Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Crux of the Pope Problem  (Read 8063 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Mithrandylan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4619
  • Reputation: +5366/-479
  • Gender: Male
Re: Crux of the Pope Problem
« Reply #75 on: May 09, 2018, 11:05:27 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Theosist,

    You and I agree in conclusion (i.e., we both think we're living in an interregnum).  But you're arguing about it all the wrong way.

    Quote
    the Pope needs to have supernatural faith... Supernatural faith is not just “necessary for” but a necessary CONSEQUENCE of membership of the Church, which is to say, it’s the very essence thereof
    .
    Supernatural faith is a consequence of grace, not membership.  The three conditions for membership are that one be baptized, confess the faith outwardly, and not be separated from the external union by heresy, apostasy, schism, or excommunication.  The consequence of being a member is that one is properly entitled to the treasures of the Church; mainly, the sacraments.  
    .
    Consequences and essences are entirely different things.  You make a snide comment about Aristotelianism, but it would do you some good.  Thomistic-Aristotelianism is the philosophy of the Church, and she abides by and operates with its distinctions and terminology in mind even in her most solemn teachings.  
    .
    Quote
    and supernatural faith will result in the external profession of AT LEAST faith in the Trinity and Incarnation, and everything else implicitly, if not explicitly due to ignorance.
    .
    I would like to see a source that very clearly argues this.  I tend toward agreeing with this, at least as a general practical consequence, but at the same time the lack of a profession of faith is not an infallible proof of a lack of supernatural faith.  But don't worry, because that's hardly a point against the sede theory as long as we keep in mind that the theory has nothing to do with whether or not someone has supernatural faith.
    .
    Quote
    Mere external profession of faith does not a member of the Church make, which is why even an occult  heretic cannot be Pope, which is why the Pope NECSSARILY has the gift of unfailing (personal) faith.
    As I have stated already (and is persistently ignored by “RomanTheo”, or he wouldn’t argue as he is arguing), Bellarmine’s argument is a reductio ad absurdum: YES, if a pope could become a heretic, then a LOGICAL DEDUCTION shows that he could NOT lose office merely for being an occult heretic;  but this contradicts the fact that personal supernatural faith is essential to membership of the Church.
    .
    Mere external profession by someone who is baptized is exactly what constitutes being a member of the Church, given its concurrence in someone who is also baptized and not excluded from the external union in some other way.
    .
    Bellarmine spends an entire chapter in the second tome of the The Controversies arguing that secret heretics are united to the Church in external profession, which is to say that they are members, since membership concerns itself only with what is visible and social.  Any conclusion of yours that Bellarmine thinks secret heretics are not members is simply not true.
    .
    I know there were still some theologians in the early twentieth century who argued that secret heretics were not members.  But since Bellarmine it has been at least the common opinion that they are, and ever since Mystici Corporis Christi I don't see how it's possible to maintain that they aren't.
    .
    At any rate, be circuмspective of Bellarmine's general ecclesiology and his teachings on membership, which are really more or less the same as what the Church has taught at higher levels.  When we speak of the Church as a corporate union we speak of what is in principle visible.  The whole motivation behind Bellarmine's work was against the reformers, especially Calvin, who insisted exactly what you're insisting: that membership consisted in something principally invisible, (they argued election, you're arguing supernatural faith).  When Bellarmine called them out on that, they slightly adjusted it to argue that supernatural faith produces good works, which was their way of keeping the Church "visible."  I don't see how that argument is all that different from you saying that the external profession of faith's relevance is that it is a mere consequence of supernatural faith.  At day's end, you're reducing the condition of membership to something that is, in principle, unable to be seen.  That's a problem.
    .
    "Be kind; do not seek the malicious satisfaction of having discovered an additional enemy to the Church... And, above all, be scrupulously truthful. To all, friends and foes alike, give that serious attention which does not misrepresent any opinion, does not distort any statement, does not mutilate any quotation. We need not fear to serve the cause of Christ less efficiently by putting on His spirit". (Vermeersch, 1913).

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46902
    • Reputation: +27765/-5163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Crux of the Pope Problem
    « Reply #76 on: May 09, 2018, 11:30:10 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!2
  • the Pope needs to have supernatural faith (claiming that the Pope can be an occult heretic and still Pope is just that)

    So you're rejecting St. Robert Bellarmine's position that occult heretics are still members of the Church and can be legitimate Popes.

    Duly noted, and dismissed ... for the reasons argued by Bellarmine.



