"IT IS A GRAVE OFFENSE NOT TO WORK FOR THE EXTERMINATION OF HERESY WHEN THIS MONSTROUS INFECTION REQUIRES ACTION"
— Council of Vienne ♰♰♰


Wednesday, April 1, 2026

Apostate Prevost honor Pro-Gay, Pro-Abortion Anglican Heretic Sarah Mullally

           Prevost mocks the priesthood instituted by Christ

          

 Apostate Robert Prevost: “To The Most Reverend and Right Honourable Dame Sarah Mullally Archbishop of Canterbury”

Revelation 22:15 Outside are the dogs (male prostitutes and unfaithful leaders), those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood. 
Pope Leo XIII’s 1896, Apostolicae Curae: Anglican orders are “absolutely null and utterly void”

Professio fidei: “Whoever denies these truths would be in a position of rejecting a truth of Catholic doctrine and would therefore no longer be in full communion with the Catholic Church”


Prevost to heretics: ‘We are already one!’

 Saint Cyprian of Carthage – Whoever is separated from the Church and is joined with an adulteress is separated from the promises of the Church.

       

 LifeSiteNews:

Leo XIV issued a congratulatory letter to Sarah Mullally – the first woman ever appointed “archbishop of Canterbury” and a vocal supporter of abortion and the LGBT agenda. In the letter, Leo praises Mullally’s “weighty” responsibilities, and explicitly invokes the Blessed Virgin Mary as a source of “inspiration” for her new role.


The March 20, 2026 message, published on the Vatican website, was released after Mullally’s installation yesterday. It makes no reference whatsoever to the Catholic Church’s perennial teaching that Anglican orders are “absolutely null and utterly void” (Apostolicae Curae, 1896), that the ordination of women is impossible and contrary to the will of Christ, or to Mullally’s own public record promoting grave moral evils of abortion and homosexual acts.


Prevost is not in full communion with the Catholic Church.

CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH

'Professio fidei'



Pope Pius IX

One cannot tolerate that faithful or clergy pray for Christian unity under the leadership of heretics, according to an intention infected with heresy

For, it is wholly in this: that it supposes the true Church of Jesus Christ to be composed partly of the Roman Church scattered and propagated throughout the whole world, partly, indeed, of the schism of Photius, and of the Anglican heresy, to which, as well as to the Roman Church, ‘there is one Lord, one faith, and one baptism’(cf. Eph 4:5). Surely nothing should be preferable to a Catholic man than that schisms and dissensions among Christians be torn out by the roots and that all Christians be ‘careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace’ (Eph 4:3) But, that the faithful of Christ and the clergy should pray for Christian unity under the leadership of heretics, and, what is worse, according to an intention, polluted and infected as much as possible with heresy, can in no way be tolerated. (Denzinger-Hünermann 2886–2887. Pius IX. Letter of the Holy Office to the Bishops of England, September 16, 1864)


Pius XI

Dealings with those who profess a mutilated version of Christ teachings forbidden

Everyone knows that John himself, the Apostle of love, who seems to reveal in his Gospel the secrets of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who never ceased to impress on the memories of his followers the new commandment ‘Love one another’, altogether forbade any intercourse with those who professed a mutilated and corrupt version of Christ’s teaching: ‘If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him: God speed you’ (2Jn 10). (Pius XI. Encyclical Mortalium animos, no. 9, January 6, 1928)

Pius IX

The necessity to anathemize those who alter the Gospel of Christ, spreading false doctrines and betraying the depository of the faith

Ever since the origins of the early Church, due to the necessity that the faith of the elect be proven like gold in the fire, the Apostle, vessel of election, wished to warn the faithful that if someone arise, of those who alter and amend the Gospel of Christ, spreading false doctrines and betraying the depository of the faith, even if it was an angel who evangelized something other than he had, it would be necessary to anathemize him. (Pius IX. Apostolic letter Ad apostolicae sedis, August 22, 1851)



Pope Leo XII

It is impossible for the most true God to approve all sects who profess false and contradictory teachings

It is impossible for the most true God, who is Truth Itself, the best, the wisest Provider, and the Rewarder of good men, to approve all sects who profess false teachings which are often inconsistent with one another and contradictory, and to confer eternal rewards on their members. […] By it we are taught, and by divine faith we hold one Lord, one faith, one baptism […] This is why we profess that there is no salvation outside the Church. (Leo XII. Encyclical Ubi primum, no. 14 May 5, 1824)

 

Pius XI

The heretics do not possess the true Church nor the faith

In his Controversies, [Saint Francis de Sales], although the holy Doctor made large use of the polemical literature of the past, he exhibits nevertheless a controversial method quite peculiarly his own. In the first place, he proves that no authority can be said to exist in the Church of Christ unless it had been bestowed on her by an authoritative mandate, which mandate the ministers of heretical beliefs in no way can be said to possess. After having pointed out the errors of these latter concerning the nature of the Church, he outlines the notes of the true Church and proves that they are not to be found in the reformed churches, but in the Catholic Church alone. He also explains in a sound manner the Rule of Faith and demonstrates that it is broken by heretics, while on the other hand it is kept in its entirety by Catholics. (Pius XI. Encyclical Rerum omium pertubationem, no. 24, January 26, 1923)


The unbelief of heretics, who confess their belief in the Gospel and resist that faith by corrupting it, is a more grievous sin than that of the Jews and the pagans who have never accepted the Gospel faith

It is written (2Pet 2:21): ‘It had been better for them not to have known the way of justice, than after they have known it, to turn back.’ Now the heathens have not known the way of justice, whereas heretics and Jews have abandoned it after knowing it in some way. Therefore theirs is the graver sin. As stated above (a. 5), two things may be considered in unbelief. One of these is its relation to faith: and from this point of view, he who resists the faith after accepting it, sins more grievously against faith, than he who resists it without having accepted it, even as he who fails to fulfil what he has promised, sins more grievously than if he had never promised it. In this way the unbelief of heretics, who confess their belief in the Gospel, and resist that faith by corrupting it, is a more grievous sin than that of the Jews, who have never accepted the Gospel faith. Since, however, they accepted the figure of that faith in the Old Law, which they corrupt by their false interpretations, their unbelief is a more grievous sin than that of the heathens, because the latter have not accepted the Gospel faith in any way at all.   The second thing to be considered in unbelief is the corruption of matters of faith. In this respect, since heathens err on more points than Jews, and these in more points than heretics, the unbelief of heathens is more grievous than the unbelief of the Jews, and that of the Jews than that of the heretics, except in such cases as that of the Manichees, who, in matters of faith, err even more than heathens do. Of these two gravities the first surpasses the second from the point of view of guilt; since, as stated above (a. 1) unbelief has the character of guilt, from its resisting faith rather than from the mere absence of faith, for the latter as was stated (a. 1) seems rather to bear the character of punishment. Hence, speaking absolutely, the unbelief of heretics is the worst. (Saint Thomas Aquinas. Summa Theologica II–II, q. 10, a.6)

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.