Author Topic: Quote from old Catholic book supports sedevacantists (Read 12866 times)

Stubborn · « **Reply #75 on:** February 09, 2017, 07:31:11 AM »

Quote from: saintbosco13

Theological theory???? You are missing the boat. This topic was raised at the First Vatican Council and here is what they had to say:

"The question was also raised (at the First Vatican Council) by a Cardinal, “What is to be done with the Pope if he becomes a heretic?” It was answered that there has never been such a case; the Council of Bishops could depose him for heresy, for from the moment he becomes a heretic he is not the head or even a member of the Church.

We know this can never happen - a council of bishops cannot judge the pope, not judging includes not even judge him to be a heretic. "The first see is judged by no one".

Quote

The Church would not be, for a moment, obliged to listen to him when he begins to teach a doctrine the Church knows to be a false doctrine,

This is the truth and this is apparently precisely the thing that sedevacantists do not comprehend.

Quote

and he would cease to be Pope, being deposed by God Himself.

Since God Himself is the only one who can depose the pope, and seeing as how the pope has never been deposed, it serves only to prove the pope has not been deposed at all.

Quote from: saintbosco13

By the way, all of the anti-sedevacantists who read the above quote from the Vatican I Church Fathers, and the Francis quotes summary above, and couldn't think of anything to say, you are now sedevacantists. Seriously.

Ridiculous.

saintbosco13 · « **Reply #76 on:** February 09, 2017, 10:44:14 AM »

Quote from: Stubborn

Quote from: saintbosco13

Theological theory???? You are missing the boat. This topic was raised at the First Vatican Council and here is what they had to say:

"The question was also raised (at the First Vatican Council) by a Cardinal, “What is to be done with the Pope if he becomes a heretic?” It was answered that there has never been such a case; the Council of Bishops could depose him for heresy, for from the moment he becomes a heretic he is not the head or even a member of the Church.

We know this can never happen - a council of bishops cannot judge the pope, not judging includes not even judge him to be a heretic. "The first see is judged by no one".

Quote

and he would cease to be Pope, being deposed by God Himself.

Since God Himself is the only one who can depose the pope, and seeing as how the pope has never been deposed, it serves only to prove the pope has not been deposed at all.

Stubborn,

Do you have any idea that you are challenging a quote from the Church fathers of the First Vatican Council here? Truly embarrassing.

As usual the anti-sedevacantists have no answers here. As Bishop Sanborn has said in the past, the anti-sedevacantists know the sedevacantists are right, but they will not admit it because it will inconvenience them too much.... Either they will have to drive longer to get to Mass, or they will run into conflict with family and friends, and they are not willing to go through that suffering, so they remain obstinate. Really sad.

Arvinger · « **Reply #77 on:** February 09, 2017, 01:24:34 PM »

Quote from: Stubborn

We know this can never happen - a council of bishops cannot judge the pope, not judging includes not even judge him to be a heretic. "The first see is judged by no one".

Again, your usual error. A heretic first loses his office due to his heresy and ceases to be member of the Church, and thus the college of bishops can depose him since he is no longer a Pope - thus, the rule that first see is judged by no one is not violated. There is no judging of the Pope involved.

A good article on the possibilities of deposing a heretic from the Chair of Peter:

Quote

Conclusion

In light of what the theologians and canonists have taught throughout the centuries, it is clear that the Church does possess a remedy by which she can rid herself of an heretical Pope. Therefore, faced with such an incalculably grave threat, the Church is not forced to wait for the “biological solution” to solve the problem.

http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/1284-can-the-church-depose-an-heretical-pope

The teaching that the first see is judged by no one was already taught by Pope Paul IV in cuм Ex Apostolatus Officio - yet, after that docuмent St. Robert Bellarmine, John of St. Thomas and many others taught that a heretical Pope can be deposed, which is further evidence that such a possibility does not violate the rule that no one judges first see (unless you want to say that all these Saints and Doctors of the Church were ignorant and could not understand cuм Ex).

Burke should go ahead with formal correction and call an imperfect council to depose Francis (unlikely as it is, it would be the best solution).

TKGS · « **Reply #78 on:** February 09, 2017, 01:35:56 PM »

Quote from: Arvinger

Burke should go ahead with formal correction and call an imperfect council to depose Francis (unlikely as it is, it would be the best solution).

Even if he wanted to do so, and I don't think he does because I don't think he really believes Bergoglio is a heretic, I doubt he'd be able to gather together more than a handful of cardinals and/or bishops.