    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46902
    • Reputation: +27765/-5163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Crux of the Pope Problem
    « Reply #77 on: May 09, 2018, 11:34:30 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Using the Principle of Non-Contradiction, Catholics are able to judge that a contradiction does exist, then they can refuse to continue listening to the false pastor. If the false pastor has not been deposed by competent authority, he still occupies his office materially in the meantime until such deposition occurs; however, he has lost all Authority on account of his heretical teaching. This is foundational in the Thesis of Cassisiacuм.

    And it's the same position articulated by Father Chazal as his "sede-impoundism".

    Offline songbird

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5063
    • Reputation: +1989/-408
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Crux of the Pope Problem
    « Reply #78 on: May 09, 2018, 05:01:45 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • But we can judge what we see.  So, it is ok for the pope to say new order, publicly manifest and that is heretical or not? You say which?

    He did this, like many before him. and would that show them to be not catholic, heretical and nominations would be null and void.

    What more do you want to hear or see?  Chapter 12 of Daniel says the Sacrifice will come to an end.  We should be a remnant! We should be close to these times.

    If one says, this pope is pope, then we are subject to him and that means we should all be going to the new order mess?!


    Make up your minds!

    Offline Lighthouse

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 872
    • Reputation: +580/-27
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Crux of the Pope Problem
    « Reply #79 on: May 09, 2018, 10:36:43 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • Theo:  "He disagreed with two of the three opinions.  And his refutation of the two opinion with which he disagreed just so happens to be a refutation of what virtually all sedevacatitsts  (sic) believe."

    You have to be kidding, or making it up.  There are actually FIVE opinions he analyzes in this chapter (Book II, Chapter 30: Can a heretical pope be deposed?).  He doesn't have total agreement with any of the 5 listed opinions. He brings forth his own.


    Offline Lighthouse

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 872
    • Reputation: +580/-27
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Crux of the Pope Problem
    « Reply #80 on: May 09, 2018, 10:43:05 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Theo: "
    What is Bellarmine's opinion?   There are two ways to seek to understand his opinion concerning how a heretic pope loses his office. One ways is to focus on a portion of what he wrote in one chapter of a book, such as his commentary on the 4th and 5th opinions in chapter 30 of De Romano Pontifice.  The other way is to read everything he wrote that relates to the question (or at least everything you can find).  If you take the first approach, chances are you will misunderstand his position.  If you take the second approach, this is what you will find."

    So you declare. Smoke and mirrors. Smoke and mirrors.
     

    Offline MyrnaM

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6273
    • Reputation: +3629/-347
    • Gender: Female
      • Myforever.blog/blog
    Re: Crux of the Pope Problem
    « Reply #81 on: May 15, 2018, 08:14:14 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Just in case you haven't heard YOUR POPE is taking a "leave" ...

    VATICAN CITY — Pope Francis says he has thought about when it might be time to “take leave” of his flock.

    Ho Hum!
    Please pray for my soul.
    R.I.P. 8/17/22

    My new blog @ https://myforever.blog/blog/

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46902
    • Reputation: +27765/-5163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Crux of the Pope Problem
    « Reply #82 on: May 16, 2018, 01:16:22 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Just in case you haven't heard YOUR POPE is taking a "leave" ...

    VATICAN CITY — Pope Francis says he has thought about when it might be time to “take leave” of his flock.

    Ho Hum!
     
    I hope that the door doesn't hit him (too hard) on his way out.


    Offline MyrnaM

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6273
    • Reputation: +3629/-347
    • Gender: Female
      • Myforever.blog/blog
    Re: Crux of the Pope Problem
    « Reply #83 on: May 16, 2018, 06:39:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0



  • Please pray for my soul.
    R.I.P. 8/17/22

    My new blog @ https://myforever.blog/blog/

    Offline trad123

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2033
    • Reputation: +450/-96
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Crux of the Pope Problem
    « Reply #84 on: May 18, 2018, 12:10:03 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Catholic_Dogma:_Extra_Ecclesiam_Nullus_Omnino_Salvatur/Chapter_V/Part_2#%C2%A7_7._INVINCIBLE_OR_INCULPABLE_IGNORANCE_NEITHER_SAVES_NOR_DAMNS_A_PERSON.


    Fr. Michael Muller:


    Quote
    "What are we to think of the salvation of those who are out of the pale of the Church without any fault of theirs, and who never had any opportunity to know better?

    To this question we give the following answer: "Their inculpable (invincible) ignorance will not save them; but if they fear God and live up to their conscience, God, in his infinite mercy, will furnish them with the necessary means of salvation, even so as to send, if needed, an angel to instruct them in the Catholic faith, rather than let them perish through inculpable ignorance." (St. Thomas Aquinas.)

