CAN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH EXCOMULGATE A POST MORTEM POPE? YES AND YOU MUST DO IT. (CONTINUATION)

SAN SOFRONIO.

  A few priests confront their bishops, in defense of Catholic orthodoxy. Disobedience begins.

  NOTE. Before continuing with the interesting reading of this article, it is convenient to quote several holy Popes talking about this thorny issue such as holy and just disobedience when it is applied in defense of the faith, doctrine, and the founded Catholic Church. through Our Lord Jesus Christ. Today no one denies the ravages that the modernist heresy is causing within the Church itself. Here is what the Popes say:  Gregory XVI, 02-27-1846: «Therefore, no one can violate the precept of obeying the power without committing grave guilt, unless  it commands us something against the law of God and the Church .

Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos: «The Christian soldiers, says Saint Augustine, served the pagan emperor; but when it came to the cause of Jesus Christ they knew no other authority than that of Him who reigns in heaven.

Leo XIII, Diuturnum Illud: «Men can have only one reason for not obeying, is when something is claimed from them  that is openly repugnant to natural and divine law; because in all things in which the law of nature and the will of God are violated  , it is equally iniquity, both to command it and to fulfill it. If then someone is forced to choose between these two things, that is to say to despise the commandments of God or those of the Princes, he must obey Jesus Christ, who  commanded to surrender “to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is from God ”(Mt. 22, 21) and following the example of the Apostles must  answer with courage:“ we must obey God rather than men ”».It is therefore our duty to disobey modernism and its representatives because their pseudo-doctrine goes against God TRINY AND ONE. So NOT OBEYING IS FAIR AND BEAUTIFUL” Leon XIII. (Diuturnum Illud)

  In such a serious situation, God Our Lord used, to initiate the defense of the true doctrine, a humble monk from Palestine named Antiochus who, leaving the peace of his convent and rebelling against his bishop and Patriarchs who supported the heresy, publicly accused to the Patriarch of Antioch to be the Anti-Christ and to renew the heresies of Eutyches and Apollinaris. The rebellion of the friar Antiochus against the heretical ecclesiastical hierarchy, found an echo in Egypt, where simple priests and friars rebelled against their heretical bishops and against the new Patriarch Cyrus of Alexandria, who would now become the primacy of the Church of Egypt, after the Pope and the Patriarch of Constantinople, the highest ranking hierarch in the Church of those times. The mighty Patriarch condemned,he excommunicated and even used violence against those unhappy priests and monks who sacrificed everything for the true doctrine of Christ.

Little by little the flame of the defense of the true Faith and the rebellion against an episcopate that had joined the heresy spread, turning some modest priests, the temples under their charge, into true bastions of true Christian doctrine, of course. with the moral and physical support of its parishioners, who, together with their pastors, understood the great need to defend the Orthodox Faith even going against their Bishops and high hierarchs of the Church in those times and thanks to this union they managed to remove the heretical Bishops. These successes were possible while the local civil authorities stood aside from all this and even refrained from providing military support to the Monothelite ecclesiastical Hierarchs. But whenever said authorities by order of the emperor intervened militarily in favor of the heretics, they took away their churches from the jealous parish priests and handed them over to the heretics, thus the victory of the heretics seemed definitive.

A HUMBLE MONK, SAINT SOFRONIO (560-638) ARISES AS THE LEADER OF THE ORTHODOXY.

  In the heat of this unequal battle, fought by a small number of priests and monks from the East, considered crazy and disturbing (¡nowadays we are also called crazy, sick, foolish, as history repeats itself! has dared to say that those who confess or commune with those who, despite our unworthiness, try to defend the faith and doctrine of Our Beloved Saved, incur mortal sin. Was this not the conduct of Vatican II regarding the members of the Fraternity in the time of Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre?)  who defended the truth against a compromising ecclesiastical hierarchy. It is at this time when Saint Sofronius, born in Damascus, came out in defense of orthodoxy, he did so until his death, this holy monk like his companions in this courageous defense of the rights of God, lacked ecclesiastical hierarchy. San Sofronio, animated by the zeal of obedience, tried, with humility typical of these monks, to convince the hierarchy of their heretical deviations, for this purpose he went to the heretic Patriarch of Alexandria, before whom he fell on his knees, to ask him crying that to read from the pulpit of the Cathedral, the Edict that renewed the HERESY OF APOLINAR; but the Patriarch in no way yielded to the supplications of this great saint and, furthermore, he censured him,He called him REBEL and threatened to excommunicate him if he continued to oppose the conciliation thesis whose aim was: "THE NECESSARY UNITY OF THE CHURCH." (Advice, exhortations, letters and many other things were not enough for those who seek unity with heretical Rome to make them understand that what they desire is contrary to the faith and doctrine of Our Lord Jesus Christ but rather with an unprecedented viciousness, doing wrong use of authority they have launched admonitions and expulsions left and right for all those priests who want to be faithful to their founder and, above all, to our divine Master and have reached such a degree their daring that they have deprived some priests and priests of their freedom. even prohibiting the priestly practice par excellence, such as celebrating the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.)