Stubborn · « **Reply #79 on:** February 09, 2017, 01:57:32 PM »

Quote from: Arvinger

Quote from: Stubborn

We know this can never happen - a council of bishops cannot judge the pope, not judging includes not even judge him to be a heretic. "The first see is judged by no one".

Again, your usual error. A heretic first loses his office due to his heresy and ceases to be member of the Church, and thus the college of bishops can depose him since he is no longer a Pope - thus, the rule that first see is judged by no one is not violated. There is no judging of the Pope involved.

A good article on the possibilities of deposing a heretic from the Chair of Peter:

Quote
Conclusion

In light of what the theologians and canonists have taught throughout the centuries, it is clear that the Church does possess a remedy by which she can rid herself of an heretical Pope. Therefore, faced with such an incalculably grave threat, the Church is not forced to wait for the “biological solution” to solve the problem.

http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/1284-can-the-church-depose-an-heretical-pope

The teaching that the first see is judged by no one was already taught by Pope Paul IV in cuм Ex Apostolatus Officio - yet, after that docuмent St. Robert Bellarmine, John of St. Thomas and many others taught that a heretical Pope can be deposed, which is further evidence that such a possibility does not violate the rule that no one judges first see (unless you want to say that all these Saints and Doctors of the Church were ignorant and could not understand cuм Ex).

Burke should go ahead with formal correction and call an imperfect council to depose Francis (unlikely as it is, it would be the best solution).

Yes Burke should at least try, after all, he has all the evidence he needs.

What is he waiting for? What are the bishops waiting for? What are the sedevacantists waiting for - what is God waiting for?

Must be they don't know that St. Robert Bellarmine, John of St. Thomas and many others made it a Church teaching and taught that a heretical Pope can be deposed.

Stubborn · « **Reply #80 on:** February 09, 2017, 02:05:30 PM »

Quote from: Arvinger

The teaching that the first see is judged by no one was already taught by Pope Paul IV in cuм Ex Apostolatus Officio - yet, after that docuмent St. Robert Bellarmine, John of St. Thomas and many others taught that a heretical Pope can be deposed, which is further evidence that such a possibility does not violate the rule that no one judges first see (unless you want to say that all these Saints and Doctors of the Church were ignorant and could not understand cuм Ex).

No, I won't say that all these Saints and Doctors of the Church were ignorant and could not understand cuм Ex - if they even knew it existed.

I will say that no matter what they said, Pope Paul IV said it cannot be done. I know I know, you would think that by me saying such a thing that I am a sedevacantist - but nope, you'd be wrong.

Arvinger · « **Reply #81 on:** February 09, 2017, 02:07:18 PM »

Quote from: Stubborn

Must be they don't know that St. Robert Bellarmine, John of St. Thomas and many others made it a Church teaching and taught that a heretical Pope can be deposed.

No need for sarcasm. St. Robert Bellarmine, John of St. Thomas and others taught about a hypothetical situation when a Pope falls into heresy and there is orthodox hierarchy to depose him. None of them could have predicted what we experience today - a massive defection from faith of large part of the hierarchy and almost universal apostasy. Thus, anyone who might try to organize imperfect council will necessarily be in small minority and thus be labeled schismatics and marginalized. As to Burke and conservatives in the Novus Ordo Church, they all accept Vatican II and the New Mass, so they don't see (or admit) full gravity of the crisis and might think that Francis and Amoris Laetitia are just another difficult moment in Church history.

Arvinger · « **Reply #82 on:** February 09, 2017, 02:14:21 PM »

Quote from: Stubborn

I will say that no matter what they said, Pope Paul IV said it cannot be done.

And I tell you that deposition of a heretical Pope does not involve judging a valid Pope. Here is the chronological order:

1. Pope falls into formal heresy (by which he loses membership in the Church and thus is no longer a Pope) - the Chair of Peter is already vacant
2. The Church establishes that he is a formal heretic
3. The Church deposes him (i.e. she deposes a non-Catholic heretic who is not a Pope and not even a member of the Church, thus there is no judging of the first see involved).

saintbosco13 · « **Reply #83 on:** February 09, 2017, 07:58:02 PM »

Quote from: Arvinger

Quote from: Stubborn

I will say that no matter what they said, Pope Paul IV said it cannot be done.

And I tell you that deposition of a heretical Pope does not involve judging a valid Pope. Here is the chronological order:

1. Pope falls into formal heresy (by which he loses membership in the Church and thus is no longer a Pope) - the Chair of Peter is already vacant
2. The Church establishes that he is a formal heretic
3. The Church deposes him (i.e. she deposes a non-Catholic heretic who is not a Pope and not even a member of the Church, thus there is no judging of the first see involved).

