From:With respect, Cardinal Müller, it's not "impossible" by Christopher A. Ferrara
June 1, 2017 http://www.fatimaperspectives.com/fe/perspective1020.asp
What is impossible, as the renowned canonist Ed Peters observes, is that “a pope commits the Church to a heresy. However grave might be the consequences for a pope falling into heresy, the Church herself cannot fall into heresy at his hands or anyone else’s. Deo gratias.”
Lionel: The Church itself has fallen into heresy including Pope Francis and Christopher Ferrara.They are not aware of an irrational premise in their reasoning which creates new doctrines and a new theology.
But, as Peters further observes, while the Holy Ghost would never permit a Pope to impose heresy upon the Church Universal, “the canonical tradition yet recognizes (and history suggests) that a given pope could fall into personal heresy and that he might even promote such heresy publicly, which brings us to some thoughts on those possibilities.”
Lionel: The two popes are in heresy and they are imposing it upon the people. The popes from Pius XII to Francis have been in doctrinal heresy which is created with a new theology, based on an irrational philosophy.
Pope Benedict XVI confirmed this on March 2016 in daily Avvenire when he said that with Vatican Council II there was a development of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. (EENS). The dogma was no more like it was for the missionaries of the 16th century and this is accepted by the present two popes.He confirmed magisterial heresy created by the use of an irrational premise to elicit a non traditional conclusion, in the interpretation of Vatican Council II and the dogma EENS in particular.The same irrationality is used to interpret other magisterial documents and it is accepted by the whole Church.
I do not here contend, although others may, that Francis has publicly promoted heresy in the strict sense, which (as Peters notes) is defined by canon law as “the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth that must be believed by divine and catholic faith. 1983 CIC 751.”
Lionel: Chris Ferrara cannot contend that Pope Francis is in heresy since he does not know what is the specific cause of the heresy, in salvation theology.He cannot know since he himself ,like Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX bishops and priests, uses the same irrational reasoning to create heretical conclusions which in general, is accepted in the whole Church.
Rather, I simply note, contra Cardinal Müller, what Peters notes, quoting Wrenn’s canonical commentary:
“‘Should, indeed, the pope fall into heresy, it is understood that he would lose his office. To fall from Peter’s faith is to fall from his chair.’ ….
Lionel: For the two popes and Chris Ferrara the dogma EENS, which has been defined by three Church Councils and is a de fide teaching of the Church, is no more like it was for the magisterium of the 16th century.Effectively and doctrinally it has been changed.This is heresy. The magisterium has changed it and is now saying so in public. They have rejected EENS with invisible baptism of desire for example, being a visible exception.So EENS as it was known for centuries is no more. This is heresy.
For the two popes, Chris Ferrara and the SSPX bishops the Nicene Creed has been changed to 'I believe in three or more baptisms, which replace the baptism of water and are examples of salvation outside the Church. They are the baptisms of desire, blood, seeds of the Word etc.' This is the new understanding of the Nicene Creed.
For the two popes and Chris Ferrara,traditionalists, sedevacantists and liberals in general Vatican Council II can only be interpreted with irrational Cushingism.They have not and will not interpret Vatican Council II with rational and traditional Feeenyism, as did the missionaries in the 16th century.
This is all first class heresy in the hierarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II.This is heresy in the Church at large and the the heresy of the two popes and the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF), Vatican.
I interpret the dogma EENS, the Nicene Creed and Vatican Council II with Feeneyite reasoning and theology.So I am in harmony with the 16th century magisterium.There is no rupture with Tradition for me. Pre and post Vatican Council II theology and doctrine are the same for me.________________________________________________
“To be sure, all admit that in talking about popes falling into heresy we are talking [about] a very remote scenario…. And the great Felix Cappello, Summa Iuris I (1949) n. 309, thought that the possibility of a pope falling into public heresy should be ‘entirely dismissed given the special love of God for the Church of Christ [lest] the Church fall into the greatest danger.’
Lionel: I have shown above how the two popes are in heresy and this heretical interpretation of the dogma EENS, the Nicene Creed and Vatican Council II is suported by Prefect of the CDF,Cardinal Gerhard Muller. He wants the SSPX and the Franciscans of the Immaculate to formally accept all this heresy, to have their situation regularised by his office.If bishops and priests affirm Vatican Council II , the Nicene Creed and the dogma EENS, like me, they could be suspended.________________________________________________
But Cappello’s confidence (at least in the scope of divine protection against heretical popes) was not shared by his co-religionist, the incomparable Franz Wernz, whose summary of the various canonical schools of thought about the possibility of a papal fall from office due to heresy is instructive.“After reviewing canonical norms on loss of papal office due to resignation or insanity, Wernz-Vidal, IUS CANONICUM II (1928), n. 453, considers the impact of personal heresy on the part of a pope (emphasis and citations omitted):“‘Through heresy notoriously and openly expressed, the Roman Pontiff, should he fall into such, is, by that very fact, and before any declaratory sentence of the Church, deprived of his power of jurisdiction…. I know of no author coming after Wernz who disputes this analysis.’” [paragraph breaks added]
Lionel: In March 2016 Pope Benedict openly, and for me notoriously, expressed heresy supported by Pope Francis.
I have reported this before and there has been no denial from the CDF or the Vatican .Nor has there been any denial from any of the traditionalists or sedevacantists.There has been no official denial also from any one in the SSPX or the FSSP.I assume the common error is obvious to all of them, including Chris Ferrara.No one wants to talk about it in public.______________________________________________
I do not touch here upon the question of how such self-deposition of a Pope on account of personal heresy would be declared by the Church. That is another discussion entirely. But if the canonists agree that it is possible for a Pope to fall into personal heresy, it is certainly not impossible, as the Cardinal opines, that a wayward Pope would “present a doctrine which is plainly against the words of Jesus Christ,” even if he dares not impose his error upon the Church.
Lionel: Jesus in Mark 16:16 has said that he who does not believe will be condemned and in John 3:5 that all need the baptism of water for salvation. For the two popes all do not need the baptism of water in the Catholic Church for salvation.There are exceptions.1) The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 mentioned exceptions of the baptism of desire and blood and being saved in invincible ignorance and 2) these exceptions were also mentioned in Vatican Council II, including LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc.So the two popes have contradicted Jesus by presenting exceptions based on invisible cases being visible exceptions to Jesus' teachings in Mk.16:16 and John 3:5.
Such is the case with AL, which imposes nothing upon the Church, but does open the door to the overthrow of the Church’s bimillenial Eucharistic discipline by any bishop so inclined, while others hold the line.
Lionel: Amoris Laetitia uses philosophical subjectivism to change moral theology and Vatican Council II and the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 also uses philosophical subjectivism to change salvation theology.So we have the faith changed with actual doctrine on salvation being changed.This is done with a new and irrational theology approved by the two popes.-L.A
Suffice it to say that the Bergoglian pontificate is a dramatic and historically unique demonstration of the strict limits of papal infallibility, here almost daily exceeded. And this indeed must be part of the unparalleled ecclesial crisis the Third Secret foretells.-Chris Ferrara