There is no need to be angry about anything. All that is happening has been prophesied and is guided by God's providence. The Crisis we are witnessing is the "The Church's Final Trial" described in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, sections 675-677. The fact is that Cardinal Bergoglio was never lawfully-elected to the papacy, according to Universi Dominici Gregis. This is because, UDG states that a new papal election can only take place AFTER the death of the previous Pope. There is no exception to this condition in UDG. However, for those who refuse to read UDG and follow the law, that is, those who persist in believing Cardinal Bergoglio was lawfully-elected Pope, Canon 194.2 states that any cleric (not excluding a Pope) is automatically "removed" from office if he "publicly defects from the Catholic faith" (e.g. professes heresy). Bergoglio has publicly and officially professed heresy by approving, in this letter, a bishop's policy of admitting unrepentant divorced and remarried individuals to Holy Communion. The original Dubia warning about this heresy has been ignored by Bergoglio. So, even if you think, he was lawfully-elected (which he wasn't), Bergoglio has automatically lost his legal authority to bind the faithful according to Canon 194.2. As Catholics we must separate ourselves from heretics, not submit ourselves to their rule. By publicly submitting to heretics, we "consent" to the evil that they propagate. This scandalizes the little ones. And those who "receive not the love of the truth" will receive, instead, "the operation of error to believe lying." This is a supernatural punishment for failing in our Christian duty to love God above all else. Bergoglio is the "abomination that causes desolation." He is the prophesied False Prophet. Remember St. Paul's words in 2 Thessalonians 2: 3 Let no man deceive you by any means, for unless there come a revolt first, and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition, 4 Who opposeth, and is lifted up above all that is called God, or that is worshipped, so that he sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself as if he were God. 5 Remember you not, that when I was yet with you, I told you these things? 6 And now you know what withholdeth, that he may be revealed in his time. 7 For the mystery of iniquity already worketh; only that he who now holdeth, do hold, until he be taken out of the way. 8 And then that wicked one shall be revealed whom the Lord Jesus shall kill with the spirit of his mouth; and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming, him, 9 Whose coming is according to the working of Satan, in all power, and signs, and lying wonders, 10 And in all seduction of iniquity to them that perish; because they receive not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying: 11 That all may be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to iniquity.
If I read all the documents and fully understand every one of them, it will likely increase my suffering greatly, but it will still not give me any authority to proclaim or do anything. What I can do is pray and offer up that suffering with Our Lady. She knows what to do. In the meantime, learning and trying to understand the Truth of our Faith is the most important thing, at least for me. That's what we've been told for years now ~ know your Faith. What better way to recognize error, and walk away from it if necessary? For me, I'll leave the heavy lifting to Our Lady & those who "do whatever He tells you". It's all any of us where I live could do under the reign of a certain Bishop who was removed by Pope Benedict circa 2009 . The problem has exponentially grown since then, and while opinions can be offered, even by the wonderfully educated lay people out there, which may be useful to that authority, there's not much else to be done by the laity...
I don't see how this can be true, PNF. Pope Benedict updated the rules for the election of a new Pontiff on 27th Feb 2013. In his update of UDG he states: "Canon 335 of the Code of Canon Law, restated in Canon 47 of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, makes clear the need to issue and constantly update the specific laws regulating the canonical provision for the Roman See, when for any reason it becomes vacant." Those reasons include a valid resignation of the reigning Pontiff, which is cannonically provided for: Canon 332, Paragraph 2: “If it happens that the Roman pontiff resigns his office, it is required for validity that the resignation is made freely and properly manifested but not that it is accepted by anyone” Cannon 332 says, "The Roman Pontiff acquires full and supreme power in the Church when, together with episcopal consecration he has been lawfully elected and has accepted the election." However, you omit the important qualifying clause in the second paragraph of the same cannon law. Cannon 194: The following are removed from ecclesiastical office by virtue of the law itself: 1. one who has lost the clerical state; 2. one who has publically defected from the catholic faith or from communion with the Church; 3. a cleric who has attempted marriage, even a civil one. The removal mentioned in nn. 2 and 3 above can be insisted upon only if it is established by a declaration of the competent authority. There is no competent authority to judge Pope Francis. "As the supreme judge of the Church, the Pope has the right of bringing every Church law-matter before his court, and to receive appeals in all Church disputes. He himself is judged by nobody (erC 1556; Prima sedes a nemine iudicatur), because there is no higher judge on earth than he. For the same reason there is no appeal to a higher court against the judgment of the Pope. The Church rejects an appeal from the Pope to General Council as this would mean putting General Council above the Pope. D 1830; crc 228, Par. 2. Cf. D 1323 (22nd Gallican Article)." (Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma by Ludwig Ott)
No surprises there. If what Fr. Martin did contravenes the letter and the spirit of the document, wouldn't a good teacher, for the sake of clarity, discipline him with the same level of publicity as Fr. Martin received when he misled the people he blessed and the errors he spread by his words and deeds? It's understandable that the Church wants to show mercy but where is the mercy for parents trying to raise young children in this fallen world? Are they expected to plough through long winded documents to explain to their children that what a hand picked representative of the Pope is doing doesn't represent Church teaching? I suppose it's none of our business.
