Cardinal Sarah: Widespread Communion in the hand is part of Satan’s attack on the Eucharist

The Field Marshal

PI Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2018
Messages
4,554
Likes
3,878
You're a disgrace and would be laughed at in any open debate.
Luckily, nobody with a brain cell will take you seriously.
You are unable to present a single serious counter argument to the points I make and rely on judgemental insults and jeers.
I think other posters will see who is lacking in brain cells.

Indeed it is clear that you are quite terrified that
I am correct in my analysis of the current papacy
and the terrible consequences thereof.
 

Ted

PI Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2016
Messages
1,765
Likes
2,541
You are unable to present a single serious counter argument to the points I make and rely on judgemental insults and jeers.
I think other posters will see who is lacking in brain cells.

Indeed it is clear that you are quite terrified that
I am correct in my analysis of the current papacy
and the terrible consequences thereof.
Yes, you alone are right and everybody else is wrong.
Can you smell your own foul arrogance?

Gobshite!
 

The Field Marshal

PI Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2018
Messages
4,554
Likes
3,878
Yes, you alone are right and everybody else is wrong.
Can you smell your own foul arrogance?

Gobshite!
You are quite quite terrified and no longer able to reason or argue rationally..
Hence this explosion of ugly and ad hominem abuse.
Pitiful.
 

SwordOfStCatherine

Staff member
Moderator
PI Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
14,509
Likes
16,824
It's not like I told blatant lies about a poster.
That gets a free pass on this site.
Yes, I mean you.
Mod Action: I have no idea what you are talking about. You have a habit of gratuitous abuse, particularly towards TFM, now please stop it.
 

The Field Marshal

PI Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2018
Messages
4,554
Likes
3,878
They all seem to accept his canonicity though.
Thank you for that very helpful precision.
There is a hideous attitude amongst many many Catholics that a pope can do whatever he pleases in relation to how the church is governed.
A pope can not do as he pleases when it comes to the formalities laid down in canon law in the matter of his own resignation from office.
Papal resignations being exceedingly rare do not receive a lot of coverage in canon law but the two provisions that do cover it no 188 and 332 ( no 2) are vital and critical to examining what Pope Benedict thought he was doing in 2013.
Pope Benedict does not have the authority to flout either of these canons.
He has without any doubt at all totally flouted canon 332 no 2 which requires a papal resignation to be properly manifested.

Canon 188 is more complex but again it states a resignation made in substantial error is invalid.
Pope Benedict has made the substantial error of believing he could bifurcate the papacy and retain a contemplative component of it.
This is not possible as there can only be one pope.
Whether he like it or not Pope Benedict remains the sole pope of the Catholic Church meaning the conclave of 2013 was invalid and the Jorge Bergoglio is not now and never has been any type of pope whatsoever.
 

SwordOfStCatherine

Staff member
Moderator
PI Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
14,509
Likes
16,824
Thank you for that very helpful precision.
There is a hideous attitude amongst many many Catholics that a pope can do whatever he pleases in relation to how the church is governed.
A pope can not do as he pleases when it comes to the formalities laid down in canon law in the matter of his own resignation from office.
Papal resignations being exceedingly rare do not receive a lot of coverage in canon law but the two provisions that do cover it no 188 and 332 ( no 2) are vital and critical to examining what Pope Benedict thought he was doing in 2013.
Pope Benedict does not have the authority to flout either of these canons.
He has without any doubt at all totally flouted canon 332 no 2 which requires a papal resignation to be properly manifested.

Canon 188 is more complex but again it states a resignation made in substantial error is invalid.
Pope Benedict has made the substantial error of believing he could bifurcate the papacy and retain a contemplative component of it.
This is not possible as there can only be one pope.
Whether he like it or not Pope Benedict remains the sole pope of the Catholic Church meaning the conclave of 2013 was invalid and the Jorge Bergoglio is not now and never has been any type of pope whatsoever.
I think you are probably correct- however I don't know enough about the ins and outs of canon law to say yes you are definitely correct. Also I don't think either of us are in the position to bind people's souls with authority on this issue. That said I don't think people have the right to insist that possible Pope Francis is the canonical Pope, or far more worse than that insist he should be obeyed blindly.
 

The Field Marshal

PI Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2018
Messages
4,554
Likes
3,878
I think you are probably correct- however I don't know enough about the ins and outs of canon law to say yes you are definitely correct. Also I don't think either of us are in the position to bind people's souls with authority on this issue. That said I don't think people have the right to insist that possible Pope Francis is the canonical Pope, or far more worse than that insist he should be obeyed blindly.
A foundational principle of catholocism is the papacy.
The only time that catholics do not have a pope is when one dies or one resigns.

When either of those events happen the only protection catholics have from the possible abuse of the papal office is CANON LAW.

It is manifestly obvious to anybody who examines the Pope Benedict xvi situation since 2013 that canon law has been breached.
The alleged resignation of Pope Benedict is surrounded with many irregularities.

The man calling himself "pope francis" is a Hegelian Panentheist and therefore not a catholic.
 
Top Bottom