An interview with Pope Michael by Christian Wagner .... Second Part of Video

New blog on the kid: Leo XIV (if such) Refers to Leo XIII ... and Leo XII? · Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: Michael II Remains My Pope · An interview with Pope Michael by Christian Wagner .... Second Part of Video · Ulysses Grant and William Tecumseh Sherman, Theologians? · Dialogue Continued

"An interview with Pope Michael by Christian Wagner on Militant Thomist-February 2022"

This is the copy on Vatican in Exile:

Why I am the True Pope with Pope Michael
vatican in exile | 21 March 2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcxnABw20-g

44:58 In confirmation of Filioque always believed check out the creed against Priscillian errors by the First Council of Toledo, which directly says Filioque. (AD 400)

Similarily in an essay to defend his orthodoxy, later erected into a creed, St. Athanasius said:

Pater a nullo est factus: nec creatus, nec genitus. / The Father was not made, nor created, nor generated by anyone.
Filius a Patre solo est: non factus, nec creatus, sed genitus. / The Son is not made, nor created, but begotten by the Father alone.
Spiritus Sanctus a Patre et Filio: non factus, nec creatus, nec genitus, sed procedens. / The Holy Spirit is not made, nor created, nor generated, but proceeds from the Father and the Son.

1:19:15 I think that essay was actually penned by Newman before he converted.

It was published without correction, and represents, less the Catholic's defense of Catholicism, than the Anglican's (up to then) defense of converting to Catholicism.

It was published that way in order to answer critics who pretended Newman had ulterior motives for converting.

So, even if you think he was a saint, supposing Chesterton was a saint, were to be canonised, it doesn't make Orthodoxy flawless .... he wrote it while still an Anglican.

1:31:07 Before hearing his answer, I think sedeprivationism was essentially condemned in connexion with Lollardism, which says "a hierarch in mortal sin has no authority" and here the modification is "mortal sin against the good of the faith not amounting to sin against the faith leading to its loss" ...

The loss of office is tied to the preaching of heresy, not to the guilt of heresy. I came across a rumour that Nestorius, after Ephesus, he went to a monastery, but after Chalcedon he said "this is what I meant" meaning, he might not have been culpable. Nevertheless, he lost office.

1:33:53 Theses on the Wittenberg door, 95. Theses condemned in Exsurge Domine 41 (though the Pope did conflate some to their syllogistic conclusion not stated, and perhaps take one from the Wartburg colloquy as well).

1:34:53 That was Tolkien, not Chesterton.

His late Holiness was not very familiar with Chesterton.

1:35:25 Sir, Geocentrism doesn't state the Earth is Centre of the Solar System, but of the Universe ...

I suppose His late Holiness got so tired of correcting that that he didn't bother.

1:38:37 I would say that once Theistic Evolution involves Adam's origins, it is heresy or even apostasy.

Accepting Evolution during Creation days pretended to be long periods could just possibly be acceptable from theology, but it's wrong, however, not necessarily a heresy.

But allowing Adam to have strictly non-human progenitors (though in human anatomy) makes God a child abuser. Allowing Adam's parents to have evolved so much this wasn't the case makes Adam not Adam, not the first man. Both are apostasy level errors.

Putting Adam very far back in time is another type of error, attacking historicity of Genesis 3 (see the Haydock view on how we know it, appendix to his comment on verse 24), and also against theodicy.

On the first of these, see also the Council of Cologne, 1860:

Our first parents were formed immediately by God. Therefore we declare that the opinion of those who do not fear to assert that this human being, man as regards to his body, emerged finally from the spontaneous continuous change of imperfect nature to the more perfect, is clearly opposed to Sacred Scripture and to the Faith.”

Accessed via a page that considers antipopes as a pope and a saint ... sourced thereon as:

Council of Cologne, Tit. IV, c. 14. English found in Patrick O’Connell, Science of Today and the Problems of Genesis (2nd ed. 1968, TAN Books, Rockford, Ill, 1993, p 187).