Canon 209:

"In common error or in positive or probable doubt about either law or fact, the Church supplies Jurisdiction: for both the external and internal forum."

Catholic refutation:

1.  There is no "common error" and there is no "probable doubt" , regarding the Catholic Dogma on Jurisdiction and Governance which is clearly listed in the Council of Florence and the Vatican Council of 1870 ... so this "canon" cannot be applied to any matters related to Jurisdiction and Governance.

2.  Regarding the text: "positive or probable doubt" --> This Canon 209 contains the heresy of "supplied Jurisdiction", a lie against the Faith as shown in Parts (2) and (3) of this packet. Also, it is lying that there is "positive or probable doubt" regarding the defined Dogma on Jurisdiction and Governance. The Jurisdiction and Governance Dogma has been clearly defined at the Council of Florence and the Vatican Council of 1870. There is one and only one source of Catholic Jurisdiction and that is hierarchically under the See of Peter -- since this source of Jurisdiction does not exist at this time (the Vatican-2 cult cannot grant Catholic Jurisdiction), there is no Catholic Jurisdiction in the world in these times. This is a punishment we are under from God for our sins and negligence’s.

3.  Regarding the text: "common error" --> Also, there is no "common error" with Catholics who care enough to take 5 minutes to read the un-ambiguous Dogmatic decrees regarding Jurisdiction and Governance, which were covered five times at the Vatican Council of 1870 because God knew that groups would set up non-Jurisdictional entities after Vatican-2.

4.  Regarding the text: "supplies Jurisdiction" --> A search of the texts of the Catholic world wide Councils and the Denzinger (Sources of Catholic Dogma) shows that there is not a single instance of the words "supplies Jurisdiction" or "supplied Jurisdiction". This fraud of "supplied Jurisdiction" is a non-Catholic fiction and heresy from top to bottom, those who propagated it lost their souls (if they died in that state), those who currently propagate it are all losing their souls. See Section 99 of this site.

Canon 20:

"If on a given matter there is lacking an express prescription of law, whether general or particular, the rule is to be surmised, unless it concerns the application of a penalty, from laws laid down in similar cases; (then) from the general principles of law observed with canonical equity; (then) from the style and practice of the Roman Curia; and (finally) from the common and constant opinions of the doctors."

Catholic refutation:

1.  Regarding the text: "If on a given matter there is lacking an express prescription of law" --> There is not in any way a "lacking of express law" regarding Jurisdiction and Governance of the Catholic Church. These express laws (both general and particular) are covered in the Divine Law (the Catholic Dogma) from the Council of Florence and the Vatican Council of 1870 which address Jurisdiction and Governance. Please see Section 87 of the website.

2.  Regarding the text: "canonical equity" (also called epikeia) --> Canonical equity can only be used against man-made law (i.e. not keeping to the letter of man-made law) it cannot be used against the Divine Law (to not keep to the letter of the Divine Law, the Catholic Dogma). So the man-made concept of "canonical equity" cannot be used against the Catholic defined Dogma which addresses Jurisdiction and Governance.

3.  Regarding the text: "unless it concerns the application of a penalty" --> "Canonical equity" is only used for issues specifically related to "application of a penalty" ... this is the only context in which "canonical equity" can be employed "from the general principles of law". In this Canon 20, the phrase (canonical equity, also called "epikeia") is not even attempting to apply epikeia to the Catholic Dogma regarding Jurisdiction or Governance (which it can’t legally do anyway). Trying to apply this Canon 20 to Catholic Jurisdiction and governance is completely fraudulent.

4.  The Divine Law (the Dogma) regarding Jurisdiction and governance clearly states that the Catholic Church is a single entity, of one Jurisdiction and governance around the whole world under the See of Peter.

If a group does not meet this definition of Jurisdiction and governance (and none do) then they are not a Catholic entity. The Vatican-2 heretic cult (founded in 1965) doesn’t because Vatican-2 is clearly a heretical society with over 200 heresies in the Vatican-2 documents. And groups which are not under a single governance under the See of Peter around the whole world do not meet this definition ("sspx" , "sspv", "Thuc line", "cmri", other "independents", etc.) so that they cannot be Catholic entities.

Canon 207:

"§ 1.  Delegated power is extinguished by completion of the mandate; (likewise) by the elapse of time; (likewise) by exhaustion of the number of cases for which it was granted, by the cessation of the final cause of the delegation, by revocation of the one delegating directly communicated to the delegate, or by resignation of the one delegated communicated directly to the one delegating and accepted by him, but not by the loss of authority on the part of the one delegating, except for the two cases mentioned in Canon 61."

