If traditionalist Catholics are to be believed there could be a lot of accuracy in the following.  I comment at the end of the page.

Pope John Paul II was not the first pope to let heresy thrive and to be blind to the truth. Pope John XXII taught heresy. St Peter taught heresy by his actions. All popes sin and all sin is teaching heresy in your sinful way of life. We believe the promise of Christ that the gates of Hell will not prevail over the Church and the papacy so he is a true pope. If it were not for this, we would be able to say his papacy was questionable.
Paul VI signed the dangerous documents of Vatican II and taught error in the Church. This does not refute papal infallibility for this charism was not used.
The office of the pope is distinct from the person of the pope. That is why the idea that a heretic cannot become a valid pope or is a pope we can safely ignore in all things is dangerous. True the pope need not be a Catholic but it is visibility that God is concerned about. Divine providence makes sure that good and evil work together for the greater good and in the same way divine providence is able to make sure that bad popes, insincere popes and good popes don’t thwart God’s plan. God protecting the pope from making an infallible doctrine that is false is no different from God making sure that evil never wins. Certainly some popes are so evil that they would try but God has his ways of not letting them win. God lets the popes err and cause schism and excommunicate unjustly. He lets them harm the faith by inactivity or even hatred of the faith. But he never lets them stand up as supreme teacher and teach infallibly any doctrine that isn’t true. The pope exists for the faith and not the faith for the pope.
The view that the Vatican II popes are not popes cannot be proven. The rule of Pope Paul IV that the election of a heretic as pope is an invalid election even if the pope is accepted by the whole Church denies that if the pope is invalidly elected that he still becomes a real pope by the Church accepting him. You need a canonical court to prove that the pope was a heretic before election and was unrepentant at the time of election before you can declare the pope to have been invalidly elected. The pope can be a heretic before election and repent and be validly pope and then attach himself to heresy after his election again. In such a case, the election would be valid. The rule never said that God would let the whole Church be fooled by a fake pope but only what would have to be done if it happened. It’s hypothetical for this pope believed that the gates of hell would never prevail over the Church by allowing a fake pope who was not the real teacher and father of all Christians which the pope is to govern the whole Church.
Popes made by visions are not real popes. Miracles and visions are not equal to the authority of the Church for the Church has to decide if they are worthy of belief and even then she only permits belief in them and doesn’t condemn people for not believing in them.
Popes such as Michael I, Linus II and Pius XIII are not popes for their reasons for saying the Vatican II Popes are antipopes are inconclusive. Also the whole Church accepted John XXIII who they think was a heretic as a real pope. Nobody questioned his papacy. When he was accepted by the whole Church he was the true pope.

The Roman Catholic Church is the one true visible Church of Jesus Christ led by a visible head on earth. It follows then that if Christ’s promise that the gates of hell will never prevail over the Church is true then no authority on earth has the right to depose the pope. The pope is chosen by God who often chooses bad popes because they are the best under the circumstances. Another reason is that if you admit that deposing popes is right you must agree that the proper grounds is when the pope becomes a heretic. If you can depose a pope for bad behaviour then no pope is safe and unity will be torn apart. Everybody sins and everybody has their little heresies. All error is a heresy and we all err.
It is possible for a pope to be a fake Catholic. Just as a king might not be the son of his father the king and have no right to be king, if he becomes king we must obey him so it is God’s will that we obey a pope who isn’t even a true Catholic. God is still in control and will be able to handle that pope.
To liberal Catholics, the vast majority, most popes have been heretical for not being liberals. If you admit that deposing popes is right what happens is that liberals and conservatives who often consider each other to be heretics could declare the pope a heretic and try and remove him.
Nevertheless the election of heretical popes must be prevented.
A real Catholic must sit on the chair of Peter as pope.  The Church is riddled with anti-Catholic heresy posing as Catholicism.  Many prelates are not believers.  The Vatican is not exempt from this apostasy.  Errors are now official teaching since Vatican II.
These are the rules that are required for this to be possible.
The Vatican must be given warnings about its heresies and invited to recant. If it does not, then a declaration must be made that the Vatican no longer has authority to choose a pope and the true Catholics will hold a papal election in opposition to the Vatican election. This declaration is supported by the 1917 Canon Law and the New Code of Canon Law which state that only Catholics can elect the pope.
It is essential then that if we want to be free of Conciliar heresy we must warn the Cardinals of the next or subsequent papal conclave of the heresies.  If they do not sign the abjuration of the heresies they excommunicate themselves and lose the power to elect the pope. The pope they elect will be an impostor. The ecclesiastics who warn the cardinals must declare them excommunicated under canon law and divine law and declare that it is now their job to execute canon law. Canon law alone can preserve the visibility of the Church for law is for looking after visibility – even civil law considers a man and woman validly married until proof to the contrary comes up for it wants order.
1. An extraordinary decree of excommunication must be levied against the conclave in the Vatican.
2. The Cardinals must be invited to convert to Catholicism and participate in the election of the new pope. If they do not, then the Church has the right to proceed with its own election.
3. The papal election must be held during an interregnum, when the previous pope is dead and before the Vatican elects a new pope. The Vatican pope will be excommunicated and the true pope proclaimed the head of the Church.  This is to prevent any doubt.
4. The Vatican II popes are heretics, but we have no proof that they are aware of this, so they must be considered to be true popes. Their teachings must be tested and not accepted on authority. If the current pope contradicts a previous pope the previous pope must be obeyed in matters pertaining to dogma and morality.
5. The election should only take place if a bishop is available to consecrate the new pope as priest or bishop or both. Because of the possibility that only bishops can pass on the sacrament of holy orders the Lord will not choose a true pope without the possibility of the pope having a consecration as a bishop.
6. If in the absence of cardinals to elect the pope, we have no choice but to revert to the traditional practice of the Church in which the orthodox Catholics of the diocese of Rome chose and proclaimed their pope. So no conclave can take place until a number of such Catholics willing to elect the pope are found. If they don’t wish to elect the pope they can legally delegate their right to the prelates performing the excommunication. Then the electors must assemble in a new conclave. The true pope preferably then should be elected in Rome.
If the cardinals fall away then the next highest officers in the Church must do their job. Lay elections and priestly ones are dangerous for it will only result in a number of conclaves and chaos. But whoever is elected pope the way we advise will be the true pope. It is advisable that the conclave elect the pope before the Vatican does for the sake of the faithful. The pope will be canonically elected and therefore the true pope. From that point on the Conciliar Church will be in a state of visible Schism from the Roman Catholic Church. The men who may become pope must first take an oath to restore the traditions of the Church and bring back a form of Mass and liturgy that is more in keeping with the Catholic faith. Legal proceedings should then be undertaken to have the Conciliar Church legally identified in the secular world as a false Catholic sect and not as the successor of the Roman Catholic Church.
The view that it is not up to us to decide if the Church is heretical but up to Church courts to decide that is foolish. You can treat a person as a murderer just because you know the person is a murderer though no court has been held. A heretical Church might refuse to let its heresy be brought to trial. Canon law is based on divine law which comes first.

MY COMMENT: This shows that no matter how firm Catholicism claims to be that the pope is the rock the Church is built on and that the faith is a rock in practice there are loads of loopholes for schism.


No Copyright