Tradicat

+ JMJ Reblog of posts originally posted: https://tradicat.blogspot.com/2015/06/jmj-church-of-christ-is-apostolic-and.html https://tradicat.blogspot.com/2017/08/re-blog-yes-sally-pope-francis-is-pope.html As a Traditional Catholic I find it ironic that I'm usually the one talking Modern Catholics off the sedevacantist ledge. Recently, Louie Verrecchio has posted an article by a Fr. Campo, that is asserting that the abdication was forced and therefore invalid ... of something to that effect. Sadly, the electrons spilled over this issue are in vain. Here's a quick summary of the doctrine on Dogmatic Facts: Now the point is this: We want to believe that Pope Francis is not the Pope, because he is doing such a bad job. However, we know that he is because of the doctrine of dogmatic facts. Any action that we 'believe' that would invalidate the election is proved wrong by the acceptance of a newly elected Pope by all the Bishops and by extension the whole Ca...

+ JMJ Just a quick note as I see that another person has jumped on the "Canonizations are not Infallible" bandwagan. First a list of the current links that I've noticed: https://onepeterfive.com/paul-vi-not-saint/ https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2018/08/the-authority-of-canonisations-do-all.html https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2018/10/de-mattei-true-and-false-saints-in.html https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/4137-the-canonization-crisis-part-ii http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02364b.htm This reference to Dr. Lamont's is telling: “ We need not hold that the canonizations of John XXIII and John Paul II were infallible, because the conditions needed for such infallibility were not present. Their canonizations are not connected to any doctrine of the faith, they were not the result of a devotion that is central to the life of the Church, and they were not the product of careful and rigorous examination. But we need not exclude ...

+ JMJ There's a bit of a fluffle over the canonization of Pope Paul VI. So - in 60 minutes I'm going to try to provide some perspective that I believe is lacking from both Drs. Lamont and Kwasniewski in their articles or that people not used to reading academic article might overlook For reference here's links to the articles. https://onepeterfive.com/paul-vi-not-saint/ https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2018/08/the-authority-of-canonisations-do-all.html For some back ground from Ott's Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma page 299: The secondary object of the Infallibility is truths of the Christian teaching on faith and morals, which are not formally revealed, but which are closely connected with the teaching of Revelation. (Sent. certa.) This doctrine is a necessary consequence of the doctrine of Infallibility which has the purpose "of preserving and of truly interpreting the deposit of Holy Faith" (D 1836). The Church could not achieve this pur...

+ JMJ As a Traditional Catholic I find it ironic that I'm usually the one talking Modern Catholics off the sedevacantist ledge. Recently, Louie Verrecchio has posted an article by a Fr. Campo, that is asserting that the abdication was forced and therefore invalid ... of something to that effect. Sadly, the electrons spilled over this issue are in vain. Here's a quick summary of the doctrine on Dogmatic Facts: Now the point is this: We want to believe that Pope Francis is not the Pope, because he is doing such a bad job. However, we know that he is because of the doctrine of dogmatic facts. Any action that we 'believe' that would invalidate the election is proved wrong by the acceptance of a newly elected Pope by all the Bishops and by extension the whole Catholic Church. Pope Francis was accepted by the Bishops in Union with Rome, ergo - we have the assurance of the doctrine that he was validly elected. P^3 PS.Now if the Church should deter...

+ JMJ This is my second article for True or False Pope .  In my design career jumping to a conclusion has bitten me a number of times.  This is why one of the key elements in project management and design engineering is listing your assumptions.  The project plan then needs to incorporate a way to validate those assumptions before it is too late. Sedevacantists have made this same mistake time and time again.  They are scandalized (rightly so!) be all the shenanigans of the Popes, assume that this can't be so, and jump to the conclusion that the current reigning Pontiff cannot possibly be the Vicar of Christ. If the sedevacantists accept the doctrine of the Church, then following the doctrine of dogmatic facts they would have to admit that we haven't had a sedevacante since the death of Pius XII (or whatever Pope they hold to be last validly elected). I hope this article helps! Keep the Faith! P^3

+ JMJ I've observed three core reactions during this crisis of the Catholic Church. The Pope can't be wrong, therefore this is the New Springtime The Pope is infallible in certain conditions and there is a problem with many things that have been said, done and written, during and after the Second Vatican Council (even in the Council doc). The Pope can't be wrong, this stuff is wrong, therefore he isn't Pope. Of course there are a spectrum of responses in between, but these are the key elements. The 1st group holds the words of the Pope et al as impeccable. Here, let me get you a Koran to kiss... The 3rd group holds that they've all been heretics and lost their office.  There is also a spectrum within this group.   One answer is that they are very poor judges of heresy.  The link below provides some reasoned thought that, I'm happy to say, is completely consistent with Church Teaching. Canon law blog: Its not impossible just very diff...