Well said... At that point a man is being deposed, not a Pope.

Stubborn · « **Reply #84 on:** February 10, 2017, 04:39:25 AM »

Quote from: Arvinger

Quote from: Stubborn

Must be they don't know that St. Robert Bellarmine, John of St. Thomas and many others made it a Church teaching and taught that a heretical Pope can be deposed.

No need for sarcasm. St. Robert Bellarmine, John of St. Thomas and others taught about a hypothetical situation when a Pope falls into heresy and there is orthodox hierarchy to depose him. None of them could have predicted what we experience today - a massive defection from faith of large part of the hierarchy and almost universal apostasy. Thus, anyone who might try to organize imperfect council will necessarily be in small minority and thus be labeled schismatics and marginalized. As to Burke and conservatives in the Novus Ordo Church, they all accept Vatican II and the New Mass, so they don't see (or admit) full gravity of the crisis and might think that Francis and Amoris Laetitia are just another difficult moment in Church history.

Yes, I completely agree - they taught their opinions about a hypothetical situation. This is known as theological speculation, not Church teaching. The cost of theological speculation is finding lead as well as finding gold. This is not my opinion, this is a fact of the nature of theological speculation.

The pope (Paul IV) said "the pope can be judged by none in this world." This IS Church teaching. After he said it, we know better than to attempt to judge the status of the pope - period. He minced no words, he added no exceptions in his statement, he left no provisos, he meant what he said as absolute as he said it.

As pope, in order to stop all speculation in the matter, he prefaced that teaching by first reminding us of the extent of his authority and who he is, saying; the pope is "the representative upon earth of God and our God and Lord Jesus Christ, who holds the fullness of power over peoples and kingdoms..." - It is for this reason that he has no superior on earth - contemplate what this means, because it is for this reason he then says: "...who may judge all and be judged by none in this world".

He then teaches us the only thing anyone can actually do about a pope who is a heretic when he quite explicitly said that, that pope may "be contradicted if he be found to have deviated from the Faith". Again, this is a magisterial teaching of the Catholic Church. After this, no one is left wondering what to do about a heretical pope, we have been given clear direction by our Holy Mother, all speculations and any confusion about what we are expected to do about a heretical pope is over forever.

All we can say as regards the Fathers who speculated the possibility that a heretical pope could be deposed, is that they were behind the times - Rome had already spoken, the case was closed - "Roma locuta; causa finita est".

And this is why your formula for deposing a pope, popular among sedevacantists and others who are behind the times, falls completely apart before it ever gets started, your first point should read: 1. Pope falls into formal heresy ~~(by which he loses membership in the Church and thus is no longer a Pope) - the Chair of Peter is already vacant.~~

Per pope Paul IV, your second and third points are therefore invalid, but per the actual magisterial teaching of the Church, the next point must read: 2. Pope to be contradicted by all of his subjects.

THIS is what the Church actually teaches can be done about heretical popes. This is all She teaches about what can be done about heretical popes.

No speculation, no wondering, no confusing procedures to concoct, absolutely nothing complicated about it at all.

saintbosco13 · « **Reply #85 on:** February 10, 2017, 11:57:28 AM »

Quote from: Stubborn

Quote from: Arvinger
Quote from: Stubborn

Must be they don't know that St. Robert Bellarmine, John of St. Thomas and many others made it a Church teaching and taught that a heretical Pope can be deposed.

No need for sarcasm. St. Robert Bellarmine, John of St. Thomas and others taught about a hypothetical situation when a Pope falls into heresy and there is orthodox hierarchy to depose him. None of them could have predicted what we experience today - a massive defection from faith of large part of the hierarchy and almost universal apostasy. Thus, anyone who might try to organize imperfect council will necessarily be in small minority and thus be labeled schismatics and marginalized. As to Burke and conservatives in the Novus Ordo Church, they all accept Vatican II and the New Mass, so they don't see (or admit) full gravity of the crisis and might think that Francis and Amoris Laetitia are just another difficult moment in Church history.

Yes, I completely agree - they taught their opinions about a hypothetical situation. This is known as theological speculation, not Church teaching. The cost of theological speculation is finding lead as well as finding gold. This is not my opinion, this is a fact of the nature of theological speculation.

The pope (Paul IV) said "the pope can be judged by none in this world." This IS Church teaching. After he said it, we know better than to attempt to judge the status of the pope - period. He minced no words, he added no exceptions in his statement, he left no provisos, he meant what he said as absolute as he said it.

