Francis, an Antipope Heretic? This is “Old News”

The problem is far deeper than Francis and those, who, constantly, try to avoid, the problem of Vatican II, are equally to blame. They are objective destroyers of the Church too lest we forget.

3
766

Francis, an Antipope Heretic? This is “Old News”
By: Eric Gajewski

FOR THE WHOLE ARTICLE WITH VIDEOS AND PICTURES:
https://tradcatknight.blogspot.com/2017/12/francis-antipope-heretic-this-is-old.html

The “conservative” Novus Ordo world was flipped upside down the other day as Francis attempted to purport his latest heresy as “authentic Magesterium”. The news traveled “to and fro” as if this truly changed anything from what we already should have previously known about Francis. And what is that? That Francis was already a material heretic to begin with. That FrancisMafia ran Benedict XVI out of town making him an Antipope.

So, what is the problem?
The problem is these “conservative” types are material heretics (in the very least) themselves following the new principles of the Novus Ordo religion since Vatican II.

To add to this, Fr. Kramer, reminds, the faithful, on social media, yesterday, that, Francis is now a formal heretic and STILL not the true Pope.

It only adds to the case against Bergoglio.

“HAVING EFFECTIVELY REPLIED TO THE DUBIA, BERGIGLIO MANIFESTS PERTINACITY: HE HAS VISIBLY SEPARATED HIMSELF FROM THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, AND THEREBY FORFEITS ANY OFFICE HE MAY HAVE HELD, AND LOSES ALL ECCLESIASTICAL DIGNITY, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULING OF SESSION 37 OF THE COUNCIL OF CONSTANCE. Fr. Kramer

Back track. FrancisTeaching on the Old Covenant. Francis has been speaking heresy for quite a while something the “conservatives” fail to see. According to Francis it was not necessary for Jesus to have come and died for the old law was never revoked!

247. We hold the Jewish people in special regard because their covenant with God has never been revoked, for “the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable” (Rom 11:29).
Francis, EVANGELII GAUDIUM

Where was the “dubia” then? The reality is the dubia is heretical as well. John Paul II and Benedict XVI taught too many heresies to keep up with. This one in particular as well. You won’t hear that on the false traditionalist sites. Having said that, what does the Church teach in regards to the “Old Covenant” being revoked? The answer now follows:

Pope Piux XII, Mystici Corporis Christi, 29-30: “…the New Testament took the place of the Old Law which had been abolished…but on the gibbet of His death Jesus made void the Law with its decrees fastened the handwriting of the Old Testament to the Cross. On the Cross then the Old Law died, soon to be buried and to be a bearer of death, in order to give way to the New Testament of which Christ had chosen the Apostles as qualified ministers.”

The Catechism of the Council of Trent: Part III: The Decalogue: “With regard to the exposition of this Commandment, the faithful are carefully to be taught how it agrees with, and how it differs from the others, in order that they may understand why we observe and keep holy not Saturday but Sunday. The point of difference is evident. The other Commandments of the Decalogue are precepts of the natural law, obligatory at all times and unalterable. Hence, after the abrogation of the Law of Moses, all the Commandments contained in the two tables are observed by Christians, not indeed because their observance is commanded by Moses, but because they are in conformity with nature which dictates obedience to them.”[3]

Council of Florence: “that the matter pertaining to the law of the Old Testament, of the Mosaic law…although they were suited to the divine worship at that time, after our Lord’s coming had been signified by them, ceased, and the sacraments of the New Testament began.”[4]

Pope Urban VIII, Profession of Orthodox Faith, 1642: “Similarly, we profess that the legalities of the Old Testament, the ceremonies of the Mosaic Law, the rites, sacrifices, and sacraments have ceased at the coming of Our Lord Jesus Christ; they cannot be observed without sin after the promulgation of the Gospel. The distinction of clean and unclean foods found in the old Law pertains to the ceremonies which have passed away with the rise of the Gospel. The Apostles’ prohibition on food offered to idols, blood, and the meat of strangled animals was suitable at that time to remove cause for disagreement between Jews and Gentiles; but since the reason for this prohibition has ceased to be, the prohibition too has come to an end.”

Pope Benedict XV, Ex Quo, 63: “The second consideration is that although the ceremonial precepts of the old Law have come to an end with the promulgation of the Gospel, and the new Law does not contain any precept which distinguishes between clean and unclean foods, nevertheless the Church of Christ has the power of renewing the obligation to observe some of the old precepts for just and serious reasons, despite their abrogation by the new Law.”[5]

FOR THE WHOLE ARTICLE WITH VIDEOS AND PICTURES:
https://tradcatknight.blogspot.com/2017/12/francis-antipope-heretic-this-is-old.html

FaceBook Comments

3 COMMENTS

    • Yes, because that is the case of deciding when the coast is clear. If you rob a bank, a period of time is spent before spending. If you rob a library, then a period is also wise. But the over confident and under educated often make hasty decisions regarding this. So, it was kept close for some time after and not deemed publicly distributable. This was a safe decision as it contains space to ensure coast is clear, and plausible deniability.
      Knowing this period would lapse, the plan to create Islam was laid. 1, 2, 3. Too many ducks in a row, make for suspicious mothers. And rightfully so. The order of the chapters and the thematic content, are the blue dye in the pages. Not to mention the days. There is no where to wiggle.

  1. If one googles Francis of Assisi the search results come up with the current pope “Francis” and how equal these two very different persons are. The word HERETIC does not differ from the word antisemitism as the outcome after “treatment” is the same. Opposition to controlling institutions is “divine” heresy and need to be burnt at the stake, made silent or is to be destroyed – as it is the will of God – so say “his human agents on Earth”.
    When a religion diverts faith and worshiping from God to the golden calf and the whore of Babylon could that be heresy by any chance? Probably not in an upside down world where evil is good and the devil serves as God.

LEAVE A REPLY