+ JMJ Concept and Classification of Dogma 1. Concept By dogma in the strict sense is understood as a truth immediately (formally) revealed by God which has been proposed by the Teaching Authority of the Church to be believed as such. The Vatican Council explains: Fide divina et catholica ea omnia crcde.nta sunt, quae in verbo Dei scripta vel tradito continentur et ab Ecclesia sive solemni iudicio sive ordinario et universali magisterio tanquam divinitus reve1ata credenda proponuntur. D 1792. All those things are to be believed by divine and Catholic faith which are contained in the Word of God written or handed down and which are proposed for our belief by the Church either in a solemn definition or in its ordinary and universal authoritative teaching.

+ JMJ Recently, I've been engaged in a 'dogmatic fact' discussion / argument and a thought occurred to me. Based on what reading I had done, I had concluded that the dogmatic fact of who is Pope was fixed in time - meaning that acceptance of the Pope at the time of election provided infallible surety that the election was valid and that indeed the elected Cardinal/Bishop was Pope at that moment. Then I realized that some people believed that the dogmatic fact meant they were always Pope.  At the time I thought they meant that the understanding of the doctrine was that the one time recognition made that person infallibly the Pope until he either abdicated or died. A light went on this morning. Does the continual acceptance of the Pope by the hierarchy continually 'refresh' the dogmatic fact - meaning we can be certain that the Pope is'still' Pope etc? I asked a friend (a real theologian) and he pointed out that the Pope is already elected. The...

+ JMJ I've been engaged in a 'dogmatic fact' discussion / argument and a thought occurred to me. Based on what reading I had done, I had concluded that the dogmatic fact of who is Pope was fixed in time - meaning that acceptance of the Pope at the time of election provided infallible surety that the election was valid and that indeed the elected Cardinal/Bishop was Pope at that moment. Then I realized that some people believed that the dogmatic fact meant they were always Pope.  At the time I thought they meant that the understanding of the doctrine was that the one time recognition made that person infallibly the Pope until he either abdicated or died. A light went on this morning. Does the continual acceptance of the Pope by the hierarchy continually 'refresh' the dogmatic fact - meaning we can be certain that the Pope is 'still' Pope etc? Instead of puzzling this out on my own, I contact a friend of mine who is a real theologian! ...

+ JMJ I recently became involved in an online argument with some people about dogmatic facts and their application. The key element is that my 'opponents' were caught in a circular argument seemingly without being aware of it. In broad strokes they claim that because of the canonization of Pope St. John Paul II, Pope Francis can't be Pope since canonizations are held to be an act of the infallible magisterium and this is obviously an error. The problem comes that the same authority that established the doctrine of the infallibility of canonizations likewise established that the acceptance of a newly elected Pope by the bishops in union with Rome establishes an infallible dogmatic fact that the new 'Pope' is Pope - the Vicar of Christ. My opponents rejected this latter dogmatic fact while maintaining the former.  As they both rest on the same authority, it is not rational to reject one and accept the other on ones own authority. Reviewing the following...

As a follow up to some of the items discussed in Part 1 and Part 2 of this series - I wanted to add the following: With regard to the doctrinal teaching of the Church it must be well noted that not all the assertions of the Teaching Authority of the Church on questions of Faith and morals are infallible and consequently irrevocable. Only those are infallible which emanate from General Councils representing the whole episcopate, and the Papal Decisions Ex Cathedra (c£ D 1839). The ordinary and usual form of the Papal teaching activity is not infallible. Further, the decisions of the Roman Congregations (Holy Office, Bible Commission) are not infallible. Nevertheless normally they are to be accepted with an inner assent which is based on the high supernatural authority of the Holy See (assensus internus supernaturalis, assensus religiosus). The so-called "silentium obiequiosum." that is " reverent silence" does not generally suffice. By way of exception. the obli...

Introduction The Infallibility of the Church is a topic upon which extreme perspectives exist in a number of groups. Before delving into the current issues, it is best to establish a foundation of what the Church teaches about this gift and dogma.