"§ 2.  But for power granted for the internal forum, an act placed inadvertently after the elapse of time or exhaustion of the number of cases is valid."

"§ 3.  When there are several delegated collegially, if one ceases (to have power), the delegation of the others also ceases, unless something else is shown by the tenor of the delegation."

Catholic refutation:

1.  Regarding the text: "Delegated power" --> This reference to "delegated power" is for completion of an assigned task or activity, the "delegated power" has nothing to do with the Catholic Dogma regarding Jurisdiction and Governance which is unchanging and unchangeable.

2.  The Catholic Sacraments, including the Mass, are legally dispensed only in accordance with the Dogma on Jurisdiction and Governance. So that the "delegated power" that is being referred to here cannot possibly mean that this "delegated power" is to be applied to the Sacraments ... or "employed" to ignore the Jurisdiction and Governance Dogma.

3.  The "delegated power" discussed here is something which lapses (comes to an end) so it must be referring to tasks, work groups, disciplinary actions, etc., and not to the Sacraments which are governed by the Jurisdiction and Governance Dogma.

Canon 882:

"In danger of death all priests and bishops, even those not approved for confessions, validly and licitly absolve all penitents whatsoever of all sins and censures whatsoever, no matter how reserved or notorious, even if there is present an approved priest, with due regard for the prescription of Canons 884 and 2252."

Catholic refutation:

1.  This canon is heresy against the Dogma on Jurisdiction and Governance as listed in the Council of Florence and the Vatican Council of 1870. These dogmatic decrees state that Catholic Jurisdiction and governance have one and only one source - under the See of Peter hierarchically, throughout the whole world.

2.  The Catholic Dogma on what to do when ... for confession when there is no priest available is outlined on Section 10.2 of the website. Confessing your sins to God, with perfect contrition (sorrow for sins because they offend God), together with the intention of wanting to go to sacramental confession places the soul back into a state of grace.

The Catholic teaching addressing the non-availability of confession is taught three times by the Council of Trent. God knew we were going to be in the situation we are in now regarding the loss of all Catholic property around the world to the vatican-2 heresy ... and disappearance of the Catholic clergy (they are not Ordained priests or consecrated bishops) ... so that sacramental confession would not be available ... and God does not command impossibilities in terms of getting to Heaven.

3.  God informs us via the Council of Trent that we are not to go to non-Jurisdictional entities for "confession", since there is no such thing as forgiveness of sins outside of the Catholic Church (citation following Trent citations). The Trent citations are:

Council of Trent, Fourteenth Session, Chapter 4, On Contrition >
"It sometimes happens that this contrition is perfect through charity, and reconciles man with God before this sacrament be actually received, the said reconciliation, nevertheless, is not to be ascribed to that contrition, independently of the desire of the sacrament which is included therein."

Council of Trent, Sixth Session, Chapter 14, on Justification >
"Whence it is to be taught, that the penitence of a Christian, after his fall, is very different from that at (his) baptism; and that therein are included not only a cessation from sins ... but also the sacramental confession of the said sins, at least in desire, and to be made in its season, and sacerdotal absolution; and likewise satisfaction by fasts, alms, prayers, and the other pious exercises of a spiritual life; not indeed for the eternal punishment, which is, together with the guilt, remitted, either by the sacrament, or by the desire of the sacrament, but for the temporal punishment."

By this teaching from the Council of Trent if we intend to go to sacramental confession when it becomes available, and have perfect contrition in confessing our sins directly to God our souls are placed back into a state of grace.

And lastly on this point, the Catholic Church has defined that there is no remission of sins outside of the Catholic Church.

So there is no remission of sins in the Vatican-2 heretic cult or in any of the groups which are in heresy against the Jurisdiction and Governance Dogma.

By the below Ex-Cathedra statement there is no sacramental absolution of sins in the Vatican-2 cult or in the Dogma violating non-Jurisdictional groups ("sspx" , "sspv", "Thuc line", "cmri", other "independents", etc.)

Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam, 18 Nov 1302, Ex-Cathedra >
"With Faith urging us we are forced to believe and to hold the one, holy, Catholic Church and that, Apostolic, and we firmly believe and simply confess this Church outside of which there is no salvation nor remission of sin, the Spouse in the Canticle proclaiming: ‘One is my dove, my perfect one'."

