I seem to be stuck in a personal limbo where I can no longer accept that these men who claim the titles of "pope" and "bishops" are wielding true authority given the manifest contradictions promulgated by pope and council over the last 50 years. I am familiar with the arguments FOR SVism and find the arguments, on the face of them, to be systematic and logical. The arguments for R&R are becoming increasingly untenable as well, imho.
I have some questions regarding the actual ramifications of this theory, if true. 5 anti-popes in a row, 50+ years of an empty throne....
The explanation of the crisis presently assailing Holy Mother Church, commonly known as "sedevacantism" in the discourse of traditional Catholics of the day, is a very complex, polymorphous thing.
To begin with, it must be clarified that there is no such thing as an "official" sedevacantism, for the faithful who professedly subscribe to such a stance do not agree on all important matters, and both their agreements and disagreements are brought about by various and sundry factors: this is due to the fact that not all sedevacantists understand sedevacantism in the same manner.
A glance of the threads that I myself have posted or wherein I have replied will show you that such is the case.
To be frank, I myself have been in a sort of "suspended animation" on account of the problematic and labyrinthine ramifications and implications of sedevacantism, and have been in the process of critically reviewing the ecclesiological orientation that informs certain interpretations of sedevacantism.
After much prayer, study and discussion, I can definitively state:
If I would be compelled to give a name to the stance to which I subscribe - though I am loathe to be compartmentalized by a label - I reckon that it would have to be docta ignorantia
(thanks, Nicholas of Cusa!).
In light of the liturgical abuses of certain acephalous and vagrant clerics of the sedevacantist persuasion, and beholding the principles pertaining to the Sacred Canons, the notes of the Church, ecclesiastical jurisdiction, &c., woefully misunderstood and abused by the lay followers of these clerics, I cannot identify myself with the sedevacantist persuasion in the same manner
Not that Benedict XVI is to be identified as the Roman Pontiff, or that the polymorphous conglomerate of modernistic constructs brought forth by John XXIII and Paul VI is to be identified as the Ecclesia Christi
. These Modernists and Judeo-Masonic internationalists present greater problems, of a more grave and labyrinthine nature, than those of the aforementioned sedevacantists, together with the sectarian novelties which they have brought about. Otherwise, Luther would have been ultimately correct, and therefore the notions of God and of His divine revelation would be have to be debased into irrelevant absurdities, or subjective constructs to be manipulated by the individual as he pleases. There would be really no reason to live, except if one manages to delude himself into some self-complacent solipsism.
Therefore, I cannot identify the "New Order" that John XXIII and Paul VI and their modernist conspirators brought forth as Catholic. No matter how problematic sedevacantism is, assenting to the possibility that Christ would allow His Church to become that
: it's just too frightening a notion to entertain. On the other hand, I cannot condemn all
those who err in good faith and adhere materially to this "New Order" as being non-Catholic. This includes the hierarchs amongst the visible ecclesiastical structures usurped by the modernists. Just because the Bishops, for example, assented to the Johannine-Pauline constructs by signing the documents of the modernists' "council," does not necessary mean that everyone of them incurred the moral culpability and canonical censures concomitant with formal heresy, nor that they thereby lost the cura animarum
. No one is competent to categorically define at exactly what point any given Bishop (who did not publicly espouse heretical errors) lapsed formally into heresy, and nor judge the canonical ramifications thereof in both the internal and external forum.
Those "officials" who have "promulgated" and implemented this "New Order" with full deliberation and have remained obstinate in such a mindset, are subject to public scrutiny because they have taken it upon themselves to assume public positions; and, by the way, the same principles of scrutiny apply also to the demagogues, clerical or lay, amongst the faithful of the sedevacantist persuasion. I can therefore say with moral certainty that such individuals ( such as Paul VI, Rahner, Benedict XVI, John Paul II, etc.) can be viewed as having formally lapsed away from the Catholic faith as proposed by Holy Mother Church for the assent of the faithful.
The person of the Roman Pontiff cannot be condemned by any Canon or disciplinary law, because the Pope is not subject to the Sacred Canons: he is either the successor of Saint Peter, having supreme primacy over the Church, or has lapsed formally into heresy and is thereby no longer a member of the Mystical Body of Christ and ipso facto
no longer can arrogate to himself the primacy that alone belongs to the Sovereign Pontiff of the Catholic
Some theologians have discussed that the it would be for a council of Bishops, retroactively approved and formally sanctioned by a future Pope, to declare that the lapsed heretic is no longer the Supreme Pontiff, but this is merely to make the factual datum
of the heretic in question having lost the Roman Primacy as a dogmatic fact that binds the faithful in conscience so that they would assent to the elevation of a true Supreme Pontiff. This has not yet happened, and this is why I cannot subscribe to what has been called "dogmatic sedevacantism," nor can I say that all who attend the Masses wherein the name of Benedict XVI is mentioned in the Sacred Canon incur the moral culpability of communicatio in sacris
. Facts are not dogmas, and I cannot condemn anyone for not assenting to a notion as complex and labyrinthine as sedevacantism in its various forms, whilst
striving to eschew the modernists and their "New Order."
