heresy. The Pope could respond with a clarification but if no clarification is given or if the clarification confirms the heresy, Cardinals, bishops and Priests can confirm the heresy and render that declaration null and void. This mechanism would not be able to protect us against new types of heresy, but it would guard the core of the faith, which unfortunately is up for grabs now since Pope Francis has no shame in making Jesus's words mean exactly the opposite of what he actually says and what the Church has stated since the founding of the Church. Such a mechanism would have also protected us from the "Spirit of Vatican II mass" and "Teen mass" and "Polka mass".

BTW, JTLiuzza
Papal infallibility cannot be at play. If the Pope #4 infallibility declares that something is true then Pope #5 cannot infallibility cannot declare that this something is not true. That's not divine law, that's simple logic. Something cannot be both true and not true in the same way in the same sense at the same time. Since God is the God of Truth, there can be no contradictions in the faith. Contrary to what many Protestants say, the Pope can't just declare anything true...he's bound by all his predecessors in a way Protestants are not.

Michael Dowd said...

In days past there were 'ways' of freeing the Church from a troublesome Pontiff.

Johnno said...

Francis now proves by public Papal action that he is an obstinate formal heretic.

He ceases to be Pope.

That's assuming he ever was, as there's still the question of whether Benedict's resignation was valid in light of what seems to be an attempt (or sabotage) on his part to split the Papacy into active and inactive offices.

Francis getting tossed out doesn't solve our problem. Benedict needs to either be tossed out too, or both Francis and Benedict have to die.

It will most likely come to the latter.

Johnno said...

Anil Wang -

There is a mechanism in place. A divine chastisement that sees the Pope or Anti-Pope dead. A time-honored favorite for when things get very bad.

Many others will die too, that's how it generally goes.

Irenaeus said...

TLM - We don't know if that is their "M.O." and we certianly do not know if Pope Francis and his brother Cardinals will declare it as infallible, and act on it as such.

Irenaeus said...

JTLuizza - With the exception of ex cathedra, none of what I put forward was defined in Vatican I. I was "way off" in my declaration of infallibility needing to be used in a sentence to indicate a teaching on faith and morals is infallible.

However, I was able to find an example from Church teaching on popes uniting themselves with their successors when they make a declaration of infallibility. This gives it greater gravitas. It comes from Pius IX's "Ineffabilis Deus":

"Wherefore, in humility and fasting, we unceasingly offered our private prayers as well as the public prayers of the Church to God the Father through his Son, that he would deign to direct and strengthen our mind by the power of the Holy Spirit. In like manner did we implore the help of the entire heavenly host as we ardently invoked the Paraclete. Accordingly, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, for the honor of the Holy and undivided Trinity, for the glory and adornment of the Virgin Mother of God, for the exaltation of the Catholic Faith, and for the furtherance of the Catholic religion, by the authority of Jesus Christ our Lord, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own: "We declare, pronounce, and define that the doctrine which holds that the most Blessed Virgin Mary, in the first instance of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege granted by Almighty God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race, was preserved free from all stain of original sin, is a doctrine revealed by God and therefore to be believed firmly and constantly by all the faithful."[29]

"Hence, if anyone shall dare—which God forbid!—to think otherwise than as has been defined by us, let him know and understand that he is condemned by his own judgment; that he has suffered shipwreck in the faith; that he has separated from the unity of the Church; and that, furthermore, by his own action he incurs the penalties established by law if he should are to express in words or writing or by any other outward means the errors he think in his heart."

I am open to correction. After all, I wasn't taught this in school.

Kathleen1031 said...

Great discussion all. I am edified by your solid commentary and conversation, thank you.
Here is the insect, pontificating from the reeds. But here is my impression.
That this pope is a destroyer cannot be disputed.
We see there is none to stop him, nor even confront him. How these men, especially the ones who dare to wear red, can live with themselves, I don't know. At best they do mew like kittens, as Mundabor says. We need lions and we have kittens.

PB XVI "retired" in bizarre circumstances, the St.Gallen mafia, which, if true, would perhaps render his abdication null. However if none of the Bishops make the point, does it matter? PB XVI apparently thought he could split the papacy. It doesn't get weirder than that. There he is, in Rome, wearing white, still called "Holy Father". You can't make this stuff up. Why does he wear white? Because "there were no black cassocks available". Still aren't I guess.
What other kind of situation would we, or could we have, now that we know with some certainty almost all of our bishops are Modernists, who don't believe what we believe. That seems every bit as big a problem as a rogue pope! Who would we get in a conclave? Only God can solve this. I tend to be with those who see disaster ahead for Rome.
Personally I believe we are in schism. I don't have any hesitation except maybe a molecular one, in refusing to listen to or follow this pope in the slightest matter. In fact, in our house, he is anathema. Why? Because of the words "If an angel comes preaching a different gospel than the one I preached, let him be anathema". Does anyone doubt he preaches a different gospel? So the matter of is he pope or not to me, becomes moot. For our household, we wait on the Lord, who will correct this aberration of a papacy. The Church is in flames. The sheep are scattered, but it seems are finding a way to adapt and live on what we were given by God to sustain us.
What an incredible time to be a Catholic. I would have preferred more boring times, but for some reason God put us all here now. We must have a part to play, please God, in the triumphant return of His Kingdom. We may end up witnessing the apocalypse. One thing for sure, this cannot continue.
I too believe Bergolio is a willing part of the Deep State and is in league with diabolical people, who are pulling the strings. I have always found it too incredible the US had a Barack Obama and the Church had a Bergolio, at the same moment in time.
God bless all here, and may He help us soon.

Michael Dowd said...

Good stuff Kathleen 1031. Perhaps the only way to get the attention of the Bishops and Cardinals (to replace Pope Francis) is to advocate a schism. They might just take this challenge seriously as it would it would threaten their power and money which is all they are evidently interested in.