Heresy – The Heart of Sedevacantism - True or False Pope

JMJ

I have been asked to contribute some articles to the http://www.trueorfalsepope.com/.

Reproduced below is my first article that I wrote discussing the core issue behind the sedevacantist theory: Heresy.

I have to admit that I have not yet had to opportunity to read the book, but rest assured I will once it appears on the shelves of my chapel's bookstore!

My article appears with others under the Sedevacantist Watch link.

P^3

Heresy – The Heart of Sedevacantism

Heresy is the heart which pumps life into all sedevacantist theories. Without a Pope that has either lost or never held the office of the Vicar of Christ the entire sedevacantist structure crumbles to dust.

This makes understanding what the Church means by the word heresy key to evaluating the arguments and opinions proferred by sedevacantists.

The Church has summarized its teaching concerning heresy in canon law, according to which heresy is:

... an error in judgement in consequence of which a baptized person obstinately denies or doubts a truth revealed by God and proposed by the Church for belief. (Canon 1325 1917)
... the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith;... (Canon 751 1982)

The critical elements that constitute heresy are summarized in the illustration below. If any of these elements are missing, then the accusation of heresy evaporates.

Illustration 1: Critical Elements of Heresy

Criteria #1: The person must be baptized. It is normally a foregone conclusion that Priests, Bishops, Cardinals and Popes have been baptized.

Criteria #2: The person must either doubt or deny a teaching of the Church. To be acted upon, this doubt or denial must have been done externally.

Criteria #3: The teaching of the Church must be a Dogma of the Catholic Church. Meaning that it is a teaching that Catholics must believe with Divine Faith as having been revealed by God. In short, no dogma, no heresy.

Criteria #4: The final criteria is that, in the face of correction by Church authorities, the person must be obstinate in their doubt / denial.

These criteria form the basis for examining most agruments put forward by Sedevacantists.

In my next article, I'll discuss the Sedevacantism Kill Chain.

Tradical

Comments

Is it sinful to attend the Novus Ordo (New Mass) - Is it Sinful to Not Attend the Novus Ordo on Sunday?

+ JMJ A non-SSPX Catholic is upset over the SSPX statements on not attending the Novus Ordo Missae. Ladies and gentlemen, what the SSPX, or at least its website editor, is advocating is a mortal sin against the Third Commandment. Unless the priest deviates from the language of the Sacramentary, the consecration, and thus the rest of Mass is to be considered valid. No one may elect not to attend Mass simply because abuses are occurring therein. Might I suggest that such absenteeism is its own abuse? The Third Commandment binds under mortal sin. Father So-And-So from the SSPX has no authority whatsoever to excuse attendance at Mass, be that Mass ever so unpalatable. Source:Restore DC Catholicism Well, this is interesting. First why does the SSPX issue this statement? Because it is sinful to put your faith in danger by attending a protestant service. It is likewise dangerous to put your faith in danger by attending a protestantized mass (ie the Novus Ordo Missae

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3

Regarding Post: Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer no longer ... now Bishop Joseph Pfeiffer (Can't see this being a problem...)

+ JMJ I've been watching the popularity of the post about Fr. Pfeiffer's attempted episcopal consecration and its continued top listing on the 'popular posts' list at the bottom of posts. After some thought, I decided that I don't want to be responsible for anyone joining Fr. Pfeiffer's 'group', however unlikely that would be at this time. So I have reverted the article to the draft state. If anyone wants it reinstated, I would ask that they comment on this post with a rationale for reinstatement. P^3

The Vatican and SSPX – An Organizational Culture Perspective

Introduction The recent and continuing interactions between the Vatican and the SSPX have been a great opportunity for prayer and reflection. The basis for the disagreement is theological and not liturgical. As noted by Dr. Lamont (2012), the SSPX theological position on the four key controversial aspects of the Second Vatican Council are base on prior theological work that resulted from relevant magisterial pronouncements. So it is difficult to understand the apparent rejection of the theological position of the SSPX.

Auctorem Fidei

Can the SSPX be right about the Novus Ordo? Revision: Feb 11, 2013 On another web forum, I was engaged in a rather heated discussion about the documents of Vatican II.

Tradicat

Search This Blog