50+ Scholars, Lawyers ask Bishops to block & Pope to withdraw ‘Fiducia supplicans’

Commentary and Critique on the above by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Traduction française

An online letter has no canonical force. It must be sent to each Bishop and/or Cardinals who are ordinaries, and to the Pope himself. If it did not do this, then this ‘Filial appeal’ wins the “misfire of the year award”. — However, if you are going to participate in the Sutri Initiative, it would be powerful to add a copy of this appeal, with all the signatures, and URL to the original, to your correspondence.

However, the authors of this Appeal include in their letter a serious historical error and interpretative mistake, when they say:

Never in the history of the Catholic Church has a document of the Roman Magisterium experienced such a strong rejection.

Because Pope Honorius I’s Letter in 635 to Sergius I, the Monothelite heretic who occupied the the Patriarchate of Constantinople, on the matter of whether there be two or one will in Christ, was condemned by ALL the Bishops of the Third Council of Constantinople on September 16, 681 A. D.. — In that they show grave ignorance of Church History.

But they also show a grave ignorance of the proper understanding of a Church document, when they call ‘Fiducia supplicans’ a “document of the Roman Magisterium”, because Pope Francis did not write the document, he merely added his signature during a meeting with Cardinal Fernandez; in addition, that Cardinal within 2 weeks affirmed that the doctrine in the document did not need to be accepted by all everywhere. So it clearly is not a document of the Roman Magisterium, since that belongs to none one but the Roman Pontiff, a dicastery cannot exercise it.

They also show ignorance of the basics of canon law, because a Dicastery erected by an antipope does not exist canonically, and there is implicit in their Filial Appeal a total ignorance of what Pope Benedict XVI did on Feb. 11, 2013, in not abdicating, only resigning.

These 3 errors are not light ones, and they all are grave for another reason too, because together they support the argument that Pope Francis never was an antipope and without the petrine munus could pass laws and exercise the Papal Magisterium: presuppositions which undermine their own basis for opposing ‘Fiducia supplicans’.

However, the statement quoted above from the letter does observe something true, because never since Honorius I, who was elected not according to the canons (there were none back then) nor by the Cardinals (they did not have an exclusive right back then) but by the Faithful of Rome (clergy electing, laity acclaiming) has a Pope encountered such opposition from the entire Church. On January 30th, last year, like Honorius I, Pope Francis was elected by Apostolic Right, the method which the Holy Spirit inspired the Apostle Saint Peter to arrange for the election of his successors. As I wrote more than a year ago, when this happens, the entire Church is united to Christ through the successor of Saint Peter in a manner which maximizes the influence of the Holy Spirit to promote unity with a holy pastor and oppose an errant or evil one.

For these reasons, I would discourage any true scholar from signing this document which would just serve as a canonical fact that the one signing it is totally ignorant of canon law, Church history, and argumentation. — These filial appeals have achieved nothing in the past, except to get scholars and bishops round the world to carry water for the Bergoglian narrative and turn true opposition into complicit silence. Which is perhaps the reason they recruit signatories by email, so that they can psychologically pound signers into conformity if they dare say anything else in public which diverges from it.

As for the whole concept of filial appeal, that is not what Pope Francis needs right now. To use a metaphor, he rather needs a Saint Nicholas fraternal slap in the face, or a Padre Pio boot in the rear of the pants.

So the next time you hear that FromRome.Info is “unrealiable” or that I am “unqualified”, ask them if they signed this Petition, as a conversation starter.

With Globalist Censorship growing daily, No one will ever know about the above article, if you do not share it.

8 thoughts on “50+ Scholars, Lawyers ask Bishops to block & Pope to withdraw ‘Fiducia supplicans’”

  1. “We, the undersigned Catholic priests, scholars, and authors, write to you …”

    “ATTENTION: Pastors, clergy, scholars, professors, doctors, and other qualified individuals may submit their signatures to this list in the next two weeks. Please provide your name, qualifications, position, and location by February 15th, to filialappeal@gmail.com. A definitive list of cumulative signatories will then be published on February 17th.”

    A small clique, from which the vast majority of Catholics are excluded!

    1. It’s better than nothing. These Catholics obviously have not the foggiest idea of how to write a canonical peition, to whom to send it, and who can sign it.

  2. One thing all this is revealing is how much ‘we’ don’t know about our Catholic Faith, even and especially those in positions that should /need to know Church History, Doctrine and Canon Law. Hence the major confusion and inaction of so many due to ignorance, fear, apathy etc

    Mary Mediatrix of all Graces, pray for us
    St Joseph, terror of demons, pray for us
    St Michael, Prince of the Church of Jesus Christ, pray for us
    Saints Peter and Paul, Pray for the Church!

  3. Brother,

    This Saturday at my parish the priest has planned a session to gather feedback on the synod on synodality. Below are the four questions. Can you advise on what specific feedback we should give? I plan on pointing out that novel interpretations lead to apostasy but I wanted to get your comments:

    The four questions
    1)Taking as a reference chapters 8 to 12 of the Synthesis Report: How can the differentiated co-responsibility in the mission of all the members of the People of God (laity, consecrated life, ordained ministry) be strengthened?
    2) In the light of Chapter 16, in order to take steps in the praxis of synodality: What forms of relationship, structures, processes of discernment and decision regarding mission allow it to be recognised, configured and promoted?
    3) Taking Chapter 18 as a guide: What ministries and participatory bodies can be renewed or introduced to better express co-responsibility?
    4) What priorities and initiatives (of those described in the report at the end of each of its 20 chapters) can we develop at diocesan parish level to further learn synodality? And by stopping all donations to the parish and diocese and to Rome unti “Fiducia supplicans” is entirely rejected, condemned, censured, cursed and declared of the devil by all our clergy.

    1. 1 — By restoring minor Orders, by excluding women from the ministry — since their ministry is the family at home — by rejecting Fiducia supplicans which undermines marriage as the only God blessed sexual relationship — by expelling sodomites from the clergy, by reform of the seminaries so that Catholic men who hear the vocation are not taught the godless doctrine of Modernists, Marxists, and Freemasons. By expelling unworthy candidates from the Papacy, Cardinaliate and Episcopacy.

      2 — Synodality is a Marxist lie which is attempting to alter the very nature of the Church as Christ willed it to be. It is of Satan and should be entirely rejected.

      3 — Minor Orders, for men only. By not granting to every priest the faculty to hear confession or preach, since most have no proper formation to do either.

      4 — Promote the Committee against Apostasy and the Sutri Initiative and if our Bishop is in favor of Fiducia supplcians, insisting that he resign and recognizing that we should no longer obey him in anything until he does.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.