2 thoughts on “Will “Pope” Francis’ Successor Be a Catholic”
Can the Cardinals create another Church?
The Catholic Church has been attacked by the enemies of truth from the very beginning. Christ healed the sick, restored sight to the blind, made the deaf hear and the lame walk. — But the enemies of truth said: He has a devil. It is by the hand of Satan that he casts out demons.
Christ, Who was meek and discrete in speech, nevertheless, reserved His maximum anger for these sons of Lucifer, saying that those who blaspheme the works of the Holy Spirit shall never be forgiven, not in this world, or in the world to come.
They crucified Him, but He rose from the Dead. — But these enemies of truth said: His disciples stole the body and invented the story of the Resurrection. The guards, who were sleeping, are the witnesses of it all!
Liars simply cannot get their narrative to fit reality, because when you deny reality, your narrative no longer fits all the facts.
Such are the liars of of own age.
Pope Benedict XVI renounced the ministry that was entrusted to him. — But the enemies of truth say he renounced the papacy.
Canon 332 §2 says that a Roman Pontiff renounces, when he renounces his munus. — But they says ministerium = munus.
Canon 1331 says that an excommunicate cannot hold a dignitas, officium or munus. An affirmation which demonstrates that ministerium does not equal munus, and to renounce ministerium is not to renounce either office or munus or any dignity. — But they say that Canon law was never meant to be precise.
Canon 17 says that all words in the Code of Canon Law must be interpreted properly. — But they say that there are no definitions in Canon Law and if you read it like a book of theology, you will misinterpret it.
The Palmarian Church vs. the Bergoglian Church
The Catholic Church is founded upon truth, indeed, upon Truth Himself, because God is Truth and the Son of God is the Truth of God. This is why the Church exists where the laws of the Church say She exists. That is how we know that this man is a bishop and that man is a priest, but that that bishop is a schismatic and that priest is a fraud.
It’s in Canon Law.
But there are some “Churches” which appear to be Churches. Let’s compare and contrast them.
One is the Church of Palmar de Troya in Spain. It is little known and very secretive. Some of those who alleged to have visions went on to found an Order of Carmelites. Several of the men involved were ordained priests by a Catholic Bishop. Then, some of these were consecrated Bishops by the same Monsignor. And one day, one of these illicitly consecrated Bishops said he had a vision of Christ in which Christ made him the Pope. Since that time there have been 3 successors. And it is no secret that the first one was well known among the sodomites of Madrid.
If we apply the Code of Canon Law to this phenomena, we see that this “church” is a schismatic Church. If you examine their beliefs and practices you will find perhaps — I have not done the study — that something they teach is contrary to the teaching of the Church. In short, you can conclude by such a comparison, that the Church of Palmar de Troya is a false church. It is not the Catholic Church. It was not founded by Jesus Christ.
The other is the Church of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. It is very well known and not very secretive. All of the Cardinals and Bishops involved claim that he was elected in a legitimate Conclave in 2013, even though Pope Benedict XVI was still alive and had not yet said to anyone alive on Earth, then or now, “I renounce the petrine munus”.
If you examine the beliefs and practices of the Bergoglian Church, you will find that at Mass they offer the ritual to Pope Francis, the name Bergoglio took after his allegedly valid election. They openly admit that the Eucharist can be given to public sinners, in defiance of the Council of Trent which excommunicated all who preach such a lie and do such a horrible thing. They are giving blessings to sodomites and are holding a Synod in Germany which wants to approve the ordination of married men and the Sacrament of Matrimony for sodomites and lesbians. — If you compare the official beliefs and practices of the Bergoglian Church it is clear that every year is it more in opposition to the teachings of the Catholic Church and that it recognizes someone uncanonically elected as its head, in defiance of everything written in the Code of Canon Law on the topic. Thus, it is a false Church, it was not founded by Jesus Christ.
A Comparison
Both of these churches can easily be recognized as false churches by the same rule of measure: Canon Law. That is why, when Christ said, Whatsoever you bind upon earth, shall be bound also in Heaven, He was not only giving to Peter and his legitimate valid Successors a tremendous power, He was also giving all of His faithful an infallibly clear objective and visible criterion by which we can discern WHO is the true Pope and HOW to know it. We are not dealing with a circumstance or event about which Canon Law is silent. The renunciation of a Pope is defined in Canon Law as to what it is and when it happens validly. — If we ignore that, we will end up in a Palmarian Church founded by the former Cardinals and Bishops of the Catholic Church
A Necessary Conclusion
All Cardinals and Bishops and Priests who want to remain in the Catholic Church need to reaffirm their adhesion to Canon Law and begin to follow through with what it says. Just as in life, if we remain silent and do not profess our faith and act it out, we shall be judged damned for all eternity, because our silence is equivalent to a denial, so in regards to the false claims of the Bergoglian Church, if we fail to apply Canon Law, Christ will recall His words to Saint Peter, and then send us to the bottomless pit, were worms never die, and the flames are never extinguished.