As pope, in order to stop all speculation in the matter, he prefaced that teaching by first reminding us of the extent of his authority and who he is, saying; the pope is "the representative upon earth of God and our God and Lord Jesus Christ, who holds the fullness of power over peoples and kingdoms..." - It is for this reason that he has no superior on earth - contemplate what this means, because it is for this reason he then says: "...who may judge all and be judged by none in this world".

He then teaches us the only thing anyone can actually do about a pope who is a heretic when he quite explicitly said that, that pope may "be contradicted if he be found to have deviated from the Faith". Again, this is a magisterial teaching of the Catholic Church. After this, no one is left wondering what to do about a heretical pope, we have been given clear direction by our Holy Mother, all speculations and any confusion about what we are expected to do about a heretical pope is over forever.

All we can say as regards the Fathers who speculated the possibility that a heretical pope could be deposed, is that they were behind the times - Rome had already spoken, the case was closed - "Roma locuta; causa finita est".

And this is why your formula for deposing a pope, popular among sedevacantists and others who are behind the times, falls completely apart before it ever gets started, your first point should read: 1. Pope falls into formal heresy ~~(by which he loses membership in the Church and thus is no longer a Pope) - the Chair of Peter is already vacant.~~

Per pope Paul IV, your second and third points are therefore invalid, but per the actual magisterial teaching of the Church, the next point must read: 2. Pope to be contradicted by all of his subjects.

THIS is what the Church actually teaches can be done about heretical popes. This is all She teaches about what can be done about heretical popes.

No speculation, no wondering, no confusing procedures to concoct, absolutely nothing complicated about it at all.

Stubborn,

You said that the Church teaching about a hypothetical situation is called "theological speculation", and that "theological speculation is not Church teaching". This same argument can be used against your quoting Pope Paul IV, since he was also writing about a hypothetical situation. Your argument is negated.

Then you again quoted Pope Paul IV in stating that, "the Pope can be judged by none in this world", and trying to come across as the hero, you confirm that this IS Church teaching. Then in the same breath you say that Pope can be contradicted if he has deviated from the faith. Have you not then, judged the Pope? You are arguing in circles!

If you look further down in the SAME docuмent from Pope Paul IV, he confirms that "If the Roman Pontiff, prior to his promotion or his elevation as Cardinal or Roman Pontiff, has deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into some heresy: (i) the promotion or elevation, even if it shall have been uncontested and by the unanimous assent of all the Cardinals, shall be null, void and worthless". This clearly applies to Pope Francis who openly taught heretically before he was even elected Pope. So the man is not Pope even if we use your own source from Pope Paul IV.

Then you again try to come across as an authority on the subject by saying, "this is a magisterial teaching of the Catholic Church", while you at the same time ignore the magisterial teaching of the Catholic Church posted at this link, which consists of magisterial quotes from numerous Popes, Doctors of the Church, and other trusted sources ALL saying a heretical Pope is no longer Pope. You love to boast that you have magisterial teaching behind your arguments, and then you conveniently sweep under the rug the other magisterial arguments against you. You have been blown away in this discussion.

MyrnaM · « **Reply #86 on:** February 10, 2017, 12:16:13 PM »

saintBosco, your post above is excellent, but it annoys me that I can't give you a thumb up anymore since this system won't allow me to do so.

I hate that we can't continue to give a person the credit they deserve, Matthew should abandon that altogether if that be the case.

Arvinger · « **Reply #87 on:** February 10, 2017, 12:17:56 PM »

Quote from: Stubborn

Yes, I completely agree - they taught their opinions about a hypothetical situation. This is known as theological speculation, not Church teaching.

But the fact that a formal heretic is outside the Church and cannot excercise any authority in the Church is most certainly Church's teaching.

Quote from: Stubborn

The pope (Paul IV) said "the pope can be judged by none in this world." This IS Church teaching. After he said it, we know better than to attempt to judge the status of the pope - period. He minced no words, he added no exceptions in his statement, he left no provisos, he meant what he said as absolute as he said it.

That is exactly true and exactly irrelevant, since deposition of a heretical Pope does not include judging a valid Pope, but merely removing a non-Catholic heretic who ceased to be the Pope the moment when he fell into formal heresy.

Quote from: Stubborn

He then teaches us the only thing anyone can actually do about a pope who is a heretic when he quite explicitly said that, that pope may "be contradicted if he be found to have deviated from the Faith". Again, this is a magisterial teaching of the Catholic Church. After this, no one is left wondering what to do about a heretical pope, we have been given clear direction by our Holy Mother, all speculations and any confusion about what we are expected to do about a heretical pope is over forever.