    That goes for the pious Jew, the pious Eastern Schismatic, the pious-whatever-ain't-Catholic.
    2 Corinthians 4:3-4 

    And if our gospel be also hid, it is hid to them that are lost, In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of unbelievers, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not shine unto them.

    Offline trad123

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2033
    • Reputation: +450/-96
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Crux of the Pope Problem
    « Reply #85 on: May 18, 2018, 12:13:07 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The Gospel and the Catholic faith are one and the same, and I dare anyone to say otherwise.
    2 Corinthians 4:3-4 

    And if our gospel be also hid, it is hid to them that are lost, In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of unbelievers, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not shine unto them.


    Offline poche

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 16729
    • Reputation: +1224/-4693
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Crux of the Pope Problem
    « Reply #86 on: May 18, 2018, 11:06:55 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • I don't get this. Are talking about the Church physically located in Rome? The physical Hierarchy located in Rome? The inability of the Roman Pontiff to teach error?
    This is fairly vague.
    Am I to understand you to say that the roman Pontiff is unable to teach error?

    Offline Cantarella

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7782
    • Reputation: +4579/-579
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Crux of the Pope Problem
    « Reply #87 on: May 19, 2018, 11:01:02 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • I don't get this. Are talking about the Church physically located in Rome? The physical Hierarchy located in Rome? The inability of the Roman Pontiff to teach error?
    This is fairly vague.

    I am pretty sure that this indefectibility of the Roman Church is intrinsically attached to the Pope of Rome. The fact that it was at Rome where St. Peter founded and organized the Church; and which indefectibility continues through his legitimate successors.

    Vatican I Council, Pastor Aeternus:

    Quote
    3. Therefore whoever succeeds to the chair of Peter obtains by the institution of Christ himself, the primacy of Peter over the whole Church. So what the truth has ordained stands firm, and blessed Peter perseveres in the rock-like strength he was granted, and does not abandon that guidance of the Church which he once received [47].

    4. For this reason it has always been necessary for every Church--that is to say the faithful throughout the world--to be in agreement with the Roman Church because of its more effective leadership. In consequence of being joined, as members to head, with that see, from which the rights of sacred communion flow to all, they will grow together into the structure of a single body [48].

    The footnotes [47] and [48] come from Pope Leo I  Sermon 3, Chapter 3:

    Quote
    III. St. Peter's work is still carried out by his successors

    The dispensation of Truth therefore abides, and the blessed Peter persevering in the strength of the Rock, which he has received, has not abandoned the helm of the Church, which he undertook. For he was ordained before the rest in such a way that from his being called the Rock, from his being pronounced the Foundation, from his being constituted the Doorkeeper of the kingdom of heaven, from his being set as the Umpire to bind and to loose, whose judgments shall retain their validity in heaven, from all these mystical titles we might know the nature of his association with Christ. And still today he more fully and effectually performs what is entrusted to him, and carries out every part of his duty and charge in Him and with Him, through Whom he has been glorified. And so if anything is rightly done and rightly decreed by us, if anything is won from the mercy of God by our daily supplications, it is of his work and merits whose power lives and whose authority prevails in his See. For this, dearly-beloved, was gained by that confession, which, inspired in the Apostle's heart by God the Father, transcended all the uncertainty of human opinions, and was endued with the firmness of a rock, which no assaults could shake. For throughout the Church Peter daily says, You are the Christ, the Son of the living God, and every tongue which confesses the Lord, accepts the instruction his voice conveys. This Faith conquers the devil, and breaks the bonds of his prisoners. It uproots us from this earth and plants us in heaven, and the gates of Hades cannot prevail against it. For with such solidity is it endued by God that the depravity of heretics cannot mar it nor the unbelief of the heathen overcome it.


    And Irenaeus, Adv. haeres. (Against Heresies):

    Quote
    2. Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority [potiorem principalitatem].
    If anyone says that true and natural water is not necessary for baptism and thus twists into some metaphor the words of our Lord Jesus Christ" Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit" (Jn 3:5) let him be anathema.

    Offline ByzCat3000

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1951
    • Reputation: +518/-147
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Crux of the Pope Problem
    « Reply #88 on: March 15, 2019, 11:29:58 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • OK so I realize this is kind of an old thread, and I'm not sure what "board etiquette" is on bumping old threads, but this seems to be the best place for me to ask this question, since it gets into an issue I've majorly been struggling with both before and after my recent decision to convert.

