Editor’s Note: Archbishop Fernandez has done the Church a favor by making it clear how deceptive, dishonest, heretical, erroneous, and malign Jorge Mario Bergoglio was during his anti-papacy. All these admissions will be evidence for his trial at the Provincial Council, which must be called within 60 days!
It can no longer be denied that Pope Francis is a sexually depraved man who surrounds himself with heretics and perverts out of a personal preference of sentiment.
This video is in the French language.
ENGLISH TRANSLATION
October 3, 2023
“The letter kills, but the Spirit quickens” (2 Cor 3:6)
Starting from this truth, exemplified many times by Jesus in exposing the hypocritical Pharisaism of the Sabbath’s literalist discipline, the Holy Church has never denied that the Word of God should be interpreted correctly.
But it is the same St. Peter who immediately seals the criterion always confirmed for the correctness of the interpretation:
“Know first of all this: no prophetic scripture should be subject to private explanation, for not by human will a prophecy was never brought, but moved by the Holy Spirit those men spoke from God.” (2Pt 1, 20-21)
It is therefore never possible to interpret the Word of God in a way that contradicts it.
The Holy Church in her Solemn Magisterium has always served the faith of believers exactly helping not to fall into the traps of those who, unwilling to accept the obvious meaning of what the Lord says, opposes it to other parts of the Word of God.
True theology is a way to help the faithful to understand the Authentic Magisterium even better.
If, on the other hand, theology becomes the law that interprets Scripture and the Magisterium in the light of the mentality of the world, we are evidently faced with the negation of both the primacy of the Word of God and of God’s faithfulness to His teaching.
If, like the response of Bergoglio and Fernandez to the reformulated Dubia of the cardinals, re-proposing the first answer, it is understood that the Church has the faculty to introduce teachings or even just practices different from the previous magisterium, as Cardinal observes. Muller is done as if the Holy Spirit could now reveal new ways of expressing the faith that directly contradicts those of all time.
This is not possible, it is a lie, because “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and always! Do not be mislead by different and peregrine doctrines” (Heb 13:8-9).
“Beloved, do not believe every inspiration, but test the inspirations, to test whether they really come from God, because many false prophets have appeared in the world. From this you can recognize the spirit of God: every spirit that recognizes that Jesus Christ came in the flesh is from God; every spirit that does not recognize Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist who, as you have heard, is coming, indeed he is already in the world” (1 Jn 4: 1-3).
The spirit that questions the Word of Jesus by virtue of the mentality of the world, of the new hermeneutics or of anything else they will invent, is the spirit of the antichrist.
Jesus has said several times that those who do not believe in John’s preaching will not be saved, and that without repentance they cannot be saved. Jesus said to them, “Truly I say to you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes go forward to you in the kingdom of God. For John came to you in the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him; but the tax collectors and the prostitutes believed him. You, on the contrary, have seen these things, but then you have not even regretted it so that you believe them.” (Mt 28, 31-32)
Clearly to say that one can administer the sacraments without asking for repentance means not recognizing Jesus who came into the flesh.
Always the Fathers of the Church saw in Jerusalem the prophetic figure of the Church:
Jesus said: Jerusalem, Jerusalem, that you kill the prophets and stone those who are sent to you, how many times have I wanted to gather your children, as a hen gathers the chicks under the wings, and you did not want to! Your house will be left to you deserted! For I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.” (Mt 23, 37-39)
More and more clearly we see the meaning of this prophecy, which evidently becomes referring to the Church in the parable that Jesus enunciates in near circumstances, the parable of the mines, in Luke 19:11 and following, which, referring to those servants who have misused their authority in the Church, says:
“And those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king, and bring them here and kill them before me” (Luc 19:27).
Let’s watch the return of our King!
Francis of Erasmus, Catholic Priest
Tarquinia, 3 October 2023, first vespers of St. Francis
by Br. Alexis Bugnolo
In the days before Christmas in the year of Our Lord One Thousand and Forty-Six, the King of the Germans, Henry III came to Sutri, Italy, in the environs of Viterbo to put in order the Roman Church.
As he descended with his armed knights into Italy, he sent emissaries to Pope Gregory VI to summon a provincial council there, to settle once and for all who was the real pope.
For in the year 1046, there were 3 claimants to the Papacy. One whom had been juridically elected, but sold the papacy and resigned, but then returned to claim it again. This was Pope Benedict IX, a teenager known for debauching himself with both sexes. Then, there was an errant Bishop who came to Rome and paid the clergy to acclaim him, so that they would have a decent man rather than this young perp. That was Pope Sylvester III. And then there was the Cardinal John Gratian, a wealthy man, who disgusted at the immoral depravity of the teenager Pope, offered to buy the papacy from him, so that he could be free to run off and marry his girlfriend. He accepted. This third claimant was Pope Gregory VI.
