The ‘Pope of Inclusion’ Strikes: Francis Laicizes Novus Ordo Priest who Denies He is Pope

But then, who is he to judge?

The ‘Pope of Inclusion’ Strikes:
Francis Laicizes Novus Ordo Priest who Denies He is Pope

‘Fr.’ Fernando Cornet, center, has been defrocked by ‘Pope’ Francis; ‘Fr.’ Giorgio Faré, left, may be next in line

More and more laity and clergy in the Vatican II Sect are figuring out there’s no way Francis could be the Pope of the Catholic Church, even if at times they still give the wrong reasons for arriving at this conclusion.

On Nov. 13, 2024, the Novus Ordo Archdiocese of Sassari, Italy, announced that ‘Pope’ Francis had removed one of its priests from the clerical state and reduced him, juridically, to the status of a layman. The cleric in question is the 57-year-old Rev. Fernando Maria Cornet, “a native Argentinian who was ordained to the priesthood in 1992 and who served in Sassari since 2011…” (source).

Then there is the case of Rev. Giorgio Maria Faré, a Discalced Carmelite presbyter, who has been dismissed from his order and declared excommunicated by the Superior General, the Rev. Miguel Márquez Calle, O.C.D., in a signed decree dated Nov. 18, 2024. This decision came a month after an initial admonition, dated Oct. 18, 2024, had been disregarded by Faré. In the future, ‘Pope’ Francis may defrock him as well.

In both cases, the reason for the disciplinary measures is the same: Both ‘Fr.’ Cornet and ‘Fr.’ Faré have publicly argued that Jorge Mario Bergoglio (‘Pope Francis’) is not in fact the Pope of the Catholic Church. Thus both have been charged with the crime of schism, defined as refusal of submission to the Pope or of maintaining communion with the members of the Church.

It seems clear that if instead of denying Bergoglio’s claim to the Papacy, these Novus Ordo priests had denied that Jesus Christ is true God and true Man, had claimed that the Virgin Mary was a sinner, or had allowed a transvestite to distribute Communion, no one in the Vatican would be losing sleep over it. In fact, the two might now be looking at a promotion.

The Cornet Case

As regards Rev. Cornet, in 2023 he published the book Habemus Antipapam? (“Do We Have an Antipope?”). In it, he investigates (a) what he believes is the true meaning of ‘Pope’ Benedict XVI’s declaration of resignation; (b) evidence for the invalidity of Francis’ pontificate; (c) the consequences of what would happen if Francis were to be declared an antipope (false pope).

The following is a discussion of Habemus Antipapam? with its author on an Italian channel. The conversation took place in September:

Just days ago, on Nov. 15, ‘Fr.’ Cornet doubled down. He released the book Alla Ricerca del Munus Perduto (“In Search of the Lost Munus“), in which he does a deep-dive into the idea we have nicknamed ‘Resignationism’, which is the notion that Benedict XVI’s resignation in 2013 was invalid on the grounds that he resigned not the papal office (munus) but only its active exercise or ministry (ministerium). Other common names for this thesis include Benepapism and Benevacantism. Interestingly enough, although it was available from the Italian Amazon initially, that page has since been removed. (The page for Habemus Antipapam?, on the other hand, still exists.)

The diocese released the following statement on its web site:

ARCHDIOCESE OF SASSARI ARCHIEPISCOPAL CHANCERY

It is hereby announced that the Holy Father Francis, by a supreme and unappealable decision, has dismissed Mr. Fernando Maria CORNET from the clerical state, in accordance with Art. 26 SST2021 [see Norms Regarding Delicts Reserved to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith] and dispensed him from ecclesiastical celibacy for crimes contra fidem (schism).

The Archbishop urged the diocesan community to pray for the unity of the Church, keeping in mind that Christians, apart from the bond of blood and belonging to the common human family “have God as their Father and the Church as their only mother,” and are part of the same body of Christ of which they are the members. “The members of Christ must not be at variance with one another; all those who form his body must each fulfill his own office… so that there may be no divisions in the body, but unity, and the members may be solicitous toward one another” (St. Augustine).