Canon Law, Editorials
Can the Cardinals create another Church?
February 7, 2020 From Rome Editor 5 Comments
By Br. Alexis Bugnolo
These excerpts from the article posted here above are precisely the points that need to be recognized as THE INDISPUTABLE TRUTH WHICH CAN BE RECOGNIZED BY ONE OF GOOD WILL WHO SEEKS TO FIND THE TRUTH. THE SALVATION OF SOULS IS THE MAIN GOAL IN THIS TIME OF CRISIS WITHIN AND OUTSIDE THE ONE, HOLY, CATHOLIC, and APOSTOLIC CHURCH.
THOSE WHO DENY THAT BENEDICT XVI REMAINS THE POPE MAY BE IN A SERIOUS STATE OF SCHISM FROM THE TRUE POPE IF THEY DO NOT EXERCISE THEIR DUTY TO SEEK THE TRUTH IN THE MOST DILIGENT AND CONSCIENTIOUS WAY POSSIBLE.
Here is the excerpted parts of the article:
Canon Law
Will Pope Francis’ successor be a Catholic?
February 7, 2020 From Rome Editor 9 Comments
By Br. Alexis Bugnolo
The problem with any successor of Bergoglio is the same as the problem with Bergoglio. This problem, canonically, arises from Canons 359 and 17. Because Canon 359 says there cannot a Conclave until there is a sede vacante, that is, until there is no longer anyone who is the Roman Pontiff, the Throne of Peter must be empty. Canon 17 says to understand what that means we need to read the Code of Canon Law. Therein, we see that in Canons 331, 332, 334, and 749, the Roman Pontiff is spoken of as holding a munus. Nowhere does it speak of a Papal Office, or of the Office of the Pope. It only speaks of the Papal or Petrine Munus. The man who holds it is, therefore, the Roman Pontiff.
So on account of canon 17, Canon 359 means that no Conclave can be called legitimately by the Cardinals until the man who held the Petrine Munus says, in accord with Canon 359: I renounce my munus, or words equivalent such as, I renounce the petrine munus.
Perhaps there is some language in which munus has a cognate or equivalent term, but in modern English it does not exist, so I use it of necessity, in my articles. It does not exist in Italian either.
The Code of Canon Law, in canon 17, therefore imposes a clear and certain standard for a legitimate Conclave — to be called during a sede vacante — and a clear and certain standard as when to recognize that a pope is no longer pope — he must be dead or have renounced the petrine munus.
Obviously, you would be insane to play games with words and renounce something else, and leave it to history to find out whether you renounced or did not renounce. But that is the situation we are in. That is why Canon 332 in paragraph 2, says that the renunciation is only valid if it manifests a renunciation of petrine munus.
An unsolveable problem Post Factum
The canonical problem any successor of Bergolio has will therefore be the same. Because, when Bergoglio resigns or dies in power, his death will not cause a sede vacante, because he was never the Pope. And he was never the Pope because he was elected while another Pope still reigned. And Another pope still reigned, because Pope Benedict renounced only the ministerium and kept the office, the dignity, the munus, and the power of the papacy for himself. Therefore, no petrine sucession took place, and hence Bergoglio was never the Roman Pontiff according to the norms of Canon Law. It follows, then, with his departure the Cardinals cannot act.
The College of Cardinals is also compromised. I mean to say, that even if both Benedict and Bergoglio were dead, it could not validly elect a Roman Pontiff. This is because of the Papal Law on Conclaves, by Pope John Paul II, which declares invalid the election of anyone made in a Conclave into which ANYONE WHOMSOEVER who is not a Cardinal Elector was admitted. But the men whom Bergoglio dared to make Cardinals are not Cardinals, because he has no authority to make them. And Pope Benedict having renounced the petrine ministry, has explicitly posited a juridical act which denies his consent to anything which happened after Feb. 28, 2013. So these man are not Cardinals and if they enter the Conclave the election will be invalid.
So after the fact — post factum, in Latin — there is no cure for the Bergoglian Church. The only true successor will be the one elected after the valid resignation or death of Pope Benedict XVI.
