“A word of advice to Akin: Don’t bother. You have already admitted enough to demonstrate that whatever one thinks of its accusation of the canonical delict of heresy, the Open Letter is a useful and needed provocation given a situation in which, to quote Philip Lawler, “the current Pope’s leadership has become a danger to the faith…” It would hardly matter if Akin were able to contrive an elaborate demonstration of how Francis, dancing between the raindrops, deftly avoids strict heresy or an anathema that strictly concerns dogma or some other form of self-separation from the Church. What does matter for all practical purposes is that we have a Pope whose self-evident reckless disregard for the teaching of his predecessors has prompted not only the Open Letter but a long series of unprecedented interventions by the faithful, beginning with the dubia of four cardinals (two since deceased) that Francis obstinately refuses to answer.
In sum, after more than fifty years of worsening drift and decay in the Church, culminating in this astounding pontificate, it is time for professional defenders of the indefensible like Akin to stop shooting at the messengers and confront the reality of the bad news they have had the evangelical courage to announce. As a confirmed soldier of Christ, Akin, no less than the rest of us, is obliged to defend the Church against error, no matter what its source, rather than the rapidly shrinking polemical turf that Catholic Answers presents as respectable mainstream Catholicism.”
Note the source. Francis is a universal, catholic problem.
“Other observers have attributed the Pope’s habitual vagueness to his training in the Jesuit order.
“For those unfamiliar with Jesuits,” wrote Dominic Lynch in The Federalist, “vague and porous doctrine is almost their raison d’être. Indeed, it is so baked into the order that finding a conservative Jesuit is more difficult than finding a liberal in West Texas.”
A firm clear open discussion of Pope Francis’ election to the papacy must commence. Though the Cardinals are the one who just initiate it, the laity have a right to request one. His election is the first to consider. The appointments he has made and the doctrine taught as a result must then be considered. The theoretical speculation has turned practical. It would be a very good thing to refine the concept of infallibility.
“Until proven otherwise means that a Pope can lose his pontificate for many reasons, including heresy, but these reasons must be incontrovertible. The heresy, but also the invalidity of the election, must be manifest and widely-known to the whole Church, because the Church is a visible society and not an invisible congregation of elected people as Protestant sects are.
In order to speak about notorious and manifest heresy, it is not enough that the Pope professes or publicly favors heresy; it must be perceived as such by Catholic public opinion. The bishops, and especially the cardinals — who are the electors and counselors of the Pope – must recognize these facts and see their consequences. Until then, a Pope must be considered legitimate.” https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/prof-roberto-di-mattei-on-how-to-resist-pope-francis-paradigm-shift-full-te