Five Popes accused of heresy – Five antipopes

Five Popes accused of heresy
Five antipopes

Open statement:

The recent accusation of “pope” Franciscus for heresy is the continuation of a long process.
An important part of the Church (14 bishops and their priests and believers) considers “Popes” Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, Benedict XVI and Franciscus as antipopes, because they proclaimed heresies and they are cut from the Church by the fact itself.

Heretics cannot attain the papacy
Canon 188 simply restates that a heretic is barred by Divine Law from obtaining the papacy. The pre-Vatican II canonists affirm that it is not canon law, but rather God’s Law that prevents a heretic such as Bergoglio from obtaining the office of pope in the first place.
Proof: According to canonist Coronata, “III. Appointment of the office of the Primacy. 1. What is required by divine law for this appointment: … Also required for validity is that the appointment be of a member of the Church. Heretics and apostates (at least public ones) are therefore excluded.” (Institutiones 1:312; Emphasis mine)
According to Wernz-Vidal: “Those capable of being validly elected are all who are not prohibited by divine law or by an invalidating ecclesiastical law… Those who are barred as incapable of being validly elected are all women, children who have not reached the age of reason; also, those afflicted with habitual insanity, the unbaptized, heretics, schismatics…” (Jus Canonicum 1:415; Emphasis mine).
Paul VI was pope but became heretic during Vaticanum II.
The four later antipopes till Bergoglio were heretics much prior to their alleged “elections”, because Vaticanum II is multiple heretic and they all accepted Vaticanum II.
According to the Anti-Deformation League: “Cardinal Bergoglio maintained a close relationship with the Jewish community in Argentina. He has celebrated various Jewish holidays with the Argentinian Jewish community, including Chanukah where he lit a candle on the menorah, attended a Buenos Aires synagogue for Slichot, a pre-Rosh Hashana service, the Jewish New Year, as well as a commemoration of Kristallnacht, the wave of violent Nazi attacks against Jews before World War II.” (See; Emphasis mine).
“Cardinal” Bergoglio also participated in an ecumenical service wherein a Protestant minister “laid hands on him” as a religious action: “…then-Cardinal Bergoglio—metropolitan archbishop of Buenos Aires, primate of the Catholic Church in Argentina, and president of the Argentinian Bishops’ Conference—is kneeling, head bowed, between Father Raniero Cantalamessa and Catholic Charismatic leader Matteo Calisi, with Evangelical Pastor Carlos Mraida extending his hand toward the cardinal’s head, as the people invoke the Holy Spirit over him.” (See; Emphasis mine).
Participating in false religious worship, according to the approved canonists and theologians, is a manifestation of heresy and/or apostasy. According to theologian Merkelbach, external heresy consists not only in what someone says, but also dictis vel factis, that is “signs, deeds, and the omission of deeds.” (See theologian Merkelbach, Summa Theologiae Moralis, 1:746.)
Therefore, Traditionalists don’t reject Bergoglio because he lost his office, but because he never could have obtained it in the first place! The Church does indeed teach loss of papal office through profession of heresy, but we need not even go down that path. Bergoglio was a heretic barred by Divine Law from ever becoming pope. Moreover, this is not a case of “Bergoglio acting badly,” but one of a manifest heretic incapable of obtaining the office.
I would be remiss if I didn’t also mention the decree of Pope Paul IV, Cum ex Apostolatus Officio of 1559. The pontiff decreed that if ever it should ever appear that someone who was elected Roman Pontiff had beforehand “deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into any heresy,” his election, even with the agreement and unanimous consent of all the cardinals would be “null, legally invalid and void.”


For detailed explanation and documentation:
Fr. Eric Jacqmin

Popes can be accused of heresy and thereby lose their papacy by the fact of heresy, read for more explanation :

Jurist Gratian

In the “Decretum”, jurist Gratian wrote a principle that was held “everywhere, always and by everybody” in the Church, hence it is an infallible Doctrine of the Tradition :

“Summa sedes a nemine iudicetur, NISI a fide devius inveniatur” :

“the Highest See cannot be judged by anyone,

unless he has been found deviating from the faith”

From Vatican II on, several popes have already been accused of heresy. Here an anthology:

Paul VI was accused of heresies by Catholic heads with many followers:

1) Rev. Father Georges de Nantes on March 28, 1973, he has handed a file in Rome: “Liber accusationis in Paulum Sextum” (letter of accusation against Paul the Sixth)

  1. On 25th of February 1982, Mgr. Archbishop Ngo Dinh Thuc proclaims the authorities of Vatican heretics and that, consequently, the popes have lost their position by the fact of heresy:

  2. Mgr. Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, November 6th, 1985:

    1. He sends a declaration to Rome with “39 doubts” about Paul VI’s publications :
    «LES 39 DUBIA sur la DÉCLARATION CONCILIAIRE SUR LA LIBERTÉ RELIGIEUSE” given to the Congregation of the Faith by S. Exc. Mgr Marcel LEFEBVRE, Archbishop of Tulle, Founder of the SSPX.

    2. In the book, “They have uncrowned Him,” Mgr Lefebvre accused Vaticanum II of heresies in an expert manner:

  3. The 30th of April 2006 : Mgr Tissier the Mallerais accuses Benedict XVI of heresies worse than Luther’s:

  4. The Bishops of the UOGCC declare the same condemnation and publish it on internet :


    We believe that God will provide a good pope for the Church.

Comments are closed.