  Very hard was for Saint Sofronio the internal conflict that was generated in his soul as a result of this “excommunication, on the one hand, the duty of obedience to his hierarchical superior in the Church and on the other the duty of being faithful to Christ defending his true doctrine, even against the betrayal of this holy doctrine by his superior.  

However, San Sofronio did not hesitate, and possessed of that energy and that holy rebellion against HERESY and its supporters, knowing that it was Christ Our Lord who instilled in his soul this zeal for the truth. Comforted by this, he continued to preach with great ardor, typical of the saints, the existence of two natures in Jesus Christ, the Divine and the Human. Then he devoted his forces to giving a decisive battle against the heretical bishops and made a painful trip to the capital of the empire, to meet with the powerful Patriarch Sergius of Constantinople who, as previously clarified, was at that time the Hierarch of Greater authority in the Holy Church after the Pope. (It is the struggle that Monsignor Lefebvre also carried out during the last years of his life with the result that we already know, but calm with his conscience and at peace with God for the good fight of faith. He said: “I don't want to hear from Our Lord on the day of my judgment ”YOU HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE DESTRUCTION OF MY CHURCH"  Words that he repeated frequently and of that I am a witness.) 

SYNODS AND ASSEMBLIES OF BISHOPS, USED TO PROPAGATE HERESIES 

San Sofronio obtained an interview with the Patriarch of Constantinople, tried to convince him about the grave danger that threatened the Church with the new heresy. Sergio, who was the soul of this heresy and also an extraordinary politician, pretended in a Machiavellian way to be impressed by the arguments of the holy friar and promised to present the case before the Synod of Bishops that functioned in Constantinople, but this Synod was closely watched by Sergio himself. (I think that here we find another similarity in the way of acting of those of us who have been speaking, since I consider that there were not a few priests who, in one way or another, made themselves heard against the agreements with writings, sermons, addresses and recommendations. out loud to the superiors who seemed to listen to them, but in the end they were only pretending as they continued and continue with their perfidious plan. In order not to err and in turn, the letter that the three Bishops sent to the superior general, the sermon of Mons. Tissier de Mallerais given in the United States Seminary from where he was expelled from the district taking refuge in the same Seminary, whoever wishes to have more details about this sermon please contact the person who writes this). 

In this way, Patriarch Sergius learned of the great combativeness of Saint Sofronius and prepared the coup, but HIDING HIS HAND, to avoid as far as possible being accused of heresy and that the orthodox counterattacks were directed against the Synod itself and not against the Patriarch. As the Synod was facing, however, it was Sergius who, as already said above, was preparing the heresy. In this skillful way he managed to obtain the support of the Episcopal Synod greater support to spread the heresy among the Bishops for whom he represented a lot the decisions of the Synod.   

This is a clever maneuver that, throughout the history of the Church, some anti-Popes have used, and Hierarchs, when it has been convenient for them, to hide their heresy and pretend to be orthodox, throwing the stone and hiding the hand to spread it without running the ball. risk of being involved and not compromising your situation. Leaving the episcopal bodies, managed secretly by these heretics, the task of opening the breaches to betrayal and at the same time Patriarch Sergius tried to reassure Saint Sofronio, demanding from him the promise of keeping silence about the two wills of Our Lord. Jesus Christ, promising, at the same time, that he would impose such a measure on the heretical Patriarch Cyrus of Alexandria.

  I end this other article by citing the complete text of SS Leo XIII, Libertas: «But where the right to command is lacking or the command opposes reason, eternal law, the divine empire,  then the fact of disobeying men to obeying God BECOMES A DUTY. In such a way the way is closed to tyrannical governments, the State is not going to attribute all the power; the citizen, the family, each part of the consortium will surely enjoya their rights and true freedom ...The principles of liberalism. What naturalistic and rationalistic achieved in the philosophy of liberalism supporters succeed in moral and civil things, because they apply to the customs and life of the first principles. Indeed, the fundamental principle of rationalism is the sovereignty of human reason, which, refusing due obedience to divine and eternal reason, and proclaiming itself independent, makes itself the supreme principle and source and criterion of truth.

Now, in the same way, the henchmen of liberalism claim that in practical [political] life there can be no divine power to which obedience is owed, but that each one is law to himself: from here comes that moral philosophy, which call independent and that, subtracting under the appearance of freedom, the human will from the observance of divine precepts, it is customary to give men a license without limits ... But when things openly contrary to the divine will are commanded, then that order and it goes against the divine will and THEN NOT TO OBEY IS JUST AND BEAUTIFUL.