Canon 188 Is Not Infallible! There Can Be TWO POPES & There Are TWO POPES ~ Signed Mélanie

Canon 188: "A resignation made out of grave fear that is inflicted unjustly or out of malice, substantial error, or simony is invalid by the law itself."

So the man-made fallible canon 188 is evidence that Pope Benedict is still the Pope? What?

Since when is canon law infallible?

Canon law is man-made and is not infallible.

Scripture, however is infallible.

What does Scripture say about TWO POPES?

The High Priests of the old and new testaments are today's Popes.

What does Scripture say about TWO High Priests - about two high priests reigning or existing  at the same time?

Under the high priests Annas and Caiphas; the word of the Lord was made unto John, the son of Zachary, in the desert." [Luke 3:2]

And they led him away to Annas first, for he was father in law to Caiphas, who was the high priest of that year." [John 18:13]

And Annas sent him bound to Caiphas the high priest." [John 18:24]

And Annas the high priest, and Caiphas, and John, and Alexander, and as many as were of the kindred of the high priest." [Acts Of Apostles 4:6]

According to infallible Scripture there can be TWO high Priests at the same time - one active high priest and one passive high priest.

Caiphas is the active high priest

Annas is the passive high priest.

Both high priests sat in judgment of Christ.

God the Father allowed both high priests to judge His Son.

So infallible Scripture proves that there can be TWO HIGH PRIESTS at the same time.

Can the Spouse of Christ - the Church follow in the footsteps of Christ?


So if Jesus Christ was judged by TWO HIGH PRIESTS then so can the Spouse of Christ - the Church be judged by TWO POPES.

Pope Francis is the active Pope.

Pope Benedict is the passive Pope.

Two Popes sit in judgment of the Spouse of Christ Two shaky, servile, doubtful popes as Mélanie prophesied:

"I didn't see, I don't see any Great Pope or Great Monarch before an extremely great tribulation, horrifying, terrible and general for all Christendom. But before that time, twice there will be a short lived peace; two shaky, servile, doubtful popes" Mélanie

Victim of Jesus nee MELANIE CALVAT,
Shepherdess of La Salette

"I protest highly against a different text, which people may dare publish after my death. I protest once more against the very false statements of all those who dare say and write First that I embroidered the Secret; second, against those who state that the Queen Mother did not say to transmit the Secret to all her people." Mélanie


  1. Doubtful indeed as neither are true popes.

  2. "Unknown" is wise to keep his unintelligent comment unsigned.

    So who's the Pope, wise guy? The late Cardinal Siri? Michael Bawden? Steve Skojec?

    Get thee behind me, Donatus.

  3. Google tells me that Seattle Kim is a Baptist theologian.

    Now ain't that cute, a Baptist coming on a Catholic blog and trying to educate us.

    I guess you'll trot out "Vicarius Filii Dei" and Luther's blasphemies next.

    Get thee behind me, Seattle Kim.

  4. That's pretty funny!! No I'm not a Korean American Baptist man. But I was raised Baptist and then converted to Novus Ordo in 2003. Never heard of this guy--interesting someone goes by my blogger name.

  5. Apologies for the mistaken identity. =)

    All the same, let's agree to differ on this one.

    Our Saviour did not depose the corrupt Caiaphas who unjustly condemned him to death; he even asked his disciples (pre-Passion, of course) to obey "the scribes and Pharisees".

    During the Arian crisis, Athanasius didn't depose the ruling Pope; he just soldiered on.

    During the Reformation, Luther deposed the Pope (in his sick mind), and look where that got us.

    There are great Popes, good Popes, and not-so-good ones. It is all foreshadowed in the Old Testament. Look at folks like Manasseh (evil, but repented), Amon (evil) or Ahaz (faithless, and trusting in secular politics rather than God's justice).

    There's also this little tid-bit that Sedevacantists hate to look at:

    "If the Pope is wicked and especially if he is foreknown, then as Judas, the Apostle, he is of the devil, a thief, and a son of perdition, and he is not the head of the holy militant Church, since he is not a member of it." - CONDEMNED by the Council of Constance along with all the other errors of Hus.

    Sedevacantism is the new Hussism. ^_^

  6. Oh dear. So much fail here I don't know where to begin.

    First of all, it's funny that DXV mentioned Canon 188. Do you know what Canon 188 in the 1917 Code of Canon Law says? You know, the one promulgated by a real pope? It says any cleric automatically loses his office in the Church if he defects from the Catholic Faith. Canon 188 of the 1917 Code, promulgated by Benedict XV, is one of the vast number of authorities that tell us Bergoglio is not the pope.

    It is slightly ridiculous for you to ask a sedevacantist who the pope is. A sedevacantist by definition believes there is no currently reigning pope. Just thought I'd throw that in for a little reality check.

    Our Lord didn't depose Caiaphas? So what? Caiaphas wasn't a pope.

    The pope under St. Athanasius wasn't a heretic, so I'm not sure what the relevance of your next statement is at all.

    Who cares what Martin Luther did? He was a heresiarch like Jorge Bergoglio, and rightly excommunicated. What he did tells us nothing about Catholic theology.

    Again, I'm not sure why you're talking about the kings of Israel. Ahaz wasn't a pope. Can we please try to stay on point.

    Lastly, I'm actually very happy to look at that quote from the Council of Constance. I always love to see the Catholic Faith promulgated with authority. That quote states that a wicked pope does not cease to be the pope. This is Catholic teaching. According to this teaching, if a pope went out and robbed banks and started trafficking in narcotics he would still be pope. That's all it's saying here. But it's also Catholic teaching that if a pope rejects the Catholic Faith he automatically stops being the pope. In fact, it said that in Canon 188 of the 1917 Code.

    Isn't it funny that John Paul 2 took that rule out of his own Code in 1983? I can't imagine why he wouldn't want those words in there ...

    St. Robert Bellarmine, Doctor of the Church, taught that if a pope were to profess heresy he would cease being pope before any declaration from the cardinals.

    Do you have any Doctors of the Church that say the contrary? I am happy to wait for you to find something.


Post a Comment