I can posit such things because it is a fact that the Johannine-Pauline Council and its concomitant constructs essentially brought forth an Œconomia nova, which constitutes a complete repudiation of the economy established by Christ and preserved by His One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
. Merely reviewing the societal, political, cultural and psychological phenomena that has proven to be inexorably concomitant with the "new economy" of what has been blasphemously called "the new Pentecost," are so many indication that there is such a thing as a Johannine-Pauline anti-Church.
"Then," some may say to me, "if the acephalous and vagrant clergy cannot claim formal Apostolic Succession but are Catholic notwithstanding because they have preserved the Apostolicitas doctrinæ
whensoever they have taught what Holy Mother Church has always taught, and if those materially adhere to Benedict XVI because they truly believe him to be the Roman Pontiff are indeed Catholic, where can I find the Church?"
Regarding the material Apostolicity of the vagrant clergy of the resistance against the Johannine-Pauline anti-Church, this should not be a problem because they can be said to be in expectancy of being duly deputed and Canonically sent to tend the flock of Christ by the authority of the Roman Pontiff: whilst lacking a missio
sanctioned by Apostolic mandate, these clerics posses and exercise some sort of titulus coloratus
, in virtue of the principles of epikeia
whereby the Church supplies them in each single instance the necessary jurisdiction whereby they may administer the Sacraments to the faithful and preach the Holy Faith unto the same: this jurisdiction cannot be said to be ordinary, neither habitual or delegated, nor does it have to be during an interregnum. They cannot claim a missio extraordinaria
, nor cite eschatological explanations for such a thing because the perpetuity and indestructibility of the Church of Christ would be compromised thereby.
The faithful who materially adhere to the Johannine-Pauline structures operate in good conscience and thereby evade any moral culpability regarding their association with the modernists, whom they erroneously believe to have been "sent" by Christ through His Church. I can posit this on their behalf and not on behalf of such heretics as the Protestant sects or the Oriental schismatic churches, because these people truly wish to be Catholics and they understand that adherence to the Apostolic See is what makes one Catholic
. They cannot see what the ecclesiologists of ages past never thought to be probable, though some of them discussed the theoretical possibility thereof.
"So," some may insist, "where is the Church?"If I had all the answers and could fix all the problems, I would not need to have the Church of Christ to guide me as illuminatrix et moderatrix mea dulcis ac benedicta
. What I do know is that the Church in herself is a wondrous mystery that no created effability can properly describe. It far transcends the rantings of cranks and party-liners of the numberless "groups" and "movements" out there, or of the culpably negligent and ignorant clerics and layfolk (the latter would include me), and it can never be debased as the harlot of the modernists. Any "solution" that takes away from the super-nature of the mysterium Ecclesiæ
and of the Mystical Body of Christ, will ultimately lead to aberration and error.
There is one way, however, to approach the question "Ubi
) nunc invenire possumus Ecclesiam Christi
In His sublime eschatological discourse, Our Lord presents certain mysterious auguries whereby we may answer this paramount and central question. Regarding the Modernists, we have been warned, "Et multi pseudoprophetæ surgent, et seducent multos. Et quoniam abundabit iniquitas, refrigescet charitas multorum. Qui autem persevevarit usque in finem, hic salvus erit. Tunc si quis vobis dixerit: Ecce hic Christus, aut illic: nolite credere
" (S. Matt. cap. xxiv., 11-13, 23). Again, against the same heretics and charlattans, whether in the Johannine-Pauline anti-Church or those who seek to delude the faithful resisting this nefarious abomination by manipulating their emotions and ideas, we have also been warned, "Surgent enim pseudochristi, et pseudoprophetæ: et dabunt signa magna, et prodigia, ita ut in errorem inducantur (si fieri potest) etiam electi. Si ergo dixerint vobis: Ecce in deserto est, nolite exire: ecce in penetralibus, nolite credere
" (ibid., 24, 26).
"Ubi possumus invenire Ecclesiam Christi in hoc sæculo
?" Our Lord Himself had told us, which is that which He had told the Pharisees and Sadducees, recorded by Saint Matthew (cap. xvi., 4): "Faciem ergo cæli dijudicare nostis: signa autem temporum non potestis scire? Generatio mala et adultera signum quærit: et signum non dabitur ei, nisi signum Jonæ prophetæ. Et relictis illis, abiit.
" Shortly thereafter, the sacred Evangelist narrates the confession of St. Peter and how Our Lord responded by vouchsafing the great promise of the foundation of His Church upon the same St. Peter (ibid., 18, 19). I cannot believe it to be merely coincidental that these aforementioned events are narrated in the selfsame chapter of the Holy Gospel according to St. Matthew.
