FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: dogmatically impossible for Francis to be Pope?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
Is anyone interested in this theory?

Why it’s dogmatically impossible that Bergoglio be the Successor of Saint Peter (fromrome.wordpress).

It has a lot to do with the Latin words munus and ministerium (another discussion, same source).

Rabbit hole? Waste of time? Worthwhile to ponder?
(06-20-2019, 08:28 PM)TruthWhichIsChrist Wrote: [ -> ]Is anyone interested in this theory?

Why it’s dogmatically impossible that Bergoglio be the Successor of Saint Peter (fromrome.wordpress).

It has a lot to do with the Latin words munus and ministerium (another discussion, same source).

Rabbit hole? Waste of time? Worthwhile to ponder?

False.  That simple.  Whenever you encounter this stuff just ignore it.
Pope Francis is the Pope.  

It’s likely this whole thing is a clever scheme of Satan to encourage more and more schism in the Churcb.  Lucifer is an ancient being. He’s far more clever than any of us.  He can easily make himself an angel of light to deceive us into grave sin (e.g schism).

Is Pope Francis a good Pope?  I don’t think I need to answer that one.  But he’s still the Pope, and we need to pray and make sacrifices for him, so that we may merit for him the graces to properly govern the flock.  

And ultimately, what does any of this have to do with your salvation?  Your salvation will be determined by your charity; whether you placed God and obedience to Him as the proper end of all things you do; and of course, that you die in Sanctifying Grace.

Focus on that.
Rabbit hole and it's a horse that's been beaten to death here on the forum.
(06-20-2019, 08:41 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: [ -> ]Rabbit hole and it's a horse that's been beaten to death here on the forum.

Thanks, I found it all by searching for "Bardhardt". Very old, actually. Why is this a current topic in that blog, fromrome.wordpress? Someone is dragging up an old chestnut? Maybe Benedict did it this way so if things get too far afield he can step in and say, 'Ahem no I am still actually pope, I was just testing your mettle.'
(06-20-2019, 11:37 PM)TruthWhichIsChrist Wrote: [ -> ]Thanks, I found it all by searching for "Bardhardt". Very old, actually. Why is this a current topic in that blog, fromrome.wordpress? Someone is dragging up an old chestnut? Maybe Benedict did it this way so if things get too far afield he can step in and say, 'Ahem no I am still actually pope, I was just testing your mettle.'

Not really that old. Barnhardt is still banging the drum daily.
The real question is whether it's dogmatically possible for a legitimate Pope to teach heresy. If the answer is yes, than Francis may well be the Pope. If the answer is no...well...then we have an antipope.

I don't know the answer to that question.

Sent from my SM-J260T1 using Tapatalk
I don't know if A. Barnhardt's points have been adequately answered. One point in the old threads was quite good: that the man visibly and widely accepted as Pope is, in fact, Pope. And, it is possible to misunderstand the canon law notion of "substantial error".

But in her Nov 2018 video, posted to her YouTube channel, she points out some very unusual thinking on the part of Benedict regarding his role. Apparently he is going to be 'suffering' and 'praying', and this is the 'ministry' aspect, but some other lucky chap will do the 'governance' bit; Benedict intends to resign the 'active' aspect. Very bizarre. The soul of the apostolate includes both a prayer element, and an engagement with other people, no? In her video of 18 June, a few days ago, she points out that delegating responsibilities doesn't constitute a resignation. She makes the comparison with a regency or indeed a delegation. So it does not appear to be a clean resignation. Can the papal office be 'expanded' or 'transformed'?

She observes that there is a reasonable case that Benedict can be thought to "fear", given the uncovering of malfeasance within the Vatican. 

She observes that Bergoglio doesn't act like a pope, and gives a bunch of examples at about the 1:54:00 mark in the November video.

Continuing interest in this topic may be fueled by the emerging response to bizarre 'teachings' that enjoy apparent papal support: see this NCR article from 10 June, about the 40-point declaration.
(06-21-2019, 12:21 AM)1Faith Wrote: [ -> ]The real question is whether it's dogmatically possible for a legitimate Pope to teach heresy. If the answer is yes, than Francis may well be the Pope. If the answer is no...well...then we have an antipope.

I don't know the answer to that question.

Sent from my SM-J260T1 using Tapatalk

Depends on what you mean by 'teach'. If you mean in his capacity as a private doctor, of course he can. JPII taught heresy all the time. If you mean in terms of infallibly teaching on Faith and Morals in accord with Pastor Æternus, no he can't, and neither Francis nor any other Pope has ever done so.
It's also important to remember that Barnhardt has zero formal training in theology or canon law. Her Alma Mater offers only four basic courses in Latin, but I doubt that a beef production major (who wasn't even a Catholic at the time) would take them. So, personally, I think her opinion on the matter is very questionable.
Will you read Fr. Kramer’s book when it is published?
Pages: 1 2