The material point is that he resisted a Pope who was in error. To resist Bergoglio’s writings and utterances contra the Deposit of Faith is merely to imitate the example of St. Paul (and is in complete opposition to reliance on private judgment). Labeling those who strive to follow St. Paul’s example in defending the Faith against papal errors “hypocrites” is, in essence, an attack on the Body of Christ.
An example of true hypocrisy is the sedevacantist habit of trotting out St. Bellarmine as a voice of authority, yet rejecting his opinion that it would be licit to resist, but illicit to “judge, punish or depose” a pontiff, since his only superior is God.
AHEM. But I'm not touching that one.....
Also note they are on opposite sides of the same sheet of the printed page - while his published Opera Omnia take up over five feet of shelf space.
What you cite deals with one who gives an immoral command who would still remain the pope, that one you resist, the other deals with a HERETIC WHO REMOVES HIMSELF FROM THE OFFICE BY HIS OWN ACT!
GET IT!?
Blather says, “An example of true hypocrisy is the sedevacantist habit of trotting out St. Bellarmine as a voice of authority, yet rejecting his opinion that it would be licit to resist, but illicit to “judge, punish or depose” a pontiff, since his only superior is God.”
The “licit to resist” quote that anti-sedes like to trot out against the sedes refers to resisting a (true) pope who gives immoral commands (as SGNA explained so well). It does not refer to a non-pope who teaches heresy to the Church. Bellarmine teaches that such a “pope” loses his office ipso facto.
http://www.traditionalmass.org/images/articles/Bellarmine-Myth.pdf