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,the SSPX and this time of Crisis - Updated

+ JMJ Obviously there's lots of events right now. First we have the April 1st - I almost thought it was April Fools - meeting between Pope Francis and Bishop Fellay.  Nothing really news worthy as this is a natural progression as Rome appears to be considering fulfilling Archbishop Lefebvre's wish to 'accept us as we are'. Second we have the April 8th publication of what will be a verbose exhortation of the Synod of the Family. I'm willing to bet that the Pope will give with one hand (unilateral regularization of SSPX) and take with the other (ambiguous document that opens the flood gates of sin further). Much to pray for. P^3

A Reply to Martin Blackshaw’s FLAWED Remnant article titled: FLAWED: SSPX Advice on Abortion-tainted Vaccines

 + JMJ    An article has appeared in the Remnant (link to article) and I am afraid that there are a number of flaws in it that need to be addressed. The author, Martin Blackshaw, believes that both the Church and the SSPX are misapplying the principle of Moral Theology called 'Cooperation In Evil'.  Unfortunately, Mr. Blackshaw rests most of his arguments on citing authors that support his position, without considering the possibility that they are wrong. This highlights a key factor in this crisis: ignorance of the faith and its application . I don't am not singling out Mr. Blackshaw for this criticism, I have observed that it applies to laity and religious, superior and subject a like.  No one seems immune in this enduring crisis, myself included.  I further believe that this ignorance is why so many Catholics, both traditional and non, rely on their gut feeling or "Catholic conscience" for charting their way through this crisis of the faith.  While...

Rorate-Caeli URGENT: Pope tells Italian Bishops he plans to abolish the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum

 + JMJ  Now THIS is probably the most important news item in the last two years - yes I place this above the pandemic. I'm only surprised by how long it took for this to surface during this pontificate. I hope and pray that it is false or that if it comes to pass that somehow some good will arise out of the ashes of Summorum Pontificum. P^3  Courtesy of Rorate-Caeli URGENT: Pope tells Italian Bishops he plans to abolish the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum (Updated) Update (May 26): Rorate's additional sources in Rome have confirmed this Wednesday that Francis has indeed a text on Summorum Pontificum lined up, which has been developed for months, but what is not known at this point is if the text is just about a more limited take on the Summorum application questionnaire (first revealed by us in the spring of 2020) or about an overhaul of Summorum Pontificum in general: drafts could be dealing with both matters. It is also not impossible for a text to come ou...

If Pope Francis is bad - what about Pope St. John Paul II et al?

+ JMJ So here we are on the apparent cusp of yet another post conciliar Papal canonization. This time we have Pope's John-Paul I and Paul VI canonizations to 'look forward' to. This follows, obviously, on the heels of Pope St. John Paul II's canonization? So the first question that I usually encounter is: How is it possible, keeping in mind the doctrine on infallibility of canonizations (note doctrine not dogma), that Pope St. John Paul II is a Saint? First, what does it mean???  According to the doctrine of dogmatic facts - it is the universal opinion of Theologians that canonizations are infallible.  It means that they enjoy the beatific vision.  ... that's it.  That is the doctrine and it is at the level of universal opinion of theologians.  It is called a 'dogmatic fact'. That they made mistakes is obvious.  That the miracles seem to not be very miraculous is also a bit of an issue. Here's something to consider: The rush that surrou...

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.