I have spoken about the facts before here, in my article The Doors to Sutri are opening, back in 2020, where I cited the Polish ecclesiastical historian, Prof. Grzegorz Kucharczyk, who pointed out the historical importance of Sutri for the Church of today. See all my articles on the Synod of Sutri, here.
Actually there were two Synods of Sutri, one in 1046, which I have just described, and another in 1061, for the reformation of the discipline of the clergy of the Roman Church. So obscure is this history, that even at Sutri, the first Council has been forgotten. It just runs contrary to too many theologians ideals of an exaggerated papal authority: the thought that the Church can depose Popes.
Sutri today is still in the ecclesiastical province of Rome. But it belongs to the Diocese of Civita Castellana. Sutri is also important in the story of the Papal States, on account of the fact that it was the first city put under the jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff in 728 A. D., by the King of the Lombards, Luitprand, in the Donation of Sutri.
Because of the important historical value of this Synod, held 977 years ago, I made a long pilgrimage to Sutri this evening to attend mass in the Church of Saint Sylvester, where in 1046 3 popes were deposed in the presence of the the German King, Henry, at whose consent only one was canonically elected.
The Synod was not held in the Cathedral of the City (shown in the feature image above and here to the right), whose large dimensions inspired the imagination to conceive of rows and rows of nobles, knights, Cardinals, Bishops, clergy, monks, faithful, all gathered in the most solemn array, to witness the most unique event in all Church history, the deposition of 3 popes on the same day.
No, it was held in the Church of Saint Sylvester, which is no bigger than a chapel in a Seminary. (This was probably done so that the combined body warmth of all those attending would heat the building on those cold December days of 1046.) And in that room from December 23-24, there stood not only Henry III, who would be crowned Emperor of the Romans on Christmas Day at Rome, but also Saint Hildebrand (the future great Pope Gregory VII, savior of the medieval Papacy), who was at that time still the acolyte of Pope Gregory VI, and Bl. Daufer, who would ascend the Apostolic Throne as Pope Victor III only twenty years later.
The events of 1046 show us that despite the scandals and tribulations of history, Our Lord remains in charge of His Church. After Mass He showed this by inspiring the priest to expose Him in the Most Blessed Sacrament at the center of the Altar, to receive the praise, love and above all adoration of the Faithful.
In the image above, Saint Anne teaches Our Lady to read from Sacred Scripture, while Saint Peter prays for Pope Saint Sylvester, Martyr. Our Lord remains with us, and His Saints are at His back! This is where we should be: upholding His unchanging will for Holy Mother Church.
And this is why we must all now insist, as I have recently urged, that a provincial council be called. Read that article to see what can do, to make it happen!
Editor’s Report: This report has been sanitized by someone trained in Peking, to be sure, for it presents such an inaccurate and marshmallow version of events, as to make one laugh.
Here is the video which was pulled from being aired at the conference.
FromRome.Info holds that the Archbishop’s theory of lack of consent, which he draws from the reckless practices of modern annulment procedures, where it is used to invalidate marriages, is totally absurd, as it would deny the capacity of the average man of saying yes, to anything. This theory is clearly something more akin to the ideas of Martin Luther.
If the Archbishop wants to say that Bergoglio being a heretic, he cannot validly be elected, then he should just say so. But the Conclave of 2013 never happened because you cannot elect someone to receive the petrine munus before the present Pope renounces it, a thing which Benedict XVI never did.
However, it is true that a heretic cannot validly consent to be elected the Pope, if he has the intention of holding on to his heresy. But this is an aspect of his soul which cannot be discerned except after the fact. Thus, whether he lacked the proper consent or not is not juridically necessary to determine, not could it be with certitude since only God knows the heart of a man.
What Archbishop Viganò does hold is that Bergoglio is an Enemy of the Church, a public heretic, and has habitual hatred for the Church as such.
As an Archbishop incardinated in the Vatican, this Archbishop has the right and duty to call for a Provincial Council. That he has not yet done so after 5 years of public criticism of Bergoglio, continues to boggle the mind.
Finally, I have often said for some years that Michael Matt is not a credible source for anything, being deeply compromised by his associations with Christendom College which was founded by CIA agents working for the Gladio Network in Europe. This indignity which he perpetrated against a guest and archbishop should be the last straw in the minds of every Catholic on who Michael Matt truly is.
