Skip to main content

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

Image
By

 

+

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

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

De Veritate - St. Thomas Aquinas - What is necessary to believe explicitly?

By
I was recently introduced to a work of St. Thomas De Veritate ( Source ) in the course of an argument concerning the minimum content of explicit faith.  When I submitted the following quote as proof: Theological faith, that is, a supernatural faith in Revelation, is necessary, and this is an effect of grace (D 1789); nemini unquam sine ilIa contigit iustificatio (D 1793). As far as the content of this faith is concerned, according to Hebr. 11, 6, at least the existence of God and retribution in the other world must be firmly held, necessitate medii (by the necessity of means) with explicit faith. In regard to the Trinity and the Incarnation, implicit faith suffices. The supernatural faith necessary for justification is attained when God grants to the unbeliever by internal inspiration or external teaching a knowledge of the truths of Revelation, and actual grace to make the supernatural act of faith. Cf. De verite 14, I I.Ott - Fundamentals of Dogma p241 In response my opponent ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Comparision of the Tridentine, Cranmer and Novus Ordo Masses

By
+ JMJ I downloaded the comparison that was linked in the previous article on the mass (here) . ... a very good reference! P^3 From: Whispers of Restoration (available at this link) . CHARTING LITURGICAL CHANGE Comparing the 1962 Ordinary of the Roman Mass to changes made during the Anglican Schism; Compared in turn to changes adopted in the creation of Pope Paul VI’s Mass in 1969 The chart on the reverse is a concise comparison of certain ritual differences between three historical rites for the celebration of the Catholic Mass Vetus Ordo: “Old Order,” the Roman Rite of Mass as contained in the 1962 Missal, often referred to as the “Traditional Latin Mass.”The Ordinary of this Mass is that of Pope St. Pius V (1570) following the Council of Trent (1545-63), hence the occasional moniker “Tridentine Mass.” However, Trent only consolidated and codified the Roman Rite already in use at that time; its essential form dates to Pope St. Gregory the Great (+604), in whose time the R...
Post a Comment
Read more

Rome and the SSPX - Version 2026 Part 5b - How Did We Get Here??? ... A Continued Anlaysis using ChatGPT.

By
 + JMJ Part 5b How Did We Get Here??? So in the previous ChatGPT analysis the LLM ‘concluded’ that there was continuity in doctrine. So now we’re going to explore this element. There is some repetition but I don't have time right now to do a lot of editing.  I think instead we'll have a Part 5c where I try to pull it all together with some old fashioned human sense making. At the end point, I think the LLM collects an interesting if somewhat skewed perspective: The SSPX mapping hinges on this claim: That Vatican II affirms (at least implicitly) propositions that the Syllabus of Errors explicitly condemned. The broader Church response is: The same propositions are still rejected—but Vatican II is addressing different categories (political, pastoral, anthropological) rather than reversing doctrine. While the summary of the SSPX position seems close, that of the broader Church seems to be either an outright AI hallucination or a consensus point from the literature that it used...
Post a Comment
Read more

News Roundup: April 30, 2026

By
 + JMJ I just realised that I haven't posted the latest Roundup ... and there is a lot in the roundup as the media storm around the SSPX continues! I also just noticed this article: European Conservative: Why the SSPX Bishop Decision Matters Far Beyond Church Politics (link) .  P^3 === Popes Past Present and Future Papal News and Views Cardinal Fernandez maintains that Francis is not dead- metaphorically Pope Leo XIV Reopens Amoris Laetitia File | FSSPX News Pope Leo: “We Do Not Agree with the Formalized Blessing of …Homosexual Couples” - OnePeterFive RORATE CÆLI: How Pope Leo is Reshuffling the Curia: Musical Chairs and Power Games RORATE CÆLI: A Giant Leap: The meaning of Cardinal Eijk’s Pontifical High Mass and the Rebirth of Dutch Catholicism RORATE CÆLI: A Sign of Continuity with the Pre-Francis Papacy: Pope to Wash Feet of Twelve Priests RORATE CÆLI: Vatican Blocks Continuity of Procedure of Beatification and Canonization of Argentine Bishop -- no new Satanellis Pope Leo...
Post a Comment
Read more

Rome and the SSPX - Version 2026 Part 5 - How Did We Get Here???

By
 + JMJ This is the fifth in this series and I think it may require a part b to show the controversial documents and teachings of the Pope post V2. P^3 Part 5 How Did We Get Here??? Introduction My family became ‘Traditional’ in early 1980’s and I didn’t realise until years later how early we entered the Fray. So the SSPX was slightly over a decade old when we started going to Mass. That is a young organization, as someone said at the consecrations “Aren’t you a little young to be a bishop?”, the response was, “That is something that time will change.” 1970: SSPX founded with diocesan approval (Abp. Marcel Lefebvre) 1974–1976: Vatican II disputes escalate; Lefebvre suspended a divinis 1988: Illicit episcopal consecrations → excommunications declared 2000: SSPX Jubilee pilgrimage to Rome (signals openness to talks) 2009: Excommunications lifted by Pope Benedict XVI 2011–2012: Doctrinal talks with CDF collapse 2015–2017: SSPX granted faculties for confessi...
Post a Comment
Read more