Canon 2252:

"Those constituted in danger of death can receive from a priest, without special faculties, absolution from any censure of man or from a censure most specially reserved to the Apostolic See, (but) are bound after recovering by the obligation of taking recourse under pain of reincidence to him who passed the censure, if it concerned a censure of man; (similarly) to the S. Penitentiary or to a Bishop or another endowed with the faculty according to the norm of Canon 2254, § 1, if it was a censure of law; and they must obey his mandates."

Catholic refutation:

1.  A "censure" in the Catholic Church is a penalty. The subject of this Canon 2252 is about lifting of penalties -- it has absolutely nothing to do with ... in danger of death sacramental confession. Even if it did, it can’t be used to legislate against the Jurisdiction and Governance Dogma defined in the Councils of Florence and Vatican 1870. Please see previous record regarding Canon 882.

2.  What this canon is referring to (in all likelihood) is the the Bull: Apostolicae Sedis Moderationi of Pius IX (1846-78) which regulates anew the system of censures and reservations in the Catholic Church.

Canon 2261:

"§ 1.  One excommunicated is prohibited from confecting and administering licitly the Sacraments and Sacramentals, except for the exceptions that follow:"

"§ 2.  The faithful, with due regard for the prescription of Para 3, can for any just cause seek the Sacraments and Sacramentals from one excommunicated, especially if other ministers are lacking, and then the one who is excommunicate and approached can administer these and is under no obligation of inquiring the reasons from the one requesting."

"§ 3.  But from a banned excommunicate and from others excommunicated after a condemnatory or declaratory sentence has come, only the faithful in danger of death can ask for sacramental absolution according to the norm of Canons 882 and 2252 and even, if other ministers are lacking, other Sacraments and Sacramentals."

Catholic refutation:

1.  This "canon 2261" is heresy against of the Divine Law, the Dogma on Jurisdiction and Governance (listed on Section 87 of this site).

2.  If someone is automatically excommunicated for heresy for going against even one of the Dogmas of the Church, he is spiritually outside of the Catholic Church so he cannot minister the Sacraments of the Church.

3.  This is another attempt to get people to not confess ... in accordance with the Dogma on Section 10.2 of this site. The Section 10.2 Dogmas are specifically for places and times when sacramental confession is not available.

Pope Leo XIII >
"The Sacraments, which some people keep and use outside the unity of Christ, are able to preserve the appearance of piety; but the invisible and spiritual virtue of true piety cannot abide there any more than feeling can remain in an amputated part of your body."

Saint Augustine, Doctor of the Church >
"There is no salvation outside the Church, and therefore whatever things of the Church are had outside the Church do not avail unto salvation."

Canon 878:

"§ 1.  Delegated Jurisdiction or permission for hearing confession can be granted within certain established bounds."

"§ 2.  Nevertheless, local Ordinaries and religious Superiors should take care lest Jurisdiction or permission be unduly limited without reasonable cause."

Catholic refutation:

1.  Delegated Jurisdiction as opposed to Ordinary Jurisdiction of a geographical bishop, can be granted by a local Ordinary. This canon does not apply to anyone in the world at this time, since there are no Ordinaries in the hierarchical structure under the See of Peter (the Vatican-2 cult does not have the Papacy only the Catholic Church has the Papacy (not filled at this time)) to grant delegated Jurisdiction.

2.  This is another case where the "sspx" is rejecting a Catholic Dogma ... they are rejecting the Dogma on Automatic Excommunication for heresy which applies to everyone who is a physical participant in the non-Catholic Vatican-2 cult.

3.  If there were Ordinaries in the hierarchal structure under the See of Peter (which there are none now), then and only then would Para 2 of this canon apply. But in these times those who are occupying the offices which were previously held by Catholic Church bishops are all automatically excommunicated for heresy for physical participation in a heretical society (the Vatican-2 cult) ... for this reason they have no power or Catholic Jurisdiction to grant to others.

4.  No other group in the world can grant delegated Jurisdiction because the groups in violation of the Catholic Dogma on Jurisdiction and Governance are not Catholic entities, these groups include the "sspx" , "sspv", "Thuc line", "cmri", other "independents", etc.

5.  Again, the deception and heresy here is that the "sspx" is saying that the Vatican-2-ists are Catholic when they’re not.

Canon 1098:

"If the pastor or Ordinary or delegated priest who assists at marriage according to the norm of Canons 1095 and 1096 cannot be had or cannot be present without grave inconvenience:"

"1.  In danger of death marriage is contracted validly and licitly in the presence only of witnesses; and outside of dangers of death provided it is prudently foreseen that this condition will perdure for a month;"

"2.  In either case, if another priest can be present, he shall be called and together with the witnesses must assist at marriage, with due regard for conjugal validity solely in the presence of witnesses."

