Don’t Confuse the Legitimate Use of Private Judgment with the Protestant Principle

“Although the Counter-Reformation canonists were understandably phobic about the impetus such a doctrine as that of automatic loss of the papal office for heresy without the judgment of the Church might give occasion to the abusive application of the Protestant principle of Private Judgment against the Papacy, the ancient age-old principle of law (Ab abusu ad usum non valet consequentia) remains ever valid, that an abuse is no argument against legitimate use; and therefore, Abusus non tollit usum: the abuse of a right does not nullify the right to its legitimate exercise. Their understandable concern for the possibility and even the likelihood that private individuals could seize upon the right to judge privately as a matter of conscience, and abuse it in the manner that it was abused by Luther to pronounce the pope a heretic, led them to adopt the opposite extreme, equally harmful and heterodox, according to which even a manifestly heretical pope remains in office and retains jurisdiction until the Church, by a juridical act pronounces judgment on him; and that private individuals may not avail themselves of their God-given right and last means of defense against the ravenous wolf, to form an opinion to acknowledge the defection and loss of office resulting from even the most manifest and patent public rejection of the Catholic faith by a heretic pope; and as a consequence to be compelled to remain subject to him, and be in communion with the public enemy of the Church for months, years or even decades, until the Church, by some miracle of providence, can finally be able to pronounce a judgment which effectively results in the heretic’s removal.”

Kramer, Paul. To Deceive the Elect: The Catholic Doctrine on the Question of a Heretical Pope (Kindle Locations 11153-11165). Kindle Edition.

Note:  Fr. Paul Kramer holds that a true pope cannot be a formal heretic.  In his estimation, this is proximate to Faith.  The point of the quote above is to emphasize that one can privately legitimately judge a cleric as a formal heretic upon the fact of public manifest formal heresy.


Fr. Paul Kramer on TradCatKnight Radio – May 24, 2018 – Heresy Rampant in Traditionalist Circles These Days

My friends, this is a must listen to interview in which Fr. Paul Kramer explains that heresies are being taught and accepted in Traditionalist circles these days in regards to the judgment of a true pope for heresy and in regards to the loss of office of a public manifest formal heretic:

  1. A council cannot judge a true pope for heresy.
  2. A public manifest formal heretic automatically loses office.

The contradictory teachings to these are heresies!  Yet, what do we hear throughout Traditionalist circles these days?  Many are calling for an imperfect council to judge Jorge Bergoglio, who they accept as a true pope, for heresy.  They also claim that a public manifest formal heretic does not lose office automatically, but must first be judged as a heretic by the competent Church authority before the loss of office takes place.

Woe to you Traditionalists who teach and/or accept these heresies!


Administrator of The Catacombs Forum Chimes in AGAIN on “Benedict Is the True Pope”

In this post, I challenged the Administrator (Admin) of The Catacombs Forum to justify the change in position that the Admin had taken from “Benedict XVI is pope” to “Jorge Bergoglio is pope”.  Since then I have not heard a peep from the Admin in response to this challenge.  However, yesterday the Admin started another thread (see screenshot below) on this matter (and has again refused to allow discussion) in which was referenced an article published by Catholic Candle.  In this article, there is a commonly used argument against the “Benedict is pope” position that states that the man that the Church universally accepts as pope is the true pope because universal acceptance corrects an invalid or doubtful election.  Now it is true that universal acceptance can do this.  However, this is assuming that the previous pope either died or validly resigned from the office of the papacy.  In Benedict XVI’s case, neither is true.  Therefore, universal acceptance has no bearing in Benedict XVI’s case.  If one does not agree, then he must either prove that Benedict XVI validly resigned the office of the papacy or admit that the papacy can be taken away from a reigning pope and given to another, which is an untenable position according to the divine constitution of the papacy.  Nevertheless, that Jorge Bergoglio has universal acceptance can itself be challenged.  Since his supposed election, there has been a small but growing number of faithful who have come to the conclusion that Benedict XVI’s did not validly resign from the office of the papacy and therefore remains pope.  Read the Declaratio; the facts speak for themselves.