Zone1 A heretic cannot be pope--much less can an apostate

notmyfault2020

Platinum Member
Oct 7, 2022
6,542
3,202
893
My words are in italics and/or brackets

I found this information at Novus Ordo Watch (which I will refer to as NOW):

Highlights from Fr Fenton article on JP II and other “popes” not being pope:


Canon 2316 Code of Canon Law 1917: One who with full knowledge helps in any way in the propagation of heresy is suspect of heresy”..

NOW says (Fr Fenton?):

It is “utterly preposterous” to say that JP II, head of the Church supposedly is not a formal heretic because of his ignorance of the teaching of the Church [!!]. (That's really something... a person claiming that the pope doesn't know Catholic teaching! And yet, since he is not really pope..)

A formal heretic is not a Catholic and since he is not a Catholic, he is not a valid pope… he is only the head of the Conciliar Church Yet by his heresy, he ceases to be head of the Church

Christ founded the Church as an indefectible supernatural society that would in truth constitute His very own Mystical Body

Vatican II focused on “freedom of belief and the freedom to be different derives” (as, I believe, JP II or some other novus ordo cleric put it)

NOW says:

Blasphemy! .. worse than heresy; it is apostasy… which does away with all of Catholicism. It does away with the very notion of revealed religion in general. It wipes out any religions’ claim to being the objective truth revealed by God, as it grounds [imprecise word] all religious belief in the sphere of the subjective and relative

This is Modernism which St Pius X called “the synthesis of all heresies”

NOW: It is also the fertile ground upon which the one-world religion of the Antichrist can be built because if God "wills all religions," then none of them are actually true.
 
Last edited:
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #3
Substitute Christ for Pope, and you'll be golden...
Don't argue with me. It was Jesus who set up His Church the way He did. You do not understand Catholicism because you (unlike yours truly) have not studied it.. I may not have ever done so myself if .. this or that had not happened in my life..
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #4
I wouldn't say that believing "God wills all religions" makes none of them true

But I can 100% understand people SAYING that .. namely, that since there are tons of religions claiming to be the one Christ founded, that means none of them are true.

That is a very egregious consequence of Vatican II, if not the worst one of all
 
Don't argue with me. It was Jesus who set up His Church the way He did. You do not understand Catholicism because you (unlike yours truly) have not studied it.. I may not have ever done so myself if .. this or that had not happened in my life..

I'll argue with you if I want to ... the RCC is heresy, the Great Harlot Babylon ... and all her Protestant daughters are whores ...

The One True God is JAH ...

... RASTIFARI ...



But seriously ... Christ established His church ... and Man promptly ruined it ... just the way God created us ...
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #7
My words are in italics and/or brackets

I found this information at Novus Ordo Watch (which I will refer to as NOW):

Highlights from Fr Fenton article on JP II and other “popes” not being pope:


Canon 2316 Code of Canon Law 1917: One who with full knowledge helps in any way in the propagation of heresy is suspect of heresy”..

NOW says (Fr Fenton?):

It is “utterly preposterous” to say that JP II, head of the Church supposedly is not a formal heretic because of his ignorance of the teaching of the Church [!!]. (That's really something... a person claiming that the pope doesn't know Catholic teaching! And yet, since he is not really pope..)

A formal heretic is not a Catholic and since he is not a Catholic, he is not a valid pope… he is only the head of the Conciliar Church Yet by his heresy, he ceases to be head of the Church

Christ founded the Church as an indefectible supernatural society that would in truth constitute His very own Mystical Body

Vatican II focused on “freedom of belief and the freedom to be different derives” (as, I believe, JP II or some other novus ordo cleric put it)

NOW says:

Blasphemy! .. worse than heresy; it is apostasy… which does away with all of Catholicism. It does away with the very notion of revealed religion in general. It wipes out any religions’ claim to being the objective truth revealed by God, as it grounds [imprecise word] all religious belief in the sphere of the subjective and relative

This is Modernism which St Pius X called “the synthesis of all heresies”

NOW: It is also the fertile ground upon which the one-world religion of the Antichrist can be built because if God "wills all religions," then none of them are actually true.
Is the label "heretic' put on John Paul II and, it appears, every pope since Pius XI primarily attributed to their poor handling or non-action with priestly abuse which is why they are heretics? I do not understand? . I agree the popes could have done more, but that does not make them false popes as renegade Catholic orgs. like Pius X Society claim. . And as much as I regret the developments, I do not see how easy it would have been for John Paul II or Benedict XVI to have enacted drastic measures with this gay cabal in the Vatican combating anything going that way. -------- So what exactly is the charge of heresy being attributed to? Is it not a belief that goes against Church doctrine or dogma?
 
Margorie Tayolor-Green is not as anti-Catholic as you are hoping. She uses inflamatory statements to make a serious point. Her charge against American Catholic institutions like Catholic Charities to almost encourage illegal entry is a legitimate charge against them. It really does not impugn Catholic teaching or anything else you are wishing for.
 