Catholic refutation:

1.  This Canon 1098 is in the context of Ordinaries and priests who do have normal Jurisdiction in accordance with the Catholic Dogma on Jurisdiction and Governance ... which no one has in these times.

2.  It is simply stating that a stand-in priest can be used for a marriage, or the marriage can be performed with witnesses only.

3.  Neither this, nor any other "canon law" paragraph can be used to set up Catholic looking activities against the Divine Law, the Catholic Dogma on Jurisdiction and Governance ... listed on Section 87 of this site.

~     ~     ~

Canon 1357:

"§ 1.  Without prejudice to the prescripts of cann. 508 and 976, a confessor can remit in the internal sacramental forum an undeclared latae sententiae censure of excommunication or interdict if it is burdensome for the penitent to remain in the state of grave sin during the time necessary for the competent superior to make provision."

"§ 2.  In granting the remission, the confessor is to impose on the penitent, under the penalty of reincidence, the obligation of making recourse within a month to the competent superior or to a priest endowed with the faculty and the obligation of obeying his mandates; in the meantime he is to impose a suitable penance and, insofar as it is demanded, reparation of any scandal and damage; however, recourse can also be made through the confessor, without mention of the name."

"§ 3.  After they have recovered, those for whom an imposed or declared censure or one reserved to the Apostolic See has been remitted according to the norm of can. 976 are also obliged to make recourse."

Catholic refutation:

This canon is heresy against the Catholic Council canonical requirement of making a Formal Abjuration to re-enter the Catholic Church after falling into heresy or after participation in a heretical society. See Section 19.1 of Immaculata-one.com.

A couple of citations regarding abjuration to re-enter the Church (that this "canon 1357" is in heresy against) are:

First Council of Constantinople, 381 A.D., Canon 7 >
"Those who embrace orthodoxy and join the number of those who are being saved from the heretics ... these we receive when they hand in statements and anathematize every heresy which is not of the same mind as the Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church of God."

Lateran Council III, 1179 A.D., Canon 27 >
" ... We likewise decree (...) that they should be subject in every way to the same sentence and penalty as the above-mentioned heretics and that they should not be received into the communion of the Church, unless they abjure their pernicious society and heresy."

Canon 144:

"§ 1.  In factual or legal common error and in positive and probable doubt of law or of fact, the Church supplies executive power of governance for both the external and internal forum."

"§ 2.  The same norm is applied to the faculties mentioned in cann. 882, 883, 966, 1111, § 1."

Catholic refutation:

1.  This "canon 144" is heresy against the Catholic Dogma on Jurisdiction and Governance. There is one and only one source of Catholic Jurisdiction and Governance ... that is from the See of Peter (not filled at this time) in a hierarchal structure throughout the whole world. Fictional "canon law" cannot override the Dogma.

2.  Same as Number 1 above, with the other faculties in canons 883, 966, 1111, § 1.

3.  Again ... the "1983 Code" is from the non-Catholic vatican-2 cult founded in 1965 ... automatically excommunicated heretic "John Paul-2" could not promulgate legislation for the Catholic Church, which he was not even in (proven on Section 36, Sub-part A of this site).

Canon 142:

"§ 2.  Nevertheless, an act of delegated power which is exercised for the internal forum alone and is placed inadvertently after the lapse of the time limit of the grant is valid."

Catholic refutation:

1.  It is heresy to say that "delegated power" for a period of time can supersede the Catholic Dogma on Jurisdiction and Governance, it can’t. If the See of Peter was in place and operational (which it isn’t at this time) then a delegation of power could take place through the local geographic Ordinary (bishop) within the single world wide Jurisdictional entity under the See of Peter.

2.  Again ... the "1983 Code" is from the non-Catholic vatican-2 cult founded in 1965 ... automatically excommunicated heretic "John Paul-2" could not promulgate legislation for the Catholic Church, which he was not even in (proven on Section 36, Sub-part A of this site).

Canon 976:

"Even though a priest lacks the faculty to hear confessions, he absolves validly and licitly any penitents whatsoever in danger of death from any censures and sins, even if an approved priest is present."

Catholic refutation:

1.  This "Canon 976" is heresy against the Catholic Dogma on Jurisdiction and Governance. The Dogma states that Catholic Jurisdiction and governance have one and only one source - under the See of Peter hierarchically, throughout the whole world. A non-Jurisdictional priest does not have the spiritual power from God to absolve sins. Repeated from canon 882 section, above:

2.  The Catholic teaching regarding confession when there is no priest available is outlined on Section 10.2 of the website. Confessing your sins to God, with perfect contrition (sorrow for sins because they offend God), together with the intention of going to sacramental confession when it becomes available places the soul back into a state of grace. This is taught three times by the Council of Trent. God knew we were going to be in the situation we’re in now regarding the loss of the Vatican and Catholic clergy ... and God does not command impossibilities in terms of getting to Heaven.

