Skip to main content

Who's In Charge? Part 4 of 5 - Conclusion

 

+

JMJ


Conclusion

Now putting Doctrine together with the Dogma what can we conclude?

The Catholic Church has a history of Great, Good, Bad and Awful Popes. That the unworthy and mediocre outnumber the Great is without question ... and in itself a proof of the Divine Origin of the Catholic Church.

Inspite of all that has occurred in the last hundred years, the Catholic Dogma's still stand the same as do the doctrines. There has been discipline that has been bent into ambiguous shapes - such as the Novus Ordo Missae, the Creed etc. Yet ambiguity is not Heresy in the true sense of the word.

What we know from Church Teaching:

  • The Catholic Church remains the institution of salvation.

  • There will always be a Vicar of Christ

  • We know we can identify the Catholic Church by Her Four Marks (Series - Marks of the Church)

    • We know where the four marks exist

    • We know that the Pope is part of the mark of Oneness ie. unity

  • The Church "Teaching" - meaning the hierarchy in this case - accepted Pope Francis at his election. Therefore at that time he was the Vicar of Christ.

What people believe in the absence of knowledge:

Now the question becomes did he remain the Vicar of Christ from his election to his death? Welcome to the noise. A number of theologians think that he has committed heresy and the consequences if truth are related to a number theological theories.

Here’s the crux of the matter, all of the theories about the loss of the Papacy remain just that theological theories. Nothing has been defined by the Church - so all we have is ... well assertions. While I have no doubt that they are well intentioned assertions nothing can change the fact that they are no truths. Even the theories of Saints don't provide a clear path to deciding when a Pope has 'lost' the papacy.

This brings us back to the difference of knowing vs believing. We can't 'know' that Pope Francis at some point lost the Papacy just as we can't know that any of his predecessors did. Until, in the absence of a official method, an authority informs us of this fact.

From my perspective there are two such authorities:

  • First, the bishops of the Catholic Church. Up to his death, they still regarded Pope Francis has being the Pope.

  • Second, Pope Francis. He never was clear on the matter and the Dubia remain unanswered (3136 days as per Canon212). Meaning he didn’t make a statement and take an action that was incontrovertibly and explicitly heretical in the pure sense of the word.

So people can believe Pope Francis wasn’t the Vicar of Christ as much as they want. But that doesn't change the fact that it is a belief and not knowledge. Acting on that belief has, in the past and I'm certain in both the present and future, will cause people to take actions that are unsupported by the Dogmas and Doctrines of the Catholic Church.

These would be the sedevacantists. I have known some personally and watched them follow the sedevacantist theory to its logical conclusion: That the Catholic Church has failed or is hidden. So and so was elected Pope by his family and friends. The list goes on …

Surprise! This contradicts and denies a Dogma of the Catholic Church and more than a few doctrines. Thus making them guilty of the crime that they accuse about a dozen or so Popes. Yes, I know at least one group that judge that the last valid Pope was Leo XIII … at least the last time I saw them publish their thoughts online.

Then you have the ones that focus only on Pope Francis. They feel that he is so unworthy to be Vicar of Christ that they insist that he can't be and then look for any semblance of a reason to support their belief. For their righteous indignation they risk becoming heretics themselves.

So the Catholic Church is the Church of Christ and Pope Francis is, sadly, the Vicar of Christ that we are stuck with for a little more of the future. (I wrote this early in the morning - unaware the Pope Francis had died a couple short hours earlier.)

Pray for him [for the Cardinals of the Conclave and the next Pope] as any good Catholic should and don't be bitter children railing at the sky for being born in a time such as this.

I was taught that we are all born in a time best suited for us to work out our salvation.

The Church Dogmas and Doctrines are guideposts along the way, don't cast them aside because the Vicar of Christ is unworthy of his office. Everyone one is ... some just less so than others.

P^3

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law- Part II: Dr. John Lamont

+ JMJ This is the second article from Dr. Lamont from his lecture given in May 2014. P^3 Source Part A: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny Source Part B: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny 8 May2014 The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law- Part II By John Lamont To understand how the Jesuit conception of obedience departed from earlier conceptions, it is helpful to compare it with the teaching of St. Thomas on obedience. The fundamental difference between the two is that St. Thomas considers the proper object of obedience to be the precept of the superior (2a2ae q. 104 a. 2 co., ad 3). Obedience that seeks to forestall the expressed will of the superior does not bear on what the superior wants or thinks in general, but only on what the superior intends to command. St. Ignatius’s lowest degree of obedience, which he does not consider to be virtuous, is thus what St. Thomas considers to be the only form of obedience. St. Thomas holds that St. Ignatius’s alleged higher forms of o...

Open Letter to Cardinal Gantin - July 6, 1988

There has been some discussion (read lots) about the term 'Conciliar Church'. I have posted this letter written by the Superior General and District Superiors of the SSPX after the 1988 Consecrations. Of particular interest is that the 'Conciliar Church' being referred to as a system. My paraphrase would be that the SSPX regards the 'conciliar Church' as an error within the Church. Source Open Letter to Cardinal Gantin Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops

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

Rome and the SSPX - Version 2026 Part 6b: Principles and Rules for Surviving this Crisis of the Catholic Church (Principle 1)

 + JMJ Principle 1: Realize that something is amiss in the Catholic Church The world in which I had my Traditional Awakening, is one in which practically anything pre-Conciliar such as liturgy, doctrinc, and even dogmas are either suppressed, ignored or re-framed to be acceptable to the ‘world’. What is more, the people adhering to these pre-conciliar teachings and liturgy are persecuted by other members of the Catholic Church. The things that non-Trads say about Trads can be quite extreme. For example, accusations against Traditionalists include that they are: A revival of the Jansenists (link) , Schismatics, Heretics, Uncharitable, Lefebrists Radicals Integrists When one group of Catholics is persecuted by the others for simply wanting to live as Catholics before them did for generations … well something is wrong. Further, we need to realize that when what was previously condemned is now promoted and what was previously promoted as the trut...

Forget the Reformation - It is time for Abrogation - Louie Verrecchio

Mr. Verrecchio has pointed out one solution to this crisis that is a dream of many Traditional Catholics of my acquaintance: The complete obliteration of the Novus Ordo Missae. If this were to occur, undoubtedly a revolt would occur within the Church, but the battle lines would be much clearer.  I assume that a lot of material heretics would make the transition to being formal heretics. P^3 Prayer Penance Patience Courtesy of Louie Verrecchio A recent article by Fr. Thomas Kocik on the New Liturgical Movement website,  Reforming the Irreformable? , is getting some well-deserved attention in traditional circles. (Do yourself a favor and read it in its entirety if you haven’t already.)