The Gallican Challenge: Will Michael Matt, Chris Ferrara, Brian McCall, John Salza, and Robert Siscoe Approve of or Reject the Idea Advanced by Elizabeth Yore at the Remnant that a pope can be removed by the College of Cardinals? I challenge them to say simply YES OR NO. I SAY NO! READERS PLEASE RESPOND TO THE CHALLENGE!


Here is the critical text from Elizabeth Yore's article and the link to the complete article. It is even more indicative of one's over all doctrinal stance than debating about a pope falling into heresy. Here, the College of Cardinals would be exercising authority over the occupant of the Holy See to remove him from office because of malfeasance in office.

Here is the section of the relevant article and the links both to the full article as published in The Remnant and to Louie Verrecchio's expose of this article at akacatholic:

https://akacatholic.com/remnant-takes-bold-stand/

http://angelqueen.org/2018/05/25/anatomy-of-a-cover-up-an-open-letter-to-frankenpope/#comment-48299
The College of Cardinals should immediately convene and remove Francis, the Bishop of Rome for his gross and grave negligence and personal complicity in the systematic flouting and abuse of his own zero tolerance policy causing a scandal of epic proportions brought upon the global Catholic Church and the Chilean Catholic Church. In Francis’ new Motu Proprio Guidelines on Bishop Removal the standard for removal is “In the case of the abuse of minors and vulnerable adults it is enough that the lack of diligence be grave.” § 3. Three years of papal stonewalling and coverup is the definition of grave.
It is easily arguable that the Francis coverup timeline demonstrates overwhelming evidence of a pernicious and wanton breach of ecclesiastic duty to ensure the protection of children and the moral integrity of the episcopacy. For once, will the Princes of the Church protect the little children? Or will they continue to quake in their mitres in the face of the dictator Pope?

Comments

  1. No, a Pope cannot be removed by the Cardinals. But do not forget to include Bishop Fellay and the SSPX to the "challenge".

    ReplyDelete
  2. My sense is they cannot remove him. But by flagrant, manifest, obstinate heresy he is already removed....he is no longer a member of the Body of Christ...as of yesterday and today. They could only meet to declare what has already occured. They could declare an official pronouncement to an event that has already happened.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Legitimate Catholic Cardinals could not remove a valid Pope, let alone heretical non-Catholic Cardinals.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think the cardinals can convene to rule if the Pope is a formal heretic. Once that is determined, it would generally be thought that the Pope would abdicate/ resign, but as far as I know, there is no direct way that the Cardinals can unseat a "validly elected" Pope- ( "validly elected" is another story entirely)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The only thing legitimate Catholic Cardinals could do would be to set up an imperfect council declaring the fact that he is invalid. They could not make a valid pope invalid.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular Posts

Original Photo of "the Meeting" between Paul VI and "Sister Lucy" found! TV Camera Stands Next to Paul VI. "Sister Lucy" Cut and Pasted In.

Again Sister Lucy II has to Bi-Locate to Get Near Paul VI during his 1967 Visit to Fatima. As Top Physicians, Plastic Surgeons, Dental Specialists, Private Investigators Analyze and Report about the Photos of "Sister Lucy," More Faked Photos Emerge . As Falling Flowers Used as Confetti Are in Identical Places, "Sister Lucy" Appears and Disappears from 1967 Photos.

Exclusive: RadTrad Thomist has Gotten Access to the Foreward to Fr. Paul Kramer's Soon to be Released "Heretic Pope?" Salza and Siscoe, Fr. Chazal and, yes, even Bishop Williamson Thou Art Refuted! Public Heresy and the Papacy and Even Membership in the Church Cannot Go Together.

Best Video footage of the first time the Imposter Sister Lucy was put before the Public on May 13, 1967 and, also, Close-Up Footage of the Imposter Aged 70 or 80.

Kevin Symonds Admits that Previously Posted Photo of Paul VI and "Sister Lucy" was Doctored. BUT......He also "knows" that there was not any "conspiracy" involved and it is no big deal. MOVE ON.....NOTHING TO SEE HERE.

Breaking News: Sister Lucy II Did NOT Have Dentures. BUT She DID Seem to Bi-ilocate. See Identical Sister Lucy Picture with DIFFERENT backgrounds! Handwriting Analysis and Height Analysis To be Included in Report.

Fraud: Facial Recognition Technology With 2,400 Picture Comparisons Shows Sister Lucy I (Pre-1958) and Sister Lucy II (Post-1958) are Definitely NOT the Same Person.

As World Experts Discuss the Sister Lucy Truth Case, Here is More Proof that the Fatima Establishment Has Used Doctored Photos to Put Forward A Fraud.