The Protest against Pope Francis’s alleged Sacrilegious Acts

This document accuses Pope Francis of heresy, idolatry, and at least implicitly accuses him of apostasy: Protest against Pope Francis’s Sacrilegious Acts

1. Pope Francis is the valid Roman Pontiff, as proven by the acceptance of Francis as Pope by the body of Bishops. The Church is indefectible, so the body of Bishops is never permitted by prevenient grace to accept an invalid Pope.

2. Dogma of Vatican I: each valid Pope has the gift of truth and a never failing faith. Therefore, prevenient grace never permits a Pope to commit apostasy, heresy, schism, or idolatry, nor to err gravely in doctrine or discipline.

3. Pope Francis cannot possibly be guilty of the sins of which he is accused, variously heresy, apostasy, and idolatry, as he is the valid Roman Pontiff, and he cannot lose his validity due to the dogma of Vatican I.

4. St. Thomas teaches that idolatry (a) committed with knowledge includes unbelief or (b) with ignorance is a wicked type of falseness. Francis cannot be guilty of either as he has the gift of truth and a never-failing faith.

5. Thus, Pope Francis is innocent of all accusations of heresy, apostasy, and idolatry, and all who accuse him of these things are guilty of heresy, as well as bearing false witness against Christ himself, as if he lied in Lk 22:32 and Mt 16:18. They are the ones who must repent.

6. Finally, the signatories to the “Protest against Pope Francis’s Sacrilegious Acts” are also guilty of schism, as no one submits to a Pope as to a Teacher and Shepherd, who is believed to be guilty of such grave sins. They are automatically excommunicated for schism and heresy.

I have nothing to do with these pride-filled self-exalting heretics and apostates, who have changed the Catholic faith from a holy religion of faith in the teachings of Jesus and His Church and His Vicars, into a religion of ignorance, arrogance, false accusations, and absolute lack of faith in anything but their own ideas and their own faulty understanding. Even an atheist “believes” whatever he himself decides is true. Therefore, these former-Catholics have departed from Christianity altogether, as they have faith in nothing more than their own ideas. They believe nothing that any Pope or Council teaches, unless their own minds say it is so, and they ignore or radically reinterpret any teaching of Tradition, Scripture, or the Magisterium, which they dislike.

Even worse are those persons who have accused the Body of Christ, with Christ as its Head and the Holy Spirit as its soul, of having been infiltrated by Satan at the highest level. That claim is not only apostasy, it is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.

They are devoid of love, as shown by the malice and contempt with which they treat the Pope and his supporters. They are devoid of faith, as they believe nothing but what their own minds say is true. They are devoid of hope, as hope proceeds from love and faith. They are not in the state of grace, as proven by their own very public words and deeds. I do not judge their souls, in saying this, but I only take them at their word, when they say they do not believe and when they openly act with extreme contempt.

Ronald L Conte Jr

This entry was posted in commentary. Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to The Protest against Pope Francis’s alleged Sacrilegious Acts

  1. franciscofigueroa1 says:

    Pope Francis has already said that those items, including the one that represents the Pachamama (mother earth) had been displayed in the church without idolatrous intentions. To say otherwise is to utter calumnies against the Pope. Calumny is a grave sin, and if it is done against the Vicar of Christ, it is even a greater sin.

    Some people bowed down before those items, but to bow down is not the equivalent to “adore” something. Otherwise, we can claim, as some Protestants do against Catholics, that anyone who bows down before someone or something is therefore thinking that the person or object in front is a god. Of course not. We can disagree to some limited extend with some decisions of the prudential order (basing our limited disagreement on T, S, M), but we must always be subject to our Father, Pastor, and Universal Teacher. Pope Francis (and any Pope) is the Visible Head of the Church because he visibly governs Her with the authority of Jesus Christ Himself, who is Her invisible Head.

  2. Rob says:

    I believe Pope Francis when he says that he had no idolatrous intentions in allowing these statues to be placed. But I do not share his confidence that there were no idolatrous intentions involved at all. I think allowing them there was a mistake on his part. The image presented is very poor even assuming no one involved at all viewed it as a pagan idol.

