His comment must be understood as based on the premise that the actor CAN DO what Aquinas says should be done in principle.

I think he is stressing the principle that faith is supreme, and no matter if the whole visible Church is burning around you, you cannot compromise on matters of faith. 

 ... no, the free exercise of legitimate papal authority cannot possibly wreck the Church so badly that we must leave submission to and communion with the hierarchy in order to remain Catholics, where they effectively establish a New Religion alien to the Catholic Religion.

It's not about receiving graces, but about receiving the office of the papacy.  You would be a wicked occult apostate, and you would receive the offices even if no graces of the office.  Of course, if you received the office, God would strike you down before you'd be allowed to corrupt the Church's teaching.

As far as God allowing it ... well, of course God allowed the Crisis, but it does not mean he would somehow renig on the Promises of Christ for the papacy, but instead would allow it to happen in some other way.

There's so much muddled and even non-Catholic thinking about the papacy among Trads that it's mind-boggling.

So, anyone who says that does not hold to the legitimay of the Conciliar papal claimants with the certainty of faith.  That would be like saying I believe that in the future the Church might reverse the dogma of the Immaculate Conception.  If you say that, you don't believe in the Immaculate Conception with the certainty of faith.

No, that would not be like saying I believe that in the future the Church might reverse the dogma of the Immaculate Conception. Unlike the legitimacy of popes, the Immaculate Conception is a defined dogma. The legitimacy of popes is an act of the Church's administration via the cardinals voting and him accepting his election. 

You sure come with your share of some real doozies.  

Please just stop posting, those of you who have no concept about Catholic ecclesiology

You are not any more qualified than anyone else here to post about these matters, and your opinion is only as valuable as the authoritative sources you can furnish to support your arguments .

No, what makes you think that's what I'm saying? The pope is condemning all things V2 so now the Church is where it was pre-V2. What reason would the pre-V2 popes even enter the picture?

It can be confusing when you evade the question and are vague

I said:

I asked if you believe that there is a possibility the Conciliar popes are declared false popes in the future. You said, "absolutely". Why do you think it is absolutely possible that it could happen? Would you say the same regarding Pius X, Pius IX, Leo XIII, etc., or is there something different between them and the Conciliar popes?

You replied:

You just answered why I do not think any such declaration will be made, although anything is possible

See, this is confusing, because I'm not sure how I "answered" why you do not think any such declaration will be made, and I never even asked if you think it will happen to begin with. You said there is "absolutely" a possibility of the Conciliar popes being declared false popes by a future pope. I asked if this is because there is a difference between the pre V2 and Conciliar popes that would cause you to say that..or if you would say the same ("absolutely" a possibility) regarding any past pope at all.

So, are you saying:

A) That the V2 popes differ in such a way from the pre-V2 popes that there is "absolutely" a possibility of them being declared false popes in the future, and not the pre-V2 popes? You said you would be "cool" with whatever the Church declares regarding the Conciliar popes

OR

B) That there is "absolutely" a possibility of a future pope declaring any past pope at all a false pope? Would you also be "cool" with this, or just whatever the Church declares regarding the Conciliar popes?

If God commands what one must do and can do, then He must supply the means to acquire the graces necessary to fulfill those commands.

How can one who receives the supernatural power/grace tied to the office of the papacy that, "whatever you bind is bound, whatever you loose is loosed."
but at the same time he is supernaturally "impeded" and he CANNOT DO what he has already received the power/grace to do? It seems to run contrary to the liberty of the Church.

Concerning the post-concilar claimants to the papacy:

1) Either God gave them the graces of the papacy, which they accepted and retained,

or,

2) They were impeded from receiving the graces of the papacy and therefore never received them,

or,

3) God did give them the graces, but they each went on to subsequently deviate from the faith and lose those graces.


Are you suggesting a 4th option; i.e.,

4) "God gave them the graces of the papacy, but then he impeded them from using them, because it is all part of the test of faith during the Great Apostasy."?

I am suggesting that a Pope not doing something (e.g., expelling heretics and eliminating confusion) could have many different causes. And most importantly, the drama is still unfolding and everything will be revealed very soon. 

As Leo XIII testified, Satan was to be given 100 years. Jesus allowed it as a test/temptation for Catholics, many of whom had become lukewarm in the Faith. What better way to test their faith than by the ecclesiastical Beast created in the mid-20th century. 

The overwhelming majority of Catholics embraced a false Mass and false sacraments. Why? Because it was "above their pay grade." They just did whatever "the Church" suggested to them. They shrugged their shoulders and jumped in feet first. Tradition...meh...that's so boring. We need to be more up-to-date, they thought.

But you will say, they were innocent. They were just doing their duty to follow their superiors. No, they were choosing the easy path because the putative hierarchy said they could choose it. No one put a gun to their heads. No one excommunicated Catholics simply for keeping the traditional faith. That it was a choice is clear from the fact that many traditional Catholics chose not to give up the Faith and Sacraments, and they were persecuted for that choice by the Novus Ordites.

There will be a great reversal of fortunes very soon. See Wisdom Chapter 5. God allows an apparent evil for a greater good. His ways are not our ways. What is the greater good? He will have accomplished the purge of the closet heretics and the lukewarm from His Church while respecting their free will. He will also have purified the elect through their suffering.