by Br. Alexis Bugnolo
As I am getting priests and laity and religious from the world over asking me the same questions, I will now answer the more common questions in one article, so that all might have the answers.
The case here regards when an antipope, like Leo VIII or Bergoglio, who reigns for a time and posits various acts, magisterial and juridical, is elected the true pope, by the Faithful of Rome, in an assembly by apostolic right.
Q. Can a not yet condemned heretic or schismatic be elected to the Papacy?
A. Yes, because in canon law, no one who has NOT yet been deprived of his rights by the public sentence of Church authority, loses his rights. Even canon 1364 which imposes immediately the penalty of excommunication does not take away the rights to be elected by or to participate in a Conclave, as the Papal Law, Universi Domini Gregis states in n. 35.
Cardinals specifically can only be judged by the Roman Pontiff alone (canon 1405 §1, n. 2).
And since no one can arrogate to himself the right to judge anyone in the Church in such a way as to deprive him of his canonical rights (cf. Discernment vs. the Arrogation of Right), such a man can be elected pope.
Q. Does an antipope have to accept his election as true Pope?
A. Canon 331 requires a pope accept his election. But in natural law, when a man is already claiming the office, his consent to his election is presumed, for it is actual and habitual and manifest that he wants the office. Thus passive or tacit acceptance of his election, that is, without publicly renouncing it, suffices for him. And since the Canon does not require active verbal expression of acceptance, this suffices in elections by apostolic right where, in the absence of rules of acceptance, the natural law prevails. But it would not suffice in a Conclave, because there the Papal Law UDG requires active, verbal expression of acceptance.
Here many are confused, because they understand “accept his election” to mean, “accept the manner of his election”, or accept being the true pope, when it only means “accept being elected the pope”. Obviously, an antipope accepts being chosen the pope. To hold otherwise is madness.
Q. Do we have to accept all the previous acts of such a Pope while he was antipope, if we accept his new election as valid?
A. No, certainly not.
Q. Are the Cardinals he appointed before when he was antipope, valid cardinals now that he is elected as the true pope?
A. Yes. Because the only thing lacking for their validity was the will of one who held the petrine munus. That deficiency is now remedied. And so they are valid cardinals and can validly elect his successor.
Q. Are all the appointments of Bishops etc., which he made as antipope valid now?
A. Yes, for the same reason.
Q. Are all the magisterial acts which he did as antipope valid now?
A. No, none of them are valid. For he had no magisterium to exercise and thus they never were acts of the Apostolic See, nor can consent after the fact make them such, because they are in the past and juridically non existent. This differs from Cardinals and Bishops etc., because they are living beings and in the present.
Q. How about all the juridical penalties which were imposed by himself or the Roman Curia, while he was antipope: are they now valid now?
A. They must be all presumed to be invalid, for reasons of the fact that they are acts in the past which had no authority to be leveled.
Q. Should we continue to oppose the errors of the man when he was antipope? And if so, how, without incurring the penalty of attacking the Pope?
A. We should continue to oppose all the errors, sins, and scandal of the antipope, but when doing so we should distinguish them from the acts he now makes as pope. This is respectful and will help spread the knowledge that he was never from the beginning the true pope, but only after his election by apostolic right.
Q. What can we expect in him now that he has been validly elected and at last has the Petrine Munus?
A. We can expect that he will not teach error in matters of faith in morals, even though his politics may remain the same. We can expect that when asked or pressured to undo what he has done as antipope that he will concede to the pressure and to the requests. We can expect him not to condone his past errors which are contrary to the faith.
Q. Does his valid election absolve him of his past sins?
A. No, rather, it makes him more responsible before God to repent of them and to do so publicly. Without that he cannot be saved.
Q. How do we now show true loyalty to Pope Francis?
A. By continuing to denounce what he did as antipope, but praying for him as pope, trusting in the prayer of Jesus, “That his faith may not fail”.
Q. How should our position differ from Bergoglians, Recognize & Resist, Anti-Roncallian Sedevacantists and Anti-Bergoglian Sedevacantists?
A. We should not like Bergoglians approve of any of his errors, sins, scandals or crimes as antipope. We should resist his past errors but not attribute them to the Vicar of Christ, but only to his person, and thus act differently from the Recognize and Resist crowd who defame the Papacy. We should recognize him as the true Pope and refrain from arrogating the right to judge him as the Sedevacantists of old and of the new kind do.
Q. Who has the authority to sort all this out?
A. The present valid pope or any future valid successor.
https://biblehub.com/drbc/john/21.htm
I forgot to mention that Peter repented after having denied The Christ, and thus was restored to communion with Christ, In The Unity Of The Holy Ghost (Filioque ), before he became Pope, Through, With, And In Christ, In The Unity Of The Holy Ghost.