    • Ron Conte says:

      I think the use of this type of figurine is open to the possibility of future abuse. But in this limited case, it was not idolatry. Also, by dogma, the Pope cannot commit idolatry. The prevenient grace of God prevents it. So we can know by faith that it is not idolatry on the part of the Pope. Still, I would advise against the continued use of these figures.

  3. Alex says:

    Romans 14:14 “I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean.”

    So…for whom Pachamama is an idol? For the tribes in Amazon. Anyone else? For Vigano? For those 20 priests? Perhaps it is they who need some correction or education.
    It was not an idol for the pope and for the majority of bishops gathered in the Amazon synod. It was just a wooden statue that cannot talk or do anything else other than represent some symbology and tradition of the peoples whose coming Christianization the Synod discussed. And what is that much different from the pagan Rome when introducing Virgin Mary to uneducated people?

    Does Vigano have a Christmas tree? Do all those fanatics have, gathered around the latin masses and cursing pope everyday, while thinking of themselves as earthly angels? If the Christmas tree is originally pagan, the candles, the eggs for easter, then is it unclean when we use it to celebrate the birth of Jesus and His Resurrection? Certainly not!

    St Francis of Assisi called the earth “mother”. So did pope Francis. And here is a common ground with those indigenous peoples who seem to be closer to the spirit of love and forgiveness preached by Jesus than the group around Vigano is. Let also remember that Satan believes in God and knows the theology in even greater detail than Vigano. That doesn’t stop him being Satan, the ultimate rejection of the good and merciful God. It is sad to see rebirth of middle age inquisitory mentality under the pretext of “defending the true catholic religion”. I’d wish the pope to be more stern with those people. We cannot afford rolling back centuries for whatever “good looking” excuse. The inquisition has to be remembered clearly and never allowed again. It has nothing to do with the love in the first Christian communities, and the teaching of Jesus in first place. Those self-appointed people who pretend to speak on behalf of God and the Church must be stopped, not waiting them to decide to exit in schism. Maybe the schism is not their goal. They already poisoned the reform and will do so with the next conclave if allowed.

  4. Rob says:

    How do you think it would look if Pope Francis exhumed the body of one of his predecessors, set it up on a throne, publicly screamed abuse at it, cut off its blessing fingers, declared all its ordinations invalid, and finally threw the carcass into the Tiber River? Yet we know from history that God would absolutely allow a Pope to do that.

    The Pope can make bigger mistakes than you seem to allow.

  5. Rob says:

    I’m not saying I think the Pope had idolatrous intentions. I’m saying that just because he didn’t doesn’t mean that no one did, or that this wasn’t a bad idea. Popes have had to be rebuked or corrected before, from St Peter to the Avignon line to the time that one tried to promulgate the teaching that the blessed do not immediately receive the Beatific Vision. It happens.

    I think you go too far in accusing these people of apostasy. I know some who are sympathetic, and overwhelmingly they are simply pious Catholics sincerely concerned for the sanctity of the church. They go too far if they accuse Francis of outright sacrilege, but I do not think they are apostates.

    • Ron Conte says:

      Popes have to be rebuked or corrected? by whom? The first see is judged by no one. If you think the Pope has erred, write a theological argument. This idea that the conservative Catholic subculture and its leaders have the role and right to accuse, judge, and condemn the Roman Pontiff is schismatic. It is heretical, as it rejects the dogma that the Pope has a never-failing faith and that his magisterium has immunity from grave error. Being guilty of schism and heresy, they are automatically excommunicated. It is dogma that no Pope can commit idolatry, apostasy, heresy, or schism, nor any grave error against doctrine or discipline.

      Some are also guilty of apostasy, as they have rejected Faith itself, replacing it with their own understanding and the prevailing views in a conservative subculture. Without faith in the Magisterium, Christianity is not a religion, but a political system. That’s apostasy. When they review every teaching of every Pope and Council (as Infiltration does) and reject anything, even of mere discipline) that does not accord with their own mind, they commit apostasy and idolatry. For they are only worshiping themselves and a subculture.

      Mary at La Salette:
      “Tremble, earth and you who make profession of serving Jesus Christ and who on the inside you adore yourselves, tremble; for God is going to deliver you over to His enemy….”

