Pope Paul IV Apostolic Constitution Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio of February 15, 1559:
6. In addition, [by this Our Constitution, which is to remain valid in perpetuity We enact, determine, decree and define:] that if ever at any time it shall appear that any Bishop, even if he be acting as an Archbishop, Patriarch or Primate; or any Cardinal of the aforesaid Roman Church, or, as has already been mentioned, any legate, 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 assent of all the Cardinals, shall be null, void and worthless;
(ii) it shall not be possible for it to acquire validity (nor for it to be said that it has thus acquired validity) through the acceptance of the office, of consecration, of subsequent authority, nor through possession of administration, nor through the putative enthronement of a Roman Pontiff, or Veneration, or obedience accorded to such by all, nor through the lapse of any period of time in the foregoing situation;
(iii) it shall not be held as partially legitimate in any way;
(iv) to any so promoted to be Bishops, or Archbishops, or Patriarchs, or Primates or elevated as Cardinals, or as Roman Pontiff, no authority shall have been granted, nor shall it be considered to have been so granted either in the spiritual or the temporal domain;
(v) each and all of their words, deeds, actions and enactments, howsoever made, and anything whatsoever to which these may give rise, shall be without force and shall grant no stability whatsoever nor any right to anyone;
(vi) those thus promoted or elevated shall be deprived automatically, and without need for any further declaration, of all dignity, position, honour, title, authority, office and power.
7. Finally, [by this Our Constitution, which is to remain valid in perpetuity, We] also [enact, determine, define and decree]: that any and all persons who would have been subject to those thus promoted or elevated if they had not previously deviated from the Faith, become heretics, incurred schism or provoked or committed any or all of these, be they members of anysoever of the following categories: the Cardinals, even those who shall have taken part in the election of this very Pontiff previously deviating from the Faith or heretical or schismatical, or shall otherwise have consented and vouchsafed obedience to him and shall have venerated him;
Castellans, Prefects, Captains and Officials, even of Our Beloved City and of the entire Ecclesiastical State, even if they shall be obliged and beholden to those thus promoted or elevated by homage, oath or security; shall be permitted at any time to withdraw with impunity from obedience and devotion to those thus promoted or elevated and to avoid them as warlocks, heathens, publicans, and heresiarchs (the same subject persons, nevertheless, remaining bound by the duty of fidelity and obedience to any future Bishops, Archbishops, Patriarchs, Primates, Cardinals and Roman Pontiff canonically entering).
I forgot who said a doubtful pope is no pope. And a Catholic commits no sin of schism for doubting his validity..
St Robert Bellarmine, Doctor of the Church
Of more interest about Leo.
He seems to firmly buy into the propaganda against Russia in the Ukraine conflict, and much like his stance over the death penalty betrays a naive hippy view of war.
https://religionnews.com/2025/05/15/will-pope-leo-xiv-change-the-vaticans-diplomacy-on-ukraine-and-russia/
His voting record throughout his life indicates that he has voted in both Republican and Democrat primaries in the past; the majority are Republican.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/pope-leo-robert-prevost-voting-records-republican-democratic-primaries/
If we are to apply this to LXIV, how do we not apply it to all since Pius XII?
And who in the college of Cardinals could it not apply to since to a man they accept the errors of VII?
It’s the passion of the Church. Im just wondering where in the Passion we are….how far along and how much longer til the end and then the Resurrection.
Because the difference is material heretic vs theological errors. To embrace Bergoglio’s heresy of false synodlism is material heresy, because it violates several de fide Dogmas. Conversely, the errors of Vatican II and its popes do not deal with Dogma. For instance, the ecumenism taught by Vatican II is theological error, not material heresy.
The Spotless Bride of Christ can teach theological error? If not the pope, who decides what is or is not theological error?
Kono, I’ve provided you several examples of error, but you refuse to research them. The biggest is the suppression of the Filioque from Nicaea in 325 to Pope Benedict VIII in 1014. Was the Church in error for 700 years, or did she err in 1014. If you choose the former, you’re. Catholic. Choose the latter and you’re Ortho. There is no third way.
The Filioque is a development of doctrine. It’s not a 180° changing of doctrine like VII documents are. IF the Church can error, what’s the point? What’s the point in Jesus’ saying, “he who hears you, hears Me”? Valid popes speak with the voice of Christ…..even if they’re immoral and in mortal sin. Saying the Church/popes have taught error is Satan’s work and destroys the Petrine Promise.
So to be clear, the Catholic Church can teach and did teach theological errors at the second Vatican Council?
In all seriousness, I did not think it possible for the church to teach error.
It’s happened many times previously as well, but always ends up getting corrected.
Seems like a distinction without a difference.
Well, there are 14 stations of the Cross. We are on post Pius XII “pope” number 7. So roughly halfway?
Mark,
Thank you for this link. There is a typo in the title of the document, however. “Apostolic Officio” should be “Apostolatus Officio.”
This citation is pure gold, and people will need to refer to it correctly while witnessing to its content among the normies.
Thank you, I fixed it. Must have been autocorrect!