David Martin | The Daily Knight
- Oct 28, 2023

Cardinal Mueller: Capitulation to Heresy Automatically Deprives a Pope of His Office

David Martin | The Daily Knight

None less than Rome's former doctrinal chief Cardinal Gerhard Mueller is echoing the Church doctors in saying that a pope loses his papacy if he professes *heresy. In an opinion piece published October 27 in the religious journal First Things, he said:

“To teach contrary to the apostolic faith would automatically deprive the pope of his office. We must all pray and work courageously to spare the Church such an ordeal.”

Mueller indeed speaks the mind of the Church in saying this. St. Francis de Sales, St, Robert Bellarmine, and other theological experts have said the very same thing. What this means is that if a pope for instance teaches that unrepentant souls "disappear" upon death without eternal punishment, proclaims that "God wills diversity of religions," publicly denies the miracle of the loaves, or has the dare to say that the Church blesses and welcomes homosexual unions, he automatically loses his papacy and his membership in the Catholic Church.

Does the Argument Even Apply?

But does this argument even apply today? How can one lose something if he doesn't first possess it to lose?

The Church needs to take a closer look at the 2013 papal election. Gerard O'Connell, a left-wing Jesuit and close working partner with accursed homo-priest Fr. James Martin wrote a book on the election of Pope Francis with the sole objective of concealing the fact that there was an intense political campaign underway in 2013 to get Cardinal Bergoglio [Francis] elected, so for obvious reasons we cannot take him seriously.

On the other hand, Pope Benedict XVI's confidant and biographer Peter Seewald penned the true story of today's papacy which reveals that a Vatican "dome of demons" extorted and ousted Benedict XVI with the intention of installing Bergoglio as their man to lead the Church to destruction.

Apostolic Constitution Contravened

Is his 1996 Apostolic Constitution Universi Dominici Gregis governing papal elections, Pope John Paul II makes it clear that vote canvassing among cardinal electors is strictly forbidden and incurs automatic excommunication. Consider the following from his Constitution:

“The Cardinal electors shall further abstain from any form of pact, agreement, promise or other commitment of any kind which could oblige them to give or deny their vote to a person or persons. If this were in fact done, even under oath, I decree that such a commitment shall be null and void and that no one shall be bound to observe it; and I hereby impose the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae upon those who violate this prohibition.” (81)

The pope also says in his Constitution:

“Confirming the prescriptions of my Predecessors, I likewise forbid anyone, even if he is a Cardinal, during the Pope’s lifetime and without having consulted him, to make plans concerning the election of his successor, or to promise votes, or to make decisions in this regard in private gatherings.” (79)

A clique of cardinals did “make plans” to force Benedict XVI’s resignation and to campaign for “the election of his successor,” with up to 25 cardinals “promising votes” the day before the election, this having come about through “private gatherings,” thus revealing the illicit conduct of those cardinal electors to be.

The Eve of the Conclave

On the eve of the conclave, Cardinal Óscar Rodríguez Maradiaga was busily on the phone with cardinal electors from the Honduran embassy in Rome. His phone effort was the tail end of this intense lobbying campaign to secure votes for the election of Cardinal Bergoglio as pope.

That same day, Maradiaga attended a private meeting of Bergoglio supporters, which included key players in the “St. Gallen Mafia,” and together they garnered pledges for up to twenty-five votes for Bergoglio. Not surprisingly, Bergoglio opened with twenty-six votes on the first day of the conclave, though that number would rise to 77 on the second day indicating that this campaign effort was gaining ground. Three days later the newly elected Pope Francis asked Maradiaga to head his powerful new Council of Cardinals, known as the “Council of Nine.”

On August 27, 2018, Vatican correspondent Edward Pentin tweeted concerning this political campaign.

“Cdls Danneels & Ex-Cdl McCarrick campaigned for Bergoglio to be Pope, as did ++Maradiaga on eve of Conclave, phoning up various cardinals from the Honduran embassy in Rome. Despite their pasts, all 3 prelates have since been special advisors of Francis or rehabilitated by him.”

Under the pain of excommunication latae sententiae, Pope John Paul forbids “each and every Cardinal elector, present and future, as also the Secretary of the College of Cardinals and all other persons taking part in the preparation and carrying out of everything necessary for the election” to allow “all possible forms of interference, opposition and suggestion whereby secular authorities of whatever order and degree, or any individual or group, might attempt to exercise influence on the election of the Pope.” (80) Unfortunately, secular and political interference played the key part in Francis’ election. According to John Paul II, such interference renders the papal election null and void.

Should the election take place in a way other than that prescribed in the present Constitution, or should the conditions laid down here not be observed, the election is for this very reason null and void, without any need for a declaration on the matter; consequently, it confers no right on the one elected. (76)

St. Pope John Paul II was a prophet in his own right who saw what was coming to the papacy since he had been victimized by this same Vatican dome of demons, therefore he issued his Apostolic Constitution (UDG) in an attempt to set pontifical bulwarks in place against future enemies of the papacy, but the document can only be effective if the bishops and cardinals take his words seriously.

Why isn't the Church listening?

*The implication is formal heresy