Christ’s Sacrifice On The Cross will lead us to Salvation, but we must desire forgiveness for our sins, and accept Salvational Love, God’s Gift Of Grace And Mercy; believe in The Power And The Glory Of Salvation Love, and rejoice in the fact that No Greater Love Is There Than This, To Desire Salvation For One’s Beloved.
“Hail The Cross, Our Only Hope.”
“Q. How should our position differ from Bergoglians, Recognize & Resist, Anti-Roncallian Sedevacantists and Anti-Bergoglian Sedevacantists?
A. We should not like Bergoglians approve of any of his errors, sins, scandals or crimes as antipope. We should resist his past errors but not attribute them to the Vicar of Christ, but only to his person, and thus act differently from the Recognize and Resist crowd who defame the Papacy. We should recognize him as the true Pope and refrain from arrogating the right to judge him as the Sedevacantists of old and of the new kind do.“
Yet more evidence of the wisdom and faithfulness of your actions. These answers have the ring of justice and mercy.
Recognize and Resist is Sedevacantism, and actually attacking Jesus’ prayer over Peter.
They may be doing Traditional Latin Mass, but…
This is very helpful. Thank you.
I think some are also concerned that possibly the election wasn’t conducted properly. I think you explained it in your video after the election but it might be helpful to explain in writing how consensus is achieved, for the benefit of any who prefer to read rather than watch a video, and for any who would have a hard time transcribing and then translating the video.
Do I understand correctly that in this type of election the electors have the right to decide on the candidates, and also on the conditions for what constitutes a winner (ie 2/3 majority or 50% plus one, etc)? And whether time should be given to get to know any not well known candidates? Please note that I am not disputing that it was done correctly.
Yes to all questions.
Ed un altra cosa: come la mettiamo se dovesse continuare a commettere eresie? In questo caso 2 le possibilità: o si sbaglia lo Spirito Santo oppure ancora non è Papa. La Scrittura non può mentire.
Comunque se da una parte sarei felice per la ricomposizione almeno superficiale di una ferita al Corpo Ecclesiale di Cristo, dall altra mi spiace per chi, in questi anni ha mantenuto la Fede e ora dovrebbe obbedire a chi ha combattuto proprio per difendere la Verita. Vedremo.
John XXI uttered a heresy. He was rebuked. He appointed a commission of Cardinals, who said what he said was heresy. He retracted. He died penitent.
That is what the prayer of Christ does for an errant true pope.
Can certainly understand your current illness…As, I’ve not nearly the meat in the fight as you and this whole situation is deplorable and nauseating to the point of regurgitation.
i understand the legitimacy of cardinals appointed by anti pope PRIOR to becoming anti pope.. but i dont understand when you say for the “same reason” any bishop created WHILE anti pope are valid too? you would think anyone created while ANTI pope would be invalid because the will was not there?
I am speaking of the Bishops still alive and still holding authority.
“We can expect that when asked or pressured to undo what he has done as antipope that he will concede to the pressure and to the requests. We can expect him not to condone his past errors which are contrary to the faith.”
Pope Francis might have been an anti-Pope before, but valid Pope now, but I would never expect someone like him to undo anything that he has done before now, even when asked, because he never considered himself an anti-Pope.
He is the rightful Pope, I reluctantly say this, but still I would never accept his agenda for the Church (Synodality in the German model), nor accept his statement that anti-homosexual laws should be ended. This would only promote that lifestyle/sin. And of course I and many young Catholic I know don’t accept Francis persecution of the Latin Mass. So even though he is valid, in those things I mentioned I would not respect his judgements or decisions.
As true Pope he will not sustain this agenda any more.
QUESTIONS CANONIQUES CONCERNANT L’ÉLECTION D’UN ANTIPAPE À LA PAPAUTÉ
#Praedicatho
https://www.homelie.biz/2023/02/questions-canoniques-concernant-l-election-d-un-antipape-a-la-papaute.html
Brother Alexis I believe Our Lady confirmed the validity of the true apostolic succession + election of Pope Francis as Vicar of Rome + holder of the Peterine Munus on the 30th Jan by interceeding for a priest Fr John Hollowell to be totally healed of 2 brain tumours on 30th Jan in Lourdes.
Please look for Fr John Hollowell of the Archdiocese of Indianapolis who announced on Jan 30 to his parishioners that he was totally healed after his visit to Lourdes
Was he healed on that very day, or some days before?
Many of the recognize and resist outlets were warning of new harsh restrictions to the Mass during Lent and Holy Week this year–a cruel and believable forecast considering the dubia from two advents prior.
However, by the grace of God, the supposed crackdown remains at bay… at least for now.
This fact seems to bolster your thesis, while the recognize and resist crowd have more or less gone silent on the matter–still avoiding your increasingly rational position.