The Rev. Fr. Antonino CANU, Vicar of the Urban Historical Center Subarea, is appointed Parish Administrator of the Parish of San Donato and San Sisto in Sassari. Collaborating with him for pastoral service will be the Cottolengo Priests already working in the Historic Center, and other priests present in the pastoral district.

Sassari, November 13, 2024

The Archiepiscopal Chancellor

Sac. Antonio Spanu

(Source; bold print given.)

The archdiocesan statement makes reference to Article 26 of the Norms Regarding Delicts Reserved to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, promulgated in 2021 by the Frankster. This article states:

It is the right of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in whatever stage and grade of the unfolding of the proceedings, to present directly the most grave cases mentioned above in artt. 2-6 to the decision of the Supreme Pontiff with regard to dismissal or deposition from the clerical state, together with dispensation from the law of celibacy, when it is manifestly evident that the delict has been committed, after having given the guilty party the possibility of defending himself.

(Norms Regarding Delicts Reserved to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Art. 26)

Imagine, Cornet’s is among “the most grave cases”! In particular, he has been charged with a crime contra fidem (against faith), specifically with “schism”. This is a bit strange, since schism is not a sin against faith — no dogma is denied — but against charity, since ecclesiastical communion is ruptured (see St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 39, a. 1, ad 3). At the same time, it is true that it is connected to faith, and that’s probably why they include it under crimes contra fidem.

Here we should note that, at least in the true Catholic ecclesiology from before Vatican II, “those cannot be regarded as schismatics who refuse to obey a Roman Pontiff because they are suspicious of his person or because of unfavorable reports [rumores] spread abroad that [he] was doubtfully elected…” (F. X. Wernz and Peter Vidal, Ius Canonicum, vol. VII [Rome: Gregorian University, 1937], p. 439, n. 398). The reason is quite simply that the essence of schism does not lie in the refusal of submission to someone one regards as a false Pope — for such refusal of submission would be but the natural consequence of one’s conviction that he is not the Pope — but in the refusal of submission to someone one regards precisely as the true and lawful Pope.

The Faré Case

As regards Rev. Faré, like Cornet he too is a Resignationist. In an Oct. 13, 2024 presentation on YouTube, he examines Benedict XVI’s declaration of resignation and likewise argues that it was invalid. Furthermore, he declares he “will no longer celebrate Holy Mass ‘with Francis our Pope'”:

The written text of this presentation has been made available for download in various languages, including English:

• Never Give Up on that Lion: Benedict XVI’s Declaratio: A Canonical and Historical Analysis (by Fr. Giorgio Maria Faré)

Different Types of Resignationism

Here we should perhaps clarify that at the present time there are at least two main strands of Resignationism, in accordance with whether Benedict XVI is considered to have invalidated his resignation by accident or on purpose. One holds that although Ratzinger may have intended to renounce the papal office, the way he went about it was ineffective on account of substantial error — the error being his mistaken idea that the Papacy could be split into an active-governing part and a passive-contemplative part. According to the proponents of this thesis, his mistake is reflected in his declaration of resignation inasmuch as he resigned from the active-governing role of the Papacy (ministerium) only while continuing to hold on to the passive-contemplative role (munus), which he believed cannot be resigned. Notable representatives of this particular school of thought appear to include Ann Barnhardt, Dr. Edmund Mazza, and the Rev. Dave Nix. (We have refuted Barnhardt’s case here.)

The other strand of Resignationism holds that Benedict XVI resigned invalidly on purpose so as to prevent the foreseen apostasy of Bergoglio from harming the Church. His declaration and subsequent words and actions contain cryptic clues revealing to those with eyes to see that he was not in fact resigning but remained Pope (until his death on Dec. 31, 2022). Notable adherents of that position seem to include Patrick Coffin, Andrea Cionci, and Estefania Acosta.

We’re not sure into which of these two categories Antonio Socci, the Rev. Alessandro Minutella, and the Rev. Paul Kramer fit at the current time, but they too are Resignationists.

A notable conservative or traditional-leaning defender of the validity of Francis’ claim to the Papacy against any kind of Resignationism, we might add, is Steven O’Reilly, who maintains a blog dedicated to refuting the various arguments of the Resignationists. In 2022, he published the book Valid? The Resignation of Pope Benedict XVI: The Case against the Benepapists.

