Author Topic: Okay, Francis is a true Pope. (Read 10593 times)

Jehanne · « **on:** November 18, 2014, 05:34:02 AM »

The arguments against sedevacantism seem to be stronger than the arguments for it. Setting aside the fact that I am a waffler, what does this mean (that is, that Francis is a true Vicar of God)? Should we now stop attending SSPX Masses? Receiving Sacraments from them? Start attending the Novus Ordo? If you accept Francis as a true Vicar, how far should your obedience toward him go?

Capt McQuigg · « **Reply #1 on:** November 18, 2014, 06:58:08 AM »

It is good to have this discussion every six months or so.

The SSPX has always considered the conciliar popes to be true popes but the society has refused to follow them in their deviations from the traditions of the Church.

Then we also have to incorporate the conciliar belief that other religions, even those that deny Our Lord, have components of holiness to them and may also be salvific outside the Church. We would need to embrace Cardinal Kasper's assessment which publicly states that Vatican II renounced the concept of "ecuмenism of return" and that other faiths, especially Judaism, are not in need of converting to the Catholic faith. In short, we must also accept as a new, post-Vatican II belief that the Catholic Church is one of many routes to Heaven.

Then there is the banality of the Novus Ordo Missae, the greatest faith killer ever invented because that is where Catholics embrace their faith publicly and, unlike all other complaints, you can read actual sociological data of Church decline in the public realm which almost matches the spiritual decline. The New Mass doesn't feed Catholics but it does encourage the sycophantic, cheap grace types who see their Catholicism as volunteering at a soup kitchen or starting a local campaign against a landfill.

The SSPX is not sedevacantist so a Catholic could partake of all the sacraments at their chapels from their priests and even though irregular, and even if declared schismatic at a future date, because the SSPX is a part of the Catholic Church where the noxious novelties of the modernists are not celebrated nor tolerated but rejected in the proper Catholic manner.

Does this mean the sedes are wrong? The only way they could be wrong is in imprudently declaring the current conciliar popes to be non-popes. The only error here is if they are overstepping their boundaries by declaring something of such a grave matter that it is reserved for special entities that are normally unavailable to them. But in times of emergency like these times, are the sedes wrong?

It is a good idea to have these arguments every six months or so.

andysloan · « **Reply #2 on:** November 18, 2014, 06:59:50 AM »

To Jehanne:

SSPX accept Pope Francis and the conciliar Popes in line with dogma. But the SSPX is not the teaching Church and in these confusing times there are contentions within their ranks. Nevertheless, attend their masses because they are in communion with the Pope (and if you will forgive me, confess any departure from submission to the Pope).

Don't get wrapped up in all the disputes and and just keep to the dogmas and truth of the Church, which God will not permit to be violated.

And unlike some in Tradition who are:

Matthew 23:24

"Blind guides, who strain out a gnat, and swallow a camel."

and deservedly are in anxiety and confusion

Just smile, relax and be at peace:

Romans 14:17

"For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but justice, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost."


Philippians 4:4

"Rejoice in the Lord always; again, I say, rejoice."

And if you can't make the Latin Mass, you can go to a NO if it is seemly. Even Bishop Williamson implicitly acknowledged this recently. And if anyone says anything against this, ignore them. Leave them to the blindness of their "elitism"

Congratulations and good for you for your good sense!

God bless!

andysloan · « **Reply #3 on:** November 18, 2014, 07:08:27 AM »

Capt says:

"But in times of emergency like these times, are the sedes wrong?"

YES!

Dogma 6:6 of the Roman Catholic Church

"According to Christ's ordinance, Peter is to have successors in his Primacy over the whole Catholic Church and for all time."

Leave them to their errors - they are not dogmatic. God will preserve the Church in relation to whatever beliefs are necessary for salvation. Matt 23:1-3 & 1 Tim 3:15.

Kiss the wife and go out for dinner.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #4 on:** November 18, 2014, 09:42:50 AM »

Normally, Jehanne, the legitimacy of a pope needs to be known with the certainty of faith, as a dogmatic fact. Given that you clearly do not have this certainty, as evidenced by the mere fact that you're even asking the question, as well as by your statement that there are arguments for and against it, you are, like myself, what I have termed a sede-doubtist.

In the case of a Papa Dubius, one can for just reasons break from submission to such a one. There's a theological maxim that a doubtful pope is not pope: Papa Dubius Nullus Papa.

In fact, most Traditional Catholics, if you dig deep enough, are sede-doubtists. If you ask them to think and to say honestly whether they believe that Francis is the Pope with the same degree of certainty as they believe in the Immaculate Conception (i.e., with the certainty of faith), only a very very dishonest person with an ax to grind would say yes.