In the Modern Schism Treaty written by Saint Vincent Ferrer in a time that for almost forty years the majority of Christians did not know who the legitimate pope was, the heretical idea of Ultraviolet is refuted, who obsessively cites and compulsively repeats: Canon Law 751 defines schism as "the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff..." to promote the heretical, apostate and schism idea that you have to obey a heretic as if he were a valid pope. This document also explained that giving papal honor to a false pope violates the First Commandment and Saint Vincent Ferrer pointed this out as a grave sin of idolatry. In this treaty he wrote: "If there is schism, there must be schismatics, who are not precisely those who obey the true pope, but those who obey the false as if it were legitimate..."

"According to @Ultraviolet, Bergoglio is like Lucifer to which everyone must blindly obey..." I said just the opposite literally today. Direct UV Quote::"One may submit to the Supreme Pontiff, nowhere does Canon Law state one must agree with the Supreme Pontiff or follow the Supreme Pontiff when he errs, especially when his errors might well lead him to Hell."

Do you not read or do you just lie and hope I won't catch the lile? Either way, you owe me an apology.

"According to @Ultraviolet, Bergoglio is a superior being on the planet, a pseudo god who can commit heresy, apostasy and schism with impunity without being automatically excommunicated."

Wrong again because charges of heresy, apostasy and schism are
1.) different from each other
2.) contradictory (an apostate renounces his fatih, a heretic does not)
3.) not YOUR pervue to judge. Simply put, stupido, your say-so isn't the say-so of The Church. When did YOU get appointed by the Catholic Church as Inquisitor General?

Judging by your lies about me, you are unable to properly discern (much less judge) such matters. You're just blowing the same smoke you do at your Santa Muerte offrenda. :P

Explain how "schismatic" "Bergoglio" refuses to submit to himself, Gesù è con noi. :P Your words "Jorge Bergoglio is an apostate, a schismatic and a heretic" Canon Law 751 defines schism as "the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff..."

Right now, "Jorge Bergoglio" IS the Supreme Pontiff, you fool. How does Jorge Bergoglio refuse to submit to Jorge Bergoglio? :D This is just as mindless as your last big stupidity about the Vatican coin. How does Mother Earth ("Madre Terra" courtesy of V.R.S. .) carry the earth in herself or, eventually, give birth to the earth, namely herself?

Is there a special school where you learned to contradict yourself like this? :D

Likewise, heresy, as the Church defines it in Canon Law 751, is "an obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith; "

Copy-pasta time... Obstinacy shows a deliberate course of action, i.e. "stubbornly adhering to an opinion, purpose, or course in spite of reason, arguments, or persuasion."

In this context, the term shows that
a.) the accused heretic has expressed a view
b.) The Church has disgreed with that view as contrary to its teachings.
c.) The Church has attempted to correct the accused heretic
d.) the accused heretic has opposed that correction by the Church.

Regarding Pope Francis,
a.) has happened.
b.)-d.) have not.

Canon Law 751 states "apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith;"

...which Pope Francis clearly is not doing. His views on the Christian faith might be riddled with errors, but he has not repudiated his Christian faith (however he defines it) totally.

Borrowing the phrase, "Once again it is shown that..." Gesu is a vindictive idiot who throws accusations at the Pope that are not supported by the laws and definitions of the Catholic Church.

Gesu neither knows nor cares about these distinctions. That's a given.

Likewise, he does not realize he isn't qualified to pronounce such judgements on behalf ot the Catholic Church.

A personal opinion that the Pope doubts or denies a truth taught by the Church to be divine is not an objective fact. Likewise, that suspicion of his supposed doubt or denial is maintained in an obstinate manner is also an unproven. Most importantly, no one has ever shown The Church has attempted to correct it and failed. So the claim has no support.

A more relevant question in light of a charge of heresy is this:
Who has the temporal authority to represent the Church when attempting to correct the supposed errors of the Church's highest temporal authority?

I truly hoped I'd seen the last of "Catholic-sounding accusations" when Crazy Jimmy from Ohio finally got himself banned for death threats..

The Pope's own views might well be contrary to the teachings of the Catholic Church. However, they remain his own and not those of the Church. Popes are not infallible every time they open their mouths. Neither are Catholic saints, as a recent GTV cartoon helpfully reminded everyone.