[ 0 → 4] TrapCast Express [ 30 → 38] There were six lay speakers in total, and one of them was Claudio Pierantoni, a professor of medieval philosophy at the University of Chile. [ 39 → 52] His presentation was entitled, The Need for Consistency Between Magisterium and Tradition, Examples from History, and it was posted at the Rarate Cheli blog on April 23rd. [ 52 → 60] Once again, trying to find some sort of historical precedent for the doctrinal disaster that is Pope Francis. [ 60 → 67] Pierantoni brought up the cases of, you guessed it, Popes Liberius and Honorius I. [ 68 → 78] Regarding Pope Honorius, he quotes, of course, the Third Council of Constantinople in 681, which includes, it is true, a condemnation of Pope Honorius as a heretic, [ 78 → 89] but when the council issued this condemnation on March 28th, 681, it did so without the Pope, because there was no Pope reigning at the time. [ 90 → 90] It was... [ 90 → 96] And without the approval of the Pope, a council is practically worthless. [ 96 → 105] The next Pope, Leo II, was elected on August 17th of 682, almost a year after the council was over. [ 106 → 120] And when he, Pope Leo II, approved the council, he approved the condemnation of Pope Honorius only insofar as Honorius was guilty of negligence by not sufficiently suppressing, [ 120 → 126] and unwittingly favoring the heresy of monothelitism because of how he expressed himself in a letter [ 126 → 135] to the patriarch Sergius. Now, Pierantoni more or less says as much, but then he also says that [ 135 → 143] Poponorius was condemned for heresy. Well, not really. He was condemned for abetting heresy, [ 143 → 150] for not doing enough to stamp it out. A lot of ink has been spilled over the years about the [ 150 → 156] Poponorius case. On Novels Art or Watch, we are going to publish at some point a big post on it [ 156 → 163] for our series, The Heretical Popes, of which we've published only one part so far on Pope [ 163 → 169] Adrian VI. The reason it's taking so long is that this is the kind of thing you need to do, [ 169 → 172] not quickly, but thoroughly, else nothing is gained. [ 172 → 178] In the meantime, people interested in the facts about the Poponorius case [ 178 → 187] may want to turn to Volume 5 of The History of the Councils of the Church by the Right [ 187 → 197] Reverend Charles Joseph Heffaly. You can find that for free online at books.google.com. Again, [ 197 → 202] that's Volume 5 of A History of the Councils of the Church by [ 202 → 202] Poponorius. [ 202 → 211] Father Charles Heffaly, and that's H-E-F-E-L-E. By the way, these historical parallels that people [ 211 → 218] are always trying to find in order to shed some light on what to do with Francis will all fail [ 218 → 226] because Francis is a manifest public heretic, and such a thing has never happened before, [ 226 → 232] meaning there has never been a public manifest heretic who was also a [ 232 → 239] valid pope at the same time, because such a thing is an impossibility. It's like saying [ 239 → 245] there can be a non-Catholic Catholic. No, there can't. It's a contradiction in terms. [ 246 → 254] Now, regarding Poponorius' letter to Sergius, even if it had contained heresy, which it didn't, [ 254 → 262] but even if it had, it was not a public letter, but a private one. It wasn't even discovered, [ 262 → 272] or made public at least, until after Poponorius had already died. So, even if it were a heretical [ 272 → 278] document, it would not have made Poponorius a public heretic. So, on that score alone, [ 278 → 286] there is no comparison with Francis. But, you know, this whole correcting and condemning a [ 286 → 292] heretical pope thing that many people are envisioning is really flawed in principle. Think about it. [ 292 → 300] If Poponorius had been a heretic and condemned as one by Pope Leo II, how would a Catholic know [ 300 → 307] if perhaps in the future Pope Leo II would not be condemned as a heretic and Honorius vindicated [ 307 → 315] again? See, once you admit the idea that a pope can be a heretic and still be a true pope, it's over. [ 316 → 320] But Pierre-Antoni does make a very good point in his presentation. He says, [ 320 → 321] quote, [ 322 → 345] Precisely. But now Pierre-Antoni also needs to apply this to his very own case. Do you really [ 345 → 352] think that the pope could now withdraw Amoris Laetitia or correct the heresies in it and all [ 352 → 352] would be fine? [ 352 → 359] Fixed? Nuh-uh. That balloon has already been popped. It's over. Remember, it's really not [ 359 → 366] just about communion for unrepentant adulterers. It's about the entire foundation of Catholic [ 366 → 374] morality. And Pierre-Antoni says as much. In Amoris Laetitia, Francis has basically turned [ 374 → 382] the Ten Commandments into the Ten Ideal Suggestions. And he's transformed the very notion of sin [ 382 → 390] from a voluntary transgression of the divine law into an attempt at virtue that has not quite [ 390 → 397] succeeded in reaching its goal. I mean, that document, Amoris Laetitia, is blatantly and [ 397 → 404] fundamentally heretical. And that's not just us Sedevacanthes saying that. Even conservative [ 404 → 410] nobles-ordos have used the word heresy to describe the content of Amoris Laetitia. [ 411 → 412] So, by, [ 412 → 419] correcting, as it were, Amoris Laetitia, nothing would be gained at all. The