They have already accused Pope Francis of teaching heresy and even apostasy. They have utterly rejected Francis as Teacher and Shepherd, as true Roman Pontiff, along with all his teachings. When Pope Francis approves of ordained women deacons, they will reject this decision. He will likely use Papal Infallibility to confirm the teaching. They will accuse him of apostasy and will say that he is not a valid Pope. They will depart from the one true Church, accusing the Church of being a false Church and a new false religion.
And then they will have a problem. There is no way back for them — other than to repent of their sins and accept Pope Francis as true Roman Pontiff and accept his teachings (including women deacons).
When each successive Pope and Council after Francis continues to support his teaching, the unrepentant schismatics will reject those Popes and Councils as well. No Pope or Council is going to reject a teaching of a past Pope under Papal Infallibility! Never has happened. Never will happen.
So they will remain trapped in their pride and ignorance, trapped outside the sole Ark of Salvation. The Flood waters are rising, and they are outside the Ark. There is no path back to the Church for them, except to submit their minds, hearts, and faith to Pope Francis — even after he is no longer Pope.
The papal accusers are already in a state of formal heresy and formal schism. (Some are actually apostates as they have accused the Church of being infiltrated by Satan.) They are already excommunicated latae sententiae. They sin gravely every time they receive Communion. They lead astray many souls by their sin of scandal, every time they attack the Pope. They are outside the Church (formally). Some may be in the state of grace, but the malice that so many of them have toward Pope Francis makes it hard for me to believe that they are all in the state of grace. Their vicious derision and malicious accusations seem incompatible with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.
But, being outside the Church, how will they return? Only by repentance.
They think that the next conservative Pope will take their side. I think he might change the discipline of Communion, making it stricter. But that will only underscore their own prohibition from the Eucharist. I think he may make some changes to Canon Law, such as issuing severe penalties for any one who verbally attacks the Roman Pontiff and anyone who contradicts his definitive teaching. But that won’t help them either.
There is just no possibility that a future conservative Pope will take the same position toward Francis as the papal accusers. So they are stuck waiting for the hypothetical Pope or Council who will, do what? Anathematize every Pope from Francis to that future point? And what happens when a future Council confirms women deacons? The papal accusers have already rejected Vatican II. They will absolutely reject a decision of Pope Francis under papal infallibility. They will continue rejecting Popes and Councils. Their only way back, other than repentance, is to hope for a future Pope or Council to reject Francis.
Well, didn’t the Sixth Ecumenical Council accuse Pope Honorius of heresy? Not really: In Defense of Pope Honorius. Some Council Fathers tried, but they were rebuffed by Pope Saint Agatho and Pope Saint Leo II. Saint Robert Bellarmine says that Honorius and other accused Popes are all innocent of apostasy and heresy.
They have no way back. They are already gone, they just don’t admit it yet. And women deacons along with married priests will force them out of the parishes. They will finally have to admit that they are schismatics, just like the SSPX.
What’s the path back for the SSPX? Hilariously, they are hoping for a Pope or Council that will reject ALL the popes since Vatican II and that Council as well. It’s not looking good for that strategy. And it is the same strategy now adopted by the papal accusers.
Those who refuse to learn from history are doomed….
RLCJ
the reproach of Christ 
Absolutely agree!
Those unfortunate accusers believe that they are the “remnant church” of the End times. That Fatima “said” of antichrist or satan in Vatican. That pope Francis is either the false prophet or at best he paves his way. They have no proof, and of course cannot have it. But they believe their own “righteousness” and “appointment by God.
So I suspect they will make their own “church” soon. In USA they are already separated in the so called latin mass communities, with fanatical priests who even on the normal mass that they are obliged to say, face “east” turning their back to the people – after the advice of cardinal Sarah and in visible defiance of pope Francis who personally walked into Sarah’s office to tell him the new mass approved by St Paul VI is the only ordinary form of liturgy in the Roman rite.
I like the old latin mass. The problem are the people who congregate in those communities and who spell hatred against the common liturgy as if “it is horrible, devils hurl there”. I have heard them personally speaking like that, after attending latin mass, or after attending the new mass and after having received the Holy Communion. I don’t know if they are in the state of grace. Or maybe, as pope Francis noted, some of them need mental help and stronger pills to keep their minds afloat. Maybe some of them are not directly influenced by the devil but simply have gone crazy, especially in a situation of difficult everyday life in families with 8-10 kids. But if the deluded faithful may have personal excuses that lessen their guilt, the priests and bishops who oppose pope Francis do not have such excuses.
Ron, could you please say more about Fatima, 102 years after the sun miracle?
The third secret of Fatima is nothing other than what was released by the Vatican in 2000. It is a vision that describes great suffering for the Church and the martyrdom of the Pope (not Francis, but the next Pope).
I totally agree with you Ron. Between the abuse scandals and theological issues with Vatican II and the last several Popes, I believe a lot (not all) of those supporting the accusers mean to ‘wake up’ those in the Church, however, they are succumbing (ironically) to a modern cultural mindset that is directly at odds with hierarchical structures. The ultimate jettisoning of these structures is to deny the authority of Peter himself based on perceived inconsistencies with past practices, etc. It basically boils down to seeing the Church as a purely human organization (& hence with inherent potential for straying from the truth) as opposed to the Bride of Christ.
Ron, as the split from Rome draws closer (at least in the US), do you envisage, as I do, that many ‘roman catholics’ will depart resulting in the removal of many parishes as well as some dioceses?
Some parishes and perhaps a few diocese will break with Pope Francis and Rome. Many will simply stop attending Mass anywhere. It will get far worse under the next conservative Pope, when the liberals behave the way that the conservatives are now behaving. Many liberals will then depart from Catholicism and no longer practice the faith at all. Far fewer persons will attend Mass. The Church will be in great crisis.
Here is one online comment of fundamentalist about the Amazon synod “How much further will we go ?. I’ll answer for myself. No further. Nothing, nothing is going to make me take up any of these diabolical assaults, attacks and destruction of Holy Catholic Church. ”
With that preset mentality closed for any further argument, shared by many fundamentalists, it is clear that ANY propositions of the Holy father and the majority of cardinals and bishops, no matter how logical and rooted in the Holy Scripture they are, will be rejected in advance. From here to a declared schism is a half step only.
I am thinking of a non-cardinal as the next pope. Maybe not even a bishop. Maybe a holy priest stigmatic? I know Ron, your view of cardinal Turkson, but imho it isn’t going to happen for many reasons, not only his advanced age. Perhaps it will be directly the pope after that you contemplate.
Because if there is a liberal schism after the conservative one, having majority among the common catholics (not just counting the few ultra liberal cardinals in Germany but the actual inclinations of the common people) the liberals will say they are the true Catholic Church. As I watch the Masses from the Brazilian shrine Aparecida, the Eucharistic prayer is already changed with participation -responses of the faithful, accepted as the normal way the things should be. I.e., Brazil and much of Latin America, according to what they show now, are going to be those liberals. So where is the point, if they have the majority. They will not call themselves schismatics, they will call themselves the renewed Catholic Church.
Of course, God can change things overnight.
Amazon Synod — women deacons — conservative schism — Pope Francis resigns — next Pope is Cardinal Arinze as Pius 13 — liberal schism — beginning of the tribulation
Speaking to Alex’s point – how can the liberals call themselves the ‘renewed Catholic Church’ if they don’t have a pope? How can they obviate this most fundamental of requirements? (maybe before a new pope is selected?)
I have been predicting that they will elect an antipope for some time now. This occurs after the reign of the next Pope, when both an antipope (liberal) and a true pope are elected, each outside of Rome.