(Regardless of any past irregularities, Pope Prevost, if truly Pope, now enjoys the supernatural protection of the Petrine Promises. The heresies in Amoris, and the heresy of Synodality, must be addressed. So let us converge these two realities and find out who’s who and what’s what. -nvp)
Here’s an idea to bring about healing and peace: Let the “Dubia Cardinals” re-submit the 2016 Dubia (Amoris) and 2023 Dubia (Synodality)
One of the things that a new Pope has to do, is tie up the loose ends left by his predecessor.
There are no ends looser that one can imagine that the DUBIA about Amoris laetitia submitted in 2016 to Francis by the “Four Dubia Cardinals” (Burke, Brandmüller, Caffarra+, Meisner+).
There were also dubia submitted in 2023 about synodality by five Cardinals (Brandmüller, Sarah, Sandoval Íñiguez, Burke, and Zen).
Resubmit the dubia Leo when things settle down.
This could be a foundational moment of healing at the beginning of a new Pontificate as well as a gesture of continuity with the last years out of which those sets of – serious! – questions were submitted by serious and highly credentialed men of the Church, Cardinals, fulfilling their duty to advise the Pope.
It might not be the best timing to resubmit these before the ink on Leo’s first signature is dry, but sometime soon when things are settling down, they could ask for the healing gesture of clarifications to their questions.
Responses could be a great consolation for a lot of people who have struggled in confusion about the Church’s teachings on some matters.
Some might argue that resubmitting the dubia would make him defensive. I think it depends on how they are resubmitted and in what moment.
Good idea.
Also request the proper Consecration of Russia in another and impress on Leo the reality of current events – Trump, whom he does not like, is blowing the peace process, because this is the one time that “America First” should really take a back-seat. Even if America miraculously withdraws, the EU is determined to continue the conflict, and Leo now resides in a prime target area, and may end up as the Pope seen in the vision.
According to the prophecy of stigmatist Antonio Ruffini, (as told by Fr Paul Kramer in 2012) the valid pope after a false pope will be the one to finally validly consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart.
He opposes the Ordo Amoris so he is invalid, a heretic.
According to St Robert Bellarmine, being a heretic does not prevent one from being selected as pope. Pope Vigilius was one such case of a heretic being installed as pope. Of course he then enjoyed the grace of the Petrine Promise and severely disappointed his heretic followers by being instilled with the true faith, recanted his heresies, and spent his papacy trying to correct them.
“Pope Prevost, if truly Pope, now enjoys the supernatural protection of the Petrine Promises.”
Wise words; this is authentic (i.e. pre-conciliar) Catholic teaching and was well understood by Catholics past. The graces of the Office will preserve a valid incumbent from heresy. It was most observable in Pius IX who as a prelate, though not a Modernist, was most liberal; however once made pope (and guided by the Holy Ghost) became a paragon of orthodoxy and warrior of the same.
However, Mark, what makest thou of the Polish gentleman, Wotylya? Was he truly a pope? If yes, how did the super-natural protection of the Petrine Office fail to prevent him from kissing the infidel’s book, from instigating Assisi (and allowing pagans to place their demon atop the Tabernacle), partake gratefully in pagan smoking ceremonies, etc., etc., etc.?
With regards to those specific actions of Wotylaya, those are his personal failings and scandalous example, as much as St. Peter’s back in the day.
What I believe the protection of the office does, is it prevents the Pope from formally binding Catholics to error and heretical doctrine.
There was nothing private about Assisi. It was a global mass media event. If the definition of infallibility is so narrow that it doesn’t include scandalizing the entire planet in an official capacity as the Vicar of Jesus Christ, the term is meaningless.
Who said anything about “private”? Assisi was arguably akin to Antioch.
Scandalizing the public out of personal weakness, or confusion, or lapse in judgement, or politics, or simple immorality is not new to the Papacy.
It is worthy of rebuke and condemnation, but by itself doesn’t unmake a Pope.
A better argument might be made if JPII enforced or encouraged routinely praying with heretics or other religions a common practice binding for all Catholics or clergy. But this doesn’t exist, and while anyone doing so can claim to be following his example, there is no authoritative statement or magisterial act permitting anyone to do so. This has been an exercise in laxity, much like the Church has lapsed to remind Catholics that they are still bound to the decrees condemning Copernicus and Galileo, which oddly enough even Wotylaya and Ratzinger upheld, though couched it by recourse to Relativity.