Can the Cardinals create another Church?
The Catholic Church has been attacked by the enemies of truth from the very beginning. Christ healed the sick, restored sight to the blind, made the deaf hear and the lame walk. — But the enemies of truth said: He has a devil. It is by the hand of Satan that he casts out demons.
Christ, Who was meek and discrete in speech, nevertheless, reserved His maximum anger for these sons of Lucifer, saying that those who blaspheme the works of the Holy Spirit shall never be forgiven, not in this world, or in the world to come.
They crucified Him, but He rose from the Dead. — But these enemies of truth said: His disciples stole the body and invented the story of the Resurrection. The guards, who were sleeping, are the witnesses of it all!
Liars simply cannot get their narrative to fit reality, because when you deny reality, your narrative no longer fits all the facts.
Such are the liars of of own age.
Pope Benedict XVI renounced the ministry that was entrusted to him. — But the enemies of truth say he renounced the papacy.
Canon 332 §2 says that a Roman Pontiff renounces, when he renounces his munus. — But they says ministerium = munus.
Canon 1331 says that an excommunicate cannot hold a dignitas, officium or munus. An affirmation which demonstrates that ministerium does not equal munus, and to renounce ministerium is not to renounce either office or munus or any dignity. — But they say that Canon law was never meant to be precise.
Canon 17 says that all words in the Code of Canon Law must be interpreted properly. — But they say that there are no definitions in Canon Law and if you read it like a book of theology, you will misinterpret it.
The Palmarian Church vs. the Bergoglian Church
The Catholic Church is founded upon truth, indeed, upon Truth Himself, because God is Truth and the Son of God is the Truth of God. This is why the Church exists where the laws of the Church say She exists. That is how we know that this man is a bishop and that man is a priest, but that that bishop is a schismatic and that priest is a fraud.
It’s in Canon Law.
But there are some “Churches” which appear to be Churches. Let’s compare and contrast them.
One is the Church of Palmar de Troya in Spain. It is little known and very secretive. Some of those who alleged to have visions went on to found an Order of Carmelites. Several of the men involved were ordained priests by a Catholic Bishop. Then, some of these were consecrated Bishops by the same Monsignor. And one day, one of these illicitly consecrated Bishops said he had a vision of Christ in which Christ made him the Pope. Since that time there have been 3 successors. And it is no secret that the first one was well known among the sodomites of Madrid.
If we apply the Code of Canon Law to this phenomena, we see that this “church” is a schismatic Church. If you examine their beliefs and practices you will find perhaps — I have not done the study — that something they teach is contrary to the teaching of the Church. In short, you can conclude by such a comparison, that the Church of Palmar de Troya is a false church. It is not the Catholic Church. It was not founded by Jesus Christ.
The other is the Church of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. It is very well known and not very secretive. All of the Cardinals and Bishops involved claim that he was elected in a legitimate Conclave in 2013, even though Pope Benedict XVI was still alive and had not yet said to anyone alive on Earth, then or now, “I renounce the petrine munus”.
If you examine the beliefs and practices of the Bergoglian Church, you will find that at Mass they offer the ritual to Pope Francis, the name Bergoglio took after his allegedly valid election. They openly admit that the Eucharist can be given to public sinners, in defiance of the Council of Trent which excommunicated all who preach such a lie and do such a horrible thing. They are giving blessings to sodomites and are holding a Synod in Germany which wants to approve the ordination of married men and the Sacrament of Matrimony for sodomites and lesbians. — If you compare the official beliefs and practices of the Bergoglian Church it is clear that every year is it more in opposition to the teachings of the Catholic Church and that it recognizes someone uncanonically elected as its head, in defiance of everything written in the Code of Canon Law on the topic. Thus, it is a false Church, it was not founded by Jesus Christ.
A Comparison
Both of these churches can easily be recognized as false churches by the same rule of measure: Canon Law. That is why, when Christ said, Whatsoever you bind upon earth, shall be bound also in Heaven, He was not only giving to Peter and his legitimate valid Successors a tremendous power, He was also giving all of His faithful an infallibly clear objective and visible criterion by which we can discern WHO is the true Pope and HOW to know it. We are not dealing with a circumstance or event about which Canon Law is silent. The renunciation of a Pope is defined in Canon Law as to what it is and when it happens validly. — If we ignore that, we will end up in a Palmarian Church founded by the former Cardinals and Bishops of the Catholic Church
A Necessary Conclusion
All Cardinals and Bishops and Priests who want to remain in the Catholic Church need to reaffirm their adhesion to Canon Law and begin to follow through with what it says. Just as in life, if we remain silent and do not profess our faith and act it out, we shall be judged damned for all eternity, because our silence is equivalent to a denial, so in regards to the false claims of the Bergoglian Church, if we fail to apply Canon Law, Christ will recall His words to Saint Peter, and then send us to the bottomless pit, were worms never die, and the flames are never extinguished.
