I think Fathers understanding of being a legal or undeclared heretic is a little underwhelming. An undeclared heretic is still a heretic (a non catholic) but he needs to be canonically tried in order for the material element to be fulfilled in being a formal heretic in the eyes of the church. Bergoglio is a manifest heretic, he has publicly denied doctrines of the faith, according to Bachofen, public heresy is the same as notorious heresy. Even with this Bergoglio still maintains his papal elect status because a notorious heretic loses jurisdiction but not his chair or seat (Bachofen et al). Also public defection from the faith can be as small as publicly partcipating and promoting a non catholic sect, according to Ayrinhac (1917 code commentator). I believe in the thesis fyi , just a few critical notes.
@@prevatican2catholicshow thank you for the reply, I have read it before, I think the article clearly defines church teaching better and it is clearer in terminology. I agree 100% with the article. I assume Father was being much more succinct in the video, I think parts of it could confuse people regarding an undeclared heretic but I understand time was a factor. It is a topic that would probably take a whole video to go into the details, maybe a good future episode? Thanks
24:00 argument of not manifestet personal heresy make a lot of sense in order to understand the thesis. Thank you Fr. Despósito.
how can we tell whether the Fathers and popes are designating someone as a sentenced or unsentenced heretic, as in P. Paul IV on the heretical pope?
Cassiciacum makes sense. There was an iterruption of 490 years when the first temple was destroyed until Jesus arrived.
Don’t you mean the 2nd temple? The first was of Solomon, who died 931 BC.
I think Fathers understanding of being a legal or undeclared heretic is a little underwhelming. An undeclared heretic is still a heretic (a non catholic) but he needs to be canonically tried in order for the material element to be fulfilled in being a formal heretic in the eyes of the church. Bergoglio is a manifest heretic, he has publicly denied doctrines of the faith, according to Bachofen, public heresy is the same as notorious heresy. Even with this Bergoglio still maintains his papal elect status because a notorious heretic loses jurisdiction but not his chair or seat (Bachofen et al).
Also public defection from the faith can be as small as publicly partcipating and promoting a non catholic sect, according to Ayrinhac (1917 code commentator).
I believe in the thesis fyi , just a few critical notes.
Fr. Dutertre discusses the issue in the Thesis site. See: thethesis.us/chapter-xiii/
@@prevatican2catholicshow thank you for the reply, I have read it before, I think the article clearly defines church teaching better and it is clearer in terminology. I agree 100% with the article. I assume Father was being much more succinct in the video, I think parts of it could confuse people regarding an undeclared heretic but I understand time was a factor. It is a topic that would probably take a whole video to go into the details, maybe a good future episode? Thanks
Indeed, compared to the brevity of an interview, a written article is more clear. Everyone should check out the Thesis website as a first stop.