FEAR or FAITH? FRIGHT or FLIGHT?
Welcome Eagles to the New Crusade!
Will thou help defend the Fortress of Faith?

TradCatKnight- MOST VIEWED & FOLLOWED Traditional Catholic APOSTOLATE Worldwide!
As Seen on: Gloria.tv, SpiritDaily, Shoebat, Canon212, VeteransToday, Beforeitsnews & many other notable websites
BOOKMARK us & check in DAILY for the latest Endtimes News!
Welcome to my Nest. #EagleoftheFortress
WEBSITE OWNERS: Don't Forget To Add Us On Your Page!
ALEXA- TOP 25K WEBSITE WORLDWIDE

Friday, October 7, 2016

St. Robert Bellarmine's De Romano Pontifice: Salza & Siscoe Heresy

 St. Robert Bellarmine's De Romano Pontifice: Salza & Siscoe Heresy
Fr. Paul Kramer

Here is Chapter 30 of St. Robert Bellarmine's De Romano Pontifice. By a careful reading of this chapter one concludes that my understanding of it, (which is in unanimous agreement of it with the interpretation of all modern scholars), is the only orthodox solution to the question of a papal loss of office due to heresy. 


The opinion of Cajetan and Suarez both offend against the principle, Prima sedes a nemine iudicatur. The canon, Si papa, has been demonstrated to be spurious, and did not originate from St. Boniface; nor has it ever received official recognition from the Church, and can only be applied in a broad sense according to which a pope who has fallen from the papal office due to heresy can then be judged and punished by the Church.
Both Ballerini and Pope Gregory XVI understood the doctrine in this manner, as did Wernz-Vidal and Matteo Conte da Coronata in the 20th Century.
The opinions of Suarez and Cajetan also suffer from the defect that they consider the manifest heretic pope to remain in office until he is judged by the Church. The problem there is that a manifest heretic ceases by himself to be a member of the Church by his own judgment against himself, by which he leaves the Church and therefore ceases to be pope -- and without the judgment of anyone, other than his own judgment against himself ( as Bellarmine explains in his refutation of opinion no. 4).
The judgment of the Church can be only an official post factum recognition by which the heretic pope can be "shown to be already judged". (Innocent III - Sermo 4)
The opinion of John Salza & Robert Siscoe are therefore heretical on these two points: 1) they deny that the public sin of heresy "in sua natura" separates the heretic from the Church without the ecclesiastical penalty of excommunication (as Bellarmine explains in ch. 30); and 2) they oppose the dogma of the petrine primacy by professing that the Church may pronounce judgment on a pope while still in office.

Addendum: 
To All Brothers and Sisters in Christ,

I agreed with father Kramer 100% about his teachings of the Catholic Teachings on "Deposit of Faith" and how to go about to avoid to be deceived by the Anti-Christ. Fr. Gruner before he died, he worried about how to teach the people to keep the faith in this Apostate era. Fr. John O'Conor and Fr. Vincent Micali, S. J. also said the same thing before they died... and so many others who died mysteriously had been said for many decades...

The reason why Satan and his minions have infiltrated the church and confused everybody because we, the Catholics, had lost the faith. Very few people do still and try hard to keep the faith. Others become lukewarm and go along with the flow of "easy life' of the New Religion of the New World Order which is 10000000% Masonic Satanic Luciferian (Freemasonry).

We have OBLIGATION TO SEEK THE TRUTH, LIVE THE TRUTH, SPREAD THE TRUTH AND DEFEND THE TRUTH. When we become lukewarm and lazy to seek out the truth and live our life according to the truth, the ANTI-CHRIST GET IN. We see it now.

So many (good) Catholics failed and become heretics without even know it. Many who are actually working and preaching and writing to help the heretics to push us into APOSTASY. In the case of Salsa, I am not sure that he ever got away from his Masonic Doctrines of Hell yet? 

We must pray more, make more offerings, offer more sacrifices. This is it. All of us will be tested of how do we keep the faith until the last breath. This is the time of APOSTASY. The Anti-Christ cannot come until the APOSTASY COME FIRST.

THE ANTI-CHRIST IS HERE NOW.  THE CATHOLICS NEED TO WAKE UP FAST. Make reparation and be prepared for we don't have time to look for a good priest to hear our confession no more. Only a few good priests among 7 billions people. Get real people. If we claim we are Catholics. We need to demonstrate our faith at this time. 

Spread out the Fatima Message and live this message to the full scale and defend it. Pray that the Bishops and the Pope will wake up regret and repent of their errs and do the consecration of Russia NOW. 

Putin is sending 40 millions Russians underground so that he can be prepared for the nuclear war come upon them and vice versa. Only stupid fools would think that they will survive the nuclear war. The warnings from Heaven are mocked and GOD WILL NOT BE MOCKED.

In the End My Immaculate Heart Will Triumph,

KimLan Vu
 =================
 
Steven Speray:
There's another point to consider with Bellarmine. 
 
If Bellarmine required two warnings to prove a pope was a manifest heretic before losing his office as Salza and Siscoe argue, why did Bellarmine also say: “For although Liberius was not a heretic, nevertheless he was considered one... for men are not bound or able to read hearts; but when they see that someone is a heretic by his external works, they judge him to be a heretic pure and simple, and condemn him as a heretic.” (On the Roman Pontiff, 29).
 
Liberius wasn't warned. Liberius wasn't even a heretic at all!
 
Again, Wernz/Vidal: The fourth opinion, with Suarez, Cajetan and others [John of St. Thomas, Fr. Laymann, etc.], contends that a Pope is not automatically deposed even for manifest heresy, but that he can and must be deposed by at least a declaratory sentence of the crime. “Which opinion in my judgment is indefensible” as Bellarmine teaches.
 
Wernz/Vidal then give their 5th opinion showing that they agree with Bellarmine that Suarez and Cajetan's position is indefensible!
 
Siscoe calls me a heretic for not accepting John of St. Thomas' argument, yet he won't call his pope a heretic for not accepting dogma as they admit.  They are like the Dimond brothers who call everybody heretics for believing in Baptism of Desire, but they won't call several dozen popes, saints, canonists, and theologians heretics for believing, promoting, and promulgating Baptism of Desire.  teeth_smile