Each of the aforementioned actions have been called non-binding, invalid, illicit, etc.

all demonstrate papal incoherence on canonical norms. Cor Orans, the take-over of the Knights of Malta, the arbitrary sacking of Bishop Torres, Amoris Laetitia, Traditiones Custodes, the Roche Rescript, et al. I will not argue these points as I think they are self-sufficient, such that even educated non-traditionalist commentators recognize the Franciscan pontificate as one of chaos and autocracy. Traditionalists (myself included) have spent the last decade establishing that Pope Francis either (a) does not understand canon law, or (b) does not care about it. But more importantly, I think, is the inconsistency it demonstrates with regards to the pope's canonical judgments. Appeal to a private conversation is an incredibly weak hook to hang one's hat upon.Ģ. Pope Francis is perfectly capable of making his mind known if he wishes. I have often seen them abused you may recall occasions during the pontificate of John Paul II where promoters of Medjugorje regularly appealed to alleged private conversations with the late pontiff in support of their activities-statements which Cardinal Ratzinger called 'freely invented.' Now, I do not suggest Bishop Huonder is lying I do suggest that what he says cannot be verified, and therefore must be taken with a large grain of salt. They cannot even be independently verified. First and foremost, anecdotes about private conversations carry no weight. I, on the other hand, believe this to be a nothingburger, for three very important reasons:ġ. Traditional Catholic media sources have been abuzz with essays and podcasts jubilantly framing these revelations as a vindication for the position of the Society and traditional Catholic media, who have consistently maintained that the SSPX is not in a state of schism.

The big news this week has been the revelations by Bishop Vitus Huonder, retired Bishop of Chur (Switzerland) that Pope Francis had told him privately that the Society of St.

Sspx buffalo