Please read the discussion at www.antipope.com if you want to understand the requirements of UDG. It is actually very simple. In a nutshell, a Canon 332.2 "resignation" of the Pope does not automatically trigger a new papal election. People incorrectly assume that it does. A Pope can resign, but an election cannot be lawfully held until he dies. In the interim period, the other officials in the Apostolic See run the Church using limited powers granted to them by law. Regarding Canon 194, I agree that the "removal" from office cannot be "enforced" without a "declaration." But prior to that "declaration," the Pope is still "removed from ecclesiastical office by the law itself." What do you think the difference is between a "removal" and an "enforced removal." Hint: you can find the answer in the Canons on Excommunication. Regardless, the Pope who "defects from the Catholic faith" loses his ability to act in a legitimate way as Pope. And Catholics must never follow a Pope who is in a state of illegitimacy, even if he retains his residence in a building at the Vatican.
PNF, I am not going to read antipope website because nobody is competent to judge that Pope Francis is an anti-Pope. At least until he dies. Incorrect. Pope Benedict XV knew the rules. The Holy Roman Pontiff himself decreed new rules concerning future Papal elections. 37. I furthermore decree that, from the moment when the Apostolic See is lawfully vacant, [it is lawfully vacant when a Pope resigns] the Cardinal electors who are present must wait fifteen full days for those who are absent; the College of Cardinals is also granted the faculty to defer, for serious reasons, the beginning of the election for a few days more. But when a maximum of twenty days have elapsed from the beginning of the vacancy of the See, all the Cardinal electors present are obliged to proceed to the election. Your argument that the Holy Roman Pontiff is removed by the law itself does not apply because he is subject to Divine Law only, not to ecclesiastical laws. As the supreme lawgiver of the Church, the Pope is not legally bound by ecclesiastical decisions and usages, but by divine law alone. (Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma by Ludwig Ott) Q.E.D.
This is one of Mark’s best. Our Lady’s message to Pedro Regis on January 1, 2024, is extremely timely and meaningful. There is a good definition of the Authentic Magisterium, too. Thank you for posting.
Sorry InVeritatem, the Apostolic See is not vacant when the Pope resigns. See the following from 1983 Canon Law: Canon 361 In this Code, the term Apostolic See or Holy See refers not only to the Roman Pontiff but also to the Secretariat of State, the Council for the Public Affairs of the Church, and other institutes of the Roman Curia, unless it is otherwise apparent from the nature of the matter or the context of the words. Then read this from UDG: 14. According to the provisions of Article 6 of the Apostolic Constitution Pastor Bonus,13 at the death of the Pope all the heads of the Dicasteries of the Roman Curia — the Cardinal Secretary of State and the Cardinal Prefects, the Archbishop Presidents, together with the members of those Dicasteries — cease to exercise their office. An exception is made for the Camerlengo of Holy Roman Church and the Major Penitentiary, who continue to exercise their ordinary functions, submitting to the College of Cardinals matters that would have had to be referred to the Supreme Pontiff. Then read this from Pastor Bonus: Art. 6 — On the death of the Supreme Pontiff, all moderators and members of the dicasteries cease from their office. The camerlengo of the Roman Church and the major penitentiary are excepted, who expedite ordinary business and refer to the College of Cardinals those things which would have been referred to the Supreme Pontiff. So you see InVeritatem, the Apostolic See is not vacant until "the death of the Pope" because Canon 361 defines the "Apostolic See" to include other Curial officials who do not "cease from their office" until AFTER "the death of the Pope. QED
'Popesplainers direspect Francis by refusing to take him at his word'. (The WM Review) Thought that is a good one lol
He lost the respect of "take him at his word" a long time ago.....I'm afraid taking him at his word is no longer an option. Anymore than taking the word of a bad alcoholic who says he/she doesn't know where the rent money went....while trying to hide the bottles...
Firstly I can say that Medjugorje has changed me personally and has converted members of my family. My son as a young man in his 20s was a bit wild, going astray. He came back from a rock concert a bit under the weather and I persuaded him to go to the youth week in Medjugorje. He went because I had paid for everything protesting that he couldn't remember ever agreeing to go. The rest is history. He came home a different person. The girl who was sitting beside him on the plane is now his wife and he is very committed Catholic. I have had so many prayers and problems solved going to Medjugorje. I know some people will never accept but I truly believe Our Lady is there reaching out to her children. On the situation we now find ourselves in with the church I am trying to stand with Our Lady at the foot of the Cross. The Holy Church is being humiliated just as Jesus and Mary were humiliated at the crucifixion. We must remain there praying for all the shepherds. I don't think we can do anything else.
