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

Rome and SSPX - Version 2026 Part 2

 + JMJ Part 2 Detailed Synopsis and Timeline (ChatGPT) At this point, I took the shortcut of uploading all of my previous links and the latest SSPX and Rome links to ChatGPT. This way we’ll see how ChatGPT interprets the world as presented on the internet. P^3 Briefing Memo Subject: Rome–SSPX Relations and Planned Episcopal Consecrations (July 1, 2026) Prepared for: Ecclesial / Academic / Media Briefing Date: February 2026 Issue Overview The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) has announced its intention to consecrate new bishops on July 1, 2026 , potentially without a papal mandate . The Holy See has acknowledged ongoing talks with the SSPX and stated its desire to avoid rupture, but has not granted approval nor outlined canonical consequences. The situation revives unresolved tensions dating to 1988 and raises questions about schism, authority, and doctrinal continuity. Background Founded in 1970 by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the SSPX seeks to preserve pre-Vat...

Schism

There is some question as to whether the Pope can be in actual schism as per the Cardinal Torquemada: Citing the doctrine of Pope Innocent III, Torquemada further teaches:  "Thus it is that Pope Innocent III states [De Consuetudine] that, it is necessary to obey the Pope in all things as long as he, himself, does not go against the universal customs of the Church, but should he go against the universal customs of the Church, 'he need not be followed' . . . " [Cited from A Theological Vindication of Roman Catholic Traditionalism, Father Paul Kramer, B.Ph., S.T.D., M. Div. (2nd edition, St. Francis Press, India) p. 29. The full quotation from Cardinal Torquemada reads, "By disobedience, the Pope can separate himself from Christ despite the fact that he is head of the Church, for above all, the unity of the Church is dependent on its relationship with Christ. The Pope can separate himself from Christ either by disobeying the law of Christ, or by commanding som...

SSPX / DICI: Communiqué of the General House of the Society of St. Pius X concerning the episcopal consecration of Fr. Jean-Michel Faure.

+ JMJ The following is the communiqué of the SSPX regarding the Bishop Williamson's consecration of Fr. Faure. As a follow-up to this article ,  I would like to highlight the rationale for denouncing the consecration. Communiqué of the General House of the Society of St. Pius X concerning the episcopal consecration of Fr. Jean-Michel Faure. On March 19, 2015, Bishop Richard Williamson performed the episcopal consecration of Fr. Jean-Michel Faure at the Benedictine Monastery of the Holy Cross in Nova Friburgo, Brazil. Bishop Williamson and Fr. Faure have not been members of the Society of St. Pius X since 2012 and 2014, respectively, because of their violent criticisms of any relations with the Roman authorities. According to them, such contacts were incompatible with the apostolic work of Archbishop Lefebvre.(1) The Society of St. Pius X regrets sincerely that this spirit of opposition has led to an episcopal consecration. In 1988 Archbishop Lefebvre had c...

Bishop Huonder, SSPX in Schism? - Nope, Consecration of Holy Oils - Update 1

 + JMJ  So Bishop Huonder is in the news for two reasons.  First, his 'Testimony' concerning Pope Francis etc. This was received as a nice reinforcement by Trads (SSPX and others).  Of course, there are those that now are demanding an apostolic investigation.  Yawn, been here before.  This was predictable as other bishops who have followed the same path came to the same conclusions.  It is the way. Second, he celebrated the Chrism Mass and blessed the Holy Oils for use in the SSPX's European chapels and ceremonies.  This caused a stir amongst some Trads who are locked in one or the other statements made by either Archbishop Lefebvre or others. I received two versions of a question regarding this event: Hi Tradical Do you have any comments about doubtful oils in SSPX europe by +Huonder (NO Bishop not conditionally consecrated)? God Bless Hi Tradical Any thoughts on Huonder oil, not conditionally ordained and consecrated by SSPX bishops? God Bless M...