Two aspects: why he normally would be a heretic, and why he isn't even so.
- why he normally would be a heretic, citing:
- So, if the present Pope appears to imply that God's final Word was not already spoken in Jesus Christ, and that the Divine Priority now is to create and consolidate a New Age, the New Bergoglian Age of Mercy, does that make him a heretic? ... If one were to take the pope's words seriously in a nakedly propositional way, one might have no alternative but to condemn them as most gravely erroneous. One might even have to condemn them as analogous to other claims made to the possession of a New Understanding which supersedes or completes the Old. Obvious examples are Islam, Montanism, and Mormonism.
- why he isn't even so, citing:
- And, dear readers, that is precisely why Papa Bergoglio cannot be deemed a heretic. To be definable as a heretic he would need to have advanced formally, with full understanding and responsibility, propositional errors. It is perfectly clear to me that he has, quite simply, not done so. Nor has he ever come close to doing so. Nor is he ever likely to. Not in a month of Sundays. He avoids precise propositional assertion like the very plague. It would get in the way of what he really wishes to achieve.
Fr Hunwicke's Mutual Enrichment : Is the Pope a heretic? (4)
Implying, there are three earlier parts. Part 1, part 2, part 3.
To me, the latter argument sounds like "Einstein cannot have reasoned unlogically, because he was avoiding showing his reasons in precise syllogistic form like the plague". Well, if he had ANY reasons, they CAN be shown in syllogistic form. And if Bergoglio has ANY preferences, they CAN be shown in propositional forms./HGL