Tradcast Express
And this is the best part of holding these heresies pertinaciously.
In other words, this time around they've upped the ante and made it clear that it's not just material heresy they're talking about, but formal heresy.
They're saying that France is knowingly, willfully, and stubbornly denies dogmas of the Catholic faith.
Well, no kidding.
But it's always good when someone other than...
The open letter bears the names of 19 signatories, but not a single one of them is a bishop or anything higher than a priest in the Vatican II Church.
So, no, Athanasius Schneider did not sign this one, and surprisingly, neither did Roberto de Mattei.
But then we'll probably soon read an interview with him on this very document in the near future, because that's just how things work in Novus Ordo land.
Among the more well-known names of the signatories are Deacon Nick Donnelly, Dr. Peter Kwasniewski, Dr. John Lamont, Brian McCall, the Rev. Aidan Nichols, and everybody's favorite, the Rev. John, look at me, I know Latin, Hunwick.
Now, as to the content of this public letter, it's addressed, as we already said, to the world's Novus Ordo bishops.
Which is unfortunate, because if there's...
Well, because if they did, I mean, they wouldn't be Novus Ordo, you know.
All right, I know that's not absolutely true for every single one of them, but you get the idea.
Well, after some introductory comments, the letter lists seven specific heretical propositions to which they say Francis subscribes.
Then they offer citations from the Church's Magisterium as to where those propositions are declared as incompatible.
With the Catholic faith, including, in some cases, even citations to Novus Ordo documents.
After that, they offer evidence from Francis' own writings, addresses, press conferences, homilies, and joint statements that show that he does indeed subscribe to these heresies.
Then they proceed to list instances where Francis' actions have confirmed the heresies in question, as well as other indicators of pertinacity.
The open letter closes...
The open letter closes with a specific request that the bishops take action against Francis.
In particular, the authors are urging them to admonish Francis publicly and, in the event that he does not repent, they are to, quote,
"...declare that he has committed the canonical delict of heresy and that he must suffer the canonical consequences of this crime," unquote.
Lastly, there is an appendix which tries to give a theological justification for the idea that...
"...the bishops can go ahead and take action against a pope."
Alright, well, forgive me for being cynical, but I don't think any more will come of this than what has come of all the other stuff before.
I mean, this isn't the first time we've seen this kind of thing, so I'm sure this will generate plenty of headlines for the next, I don't know, ten days or so, including the typical follow-up interviews with some of the signers.
And then you'll also have, of course, people like...
Schneider weighing in, right?
And Father Thomas Wynandi.
And then the matter will be discussed on Raymond Arroyo's program on EWTN.
And then there will be an article written by Dr. Robert Fastigi, who will tell the authors of this public letter why what they're saying is all a bunch of baloney.
And after two weeks or so, the whole matter will be forgotten and everyone will have moved on to other things.
Especially because Francis will have caused three more scandals in the meantime.
Folks, we've seen it all before.
So, remember all the things that transpired since the publication of Francis' exhortation Amoris Laetitia on April 8th, 2016?
Forty-five scholars wrote an open letter to the College of Bogus Ordo Cardinals accusing Francis of 19 heresies and other errors found in Amoris Laetitia.
And then a number of prominent pro-life personalities, including clergy, issued...
They issued what they called a plea to Pope Francis, which was a half-hour video clip in which each of them pleaded with Francis, the arsonist, to please put out the fire.
Then came the so-called dubia from cardinals Burke, Caferra, Meissner, and Braunmuller, in which they challenged Francis to explain how his teaching in Amoris Laetitia does not contradict established Catholic doctrine and dogma.
Well, we all know how Francis responded.
He responded to that with deafening silence.
He simply ignored it and has done so to this very day.
In late 2016, Cardinal Burke threatened a formal act of correction of Francis, which apparently consists in waiting for him to die because that act of correction never came.
In April of 2017, Cardinal Caferra sent a letter to Francis requesting a private audience with him.
To discuss the dubia.
And you can imagine how the Frankster responded to that.
