CathInfo.com

Ordinary laymen cannot judge? How about their pastors? How about Hans Urs Von Balthasar, who was judged worthy of being made a cardinal even though he contradicted Christ Almighty on the subject of Hell? How about Avery Dulles, who received the same honor though in  one of his books he finds Christ wanting in the proper etiquette at dinner parties?

May ordinary laymen judge that the Mass created and pushed by the Pope is in any way lacking as far as Catholic Truth goes?

May the ordinary layman judge that the Saints created by "His Holiness" are in any way lacking in Catholic virtue?

May the ordinary layman judge that there is anything dubious about the long-standing papal claim that the post-Vatican II era has been a time of great strides for the Kingdom of Heaven, of wonderful renewal and marked growth, despite any problems that may have arisen also?

Actually, the sedevacantists are the only ones who are NOT "judging the pope" in any way.

But the issue of how to handle the problem of sedevacantist contribution to discussions concerning the "pope" outside the Crisis forum has yet to be addressed. I would continue in this vein over there.

Ordinary laymen have the right to protect their souls and the souls of others according to the norms of Catholic doctrine. It is not Christian to be so dismissive of "ordinary laymen", especially in a context in which it is clear that there is no need to single them out, since extraordinary clerics are in no position to judge popes either.

Who is saying that anyone but a pope has papal authoriity? Who has thrown Josef Ratzinger into the Mamertine prison? Who has solemnly declared and decreed in the names of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul that he is not a pope? (Besides the would-be Roman Pontiffs in Kansas and Spain and a few other places.)

We have heard about the ordinary layman. Now let's talk about the ordinary Traditionalist. He judges everything that a pope says and does, and for the most part finds him wanting, and says so publicly. He reduces his "popehood" to a convoluted abstraction. Only the so-called Novus Ordo conservative follows the pope as a trusting child, and for this "crime" he is called an unCatholic pope worshiper by Traditionalists.

Who are Traditionalists to judge the pope and find him and his faithful children unTraditional, that is, unCatholic?

By what right did ordinary laymen take an uneducated and youngish Nazarene carpenter for the Christ, in the teeth of what their valid religious superiors told them about His being in league with Beelzebub and a Samaritan and a blasphemer? "I thank Thee Father, that Thou has hidden these things from the wise and the learned, and hast revealed them to little children."

There's your "authority" for ordinary laymen judging of Jesus and the workings of His Kingdom right there. If there is anything to be regretted here according to Christian standards, it is that we do not hear more from six year old sedevacantists.