Editor’s Note: This a direct denial of the authority of God Who is author of the sacraments and lawgiver in all which regards them. It also denies the Revelation handed down through the Apostle Paul, regarding the fear and aw one should have before the Sacrament, lest one receive unto condemnation. They only possible way that communicants would have the last word on such a matter is if the Catholic Religion was made up by men, and was nothing more than a feel good superstition.
Cardinal Fernandez must be deposed as a heretic. Pope Francis must rebuke him in 30 days, or he too shares juridically in the sin of heresy.
Editor’s Note: Here the public pertinacious heretic says that so long as there is no confusion with Sacramental Marriage, Sodomites who dedicate themselves to mutual abuse in the most gross and disgusting sexual perversions, can receive Christ’s Blessing as they promise a life long relationship of continual mortal sins.
The magnitude of the blasphemy against God as Creator and Savior is manifest. This heretic must be deposed in a Provincial Council!
The “suggestion” was made in a private letter addressed to the 5 Cardinals on July 11, 2023, and is believed to have been written by the then Archbishop Fernandez (now Cardinal). In a provincial council, Jorge Mario Bergoglio will have to be asked if he agrees with its contents or whether he will forever publicly and privately renounce this heretical blasphemy. If he does not renounce it, then it is clear he is not the one for whom the Lord Jesus said, “I have prayed for thee, Simon, that thy faith may never fail”.
Evidently Archbishop Fernandez is so drunk on perverse lust, that he did not see that in releasing the private letter of Pope Francis to the Cardinals, he published another canonical fact of Pope Francis’ heresy to the world, which can be used against him in a Provincial Council. The Cardinals have played poker well, and they got the enemies of Christ to show their hands.
Kudos to every last one of them!
Brothers and Sisters in Christ,
We, members of the Sacred College of Cardinals, in accord with the duty of all the faithful “to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church” (can. 212 § 3) and, above all, in accord with the responsibility of Cardinals “to assist the Roman Pontiff … individually … especially in the daily care of the universal Church” (can. 349), in view of various declarations of highly-placed Prelates, pertaining to the celebration of the next Synod of Bishops, that are openly contrary to the constant doctrine and discipline of the Church, and that have generated and continue to generate great confusion and the falling into error among the faithful and other persons of good will, have manifested our deepest concern to the Roman Pontiff. By our letter of July 10, 2023, employing the proven practice of the submission of dubia [questions] to a superior to provide the superior the occasion to make clear, by his responsa [responses], the doctrine and discipline of the Church, we have submitted five dubia to Pope Francis [select the link below to read them]. By his letter of July 11, 2023, Pope Francis responded to our letter.
Having studied his letter which did not follow the practice of responsa ad dubia [responses to questions], we reformulated the dubia to elicit a clear response based on the perennial doctrine and discipline of the Church. By our letter of August 21, 2023, we submitted the reformulated dubia [select the link below to read them] to the Roman Pontiff. Up to the present, we have not received a response to the reformulated dubia.
Given the gravity of the matter of the dubia, especially in view of the imminent session of the Synod of Bishops, we judge it our duty to inform you, the faithful (can. 212 § 3), so that you may not be subject to confusion, error, and discouragement but rather may pray for the universal Church and, in particular, the Roman Pontiff, that the Gospel may be taught ever more clearly and followed ever more faithfully.
Yours in Christ,
Walter Cardinal Brandmüller
Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke
Juan Cardinal Sandoval Íñiguez
Robert Cardinal Sarah
Joseph Cardinal Zen Ze-kiun
READ THE NEW DUBIA
Finally, someone has taken action. The Dubia were proposed and Pope Francis evaded a clear response, putting him under the suspicion of heresy. Now the Cardinals have written Pope Francis again, and after more than 30 days, Pope Francis has failed to respond.
This confirms the juridical doubt that Jorge Mario Bergoglio is a Catholic. It has established a canonical fact that his heresy is pertinacious, manifest and public.
This questioning of the man by 5 members of the College of Cardinals, without a Catholic response on the part of Bergoglio, now demands a hearing in a PROVINCIAL COUNCIL to elicit an act of Catholic Faith from the man WHICH MUST CONTAIN A FORMAL AND EXPLICIT RENUNCIATION OF ERRORS.
I THANK THE LIVING GOD, THAT THESE 5 CARDINALS HAVE ACTED.
What can we expect now?
Pope Francis must answer the Cardinals within 60 days in a Catholic manner, or he must be publicly suspected of having separated himself from the Church by heresy. In such a case a Provincial Council in the ecclesiastical province of Rome MUST be convened to discern if he be a Catholic or not, and if he be not, declare him in virtue of canon 1364 to no longer hold the Papal Office. In which case the Council will pronounce the Apostolic See legally vacant, requiring the College of Cardinals to elect another.