horse is already out [ 419 → 425] of the barn. You can close the barn door now all you want, and you can put extra security locks on [ 425 → 433] it and whatever, but it's already too late. The doctrine that the papal magisterium can safely [ 433 → 440] be followed at all times has already been violated. To try to fix it now by means of a correction [ 440 → 441] after the fact won't be easy. So, I'm going to try to fix it now by means of a correction after the [ 441 → 442] fact won't be easy. So, I'm going to try to fix it now by means of a correction after the fact won't [ 442 → 449] accomplish anything. And as for the accusation that Pope Liberius was a heretic and excommunicated [ 449 → 457] St. Athanasius, John Daly has completely dismantled that myth. And you can find all [ 457 → 463] the evidence. It's very well documented. You can find all that evidence on our blog at [ 463 → 472] NovusOrdoWatch.org slash wire. NovusOrdoWatch.org slash wire. Just type Pope Liberius. [ 472 → 477] Just type Pope Liberius into the search box at the top right, and you will get the posts pertaining [ 477 → 486] to that issue. You know, one thing I'd like to know is, why are people making such a big fuss [ 486 → 493] about Amor's Laetitia and yet are virtually silent on all of France's other heresies and blasphemies? [ 494 → 501] Why is there a conference on Amor's Laetitia and not one on France's naturalism, his ecumenism of [ 501 → 502] blood, his indignation, his indignation, his indignation, his indignation, his indignation, his [ 502 → 510] indifferentism, and so forth? This odd double standard is nothing new, though. Where were the [ 510 → 517] conferences, the petitions, the outrage when Joseph Ratzinger as Archbishop of Munich denied [ 517 → 523] Catholic teaching on original sin, for example? When as the head of the Congregation for the [ 523 → 530] Destruction of the Faith, he denied the dogma of papal primacy? When as Pope Benedict XVI, [ 530 → 532] he said that he has respect for the [ 532 → 539] Muslim Koran, which is heretical and blasphemous? Where was the outrage, where were the conferences [ 539 → 545] and the petitions when Pope John Paul II claimed that non-Christians' firm adherence to their [ 545 → 553] errors is the effect of the Holy Ghost? Yeah, he said that in his 1979 encyclical, [ 553 → 559] Redemptor Hominis, number six. You can look it up on the Vatican website. John Paul II, [ 560 → 562] encyclical, Redemptor Hominis. [ 562 → 571] Number six. So, what is going on here? Why is the outrage so selective? Why is orthodoxy [ 571 → 576] always reduced to being orthodox only on matters of the Sixth and the Ninth Commandments? [ 578 → 585] Now, before we close, on a related note, everybody is so gung-ho about getting Francis to [ 585 → 592] answer the dubia or clarify Amoris Laetitia like we didn't long have all the clarity we need. [ 592 → 597] But what is the point? I mean, what would happen if he actually did answer the dubia? [ 599 → 605] Nothing, really. Because whichever side loses, so to speak, would simply resist. [ 606 → 609] And everything else would keep going on as before. [ 610 → 617] See, in the Novus Ordo Church, the papacy is not only completely useless, but actually the biggest [ 617 → 622] stumbling block to Catholicism. It's the biggest obstacle of orthodoxy. Have you ever noticed that? [ 622 → 630] I mean, all the Vatican II reforms came from the Vatican. And the funny thing is [ 630 → 637] that people keep getting told that they need to read this or that papal document in continuity [ 637 → 643] with tradition, right? Well, why don't they just write it in continuity with tradition? [ 644 → 651] How's that for a change? All right. Lastly, the idea of the fraternal correction [ 651 → 652] of the Vatican. So, what is the point of that? Well, the idea of the fraternal correction of the [ 652 → 661] In case he doesn't answer the dubia, well, here, too, you have to ask yourself, [ 661 → 668] what do these people think that that would accomplish? At best, they would have a bunch of [ 668 → 676] supposed cardinals in direct and public opposition to the supposed pope on a matter of doctrine. [ 676 → 682] And then what? The papal magisterium trumps any lesser magisterium in the [ 682 → 688] Catholic Church. So, for people who hold that Francis is the vicar of Christ, well, they would [ 688 → 695] actually have to go with him, with Francis. Welcome to the papacy. So, that whole fraternal [ 695 → 703] correction thing wouldn't accomplish anything either. So, folks, in the end, it's all a big [ 703 → 710] dog and pony show for nothing. All it accomplishes is it distracts you from the reality that the [ 710 → 712] Vatican II sect is a fraud. And so, you have to go with him. And so, you have to go with him. And so, [ 712 → 718] Francis is not the pope of the Catholic Church. They always need to give traditionalists in their [ 718 → 723] church something to hang their hopes on, to make sure they don't become set of accountants. It's [ 723 → 729] worked for them for decades, and they will continue using the strategy for as long as [ 729 → 735] people still fall for it. Don't be one of them. Tradcast Express is a production of [ 735 → 741] Novus Ordo Watch. Check us out at tradcast.org. And if you like what we're doing, please consider [ 741 → 742] making a tax. [ 742 → 745] Donate at novusortowatch.org.