Why it's Dogmatically Impossible that Bergoglio be a Succesor of Saint Peter. This is the teaching of Vatican I, that the very nature of the Divine Institution of the Papacy requires that a successor …More
Why it's Dogmatically Impossible that Bergoglio be a Succesor of Saint Peter.
This is the teaching of Vatican I, that the very nature of the Divine Institution of the Papacy requires that a successor of Saint Peter succeed to the Office of the Cathedra of Peter fromrome.wordpress.com/…/why-its-dogmati… which, because of Benedict's non-resignation never happened. Also, why its dogmatically illicit to name Bergoglio instead of Benedict in the Canon of the Mass
This is the teaching of Vatican I, that the very nature of the Divine Institution of the Papacy requires that a successor of Saint Peter succeed to the Office of the Cathedra of Peter fromrome.wordpress.com/…/why-its-dogmati… which, because of Benedict's non-resignation never happened. Also, why its dogmatically illicit to name Bergoglio instead of Benedict in the Canon of the Mass
Ultraviolet
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
sedevacantism is caputvacantism. The Church has had a long, long run of "bad popes" and worse ones are coming soon. It is what it is. Just because you don't like what the Pope says, or what the Pope does, doesn't change that he's still The Pope.
Seems a lot of people have forgotten one of the most important legal cases of our time:. https:/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol_Records,_Inc._v._Thomas-Rasset …More
sedevacantism is caputvacantism. The Church has had a long, long run of "bad popes" and worse ones are coming soon. It is what it is. Just because you don't like what the Pope says, or what the Pope does, doesn't change that he's still The Pope.
Seems a lot of people have forgotten one of the most important legal cases of our time:. https:/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol_Records,_Inc._v._Thomas-Rasset
It was the big one every one had been waiting for. For years beforehand, many self-appointed experts in "internet law", some of which were in fact real lawyers, loudly insisted it was impossible for the record industry to prove in a court of law that their copyrights were being violated because (blah-blah-blah). Then the case went to trial and in less than a day later, all those big-mouths were quiet with bitter helpings of humble pie.
The really arrogant ones swallowed it down and continued braying, "This won't stand on appeal and the next case will be different." They were still wrong.
Seems people still haven't learned the lesson these cases provided. A person's interpretation of "automatic excommunication" or "automatic anathematization" (I'm talking to you, Gesù è con noi) is just like their opinion on any other point in law (canon or secular). Until you see it ratified in court, it's just a lot of hot air.
Seems a lot of people have forgotten one of the most important legal cases of our time:. https:/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol_Records,_Inc._v._Thomas-Rasset
It was the big one every one had been waiting for. For years beforehand, many self-appointed experts in "internet law", some of which were in fact real lawyers, loudly insisted it was impossible for the record industry to prove in a court of law that their copyrights were being violated because (blah-blah-blah). Then the case went to trial and in less than a day later, all those big-mouths were quiet with bitter helpings of humble pie.
The really arrogant ones swallowed it down and continued braying, "This won't stand on appeal and the next case will be different." They were still wrong.
Seems people still haven't learned the lesson these cases provided. A person's interpretation of "automatic excommunication" or "automatic anathematization" (I'm talking to you, Gesù è con noi) is just like their opinion on any other point in law (canon or secular). Until you see it ratified in court, it's just a lot of hot air.
BrAlexisBugnolo
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Ugh, you obviously did not even read the article, because if you did, you just rejected the infallible Teaching of Vatican I on what a papal succession consists in.
Gesù è con noi
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
In addition Bergoglio is not a successor of Peter because he was already disqualified because he was automatically excommunicated and anathematized for being an apostate in Argentina. BERGOGLIO´S HERETICAL PAST IS FRANCIS´ PRESENT - CATHOLIC TV PROGRAM A COFFEE WITH GALAT-
mattsixteen24
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
la verdad prevalece
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Escribe nuestro hermano BrAlexisBugnolo: Esta es la enseñanza del Vaticano I, que la naturaleza misma de la Institución Divina del Papado requiere que un sucesor de San Pedro suceda a la Oficina de la Cátedra de Pedro https:/fromrome.wordpress.com/…/why-its-dogmati…
lo cual, debido a la no renuncia de Benedicto, nunca sucedió. Además, ¿por qué es dogmáticamente ilícito nombrar a Bergoglio en …More
Escribe nuestro hermano BrAlexisBugnolo: Esta es la enseñanza del Vaticano I, que la naturaleza misma de la Institución Divina del Papado requiere que un sucesor de San Pedro suceda a la Oficina de la Cátedra de Pedro https:/fromrome.wordpress.com/…/why-its-dogmati…
lo cual, debido a la no renuncia de Benedicto, nunca sucedió. Además, ¿por qué es dogmáticamente ilícito nombrar a Bergoglio en lugar de Benedicto en el Canon de la Misa?
