@AlbinusFalco @FrDesposito @andrewXbartel @NovusOrdoWatch @frcekada I continue: universal acceptance is only a sign, that is it indicates the papacy, but as all signs of credibility, it is destroyed when you have contrary evidence. Exemple: you know that somebody is a fake wonderworker if he doesn't preach the faith.
@AlbinusFalco @FrDesposito @andrewXbartel @NovusOrdoWatch @frcekada If I understood correctly Bp Guérard on the matter: universal acceptance is infallible because of UOM. But there is no UOM without Pope. Therefore not infallible without Pope. Now, the objection is: that begs the question, but wait.
@EliSDillon @Sensus_Fidelium @FrDesposito The cardinals have no authority over the pope, but can only declare legally that someone is actually not a pope. That means he already wasn't a pope. Am I wrong?
@EliSDillon @FrDesposito @Sensus_Fidelium Exactly. Now obviously the reaction is: Wow how is that possible? Well you do not wonder when you know some history and how the modernists wanted to change the Church from the inside.
@Sensus_Fidelium @FrDesposito @EliSDillon Obviously I don't have " authority " to declare it (otherwise it would have been done long ago ;)....) But I have enough of a brain to see it. Just as I can declare someone a murderer (because no authority !) but yet I can see someone being a murderer.