Arguably, Assisi was a politically motivated event to encourage secular peaceful relations. Sill scandalous, but a far cry from motivations of heretical or apostate thoughts. WWII and the threat of atheistic Communism was still traumatic in the memory of JPII’s generation which made them vulnerable to such desperate demonstrations.
You could make an argument that Vatican II’s errors were what JPII was interpretively putting into practice, but you’ll have to prove that sufficiently. In other words, demonstrate that he was an obstinate formal heretic in this regard instead of a fool. And yes, that definition is narrow, by intentional design.
I am very open to anyone building that case
I conflated “personal” with “private”. My apologies. But it was a public and official act, and it was projected to the faithful around the world. If it was in error, it was an enormous one, and the pope never acknowledged it. He certainly never apologized for it. And in 2002, he called another Assisi, this time to commemorate the newest forever war of the moment (apparently the second gathering was even more outrageous than the first).
But it’s not just Assisi, or the Koran kissing, or calling on St. John the Baptist to protect Islam… Repeated official acts of public obstinacy toward the First Commandment sound heretical enough to me, but there’s also a ton of evidence in his encyclicals and speeches that show Wojtyla didn’t just flirt with the heresy of religious indifferentism, he lived and breathed it. There’s similar evidence, to varying degrees, against every pope of the council. The common denominator seems pretty apparent. And they’re never shy about telling us what it is by name.
The requirement that he was an obstinate formal heretic is far stricter than the Church has ever required in the case of the papacy. The fathers in the debate at the First Vatican Council made no such strict distinction when declaring that no pope had ever publicly erred in faith and morals (private letters and private audiences excepted), as was also stated by St Robert Bellarmine, and Pope St Agatho 1000 years before. No pope had ever erred in faith and morals at all up through the 1870s, regardless of whether he made it binding or was declared formally.
That answer would be fascinating to hear on a podcast with Dr. Mazza and Ann Barnhardt.
Recording today!
I’ve often wondered how one squares the Petrine Promise with those acts of participation in false religions. I’m not able to, but I also can’t figure out the mechanism that made his election invalid.
Yes! And play him Taylor Marshall’s last interview with Bishop Schneider from a few weeks ago where he detailed the things that Bergoglio should do before his death.
7. He makes the 7th false pope in a row. “Fr.” James Martin is elated. That pretty much tells the story.
btw – the Vatican lightning strikes.
If I remember correctly, for Bergoglio, it plain struck St. Peter’s.
I can’t find a photo of the one for the recent conclave, but I believe it did not strike. It was 1 main branch that sent out 2 branches. To me, it could have been the Trinity.
Except the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Father alone, no filioque. /jest
No lightning strike, rather a 2.9 Richter tremor in the Roman region (the exact name eludes me) that carries the name of Roman deacon St. Casaerius, who was martyred for refusing to make pagan offering to Apollo and, perhaps ominously, whos subsequent prayers led to the collapse of the temple of Apollo, killing the pagan ‘priest’.
Consult St. John Bosco’s (I think) second major prophecy; the one with imagery rather similar, in part, to the Third Secret and which indicates that the papacy will be restored after 200 risings of the sun, and the restoration of holy Church in double this period.
200 days means 200 equal units of time and I noticed that if regarded as years and divided by 3 (the number of the most high Trinity), this gives 66.6 years. False pope Roncalli was ‘elected’ on the 28th of October, 1958 and 66.6 years (i.e. 66 years and eight months) later will be the 29th of June this year, Feast of Ss. Peter and Paul.
The Vatican’s Third Secret depicts the Church in a state of Sede vacante (what better way to represent such than with a dead pope?) and this is consistent with the theme of St. John Bosco’ vision.
If you are unsure about sedevacantism, search for and watch the short 17:48 minute sermon given by Fr. Anthony Cekada (+2020, please pray for his repose) on the SSPX which gives the fundamental truths of Catholicism and thus, by extension, sedevacantism. To deny the latter is to deny the former.
OR – It is the West that is in schism, not the East, and therefore no such thing as a Petrine Protection. Time will tell, and how much cognitive dissonance will Trads experience if this validly elected Pope continues the heresy of Antipope Bergoglio.