Bergoglio, Heresy, and the Faux-opposition

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

As the years go by, the fake opposition descends to lower and lower moral levels, and most of the time I ignore them, but they have recently stooped to a point of such infamy, that I have to post at least a comment and rip their masks off.

They are claiming that I cannot see or that I refuse to see that Jorge Mario Bergoglio is a heretic or heretical.

Yet, it was on these very pages in 2015, that I was one of the first to call him out for heresy in denying the Divine approbation for capital punishment.

Back then the so called opposition sneared, barked and defamed me for my judgement. (You see, they are all closet socialists and so are against capital punishment).

Now they say I am dishonest in claiming that Berogoglio is not a heretic.

But I never claimed such a thing. It was they who claimed that 8 years ago, and did not flip on their position until recently, say, after January 30th, because, the truth is that they hate the papal office and love lying and mendacity.

That is why I am the only one to call for a provincial council to rebuke the man. And why no one has taken any action in that regard other than some of my readers who have written letters.

The thing is, being a Catholic, and not like these grifters of souls, I recognize that whereas with my private judgement I discern heresy in the man, I have no authority to declare him such, nor the charism to discern whether he be pertinacious in his heresy, such that he fall under the penalty of ipso facto excommunication in canon 1364, which summarizes succinctly the ancient discipline.

Only the Bishops in a legitimate council acting together have such a charism and such an authority.

But my opponents all think they do, whenever they say more rosaries than their neighbor in a single day. (Sarcasm).

FEATURED IMAGE: is Zubaran’s, Bl. Urban II calls St. Bruno to Rome, 1655, which depicts a meeting which probably never happened because during his pontificate Blessed Urban II, who called the First Crusade, and whose feast day is today July 29th, was rarely in Rome, and St. Bruno the founder of the Carthusians, if he met Bl. Urban II, it was at the Council of Brindisi in 1091. No disrespect is being shown to the Blessed Pope, because this painting was executed by Zubaran 28 years after St. Bruno’s canonization Feb. 17, 1623 by Pope Gregory XVI, but Bl. Urban II was not beatified until July 14, 1881 by Pope Leo XIII, and thus lacks the aureole.

 

With Globalist Censorship growing daily, No one will ever know about the above article, if you do not share it.

8 thoughts on “Bergoglio, Heresy, and the Faux-opposition”

  1. Well said Brother Alexis. Truly there has been a tendency for many, even those that profess to be Traditional … to divide and seek to diminish the importance of the teachings of the Church and the Hierarchy. The Death Penalty always had been taught and understood within the Catholic Church, until Pope JPII and his stance against it. Also, many other teachings and traditions have been slowly and methodically taken away from the unsuspecting Catholics still in the Pews. Unfortunately, there have been opportunists, especially converts, that are giving Catholics, as you well said, Faux Opposition to many wrongs done among the prelates of the Church. We are living in a time that it appears God is exposing all and we need to remain Faithful no matter what happens, we remain within the Barque of St. Peter!

  2. In addition, [by this Our Constitution, which is to remain valid in perpetuity We enact, determine, decree and define] that if ever at any time it shall appear that any Bishop, even if he be acting as an Archbishop, Patriarch or Primate; or any Cardinal of the aforesaid Roman Church, or, as has already been mentioned, any legate, or even the Roman Pontiff, prior to his promotion or his elevation as Cardinal or Roman Pontiff, has deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into some heresy: (i) the promotion or elevation, even if it shall have been uncontested and by the unanimous assent of all the Cardinals, shall be null, void and worthless… ” Cum ex Apostolatus Officio” Apostolic Constitution of Pope Paul IV, 1559

    . The Papal Bull Cum ex apostolatus officio of Pope Paul IV teaches that: if anyone was a heretic before the Papal election, he could not be a valid pope, even if he is elected unanimously by the Cardinals. Canon 188.4 (1917 Code of Canon Law) teachers that : if a cleric (pope, bishop, etc.) becomes a heretic, he loses his office without any declaration by operation of law.

    1. A heretic, is someone who in the judgement of the Church, not of any private person, is a heretic. That requires that the Church act and make such a declaration. That is why Cum ex Apostolatus Officio remains true, but your attempt to use it to support your private judgement is false.

      1. Can. 1364— § 1. An apostate from the faith, a heretic or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication, without prejudice to the provision of can. 194 § 1 n. 2; he or she may also be punished with the penalties mentioned in can. 1336 §§ 2-4.

        A latae sententiae penalty is a penalty that is inflicted ipso facto, automatically, by force of the law itself, at the very moment a law is contravened. A ferendae sententiae penalty is a penalty that is inflicted on a guilty party only after it has been pronounced by a third party.[2]

      2. The commentary you quote is deficient, because while the sentence is inflicted immediately, without the charism of the Holy Spirit, given only to the Sacred Hierarchy, to discern heresy in a man, only when he is reproved 3x and reject correction can they infallibly discern he was not merely mistaken with good will, nor confused out of ignorance, but had malice against the truth.

        Laymen and anyone else who presume to have such a charism, are really the workers of Satan stealing souls through the following false syllogism:

        That man is a heretic,
        Canon 1364 says heretics are outside of the Church,
        Therefore that man is not in the Church.

        Their syllogism is really a cover for this argument:

        That man is a “heretic” because I say so,
        Canon 1364 says that all whom I call “heretics” are outside of the Church,
        Therefore that man is outside of the Church.

        I have expanded and revealed their true syllogism, which you appear to hold, by your continuous insistence on a point which I have explained dozens of times, so show you were it goes wrong. It inserts private judgement into an objective forsensic procedure, arrogates the right of judgement to private judgement, and then starts kicking people out of the Church.

        Since Pope Francis has not died and the Cardinals have not elected you the pope, your personal judgements have no value whatsoever in the controversy.

        However, if you are honestly convinced a man has deviated from the faith, and do not denounce him, then you share in his guilt and will burn in hell, and such a denunciation requires that you put pen to paper, and write to an ecclesiastical authority. I am sure you have not done that, because you would not be commenting here if you had.

Comments are closed.