It is the earnest and persevering cultivation of the interior life that is most important, particularly by means of perfect devotion to the great Mother of God, Blessed Mary ever-Virgin. Confiding in her maternal tutelage and regal patronage, it behooves us to discern the mysterious "signum Jonæ prophetæ
," particularly by paying heed to the message of Our Lady of the Rosary at Fatima; so that we may not also be guilty of the censure of Our Lord, "Faciem ergo cæli dijudicare nostis: signa autem temporum non potestis scire?
The ineffable magnificence and clemency of the Lord God is to be lauded and super-extolled on account of the visitation of Our Lady of the Rosary at Fatima, and her promulgation of the grand epitome of Divine Revelation as found in the Holy Scriptures, particularly the Gospels and the Epistles, and in sacred Tradition, as taught by Holy Mother Church: a little Summa
of dogmatic and moral theology of great simplicity and practicality. If one were to put into practice this great message of Our Lady of the Rosary at Fatima with great generosity and self-abnegation, they would simply be following the way of salvation and perfection as outlined by Our Lord in the Gospels and by the Apostles in their Epistles, and as taught by the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, together with the Saints and other masters of the spiritual life.
If one follows the counsels that our Heavenly Mother gave at Fatima with great generosity and magnanimity that presupposes complete and universal mortification, both exterior and interior, and a docility to the operations of the gifts of the Holy Ghost, which presupposes in turn the active and passive purification of the senses and of the soul, then the interior soul could arrive at the mystical union which St. Thomas Aquinas and St. John of the Cross saw as the normal efflorescence of the interior life. The unicity of asceticism and mysticism in the interior life as taught by these great Doctors and their commentators makes it clear that the soul ought to attain to the heights of the unitive life since grace and charity ought always to increase in us more and more day by day, especially ought they to augment significantly after each Holy Communion.
Again, the value of the message of Our Lady of the Rosary at Fatima consists precisely in how faithful a mirror it is of Divine Revelation and the doctrines of the Saints and theologians. It synthesized in a practical manner the doctrines of St. Louis-Marie de Montfort and laid out a practical program whereby we may consecrate ourselves entirely to Jesus through Mary and be enabled to attain to that apostolic zeal and charity that will enable us to edify our brethren and help restore Holy Mother Church and Christian civilization.
Amidst the designs of Divine Providence whereby the infinite excess of the eternal charity of the Lord God has fore-ordained all things that they may co-operate for the greater good of His predilect servants, the one which most puzzles interior souls is the vocation to follow our Divine Savior in the via dolorosa
, whilst carrying our Cross and even espousing ourselves unto the same in devout enthusiasm and self-effacing love: "Si quis vult post me venire, abneget semet ipsum et tollat crucem suam et sequatur me
" (S. Matt. cap. xvi., 24). Verily this is a very great grace and a glorious way of ascending unto the heights of the interior life, according as it is written, "Deus qui præcingit me virtute et posuit inmaculatam viam meam, qui perfecit pedes meos tamquam cervorum et super excelsa statuens me
" (Ps. xvii. 33-34). Yet it is true: "multi autem sunt vocati pauci vero electi
" (S. Matt. cap. xxii., 14).
This is essentially the great "signum Jonæ prophetæ
:" to be given over in perfect devotion to Jesus through Mary, and thereby be enabled by holy grace to fulfill what is written in Holy Writ: "expecta Dominum, viriliter age et confortetur cor tuum et sustine Dominum
" (Ps. xxvi. 14); "In capite libri scriptum est de me ut facerem voluntatem tuam, Deus meus volui et legem tuam in medio cordis mei
" (Ps. xxxix. 8-9).
To return to the heavenly Jerusalem, tropologically signifying the life of prayer and contemplation, imitating Our Lady and St. Joseph when they repaired unto Jerusalem to seek the Child Jesus (S. Luc. cap. ii., 45 sqq.), and thereby bearing within us by living faith the great "signum Jonæ prophetæ
" throughout the mystical three days' trial, is the way we can find Our Lord Jesus in His Mystical Body, the Church unto whom He espoused Himself upon the Cross.
Oh, uh, anyways..Docta ignorantia
, or whatever you wish to call it, is the best to which I can attain without exceeding my limited capacities and daring to aspire to heights wherein no mortal mind is to ascend in the present economy of Providence.
It is a quizzical and labyrinthine question, and one that exposes in a sublime manner the profundity, immensity, height and unfathomable extent of the mysterium Ecclesiæ
. The ecclesiologists had just begun to discover the awesome and dread mysteries of the Church of the Word Incarnate when the progress of sacred science was derailed by the onslaught of modernism.
Whatever position any individual Catholic adopts will be of no avail for him if he does not give himself over to works of piety, charity and penance; perseveringly practice interior and exterior mortification; and frequent the holy Sacraments and seek the spiritual direction of a devout and learned Priest; and abandon himself with filial confidence unto the designs of Divine Providence, whilst consecrating himself to Mary Most Holy as her unworthy servant, so that she may jealously preserve him by her benign tutelage and patronage as Mediatress of All Graces.
That is what I had to say.