Banker Gotti Tedeschi (and 61 people) accuse the Pope of 7 heresies

The “Formal correction” on Amoris laetitia has been released: no cardinal or bishop in communion with Rome has signed it. Former IOR president and anti-Francis blog managers among the 62 signatories 

Post-synodal exhortation Amoris Laetitia


Pubblicato il 24/09/2017
Ultima modifica il 24/09/2017 alle ore 17:20
vatican city

At midnight on 23 September 2017, the "formal correction” to Pope Bergoglio for the alleged errors contained in the post-synodal exhortation Amoris laetitia was jointly published on several blogs and online newspapaers tied to the  the anti-Francis cabal. But surprisingly, the document, which according to the publishers was handed over to Francis on August 11, no cardinal has signed the document. The formal correction lacks the signature of the archbishop emeritus of Bologna Carlo Caffarra, who died on 6 September and in truth, had never wanted to call it a "correction” to the Pope. American cardinal Raymond Leo Burke, the first to use this expression, (which by way has no serious historical-canonistic grounds), didn’t sign the document nor did Walter Brandenmuller. None of the bishop in communion with Rome, not even the name of the auxiliary of Astana Athanasius Schneider - the most mediatically exposed among Francis' opposers - appear at the bottom of the document. The only episcopal signature is that of the superior of the Society of Saint Pius X, Bernard Fellay.  

  

  

The "formal correction” presented in the form of a "filial correction”, was signed by 62 people (initially they were 40, the others were recently added) and released in the United States by the ultra-conservative Rorate caeli website, while in Italy it was released by Sandro Magister's blog, Nuova Bussola Quotidiana directed by Riccardo Cascioli and by Professor Roberto De Mattei's Roman correspondence website, the lattest appearing  among the 62 signatories.  

  

The authors of the document claim, “By these words, deeds, and omissions, and by some passages of the document Amoris laetitia, Your Holiness has upheld, directly or indirectly, and, with what degree of awareness we do not seek to judge, both by public office and by private act propagated in the Church the following false and heretical propositions: 

  

1. A justified person has not the strength with God’s grace to carry out the objective demands of the divine law, as though any of the commandments of God are impossible for the justified; or as meaning that God’s grace, when it produces justification in an individual, does not invariably and of its nature produce conversion from all serious sin, or is not sufficient for conversion from all serious sin. 

  

2. Christians who have obtained a civil divorce from the spouse to whom they are validly married and have contracted a civil marriage with some other person during the lifetime of their spouse, who live  more uxorio  with their civil partner, and who choose to remain in this state with full knowledge of the nature of their act and full consent of the will to that act, are not necessarily in a state of mortal sin, and can receive sanctifying grace and grow in charity.'   

 

3. A Christian believer can have full knowledge of a divine law and voluntarily choose to break it in a serious matter, but not be in a state of mortal sin as a result of this action.  

  

4. A person is able, while he obeys a divine prohibition, to sin against God by that very act of obedience. 

  

5. Conscience can truly and rightly judge that sexual acts between persons who have contracted a civil marriage with each other, although one or both of them is sacramentally married to another person, can sometimes be morally right or requested or even commanded by God. 

  

6. Moral principles and moral truths contained in divine revelation and in the natural law do not include negative prohibitions that absolutely forbid particular kinds of action, because these are always gravely unlawful on account of their object. 

  

7. Our Lord Jesus Christ wills that the Church abandon her perennial discipline of refusing the Eucharist to the divorced and remarried and of refusing absolution to the divorced and remarried who do not express contrition for their state of life and a firm purpose of amendment with regard to it. 

  

"These propositions - conclude the signatories - all contradict truths that are divinely revealed, and that Catholics must believe with the assent of divine faith… It is necessary for the good of souls that they be once more condemned by the authority of the Church. In listing these seven propositions we do not intend to give an exhaustive list of all the heresies and errors which an unbiased reader, attempting to read Amoris laetitia in its natural and obvious sense, would plausibly take to be affirmed, suggested or favoured by this document: a letter sent to all the cardinals of the Church and to the Eastern Catholic patriarchs lists 19 such propositions. Rather, we seek to list the propositions which Your Holiness's words, deeds and omissions, as already described, have in effect upheld and propagated, to the great and imminent danger of souls.”  

 

The document and the list of its supporters is online and translated into six languages: the 7 heresies written in Latin are accompanied by other materials. The most important, and in some ways, closest name to the Vatican world, is that of the banker Ettore Gotti Tedeschi, former president of the Institute for Religion Works (IOR), who was removed from office in 2012. In addition to the name of Fellay there are other signatures of priests, scholars, journalists and bloggers from 20 different nations, directly related to the Lefebvrian, conservative and far-right Catholic world.  

home

home