3.  God is telling us via the Council of Trent that we are not to go to non-Jurisdictional entities for "confession" ... since there is no such thing as forgiveness of sins outside of the Catholic Church. The Trent citations are:

Council of Trent, Fourteenth Session, Chapter 4, On Contrition >
"It sometimes happen that this contrition is perfect through charity, and reconciles man with God before this sacrament be actually received, the said reconciliation, nevertheless, is not to be ascribed to that contrition, independently of the desire of the sacrament which is included therein."

Council of Trent, Sixth Session, Chapter 14, on Justification >
"Whence it is to be taught, that the penitence of a Christian, after his fall, is very different from that at (his) baptism; and that therein are included not only a cessation from sins ... but also the sacramental confession of the said sins, at least in desire, and to be made in its season, and sacerdotal absolution; and likewise satisfaction by fasts, alms, prayers, and the other pious exercises of a spiritual life; not indeed for the eternal punishment, which is, together with the guilt, remitted, either by the sacrament, or by the desire of the sacrament, but for the temporal punishment."

By this teaching from the Council of Trent if we intend to go to sacramental confession when it becomes available, and have perfect contrition in confessing our sins directly to God our souls are placed back into a state of grace.

--

Again, there is no remission of sins outside of the Catholic Church, so there is no remission of sins in the Vatican-2 heretic cult or in any of the groups in heresy against the Jurisdiction and Governance Dogma.

Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam, 18 Nov 1302, Ex-Cathedra >
"With Faith urging us we are forced to believe and to hold the one, holy, Catholic Church and that, apostolic, and we firmly believe and simply confess this Church outside of which there is no salvation nor remission of sin, the Spouse in the Canticle proclaiming: 'One is my dove, my perfect one.' "

4.  Again ... the "1983 Code" is from the non-Catholic vatican-2 cult founded in 1965 ... automatically excommunicated heretic "John Paul-2" could not promulgate legislation for the Catholic Church, which he was not even in (proven on Section 36, Sub-part A of this site).

Canon 1335:

"If a censure prohibits the celebration of sacraments or sacramentals or the placing of an act of governance, the prohibition is suspended whenever it is necessary to care for the faithful in danger of death. If a latae sententiae censure has not been declared, the prohibition is also suspended whenever a member of the faithful requests a sacrament or sacramental or an act of governance; a person is permitted to request this for any just cause."

Catholic refutation:

1.  This "Canon 1335" is heresy against the Catholic Dogma on Jurisdiction and Governance. The Church teaching regarding confession and contrition when there are no Catholic bishops or priests available (as is the case in these times) is stated in the Council of Trent as shown above (under "Canon 976").

2.  Automatically excommunicated group leaders of the vatican-2 cult do not have the sacramental power to absolve sins. Those persons who are the leaders of the groups who are in heresy against the Jurisdiction and Governance Dogma also have no sacramental power to absolve sins. These groups include the "sspx" , "sspv", "Thuc line", "cmri", other "independents", etc.

3.  Regarding the text "latae sententiae" --> Everyone who is a physical member of the vatican-2 cult is automatically excommunicated for participation in a heretical society, as are those in the groups who are in violation of the Jurisdiction and Governance Dogma. So the entire subject of this "Canon 1335" regarding Catholic censure is overcome and made irrelevant by other events (the establishment of heretical societies).

4.  Regarding the text "whenever a member of the faithful requests ..." --> This phrase has no application because the entire canon is heresy against the Catholic Dogma on Jurisdiction and Governance.

5.  Again ... the "1983 Code" is from the non-Catholic vatican-2 cult founded in 1965 ... automatically excommunicated heretic "John Paul-2" could not promulgate legislation for the Catholic Church, which he was not even in (proven on Section 36, Sub-part A of this site).

Please also see: Sections  105,  105.2,  105.3,  105.4,  and 105.5 ... which address the "sspx" hoax.

~ ~ ~ ~

<<< --- <<< --- <<< --- <<< ---  End Section 105.3  --- >>> --- >>> --- >>> --- >>>

Immaculate Heart of Mary    ~     Our Lady of Good Remedy    ~     Our Lady of La Salette    ~     Immaculate Heart of Mary