Seeking The Pope

To
David Bawden

Dear Sir,

Thank you for your letter of 24th September 2002.

Before I write back, I am waiting for the response from Teresa Benns, as she promised. Additionally, I would like you to address also the points I have raised in my article, SMBB. For your convenience, I have reproduced them below.

However, the reason I am writing this letter is to apologize for the wrong I did to you about two years back, when I pre-empted your response to my letter. I have already apologized to Teresa Benns, but I owe an apology to you directly.

However, this should not be construed to mean a recognition of your claim to be the pope, though I will re-examine your claim without any preconceptions and prejudices.
The Points I want you to address:

  1. On pages 99 & 432, they pretend to be promulgating law, a law that by its very nature must, if it were true, bind all.

    The Canon they are quoting says 9: "The laws thus promulgated, do not begin to bind in conscience until three months have elapsed after the date of issue of the periodical containing the law."

    In doing this, they attempt to usurp the Right and Privileges of the Roman Church.

    No layman, whatsoever, has any right to either legislate or bind in conscience the entire Church; that belongs to the legitimate authorities – the Pope and the Holy Roman Church, the first Church from among the churches of the general or Œcumenical Church.

    The Authors themselves tell us whether we have any right to do so, on page 432, "...strictly speaking, we cannot decide in Church affairs whatsoever..." And yet they so blithely go forward to ‘PROMULGATE’ a law for the whole Church!

    And what is the consequence of this their act?

    They themselves tell us, on page 430, Canon 2345: "Persons who usurp or retain, personally or through others, goods and rights pertaining to the Roman Church automatically incur excommunication reserved in a special manner to the Apostolic See."

    Note: If you incurred excommunication before your purported election, then you were not eligible to be elected, nor Benns to participate in the election, and your election is rendered null and void.


  2. On page 472, they state, ‘... the New Jerusalem reigns elsewhere... No longer will Rome be the seat of the papacy... We believe that first Rome’s spiritual dominion over true Catholics will be destroyed...’

    In your letter of 24th Sept., you apparently correct this error, by admitting that as Pope, your diocese is Rome. That is an improvement. However, you are obligated to admit this correction openly and formally, aren't you?


  3. On page 472, the authors state, ‘... the battle fought in heaven between the dragon, Roncalli, and St. Michael...’ When was Roncalli in heaven? Before his conception, when, according to Catholic theology, God created his soul, or sometime after that?
Yours sincerely,

Prakash J. Mascarenhas, Bombay, India.