Glaring Double Standards

The U.S.-based Novus Ordo news portal Crux points out that both clerics have honorable backgrounds with noteable accomplishments:

Strikingly, both Cornet and Faré had fairly distinguished ecclesiastical pedigrees before their fall from grace.

Cornet, in addition to serving as a pastor at several parishes in Sardinia, has degrees in theology and patristics from the prestigious Augustinian Patristic Pontifical Institute in Rome, as well as a degree in linguistics and culture from the University of Sassari. He’s the author of several books, including a 2011 work tracing his family’s history from its roots in Sassari to its arrival in Argentina, and a 2015 collection of essays on Sts. Cyprian, Ambrose and Augustine.

Faré is also a published author, including a 2019 book on the Mass for which the foreword was penned by Spanish Cardinal Antonio Cañizares Llovera, who served as the Vatican’s top liturgical official under Pope Benedict XVI.

(“Two more Italian priests sanctioned for claiming Francis is ‘anti-pope’”, Crux, Nov. 16, 2024)

Of course for ‘Pope’ Francis of all people to charge others with crimes against the faith is beyond preposterous — the laundry list of crimes he has committed against the Faith and things connected with the Faith wouldn’t fit on a roll of toilet paper. But the double standard doesn’t matter: Francis is the one with the (perceived) power, and he wields it with great delight especially against his enemies. It is this very power that is threatened by the argumentation of clerics like Cornet and Faret, for Bergoglio’s entire edifice rests on the idea that he is the Pope of the Catholic Church. Take that away, and everything collapses!

The Italian Il Messaggero reports:

The Vatican’s stance is extremely tough, uncompromising, and unyielding: priests who commit the crime of attacking the unity of the Church are permanently expelled. Zero tolerance towards those who question the legitimacy of Pope Francis or sow discord and chaos through social media.

(Franca Giansoldati, “The Vatican’s Unyielding Stance Against Church Dissent”, Il Messaggero, Nov. 15, 2024)

Now, let’s put some things in perspective here. No one has been attacking “the unity of the Church” more than ‘Pope’ Francis, who has reportedly even admitted: “It’s not impossible that I will go down in history as the one who split the Catholic Church” (source).

Furthermore, a ‘Pope’ who claims that Lutherans are part of the Mystical Body of Christ, that the Church needs Anglicans precisely as Anglicans, and that religious differences are not only willed by God but “necessary”, such a ‘Pope’ is obviously not terribly worried about the unity of the Church.

And when it comes to “sow[ing] discord and chaos through social media” and through many other channels of communication, who fits the bill better than the ‘Pope’ who has repeatedly asked young people to “make a mess” in the church?

We notice with great interest, by the way, that Francis handed down his definitive decision unilaterally as the supreme monarch of the Vatican II Church. (That Catholic doctrine on the Papacy sure comes in handy at times, doesn’t it?!)

But… the questions now present themselves: What happened to all the synodal ‘walking together’? What happened to a more ecumenical and collegial exercise of the ‘Petrine ministry’? How amusing that in just that moment and on that issue, Francis showed himself to be a bona fide “indiestrist” (“backwardist”) who clings rigidly to some serious nostalgia for the past! By his own analysis, he must be hiding someting!

Notice, too, that Cornet’s “infinite dignity” suddenly played no role, and that the ‘Pope’ who at other times wonders out loud, “Who am I to judge?”, very quickly remembered who he is to judge — or at least, who he claims to be. He who just a few weeks ago warned against “[t]hose who arrogantly claim to have the exclusive right to hear the voice of the Lord”, has rendered a judgment that cannot be appealed.

Bergoglio is lucky most of his sheeple won’t recall the homily he gave on Nov. 5, 2015, probably about 3 billion words ago:

The Christian includes, he does not close the door to anyone, even if this provokes resistance. He who excludes, because he believes himself to be better, generates conflicts and divisions, and does not consider the fact that “we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God.” That was the message of Pope Francis during Thursday morning’s Mass at Casa Santa Marta.

(“Pope Francis: The Christian includes; Pharisees exclude”, America, Nov. 5, 2015)

Because of this attitude of perpetual universal inclusion, Francis has not tired of repeating his mantra “todos, todos todos!” (“everyone, everyone, everyone!”) at every opportunity. “We must be open to everything”, the faker told CBS’s Norah O’Donnell earlier this year.

