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

Poll

Could a new "pope" elected by the N.O. church "undo" the damage of Vatican II?

Yes, he can declare it heretical and anathematize the post-conciliar popes straight to hell!
15 (45.5%)
He can only admit that it was "imprudent" and then return to Tradition while passing the rest over in silence.
3 (9.1%)
No, impossible - he cannot call a General Council ratified by a true pope heretical - that would be admitting defection.
1 (3%)
He can only admit it was a false Council of the Catholic Church at all and the V2 "popes" were false claimants who defected
7 (21.2%)
No man elected by the N.O. church could ever be the pope because the N.O. church and it's clergy are NOT part of the Catholic Church.
5 (15.2%)
I heard there is poisonous fog outside - you should go outside and inhale deeply please.
2 (6.1%)

Total Members Voted: 32

« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6

Author Topic: Poll: Could a new "pope" fix the Novus Ordo church and make it Catholic again?  (Read 56287 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Johannes

Poll: Could a new "pope" fix the Novus Ordo church and make it Catholic again?
« on: January 01, 2025, 11:55:52 AM »
If one holds that the Novus Ordo hierarchy is in fact, also the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church, then - let us imagine a scenario where a tradition loving/serving pope is elected by the N.O. cardinals:

Francis is dead. The cardinals assemble they vote and select a new pope. He shocks everyone by declaring the Vatican II Council was a break from Tradition and all the reforms that followed were evil and harmful to souls and he condemns them and reinstitutes all as it was before the Council. He anathematizes all the previous popes for their egregious errors and heresies. The docuмents of V2 are burned in St. Peter's square. The Modernist prelates are thrown out of their Sees the world over. The Sacramental Rites are restored. The Church rises gloriously to all its former beauty and grandeur surpassing your wildest dreams.

But if you think all this ^^ can actually happen - then you are saying you think the Church has defected.

For such a change to take place would discredit the Church and Her infallibility in the eyes of all men for the rest of time. No one would ever take anything She taught or said seriously ever again (including all the faithful). The protection of God would clearly have left His Church and in theory, then it could happen again, and again, and again, etc. No one would ever really listen to the popes ever again. The "faithful" would first weigh everything he said against their own rule of faith and what they thought were heresies and then, only once it fit their understanding would they assent and obey.

Some considerations:

The Church’s infallibility extends to dogmatic facts This proposition is theologically certain.

If you accept as a Dogmatic Fact that Vatican 2 was a legitimate council call by a true pope, with the docuмents signed/supported by 99.9% of the Catholic bishops and ratified by a true pope - then you must admit V2 was infallible.

If your position is that it was a legitimate council - then you CANNOT say it was heretical for that would be a denial of the infallibility of the Church and itself a heretical position to hold.


"What good would it do to proclaim in theory the infallible authority of ecuмenical councils if one could licitly doubt the legitimacy of the specific council?" Source: Van Noort's Dogmatic Theology (see full text and link below)

If you acknowledge the V2 hierarchy as legitimate but deny the Dogmatic Fact of the legitimacy of V2, you are left with an empty shell of a nothing church and a neutered papacy/hierarchy that can only lead you to hell.

If you accept the V2 Church hierarchy as the legitimate Catholic Church hierarchy, then the following are Dogmatic Facts and the logical conclusions follow:

Dogmatic Fact:
A General Council of the Catholic Church ratified by the Roman Pontiff is legitimate and its teachings are theologically "safe".

Dogmatic Fact:
The Second Vatican Council was a legitimate council called and ratified by true popes

Conclusion #1
Therefore, the Second Vatican Council's teachings are "safe".

Conclusion #2
Therefore, the Second Vatican Council's teachings ARE NOT schismatic or heretical.

Dogmatic facts are both indirect and secondary objects of infallibility. If you believe in the legitimacy of the Novus Ordo, post-conciliar church hierarchy as being synonymous with the same men that constitute the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church, then the above Dogmatic Facts are infallible and so are their conclusions. To deny them would be to indirectly deny infallible truth and therefore heresy.

"...dogmatic facts can rightly be called not only secondary but also indirect objects of infallibility."


A further consideration if you hold the V2 hierarchy is legitimate:

The Church cannot promulgate a liturgy for the universal Church that is harmful to souls.

The full power of ordering and promulgating liturgical disciplines belongs to the Roman Pontiff.

The Novus Ordo therefore cannot be harmful to souls.



"[the Church] can never sanction a universal law which would be at odds with faith or morality or would be by its very nature conducive to the injury of souls." So, if you accept the V2 council and its hierarchy as legitimate you better get to the Novus Ordo and stop railing against it - otherwise you are besmirching the infallibility of the Church - injurious to pious ears, suspect of heresy.



"But if the Church could make a mistake in the manner alleged when it legislated for the general discipline, it would no longer be either a loyal guardian of the revealed doctrine or a trustworthy teacher of the Christian way of life. It would not be a guardian of revealed doctrine, for the imposition of the vicious law would be, for all practical purposes, tantamount to an erroneous definition of doctrine. It would not be a teacher of the Christian way of life, for by its laws it would induce corruption into the practice of religious life. "




"God also positively guides the Church's teachers to correct knowledge and presentation of the truth He has entrusted to the Church." So, if you believe V2 was legitimate but heretical then you believe God positively willed the Church to fall into corruption. - which is blasphemy - at the least.


