Today, Fr. Z, Father John Zuhlsdorf, appeared to say that canon law rules on excommunication override the conclave constitution of a pope and then said:
"If you are going to say that Francis is not a legitimate Pope, you need a better argument than an invalid conclave due to conspiracy."
(Fr. Z's Blog, "Is Francis an Antipope because Cardinals conspired and the conclave was invalid?, October 17, 2019)
Unfortunately for Fr. Z's argument, Cardinal Raymond Burke said:
"The only grounds that could be used for calling into question the validity of the [Francis] election would be were the election organized by a campaign beforehand which is strictly forbidden and that would be difficult to demonstrate."
(Patrick Coffin Show, "141: Dubia Cardinal goes on the Record - Raymond Cardinal Burke")
Moreover, apparently Fr. Z thinks he is a cardinal who can judge Pope John Paul II's conclave constitution.
I suggest that he read paragraph 5 of Universi Dominici Gregis:
"[C]oncerning the prescriptions contained in this Constitution... I [Pope John Paul II] Decree that all power of issuing a judgement of this in this regards to the College of Cardinals."
As Bishop Rene Gracida says and the constitution said only the cardinals can interpret it, not canon lawyers or Fr. Z.
Pray an Our Father now that as Bishop Gracida has asked for in his Open Letter to the Cardinals that they convene a imperfect council to investigate the validity of the Francis conclave.
Also, pray an Our Father that the imperfect council investigate the validity of the Pope Benedict XVI resignation and issue a correction of the Francis explicit heresy of Communion for adulterers.
"If you are going to say that Francis is not a legitimate Pope, you need a better argument than an invalid conclave due to conspiracy."
(Fr. Z's Blog, "Is Francis an Antipope because Cardinals conspired and the conclave was invalid?, October 17, 2019)
Unfortunately for Fr. Z's argument, Cardinal Raymond Burke said:
"The only grounds that could be used for calling into question the validity of the [Francis] election would be were the election organized by a campaign beforehand which is strictly forbidden and that would be difficult to demonstrate."
(Patrick Coffin Show, "141: Dubia Cardinal goes on the Record - Raymond Cardinal Burke")
Moreover, apparently Fr. Z thinks he is a cardinal who can judge Pope John Paul II's conclave constitution.
I suggest that he read paragraph 5 of Universi Dominici Gregis:
"[C]oncerning the prescriptions contained in this Constitution... I [Pope John Paul II] Decree that all power of issuing a judgement of this in this regards to the College of Cardinals."
As Bishop Rene Gracida says and the constitution said only the cardinals can interpret it, not canon lawyers or Fr. Z.
Pray an Our Father now that as Bishop Gracida has asked for in his Open Letter to the Cardinals that they convene a imperfect council to investigate the validity of the Francis conclave.
Also, pray an Our Father that the imperfect council investigate the validity of the Pope Benedict XVI resignation and issue a correction of the Francis explicit heresy of Communion for adulterers.
Comments
And I need a better argument?
The witches and warlocks have taken over; they’ve literally begun adoring demons in our holiest places under the invitation and leadership of this wicca antipope of the apocalypse; fundamental dogmas are being overturned with a wrecking ball. And Z is still back there insisting the Conclave was valid?
That is not reasonable. It is into the realm of diabolical blindness. None of this is reasonable. None of this is Catholic. He is Priest in an apostate Church. And I need a better argument! No. I’m comfortable with my argument.
The Latin original resignation was in substantial error. Plain by the text and Canon Law. Plain by subsequent clarifications. Plain by subsequent actions.
Game over. Conclave invalid while the Pope still lives and reigns. Everything else is white noise.
Answer that. Explain how you keep the Munus, and remain firmly and forever within the enclosure of St. Peter and are not still the Pope. Any support for that in Tradition? Seen an Emeritus anywhere in history we can use for comparison?
It’s pretty simple. Resign the Office (Munus), and go home. Strike 1, strike 2. New Pope has Divine Protection from heresy and error ... uh .... strike 3.
People will not be damned for honestly, unknowingly adhering to an anti-pope. Canonized saints have done so.
No more loopholes, indeed. Time is growing short. Opposition to Lucifer’s conquest is utterly lacking while we debate “is he or is isn’t he”.
He stands defiantly before God. He adores demons. Well?
All you angels and saints, ora pro nobis!