This action of the Provincial Council must be undertaken, because a doubtful pope is no pope. That is, the Provincial Council will be the only way for him holding on to the office. If he obstructs its convening, the faithful can omit his name in the Canon, publicly admit he is a heretic, and refuse all his orders, even those legitimate, on the grounds that he does not appear to be a member of the Church. — If the Bishops of the province are asked to convene such a council and refuse, then the same results. (While private persons can request such a convocation, I think the Bishops of the Province are only canonically required to respond to Bishops holding jurisdiction, or other Provincial Councils called in other parts of the world, which demand this be done, to preserve the Unity of the Church).
As a side note, if you are such a Catholic, especially if you are a Bishop or priest, as doubts that Bergoglio is a Catholic, should should already have written to all the Bishops in the Province of Rome, and asked them to convene such a Council.
Many Catholics have long held that Jorge Mario Bergoglio is a heretic, in virtue of their private judgement, discerning things spiritually and comparing his statements and actions with the rule of the Faith. But such private judgements have no canonical value as a fact to condemn a man. By the above action of the Cardinals, which has elicited an evasive response from Jorge Mario Bergoglio, the matter has entered into the canonical record, since as Bishops the Cardinals possess the charism of truth and can discern heresy in a manner in which the Church must hear their witness.
The only organ of the Church that can decide the matter juridically, however, is the Provincial Council in the ecclesiastical province of Rome (roughly co-extensive with the Region of Lazio, in the Italian Republic). These Bishops, and all the major superiors of diocesan institutes in that territory, as well as all Rectors of pontifical institutes and all Abbots of the Territorial Abbeys, constitute the juros in the matter. Technically the first phase of which is not a trial, but a Synod in the true sense where Pope Francis should be invited to attend and respond to the doubts of the Faithful. If he refuse, or if he attend and give unCatholic answers, then the Council can proceed to the trial phase, and vote whether his responses constitute an act which has undubitably shown that he is not a member of the Church in virtue of canon 1364, since the profession of manifest, public, pertinacious heresy ipso facto excommunicates a man. If he refuses to attend the Council can also proceed to the trial phase and declare him contumacious, and thus juridically guilty of all charges, and thus depose him.
THE GREAT DEFECT of the action by these 5 Cardinals, is that they have divulged the sin of Bergoglio to the public without apparently taking any action to convene a provincial Council. This is not the proper juridical procedure.
Perhaps they have failed here because they are following the erroneous juridical opinion of Cardinal Burke, who has stated in the past, that there is no way to resolve a crisis of a heretical pope. I have publicly corrected him several times on this matter, most fully (here) 2.5 years ago.
Cardinal Burke is an expert on annulments, so I do not expect him to have spent time in the past on this. But in the last 2.5 years he has had plenty of time. I theorize that he is stuck on the canonical problem that the New Code of Canon Law states that the Metropolitan of the province has the right to convene a Provincial Council. And thus it cannot be convened if he is the person to be put under trial. However, in the case of the Pope, such a reading is not valid, because a doubtful pope is no pope. Therefore, since in the above, the 5 Cardinals have shown that it is doubtful that he is the pope, since he has pertinaciously refused to give a Catholic answer to 10 dubia, the Bishops of the ecclesiastical Province of Rome have the liberty to elect one of their own to convoke the Council, on the grounds that the Metropolitan see can be rightfully held to be impeded by the unwillingness of the man who is the Roman Pontiff of solving this canonical crisis.
Editor’s Note: The above video from Vatican News shows a completely empty Piazza di San Pietro during the Saturday, September 30 ceremony, in which Pope Francis named 22 new Cardinals of the Roman Church. Normally, such an event fills the entire piazza. There are no more than 200-300 persons in attendance, if even that.
According to Catholic Theologians, the Roman Church is the only local church which will never fall away from the Faith. For this reason, the Holy Spirit moves more efficaciously among the Faithful there than any where else. FromRome.Info reported recently how the Faithful are refusing to stand or pray for the “Synod” on Synodality. Now, we have visible evidence, that the Faithful of Rome no longer recognized Pope Francis as a Catholic, nor his appointees as anything even worthy a photo op. — So the next time some priest in a far off land demands that you show respect for Pope Francis’ progressive ways: show them this photo and say, “No, Father, I do not have to do that: you see, I too am a Roman Catholic!”
Vox populi, vox Dei.
I suggest that all Catholics, now, compare the reaction of Catholics at Rome to what your online or TV personalities are telling you to think about Pope Francis, and learn to discern whom not to listen to for advice in the future. Not trusting certain persons, is a very important decision for physical and spiritual survival in life. We need to pay more attention to this in the future, as the recent years demonstrate.