If Bergoglio thinks that Cornet and Faré are guilty of some terrible sin for publicly maintaining he is not the Pope, very well, but then where are the dialogue committees, the listening sessions, the culture of encounter we must practice with each and every child of God, especially the excluded?

Moreover, maybe the presbyters in question just aren’t ‘ready’ yet to accept him as Pope, perhaps due to a lack of maturity or capability on their part. After all, it was only last year that Francis said to Jesuits in Portugal:

We must not be superficial and naive, forcing people into things and behaviors for which they are not yet mature, or are not capable. It takes a lot of sensitivity and creativity to accompany people spiritually and pastorally. But everyone, everyone, everyone is called to live in the Church: never forget that.

(Antipope Francis; in Antonio Spadaro, S.J., “‘The Water Has Been Agitated'”, La Civiltà Cattolica, Aug. 28, 2023)

Funny, but somehow this principle of insufficient maturity and capability seems to apply only to people who habitually commit sodomy!

Lastly, can’t Francis at least put out a statement honoring Cornet’s position as an ‘enrichment to humanity’, just as he says about other religions, especially pagan ones?

Final Thoughts

The stark truth is that Francis has marginalized Cornet. He is now an outcast of sorts, a member of the very existential peripheries otherwise so beloved of Bergoglio; and Faré is probably not far behind.

Francis’ defrocking of Cornet gives the lie to the incessant Bergoglian propaganda about how no one is to be rejected, how all are to be included, listened to, valued, and accompanied. But then, it has never really been about including the marginalized per se. It has only been about swapping out one set of marginalized people for another.

And so the two Italian presbyters find themselves excluded and discarded, victims of the throw-away culture. Perhaps Francis will wash their feet next year on Holy Thursday? Fat chance!

From Bergoglio’s perspective, it is of course clear that he cannot simply let cases like Cornet’s and Faré’s slide. He has to come down hard on them, lest even more clerics and laity end up calling his bluff. However, his actions risk producing what is known as the ‘Streisand effect’, defined as “an unintended consequence of attempts to hide, remove, or censor information, where the effort instead increases public awareness of the information.” Indeed, Cornet’s theses are probably getting much more exposure now than they would ever have received had Bergoglio not made his move. Oh well, tough choice for Francis!

Crux‘s John Allen has noted in his most recent broadcast that if a priest wants to get laicized, then denying Bergoglio is the Pope is the surest and quickest way to get it done. (Maybe Dan Horan should try it!) By contrast, let’s remember how long it took for ‘Cardinal’ Theodore McCarrick to be laicized — but then he always affirmed Francis to be the Pope, so that would explain it.

All of this is further put into perspective by looking at some of the clerics whom Francis has not defrocked, declared excommuniated, or otherwise disciplined, or has only done so after much pressure from public outrage. The total list of names is getting longer and longer:

• The Scandals Haunting Pope Francis (2024)
• What we know about the Príncipi case, and why it’s a scandal (2024)
• Friend of Francis ratified as Bishop despite abuse accusations (2024)
• No Excuse for Surprise: Rupnik, Francis, and the Pattern of Protecting Predators (2023)
• The Rupnik affair goes from scandalous to contemptible (2023)
• Six cases where the sexual abuse scandal touches Pope Francis (2017)

So, who might be the next candiate for Francis to dismiss from the Novus Ordo priesthood? Surely Faré will be next, but then? Perhaps a Franciscan Capuchin ‘biblical scholar’ who encourages people to think there was “homosexual love” between Jonathan and David in the Old Testament and between the Roman centurion and his devoted servant in the New? One who says that since the Gospel does not tell us one way or another, there could have been — he does not say that there was but that we don’t know that there wasn’t — a homosexual relationship between Jesus Christ and Lazarus or Christ and the disciples? Oh, no! That one — his name is ‘Fr.’ Roberto Pasolini — Francis just promoted to the position of Preacher of the Papal Household.

Only a fool can’t see what’s going on here.

Image source: composite with elements from YouTube (screenshots) and Shutterstock (El Greco/Carlos Yudica)
Licenses: fair use and paid