by Br. Alexis Bugnolo:  English Language Transcript

Traduzione Italiana

Five years ago, I wrote to a Cardinal about the invalidity of the election of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, in the Conclave of 2013, and he wrote me back, claiming that as Catholics we must presume the election was valid and that Pope Francis had received the papal office from Christ. I responded to the Cardinal, here, in this open letter, “Dialogue with a Cardinal who refused to dialogue“, published on January 23, 2020, a copy of which I mailed directly to him.

Since the issue is timely, I will reformulate his question for present circumstances, and give my reply:

Must a Catholic presume Pope Leo XIV is a validly elected pope,
who actually holds the papal office?

No, because:

Firstly, because, that a man is the pope is not a presumption of fact, but the conclusion of law.

For example, he is not the pope, whom the Cardinals say is the pope, rather, he is the pope who was validly elected by the Cardinals according to the norm of the Papal Law of John Paul II, Universi Dominici Gregis.

To say the first, that is, that “he whom the Cardinals say is the pope, is the pope”, confuses the means whereby we know a canonical fact with the cause of the legitimacy of a canonical fact. They are two different things. — Yes, we know under normal circumstances who was elected by the Cardinals, from the Cardinals themselves. That is the normal channel for knowing the canonical fact of the election. But the canonical fact of the election is not the canonical validity of the election. The canonical fact is the witness that the event took place. Period. — But the legitimacy of the election is much more important. Just as the truth of any claim is more important than the fact the claim was made.

Otherwise, if anyone came to your door, knocked, and when you opened it, claimed to own your house, his mere fact of having claimed it, would make him its owner. Now just as this principle holds no matter who is at the front door, whether it be a nobody, the town clerk, the assessor’s office superintendent, the mayor, governor, etc., so also in a papal election. — Thus, the truth of the claim is based on the conformity of facts with the prescriptions of the law governing ownership. The truth of the claim is not based on the dignity of those claiming it!

So, the Catholic who can read the Papal Law and who has knowledge of the historical facts, can assess the validity of the claim of the Cardinals.  If he can do this it would be the mortal sin of sloth, if he presumed the claim was true, upon hearing a contrary claim, based on the factually demonstrated discrepancy of behavior with the requirements of the law.

So yes, an ignorant Catholic can presume that if the Cardinals say X is the Pope, that X is the pope. But a literate Catholic in the age of social media, who has access to nearly all information, can not presume, after the first moment in which he encounters any report that puts in doubt the validity of the election.

And here is the difficulty most Catholics have: They believe that they must wait for certain evidence that the Cardinals are not worthy of trust. That is, they refuse to read the law or compare the requirements of the law with the facts of what happened, BECAUSE they are waiting rather for the testimony of some Cardinal that disputes the claim of other Cardinals. And they infer from the unanimity of the Cardinals to the validity of the election, REGARDLESS of what the law says. A grievous error, which marks them with the mark of the disciples of the Antichrist, according to Saint Paul the Apostle.

I can recognize this approach, for being half Sicilian, I know how many deal  with organized crime: they simple do not admit it exists, so that they can go about their day without any worries. They might pity the victims of the Mafia, but they really don’t care about that, until one of their loved ones becomes a victim.

So the next time anyone, especially a priest, tells you to shut up or be quite or that you are a sinner or bad Catholic for NOT presuming he is a pope and/or for sharing the truth about the election so that others might be liberated from the deception, ask your interlocutor if they are preaching out of their personal presumption, born of sloth or because they have done their own investigation.

Again, no, Secondly, because if you have the responsibility to act on the basis of another’s claim, you are liable if you act on presumption alone

Every Catholic who has ever been in a position of responsibility, understands this. Because, the mere fact that you hold authority, does not exculpate you from responsibility. Nay, it increases it. This is why in all official matters of state, every government official is required to act only if the proper verifiable and verified actions or documents are communicated.

The same is true for every Catholic. For if we are to accept the Magisterium of someone claiming to be the Vicar of Jesus Christ, we would be grossly negligent and responsible for the harm to all around us, if we propagate his teachings having presumed his election was valid, and remained in our presumption, even when other Catholics have shared with us information about the possibly invalidity of his claim to the papacy.

Remember, we are not dealing here with a controversy over whether the local Ice Cream Shop uses cream or milk to make their products. We are dealing with your eternal salvation and those of all around you, who heed your advice and counsel, whether you be a parent, friend, colleague or relative. Moreso, if you be a priest, pastor, confessor or spiritual director, or ecclesiastical superior.

Thus, it is both deeply irresponsible and gravely reckless for anyone in such position to accord to a man claiming to be the Roman Pontiff the presumption that he is, as soon as anyone whomsoever says there is a problem in his election. All Catholics of all ages before our own, understood this, which is why there have been named more than 40 antipopes in history. How did they earn the moniker, “antipope”, except by the fact that some Catholics contested the validity of his claim to power?

Those who refuse to hear any such contestation, and who hold responsibility over others, are thus showing themselves to be incompetent in the execution of their duties.

And this truth is reflected in Canon 41, which holds that anyone who is required to execute an administrative order, who has not verified that the one issuing it has authority and that the act itself is legitimate, acts invalidly, that is, posits an act which he has no authority to make, usurping the rights of the one who legitimately could authorize the act and defrauding all those subjects who have the right to not be deceived in a matter regarding the claim that a superior has asked something of them.

Thus, priests especially have the duty to investigate all reasonable claims that a papal election is irregular or invalid, otherwise they are sinning gravely in the execution of their ministry. Likewise are all those who have been entrusted or who have taken up by their own volition, the dissemination of information about the Catholic Church, if they censor any discussion or reports about the irregularities in a papal election.

And in all these cases, we are not talking about a small sin, but a mortal sin, because to spread information that someone is the Pope when he is not the pope is to spiritually mislead or scandalize the faithful, and thus is a mortal sin multiplied by as many persons who might hear him say such things.

Thus, if anyone tell you not to investigate, or not to listen to such news of problems in a papal election, remind them that they are sinning gravely against justice and are attempting to violate your rights and duties under Canon 41.

And so to such persons, a parent, for example, can reply in private or in public,

“Father, as a parent, who believes and holds to the Catholic Faith, I have the grave duty, according to Canon 41, of verifying Prevost’s claim to be the pope, before I can offer him any obedience, reverence or respect as the Pope; and your attempt to dissuade me of this grave duty, is a grave sin against the charity and justice you own me and my family. Moreover, since there is objective evidence that his election was invalidated by the presence of 133 Cardinal Electors in defiance of the Papal Law on Conclaves, and that he spoke against the Catholic Faith before his election, I must hold that it is more probable that his election is invalid, because of the authority of Popes John Paul II and Paul IV, the text of whose constitutions are clear on these points, and which cannot be overturned by the interpretations of anyone, but a true Pope.”

And if a priest persist, add:

“And if you continue to abuse your position over me as a priest, I will file a charge against you for spiritual abuse.”

+ + +

If you would like to download this video, click the down arrow in the upper right corner of this video:

+ + +

+ + + + + + +

The Book on the Trinity, every faithful Catholic priest would love as his next present

This is Br. Bugnolo's English Translation, of Saint Bonaventure's encylopedic book of theology on the Trinity: With this book, your priest will always have something intelligent and awesomely inspiring to preach to you about God the Father, God the Son & God the Holy Spirit!

+ + +