lo cual, debido a la no renuncia de Benedicto, nunca sucedió. Además, ¿por qué es dogmáticamente ilícito nombrar a Bergoglio en lugar de Benedicto en el Canon de la Misa?
la verdad prevalece
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Scrivi il nostro fratello BrAlexisBugnolo: questo è l'insegnamento del Vaticano I, che la natura stessa della Divina Istituzione del Papato richiede che un successore di San Pietro succeda all'Ufficio della Cattedra di Peter https:/fromrome.wordpress.com/2019/06/18/why-its-dogmatically-impossible-that-bergoglio-be-the-successor-of-saint-peter/
perché la non-dimissione di Benedetto non è mai avvenuta …More
Scrivi il nostro fratello BrAlexisBugnolo: questo è l'insegnamento del Vaticano I, che la natura stessa della Divina Istituzione del Papato richiede che un successore di San Pietro succeda all'Ufficio della Cattedra di Peter https:/fromrome.wordpress.com/2019/06/18/why-its-dogmatically-impossible-that-bergoglio-be-the-successor-of-saint-peter/
perché la non-dimissione di Benedetto non è mai avvenuta. Inoltre, perché è dogmaticamente illegale nominare Bergoglio invece di Benedetto nel Canone della Messa?
perché la non-dimissione di Benedetto non è mai avvenuta. Inoltre, perché è dogmaticamente illegale nominare Bergoglio invece di Benedetto nel Canone della Messa?
la verdad prevalece
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Écrivez notre frère BrAlexisBugnolo: C'est l'enseignement de Vatican I que la nature même de l'Institution divine de la papauté exige qu'un successeur de saint Pierre succède à la présidence de Pierre https:/fromrome.wordpress.com/2019/06/18/why-its-dogmatically-impossible-that-bergoglio-be-the-successor-of-saint-peter/
parce que la non-démission de Benoît n'a jamais eu lieu. De plus, pourquoi …More
Écrivez notre frère BrAlexisBugnolo: C'est l'enseignement de Vatican I que la nature même de l'Institution divine de la papauté exige qu'un successeur de saint Pierre succède à la présidence de Pierre https:/fromrome.wordpress.com/2019/06/18/why-its-dogmatically-impossible-that-bergoglio-be-the-successor-of-saint-peter/
parce que la non-démission de Benoît n'a jamais eu lieu. De plus, pourquoi est-il illégal de nommer Bergoglio à la place de Benoît dans le Canon de la Messe?
parce que la non-démission de Benoît n'a jamais eu lieu. De plus, pourquoi est-il illégal de nommer Bergoglio à la place de Benoît dans le Canon de la Messe?
One more comment from la verdad prevalece
la verdad prevalece
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Escreva o nosso irmão BrAlexisBugnolo: Este é o ensinamento do Vaticano I, que a própria natureza da Instituição Divina do Papado exige que um sucessor de São Pedro suceda ao Ofício da Cátedra de Pedro https:/fromrome.wordpress.com/2019/06/18/why-its-dogmatically-impossible-that-bergoglio-be-the-successor-of-saint-peter/
porque a não-resignação de Bento XVI nunca aconteceu. Além disso, por que …More
Escreva o nosso irmão BrAlexisBugnolo: Este é o ensinamento do Vaticano I, que a própria natureza da Instituição Divina do Papado exige que um sucessor de São Pedro suceda ao Ofício da Cátedra de Pedro https:/fromrome.wordpress.com/2019/06/18/why-its-dogmatically-impossible-that-bergoglio-be-the-successor-of-saint-peter/
porque a não-resignação de Bento XVI nunca aconteceu. Além disso, por que é dogmaticamente ilegal nomear Bergoglio em vez de Bento XVI no Canon da Missa?
porque a não-resignação de Bento XVI nunca aconteceu. Além disso, por que é dogmaticamente ilegal nomear Bergoglio em vez de Bento XVI no Canon da Missa?