I honestly regret not having gone myself when the chance was there......there are so many many wonderful stories of skeptics who went "with someone" and returned with changed hearts. What beautiful gifts your son received....just amazing ~
My little brother first heard his call to the priesthood in Medjugorje at the age of 12. Having met some of the visionaries and attended Mary's apparitions, I can attest to the joy, peace, humility and simplicity of the visionaries and the true signs of Mary's presence. The birds stop making noise when she appears...and people present who are possessed can't help crying out and trying to get away. Also I'll tell a little story. I took my 4 year old son to Medjugorje many years ago. He was there with us during Mary's apparition, though he never said anything to me about it. He was only 4, after all. But a few years later when he was 7, we were walking through the neighborhood sprinkling holy water and praying the rosary for each person in our neighborhood. When we passed a particular house, I smelled the distinct warm smell of heavenly roses. I got goosebumps and knew it was Mary's presence because I'd smelled that before during one of her apparitions in Medjugorje (the first time I'd gone, before my son was born). I hadn't said anything at all yet when my son piped up, "Hey, why does it smell like Medjugorje?" That was a really neat moment because it confirmed for me that it was Mary, and my son not only remembered Medjugorje but had apparently smelled roses during her apparition though he'd never told me.
Children seem to see and remember so much.....it's always a wonder when they share something like that!!!!!
How wonderful maryrose, a great grace was bestowed upon your son. No one can deny that Medjugorje has produced good fruits. If the Vatican did not believe that something supernatural occurred, especially early on, they would have denounced it long ago. Medjugorje has not been without controversy, so I completely understand why the Vatican has been very cautious as their investigation continues. I pray that we will live to witness the lasting sign promised by our Holy Mother.
My apologies PNF, but your argument is false. The Apostolic See IS VACANT when the Pope resigns. You are simply quoting paragraphs from UDG which are consistent with your argument but you ignore those paragraphs which explicitly contradict and abrogate your false interpretation. Firstly, Pope Benedict most likely knew he was going to resign and he made explicit provision for the resignation of a Pope when he updated and changed the rules concerning the lawful election of the Roman Pontiff. As I said above, provision is already made for such a resignation in Cannon Law. 2. His Motu Proprio in 2013 derogates (replaces) the original UDG of St. John Paul II (1996). In fact if you try to download the UDG (1996), the Vatican website serves you the Motu Propriu updated version. 3. You quote paragraph 14 concerning the death of the Pontiff and you are claiming that the Apostolic See is not vacant. However, in paragraphs 2 and 3 the rules were updated to state that the Apostolic See IS VACANT when a Pope resigns. "2. During the vacancy of the Apostolic See, the government of the Church is entrusted to the College of Cardinals solely for the dispatch of ordinary business ... 3. I further establish that the College of Cardinals may make no dispositions whatsoever concerning the rights of the Apostolic See and of the Roman Church, much less allow any of these rights to lapse, either directly or indirectly, even though it be to resolve disputes or to prosecute actions perpetrated against these same rights AFTER the death OR valid resignation of the Pope.12 All the Cardinals are obliged to defend these rights." I remind you that this means: "During the vacancy of the Apostolic See ... AFTER the death of the Pope OR AFTER the valid resignation of the Pope". So are you going to argue that Pope Benedict XVI and his Cannon lawyers were somehow not aware of Article 6 of Pastor Bonus and that there is some internal inconsistency in the new UDG which invalidates it? No. The new Motu Propriu refrrences Pastor Bonus and it needs to be read in the light of the new rules concerning the resignation of a Pontiff, i.e., "On the death or valid resignation of the Supreme Pontiff". 4. If there were any doubt concerning the legitimacy of the new rules concerning the vacancy of the Apostolic See due to resignation of the Pope, it is emphasised again in paragraph 77: "77. I decree that the dispositions concerning everything that precedes the election of the Roman Pontiff and the carrying out of the election itself must be observed in full, even if the VACANCY of the Apostolic See should occur as a result of the resignation of the Supreme Pontiff, in accordance with the provisions of Canon 333 § 2 of the Code of Canon Law and Canon 44 § 2 of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches" Finally, I would like to point out that just as the Pope is not subject to Cannon Law, Cannon 349 acknowledges that the election of the Roman Pontiff is done in accordance with a 'special law' (UDG). Q.E.D. I rest my case.