  6. Rob says:

    Saint Paul corrected Saint Peter, Saint Catherine rebuked the Avignon Pope for not returning to Rome, and some (I forget who at the moment) opposed the promulgation of the belief that the Beatific Vision was not received by the blessed immediately after death.

    Those things all happened. People have objected to the Pope’s actions or decisions before, some of them Saints.

    • Ron Conte says:

      Popes can err only to a limited extent. To that extent, they can be offered a theological argument as correction, or prayers. But to publicly accuse any Pope of idolatry, apostasy, heresy, or schism (any grave failure of faith) is contrary to dogma (“never failing faith” Vatican I). And it is also the error of schism, as no one submits to the authority of a Pope they think is an idolator, apostate, heretic, or schismatic.

    • franciscofigueroa1 says:

      Saint Catherine of Siena did not “rebuke” Pope Gregory Xl (who was in Avignon at the time). She wrote tender letters to the Holy Father, one of them, as a plea, begging him with so much love, holiness, and reverence to him, as loving child to her father. She even called him “my dear babbo”. Nothing compared to the open letters sent today to the Pope. Furthermore, Saint Catherine did not intend such letter to be a public letter (it was a private letter, later made public by other persons). This letter can be read online now.

  7. Rob says:

    Also where do you get the doctrine that no Pope can make a grave error in doctrine or discipline?

  8. Rob says:

    I don’t accuse Pope Francis of idolatry. But I think in this matter he can be credibly accused of negligence. I recommenced we pray for him.

  9. Alessandro Arsuffi says:

    The people accusing the Pope idolatry have very short Memories or haven’t looked closely at Church buildings before. For example, they ignore the fact that the Seven Virtues are often personified as women with symbols and represented in statues and paintings. One of them, Justice, Is usually identical to Roman goddess Iustitia, including the presence of a weight scale. And tbh the Church never feared to adopt pagan symbols of they help ti spread the Faith.

  10. Alex says:

    The accusers don’t care of “idols” unless they are so stupid as to accept pachamama as an idol for themselves. The smarter ones, like Vigano, seek any weakness in the prey that is now pope Francis for them. Idolatry is not the first issue those people launch a crusade at. And won’t be the last one. Ultimately, they want to replace pope Francis with someone of their like, someone who will revert back Vatican II. Not Benedict, because actually Benedict has words that no one of them would like, including of the Environment that is yet another topic of attack for them. Including of scientific approach of theology compared the Eucharist with a nuclear explosion and mutation (what a heresy, if pope Francis would say the same!)

    It isn’t gonna happen! The 5,000 bishops who all have been anointed by the Holy Spirit (not only Vigano, Sarah, Burke and Muller), and also the vast majority of 1.2 bln catholics, maybe 1.1. bln just can’t stand that reversal of history! Why not to make a poll among common catholics how they think about, not only among the US catholics that are being asked by sociologists and are given as example for some different and better kind of catholics. Let see how Latin American catholics think, they are half of all. How their bishops think. Oups, they just said it in the Amazon synod…inconvenient! Watch the online masses from Brazilian national shrine Aparecida to see a bit different order of mass where the people participate in the Eucharistic prayer… Another heresy maybe? Approved by some 200 Brazilian bishops?

    Then let cloud everything in outdated rhetoric, in idolatry, in homosexuality warnings every now and then, so the common believers never know what is going on and how close to hell they are… knowing that even the pope is with one leg stepping in hell according to such great doctors of the church as Burke and Vigano…Medieval tactics! It failed back then, it will fail now too.

    It has Nothing to do with the wooden statue that cannot speak. Or if it does, those who accept pachamama as an idol, actually are at the level of the Amazonian tribes only their opposite….And let repeat it again, they should get rid of their christmas trees this year and every next year…because it is idolatry according to that logic! Let declare every church that puts a christmas tree a heretic church…Jesus was never born under a pine tree! Let start burning trees, and books… I saw already a priest burning images of pachamama. Next is to burn all works of the heretical pope Francis, better in public infront of those secluded church communities that still pretend they are catholic (i.e. universal in translation).

Comments are closed.