    Ladislaus, I've seen you mention before, in essence, that the problem with Sedevacantism is that it gives individuals the right to sift popes, so to speak, because of their own view of whether or not that pope taught heresy, leading to reductio ad absurdum type conclusions like Richard Ibryani (to give an extreme example), yet R + Rs in essence believe in magisterium shifting, that the ordinary magisterium can be not just imperfect, but downright dangerous to souls.

    It seems to me that Trad Catholicism, of any kind (and Eastern Orthodoxy) are in an uncomfortable position with regards to the role of private judgment, while Vatican II Catholicism (for lack of a better word for it) seems to have have a problem with lack of continuity with Tradition.  Protestantism of course has BOTH of these problems, magnified to the nth degree, which is why despite the problems with current Catholicism, there was no way I could stay Protestant.

    But what you've shared here (and I've read other old posts as well, but mostly here) seems to suggest that "We don't know if the see is vacant or not" somehow solves the problem of private judgment, and I'm not sure how it does.  I don't see how it doesn't practically allow the same level of private judgment that full blown Sedevacantism does, even if you can't state it with absolute certainty, you can still ignore the magisterium of anyone you think "might not be" Pope.  How does that fix anything?

    Furthermore, why couldn't hermeneutic of continuity be true?  To be clear, I'm not definitively stating that it is, but it seems like an approach like that would minimize private judgment more (mind, I suppose blindly following Francis would minimize private judgment even less, but at a much higher price to tradition.) 


    Offline Nishant Xavier

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2873
    • Reputation: +1894/-1751
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Crux of the Pope Problem
    « Reply #89 on: March 16, 2019, 08:22:08 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ladislaus
    don't tell me that a legitimate Ecuмenical Council taught errors (or even heresies) to the Universal Church and don't tell me that a legitimate Pope promulgated a Rite of Mass that displeases God and is harmful to faith.  Don't tell me that it's OK for Catholics to go so far as to break communion with the legitimate hierarchy in order to reject this Magisterium and Universal Discipline.  Don't tell me that the Magisterium and Universal Discipline of the Church have gotten so corrupt that we're almost required to break communion with the Church in order to save our souls.  That is nothing other than the defection of the Catholic Church.
    Then, you should be a traditional Catholic in Communion with Rome, Ladislaus, which is the correct traditional Catholic position. Fr. Michael Mary explains it below. If you agree with Father, the easiest and simplest way would be to go to an SSPX, FSSP or ICK Priest, confess the sin and schism of schismatic sedevacantism, and resolve never to participate in it again. I know what you'll say, the SSPX are not in full peace with the Apostolic See either, but the Pope disagrees, because (1) only Priests in peace and communion with the Holy See can be granted the power to forgive sins (2) only Bishops in peace and communion with the Holy See can likewise be granted the mandate to consecrate Bishops. And (3) since Bishop Fellay has made clear H.E. and Society Bishops have ordinary jurisdiction since the Year of Mercy, that is another clear evidence that the Society is in full communion. At any rate, after Divine Mercy Sunday this year, it will become indisputable.

    One could even confess to Society Priests and resolve never to support SVism again, just as with any other sin. 60 year SVism is a very serious and grave mortal sin against the Faith, because it denies many dogmas, and dogmatic facts. http://www.trueorfalsepope.com/p/sedevacantists-reject-pre-vatican-ii.html

    "Rejection of a Dogmatic Fact is a Mortal Sin Against Faith

          In his 1951 book On the Value of Theological Notes and the Criteria for Discerning Them, Fr. Sixtus Cartechini, S.J., explains that the rejection of a dogmatic fact is a “mortal sin against faith”[13] (and the example he uses of a dogmatic fact is the legitimacy of a determine Pope). Hence, Sedevacantists - who publicly reject the Church’s judgment concerning the legitimacy of a determine Pope, in favor of their own personal opinion – have committed an objective mortal sin against the Faith. And, needless to say, those who follow the private opinions of these Sedevacantist apologists commit the same mortal sin (at least in the objective order). We can only hope that these individuals renounce their grievous error before they arrive at their Particular Judgment."

    "Looking to the future, the next stage will be to have our community canonically erected." http://andrew4jc.blogspot.com/2008/07/te-deum-laudamus.html

    You can either choose to do or not to do, it's up to you. But if you do, you will know that is God's Will for you and for us all and there will be the Peace the world cannot give, which Jesus promised to give us, as long as we remain in His Church, fighting the good fight for the Faith, cuм Petro et sub Petro.