Barnhardt Failure: Uses St Catherine Of Siena Against Bishop Athanasius Schneider

St Catherine Of Siena 

Dr Maza claims to be a Historian. 

In the latest podcast Barnhardt Podcast #197: Mos Eisley Scum Synod — it’s a M.E.S.S. 

Dr. Mazza uses the history of Avignon Papacy to try to prove a point. He fails.

• Anti-pope Clement VII. 1378 - 1418
• True Pope  Urban VI 1378 - 1389

Two claimants. Both were in contention for the Papacy. Only one was a True Pope - Urban VI 

We had TWO Popes in 2013

• Pope Benedict resigned
• Pope Francis reign 

Neither were in contention with each other for the Papacy.

Big difference. 

You cannot use the Anti-Pope Clement VII to prove that Pope Francis is Anti-Pope.

Not the same.

Pope Benedict acknowledged Pope Francis as the True Pope

Now for St Catherine Of Siena.

Dr Mazza uses this from St Catherine Of Siena letter for TO THREE ITALIAN CARDINALS 

The persecution which you, together with others, are inflicting on that sweet Bride, at a time when you ought to be shields, to ward off the blows of heresy. In spite of which, you clearly know the truth, that Pope Urban VI. is truly Pope, the highest Pontiff, chosen in orderly election, not influenced by fear, truly rather by divine inspiration than by your human industry. And so you announced it to us, which was the truth. Now you have turned your backs, like poor mean knights; your shadow has made you afraid. You have divided you from the truth which strengthens us, and drawn close to falsehood, which weakens soul and body, depriving you of temporal and spiritual grace. What made you do this? The poison of self-love, which has infected the world. That is what has made you pillars lighter than straw. Flowers you who shed no perfume, but stench that makes the whole world reek! No lights you placed in a candlestick, that you might spread the faith; but, having hidden your light under the bushel of pride, and become not extenders, but contaminators of the faith, you shed darkness over yourselves and others. You should have been angels on earth, placed to release us from the devils of hell, and performing the office of angels, by bringing back the sheep into the obedience of Holy Church, and you have taken the office of devils. That evil which you have in yourselves you wish to infect us with, withdrawing us from obedience to Christ on earth, and leading us into obedience to antichrist, a member of the devil, as you are too, so long as you shall abide in this heresy.

First: Dr Mazza said that this letter addresses ALL Cardinals. But the title of the letter is To THREE Italian Cardinals.

Who is wrong here.

Why does Dr. Mazza say ALL when the letter is clearly addressed to only THREE?

Dr Mazza is lying. 

Second: St Catherine Of Siena accuses the THREE Cardinals of HERESY. 

Question: If these THREE Cardinals are Heretics then are they still Cardinals? Because we know that Barnhardt and her ilk claim that the Pope is no longer the Pope if he is a Heretic. Did these Cardinals lose their office because of HERESY? If they lost their office because of heresy and are now outside the Church then how can they correct the wrong they did by backing an Anti-pope?

THEY DID NOT LOSE THEIR OFFICE - THE THREE CARDINALS STILL REMAINED IN THE CHURCH EVEN AS HERETICS.

Same goes for a Pope who is a Heretic.

The Three Cardinals remained Cardinals regardless of their heresy

Pope Francis remains the Pope regardless of his heresy.

Ann Barnhardt are and her ilk are wrong 

Bishop Athanasius Schneider: About The Validity Of The Pontificate Of Pope Francis

There is no authority to declare or consider an elected and generally accepted Pope as an invalid Pope. The constant practice of the Church makes it evident that even in the case of an invalid election this invalid election will be de facto healed through the general acceptance of the new elected by the overwhelming majority of the cardinals and bishops.

Even in the case of a heretical pope he will not lose his office automatically and there is no body within the Church to declare him deposed because of heresy. Such actions would come close to a kind of a heresy of conciliarism or episcopalism. The heresy of conciliarism or episcopalism says basically that there is a body within the Church (Ecumenical Council, Synod, College of Cardinals, College of Bishops), which can issue a legally binding judgment over the Pope.

The theory of the automatic loss of the papacy due to heresy remains only an opinion, and even St. Robert Bellarmin noticed this and did not present it as a teaching of the Magisterium itself. The perennial papal Magisterium never taught such an option. In 1917, when the Code of Canon Law (Codex Iuris Canonici) came into force, the Magisterium of the Church eliminated from the new legislation the remark of the Decretum Gratiani in the old Corpus Iuris Canonici, which stated, that a Pope, who deviates from right doctrine, can be deposed. Never in history the Magisterium of the Church did admit any canonical procedures of deposition of a heretical pope. The Church has no power over the pope formally or judicially.The surer Catholic tradition says, that in the case of a heretical pope, the members of the Church can avoid him, resist him, refuse to obey him, all of which can be done without requiring a theory or opinion, that says that a heretical pope automatically loses his office or can be deposed consequently.

Therefore being it so, we must follow the surer way (via tutior) and abstain from defending the merely opinion of theologians (even be them Saints like St. Robert Bellarmin), which says that a heretical pope automatically loses his office or can be deposed by the Church therefore.

The pope cannot commit heresy when he speaks ex cathedra, this is a dogma of faith. In his teaching outside of ex cathedra statements, however, he can commit doctrinal ambiguities, errors and even heresies. And since the pope is not identical with the entire Church, the Church is stronger than a singular erring or heretical Pope. In such a case one should respectfully correct him (avoiding purely human angerand disrespectful language), resist him as one would resist a bad father of family. Yet, the members of a family cannot declare their evil father deposed from the fatherhood. They can correct him, refuse to obey him, separate themselves from him, but they cannot declare him deposed.

Good Catholics know the truth and must proclaim it, offer reparation for the errors of an erring Pope. Since the case of a heretical pope is humanly irresolvable, we must implore with supernatural faith a Divine intervention, because that singular erring Pope is not eternal, but temporal, and the Church is not in our hands, but in the almighty hands of God.

We must have enough supernatural faith, trust, humility, spirit of the Cross in order to endure such an extraordinary trial. In such relatively short situations (in comparison to 2000 years) we must not yield to a too human reaction and to an easy solution (declaring the invalidity of his pontificate), but must keep sobriety (keep a cool head) and at the same time a true supernatural view and trust in Divine intervention and in the indestructibility of the Church.

+ Athanasius Schneider