Exactly the same way he responded to the dubia in the first place.
Namely, not at all.
Meanwhile, Caferra and Meissner have died, and the only remaining dubia cardinals are Braunmuller, age 90, and Burke, age 70.
Then another milestone came on August 11th, 2017, when 62 Novus Ordo scholars sent to Francis...
Their 25-page so-called filial correction, which has produced exactly zero in terms of remedying the situation.
As Francis naturally ignored this correction, the authors released the full text to the public on September 23rd, which triggered a lot of press coverage, discussion and debate, interviews, books on the issue even, and whatnot.
But of course, other than that, it accomplished absolutely nothing.
So, with all that in the past, and I may very well have forgotten a thing or two, please permit me not to get all that excited about this latest attempt by Novus Ordos to fight the man they believe is the lawful vicar of Christ.
Now, there's a lot to say about the actual content of the open letter, but I'll have to leave that for a blog post because that takes some time to put together.
But there's one thing I want to mention right now, and that's the author's curious claim that although it is...
That must determine that the Pope has become a heretic, and that this must be announced, quote,
At the same time, they're saying that, quote,
These actions do not need to be taken by all the bishops of the Catholic Church, or even by a majority of them.
A substantial and representative part of the faithful bishops of the Church would have the power to take these actions.
Oh yeah? Says who? Well, we're not told.
Have these people actually thought about what they're saying here?
This is a complete mess, and it has to be because it's based on faulty theology.
You cannot have an openly heretical Pope, meaning it is not possible that someone be Pope and a public heretic at the same time.
At any point, regardless of whether there's been a trial...
A declaration, an intervention, or anything else, it's not possible.
And this shows the absurdity of the whole matter because, for one thing, it cannot be done.
It's impossible for bishops to remove someone who is Pope from office.
It's impossible not only theologically, because they have no authority to do so,
they have no authority over the Pope, but also because no bishop can bind another bishop about something like that.
So unless the decision is...
If the decision is unanimous, you're just going to have some bishops agreeing and others disagreeing about whether the Pope is a heretic or not.
But then, as we've seen, the authors of the open letter hold that it wouldn't even require a majority of bishops to do that.
So a minority would suffice.
Well, isn't that convenient?
All that is needed is a substantial and representative part of the bishops.
Oh wait, no.
Not even...
Even that.
It's only a substantial and representative part of the faithful bishops that is needed.
And so, who will verify these made-up criteria?
Will it be the authors themselves?
Or will it be other Novus Ordo clergy they approve of?
I mean, I doubt they're going to want to let Blaise Cupich and James Martin make that determination, huh?
But it gets better still because they say at the very end, quote,
quote,
unquote.
So this is great.
Only a substantial part of the faithful bishops are needed to kick Francis to the curb.
But, surprise, only those are faithful bishops who actually...
who actually do it.
Or at least that's how it appears to them.
Well, you know, there is one objective surefire criterion for determining who is a faithful bishop in Catholic theology.
And that is whoever is recognized by the Pope as being in communion with him.
Ha ha.
Yeah, well, now do they have a problem or what?
You can't just make up your own criteria, you know?
It's a madhouse otherwise.
Now, think about what this would look like if the roles were reversed.
Imagine if Benedict XVI were the Novus Ordo Pope.
And instead of these semi-trads and conservatives, the people writing an open letter like that were Massimo Fagioli, Hans Küng, Richard Rohr, and other frightening characters like that.
Imagine they were lobbying their favorite pseudo-bishop.
Like Cupich, Forte, Baldessari, Marx, Maradiaga, Gumbelton, and Tagle.
To get Benedict XVI denounced and removed as a heretic or whatever.
What do you think these people's reaction would be now?
They would be yelling schism.
But, you know, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
So be careful what principle you make up as you go along.
Because it may just come back to bite you.
Tradcast Express is a production of Novus Ordo Watch.
Check us out at tradcast.org.
And if you like what we're doing, please consider making a tax-deductible contribution at novusordowatch.org.