Is the label "heretic' put on John Paul II and, it appears, every pope since Pius XI primarily attributed to their poor handling or non-action with priestly abuse which is why they are heretics? I do not understand? . I agree the popes could have done more, but that does not make them false popes as renegade Catholic orgs. like Pius X Society claim. . And as much as I regret the developments, I do not see how easy it would have been for John Paul II or Benedict XVI to have enacted drastic measures with this gay cabal in the Vatican combating anything going that way. -------- So what exactly is the charge of heresy being attributed to? Is it not a belief that goes against Church doctrine or dogma?
JP II spread the heresy that all religions save. That belief being foisted on people has FAR worse consequences than even sexual abuse, I dare to say. Sexual abuse is about the worst thing a person can do and then it was covered up. But as per OP, apostacy abolishes (my word) Catholicism, which claims to be --IS-- the Church Christ founded. So just how is it OK to abolish Christ's Church?

And then theres is this: There was no major pedophilia problem until Vatican II
 
Margorie Tayolor-Green is not as anti-Catholic as you are hoping. She uses inflamatory statements to make a serious point. Her charge against American Catholic institutions like Catholic Charities to almost encourage illegal entry is a legitimate charge against them. It really does not impugn Catholic teaching or anything else you are wishing for.
who is trying to impugn Catholic teaching? It is I and people like me who UPHOLD true Catholic teaching. Meanwhile, thefake V2 Church keeps teaching error.. and protecting pedophiles.

And I am thankful to MTG for confirming to yours truly and many others that Catholic Charities is corrupt and off-base by helping illegals (to be illegals, to crash our border in violation of our laws). If bidim or anyone else doesn't like the laws that say they cannot enter, then he can change the damn laws. But nope.. Liberals just violate it..
 
Margorie Tayolor-Green is not as anti-Catholic as you are hoping. She uses inflamatory statements to make a serious point. Her charge against American Catholic institutions like Catholic Charities to almost encourage illegal entry is a legitimate charge against them. It really does not impugn Catholic teaching or anything else you are wishing for.

I think she's trash.
 
And I am thankful to MTG for confirming to yours truly and many others that Catholic Charities is corrupt and off-base by helping illegals (to be illegals, to crash our border in violation of our laws). If bidim or anyone else doesn't like the laws that say they cannot enter, then he can change the damn laws. But nope.. Liberals just violate it..
 
JP II spread the heresy that all religions save. That belief being foisted on people has FAR worse consequences than even sexual abuse, I dare to say. Sexual abuse is about the worst thing a person can do and then it was covered up. But as per OP, apostacy abolishes (my word) Catholicism, which claims to be --IS-- the Church Christ founded. So just how is it OK to abolish Christ's Church?

And then theres is this: There was no major pedophilia problem until Vatican II
Ok, so francis has said some thing most devout Catholics find untenable. That can be discussed. But why are all the other popes heretics or not real popes? Seems to me you have been saying since vatican II the Catholic Church has been in grave error and the popes have all been frauds.
 
Ok, so francis has said some thing most devout Catholics find untenable. That can be discussed. But why are all the other popes heretics or not real popes? Seems to me you have been saying since vatican II the Catholic Church has been in grave error and the popes have all been frauds.
yes, that is what I am saying
 
JP II spread the heresy that all religions save. That belief being foisted on people has FAR worse consequences than even sexual abuse, I dare to say. Sexual abuse is about the worst thing a person can do and then it was covered up. But as per OP, apostacy abolishes (my word) Catholicism, which claims to be --IS-- the Church Christ founded. So just how is it OK to abolish Christ's Church?

And then theres is this: There was no major pedophilia problem until Vatican II
Sorry, my error. You are saying it was JP II who said "all religions can save?" That I did not catch. I would be curious to know exactly what he said or meant.
 
Don't argue with me. It was Jesus who set up His Church the way He did. You do not understand Catholicism because you (unlike yours truly) have not studied it.. I may not have ever done so myself if .. this or that had not happened in my life..
Start by not believing that Christ set up the Catholic church. Christ refers to people as HIS Church. Not a denomination. He isn't going to rapture the Vatican. He didn't even address them with the other churches in Rev. which should tell you something.
And when He returns, He will be returning to the Jewish homeland, not Rome. The Jewish Temple has always been Christ's church. He plans on residing in Jerusalem when He returns to us. And judgment will be determined by how the Jews were treated, not the Catholics, and Rome has never been fond of Israel...
The last two letters in Rome = me
The last two words in Israel = God
 
yes, that is what I am saying
This is a paragraph from Vatican II.

847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church: Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.

Do you have a problem with that statement? . Maybe that was something JohnPaul II was alluding to? If not, I still would need to know more about what he did say.
I know he was 'over-ecumenical' in some instances, honoring non-Christian religions, I agree. But to what extent was it intended, that is not clear to me.
 
Last edited:
Start by not believing that Christ set up the Catholic church.
Why are you bossing me around?

You don't have a clue who I am. You think you know me by my words but you do not (I refer to you not knowing what all I know.. or my experiences in life). And you certainly don't know what Catholicism is all about. Read some Church history.

I think it was Fulton Sheen who said that there are not 100 people who hate the Catholic Church but there are many who hate what they think it is
 
Sorry, my error. You are saying it was JP II who said "all religions can save?" That I did not catch. I would be curious to know exactly what he said or meant.
well, I don't have time to do everyone's homework. He kissed the Koran.. he had pagans worship in Catholic Churches.. he and other recent popes have had conferences with communists and others.. (while refusing to see members of the CC), even though the Traditional Church, the TRUE Catholic Church has always condemned Communism in no uncertain terms.. etc
 

Forum List

Back
Top