Canon Law, Editorials
Can the Cardinals create another Church?
February 7, 2020 From Rome Editor 5 Comments
By Br. Alexis Bugnolo
These excerpts from the article posted here above are precisely the points that need to be recognized as THE INDISPUTABLE TRUTH WHICH CAN BE RECOGNIZED BY ONE OF GOOD WILL WHO SEEKS TO FIND THE TRUTH. THE SALVATION OF SOULS IS THE MAIN GOAL IN THIS TIME OF CRISIS WITHIN AND OUTSIDE THE ONE, HOLY, CATHOLIC, and APOSTOLIC CHURCH.
THOSE WHO DENY THAT BENEDICT XVI REMAINS THE POPE MAY BE IN A SERIOUS STATE OF SCHISM FROM THE TRUE POPE IF THEY DO NOT EXERCISE THEIR DUTY TO SEEK THE TRUTH IN THE MOST DILIGENT AND CONSCIENTIOUS WAY POSSIBLE.
Here is the excerpted parts of the article:
Canon Law
Will Pope Francis’ successor be a Catholic?
February 7, 2020 From Rome Editor 9 Comments
By Br. Alexis Bugnolo
The problem with any successor of Bergoglio is the same as the problem with Bergoglio. This problem, canonically, arises from Canons 359 and 17. Because Canon 359 says there cannot a Conclave until there is a sede vacante, that is, until there is no longer anyone who is the Roman Pontiff, the Throne of Peter must be empty. Canon 17 says to understand what that means we need to read the Code of Canon Law. Therein, we see that in Canons 331, 332, 334, and 749, the Roman Pontiff is spoken of as holding a munus. Nowhere does it speak of a Papal Office, or of the Office of the Pope. It only speaks of the Papal or Petrine Munus. The man who holds it is, therefore, the Roman Pontiff.
So on account of canon 17, Canon 359 means that no Conclave can be called legitimately by the Cardinals until the man who held the Petrine Munus says, in accord with Canon 359: I renounce my munus, or words equivalent such as, I renounce the petrine munus.
Perhaps there is some language in which munus has a cognate or equivalent term, but in modern English it does not exist, so I use it of necessity, in my articles. It does not exist in Italian either.
The Code of Canon Law, in canon 17, therefore imposes a clear and certain standard for a legitimate Conclave — to be called during a sede vacante — and a clear and certain standard as when to recognize that a pope is no longer pope — he must be dead or have renounced the petrine munus.
Obviously, you would be insane to play games with words and renounce something else, and leave it to history to find out whether you renounced or did not renounce. But that is the situation we are in. That is why Canon 332 in paragraph 2, says that the renunciation is only valid if it manifests a renunciation of petrine munus.
An unsolveable problem Post Factum
The canonical problem any successor of Bergolio has will therefore be the same. Because, when Bergoglio resigns or dies in power, his death will not cause a sede vacante, because he was never the Pope. And he was never the Pope because he was elected while another Pope still reigned. And Another pope still reigned, because Pope Benedict renounced only the ministerium and kept the office, the dignity, the munus, and the power of the papacy for himself. Therefore, no petrine sucession took place, and hence Bergoglio was never the Roman Pontiff according to the norms of Canon Law. It follows, then, with his departure the Cardinals cannot act.
The College of Cardinals is also compromised. I mean to say, that even if both Benedict and Bergoglio were dead, it could not validly elect a Roman Pontiff. This is because of the Papal Law on Conclaves, by Pope John Paul II, which declares invalid the election of anyone made in a Conclave into which ANYONE WHOMSOEVER who is not a Cardinal Elector was admitted. But the men whom Bergoglio dared to make Cardinals are not Cardinals, because he has no authority to make them. And Pope Benedict having renounced the petrine ministry, has explicitly posited a juridical act which denies his consent to anything which happened after Feb. 28, 2013. So these man are not Cardinals and if they enter the Conclave the election will be invalid.
So after the fact — post factum, in Latin — there is no cure for the Bergoglian Church. The only true successor will be the one elected after the valid resignation or death of Pope Benedict XVI.