From Familiar Explanation of Christian Doctrine by Rev. Michael Müller, C.SS.R. 1874
Link: Mueller's Catechism 1874


Q. Is not the Catholic Church the household of which Jesus Christ is the Master?

A. She is.


Q. Will Satan be able to take possession of this household in spite of its Divine Master?

A. No one can say so without blasphemy.


Q. Is not the Catholic Church the Body of Jesus Christ?

A. The Church, says St. Paul, is the Body of Christ.


Q. What follows from this?

A. That Christ is inseparably united with His Church.


Q. What, then, would it be for one to say that the Church could be destroyed?

A. It would be to say that Christ or God can be overcome, which would be the height of madness and blasphemy.


Q. How long will Christ protect and defend His own Body—the Catholic Church?

A. To the end of the world.


Q. In what words has He given us this assurance?

A. In these words: "Behold, I am with you all days, even to the end of the world" (Matt. xxviii. 20); and, therefore, "the gates of hell shall not prevail against my Church."


Q. Is there any other reason why the Catholic Church cannot be destroyed?

A. Yes; the true life of the Catholic Church is the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of Truth, who, according to the promise of Jesus Christ, will abide with His Church for ever.


Q. What is meant by this promise?

A. That the Holy Ghost will enlighten the pastors of the Catholic Church to preserve and deliver her holy doctrine to the end of the world uncorrupted, and encourage them and the faithful to live up to it, and even to lay down their lives for it. St. John xiv. 16, and Gal. iv. 6.


Q. What follows from this?

A. It follows that, although the hands of blind or wicked men may rob the Church, may pluck the crown from the Pontiff's brow, may drive her prelates into exile or death, may destroy and defile her sanctuaries, may persecute her children and massacre them by thousands, yet her faith, planted by the Son of God on earth, will gloriously shine and endure to the end of the world. [notice how this answer doesn't mention such an absurd, insane, mad, heretical and blasphemous scenario as that the hierarchy including the Roman Pontiff will all embrace heresy and force it on the faithful.]

In conclusion,

If you hold that such a "renewal" to Tradition of the Catholic Church is necessary (as described in the scenario at the top) then essentially you have to admit that you do not belong to the Catholic Church but rather a manmade institution that is fallible and can be so over and over again and Vatican II could happen again with Vatican III, IV, V, etc. You belong to a false church that has not the promise of Christ, or you then must hold that the Church has defected, and you commit the sin of blasphemy and heresy.


The only logical answer is what both preserves the Church from corruption and allows one to maintain their sanity without contradicting what the Church has always taught.

Source:


Find the rest here: Van Noort: Dogmatic Theology Vol. 2 Christ's Church

Logged

Offline Geremia

Re: Poll: Could a new "pope" fix the Novus Ordo church and make it Catholic again?
« Reply #1 on: January 03, 2025, 10:33:27 AM »
Yes, he can do what Pope Innocent II did by convening Lateran II, condemning the acts of Antipope Anacletus II.
Quote from: Geremia on August 20, 2019, 12:29:42 PM
cf. Antipope Anacletus II vs. Pope Innocent II
Logged

Offline Meg

Re: Poll: Could a new "pope" fix the Novus Ordo church and make it Catholic again?
« Reply #2 on: January 03, 2025, 11:20:01 AM »
Johannes,

You asked seven questions in your latest post on this thread. How do you come up with all of these questions, on every thread that you create? Do you really believe that we are required to answer them? I don't believe that we are required to answer them. 
Logged

Offline Meg

Re: Poll: Could a new "pope" fix the Novus Ordo church and make it Catholic again?
« Reply #3 on: January 03, 2025, 11:38:52 AM »
Quote from: Johannes on January 03, 2025, 11:32:45 AM
"Because the decrees of an irregularly appointed person are irregular, whatever he had established we destroy, whomever he had exalted we degrade, and however many he had consecrated we unordain and depose".

Well, the "tradition-loving pope elected by the N.O. clergy " couldn't really do exactly what Innocent did. His election was confirmed by an imperfect council. But in the scenario, I am projected it is based on the N.O. cardinals electing a new pope. If this new tradition-loving pope "destroyed" whatever the post-conciliar popes had "established" and subsequently degraded the "Cardinals" who had elected him then he would in effect be destroying his very own "election" or at least making it doubtful.

If every traditional Catholic on this forum decided to follow your lead, and totally denounced and rejected as evil everything having to do with the conciliar church, would you then be happy?

How would you spend your time, if every suddenly all here agreed with you? Would you find another venue to spam?
Logged

Offline Meg

Re: Poll: Could a new "pope" fix the Novus Ordo church and make it Catholic again?
« Reply #4 on: January 03, 2025, 04:01:50 PM »
Quote from: Johannes on January 03, 2025, 02:44:27 PM
These questions are phrased so well, I will just redirect them back at you.




In directing the questions back to me, I would say that I don't need all traditionalists to agree with me, as you need them to agree with you. The only time I really complain about sedevacantism anymore is when they (like yourself) get really pushy and expect everyone to agree with them.

We're all trying to get through the Crisis as best we can. A few of us here follow the sounds teachings of +ABL, even though he got things wrong on occasion. But we don't expect that he was perfect. He was a good example to follow, but I don't expect that many here will agree, and that's fine.

Why post the photo of Pope Francis with his hand to his ear? You have such hatred for the Pope, and you seem to want us do follow suit. We have no control over the situation in the Church. Do you believe that Pope Francis is more powerful than God? I don't believe that he is. God is still in control, even when all seems lost. 
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
« previous next »