Pope Francis Admires His Beach Ball

Chapter 35

Student: It does not appear that in the case described one would need to appeal from the pope; it seems more to the point that one would have to accuse the pope. For an appeal or a challenge is made either from a judge (or from someone functioning as a judge), or is made outside of the courtroom so as to prevent the occurrence of something prejudicial to the appellant as to the issue concerning which he is appealing. But in the first instance one must not appeal from a pope if he teaches or preaches heretical wickedness because in teaching or preaching he does not perform a judicial office nor acts as though he were, but he functions rather as a doctor or a preacher or a theorist. Nor does the second instance of the case described obligate one to appeal from the pope, because such an appeal is concerned with the prevention of some future event. For instance, when someone appeals in order to prevent some election from occurring which is prejudicial to the appellant, such an appeal concerns an election yet to be, namely so as to prevent its occurrence. But the assertion of the pope which he preached or taught is an event of the past. Therefore in the second instance one must not appeal from a pope preaching in this manner.

Master: As mentioned earlier, some say that they don't mean to speak of an appeal in the strict sense (as positive law understands this) when they affirm that it is permitted to appeal from a pope who teaches heretical wickedness. What they mean to speak of is an appeal in the widest sense, whereby every opposition by word or by deed to a pope who teaches heretical wickedness may be referred to as an appeal. And this is the way in which one is permitted to appeal from a pope who preaches heresy, because every catholic is allowed to oppose this heresy, and to accuse the pope should the latter prove to be pertinacious.

Student: These theorists speak inaccurately when they say that every opposition to a pope may be termed an appeal, because it is obvious that every accusation is an opposition, and an accusation differs from an appeal, therefore not every opposition is an appeal.

Master: As I have already mentioned, these theorists are not concerned in this matter with technical verbal accuracy.

Student: Why.

Master: Because, as I have stated earlier, they do not deem it absolutely necessary to issue a legally proper appeal in any case whatsoever from a heretic pope or a pope preaching heresy, if by appeal you mean the uttering of the word itself. But if someone would want to designate as an appeal every opposition to a heretic pope, then they say that an appeal is necessary. And if someone objects that the term "appeal" must not be used in this sense, these theorists refuse to enter into a dispute about words, and for that reason firmly maintain that a pope who preaches heresy in the aforesaid manner must be opposed by catholics.


  1. Heretic Pope? Uhmm... Nope. Not even possible! Nor do you offer any sort of actual, objective evidence for your slander 😔.. Are you an atheist w/ some sort of obsession upon the Pope?

  2. To Facts Matter: see http://popefrancisthedestroyer.blogspot.com/2015/05/pope-francis-heretic-admits-i-feel-like.html


Post a Comment