Again, irrelevant, since deposition of a heretic is not judging a Pope - for a heretic is not a Pope. The Church merely recognizes that a heretic placed himself outside the Church and is no longer a Pope.

Quote from: Stubborn

All we can say as regards the Fathers who speculated the possibility that a heretical pope could be deposed, is that they were behind the times - Rome had already spoken, the case was closed - "Roma locuta; causa finita est".

They were not behind the times, all these Saints, Doctors and theologians taught after cuм Ex Apostolatus Officio, and many theologians hold the same opinion after Vatican I - because deposition of a heretic does not involve judging a valid Pope.

Quote from: Stubborn

And this is why your formula for deposing a pope, popular among sedevacantists and others who are behind the times, falls completely apart before it ever gets started, your first point should read: 1. Pope falls into formal heresy ~~(by which he loses membership in the Church and thus is no longer a Pope) - the Chair of Peter is already vacant.~~

No, your argument falls apart completely at the beginning, because you do not recognize that a formal heretic is outside the Church. It is not the Church who removes him from the office, he removes himself from the office through heresy. The Church with her declaration only recognizes this fact.

Quote from: Stubborn

Per pope Paul IV, your second and third points are therefore invalid, but per the actual magisterial teaching of the Church, the next point must read: 2. Pope to be contradicted by all of his subjects.

Again, a formal heretic is not a Pope, no judging of a Pope is involved in deposition of a heretic.

Quote from: Stubborn

THIS is what the Church actually teaches can be done about heretical popes. This is all She teaches about what can be done about heretical popes.

No, this is what you quoted is what a Church teaches about a true Pope. A formal heretic is not a Pope, and thus can be deposed.

It is ironic that on this issue you agree with sedevacantist Mario Derksen from Novus Ordo Watch and you are against majority of R&R Traditionalists. Here Salza and Siscoe argue against your position:
http://www.trueorfalsepope.com/p/sedevacantistwatch-novusordowatch.html

Stubborn · « **Reply #88 on:** February 10, 2017, 12:35:30 PM »

Quote from: saintbosco13

Stubborn,

You said that the Church teaching about a hypothetical situation is called "theological speculation", and that "theological speculation is not Church teaching". This same argument can be used against your quoting Pope Paul IV, since he was also writing about a hypothetical situation. Your argument is negated.

It is no argument, all I did was quote the explicit teaching of a pope, which is at least odd that sedevacantists, of all people, argue against the teaching of the pope as a rule.

Quote from: saintbosco13

Then you again quoted Pope Paul IV in stating that, "the Pope can be judged by none in this world", and trying to come across as the hero, you confirm that this IS Church teaching. Then in the same breath you say that Pope can be contradicted if he has deviated from the faith. Have you not then, judged the Pope? You are arguing in circles!

You must have failed to notice that in the same breath, it's not me, rather it is *the pope* that says a pope may be contradicted if he has deviated from the faith - in your misdirected zeal to correct me, you are arguing that the pope is "arguing in circles."

Quote from: saintbosco13

If you look further down in the SAME docuмent from Pope Paul IV, he confirms that "If the Roman Pontiff, prior to his promotion or his elevation as Cardinal or Roman Pontiff, has deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into some heresy: (i) the promotion or elevation, even if it shall have been uncontested and by the unanimous assent of all the Cardinals, shall be null, void and worthless". This clearly applies to Pope Francis who openly taught heretically before he was even elected Pope. So the man is not Pope even if we use your own source from Pope Paul IV.

Yes, that is the only part that the sedevacantists ever zoom in on as they seemingly ignore every other teaching in there. Now, in order to know what our responsibility in the matter actually is, you have to go back to the part where the pope teaches that the only thing we can do about a heretic pope who is no pope, is contradict him. Not depose him. There is no Catholic teaching giving anyone the right to depose a pope, not even Richard Ibranyi - and he has docuмented proof of the heresies of popes and cardinals going back 887 years!

Stubborn · « **Reply #89 on:** February 10, 2017, 12:41:29 PM »

Quote from: Arvinger

Quote from: Stubborn

Yes, I completely agree - they taught their opinions about a hypothetical situation. This is known as theological speculation, not Church teaching.

But the fact that a formal heretic is outside the Church and cannot excercise any authority in the Church is most certainly Church's teaching.

You do not understand what you are trying to communicate. Because your foundation falls apart before the starting gate, everything is irrelevant, which is to say, the magisterial teaching of the pope is irrelevant.