CathInfo.com

If there has been no pope since John XXIII or Paul VI then there are no more bishops with jurisdiction which means no more apostolicity which is one of the four marks of the Church. This is heretical.

Let's avoid this for now and return to Father Chazal's position.  While I disagree, and believe that this objection (that of "ecclesiavacantism") has been adequately addressed by the SVs, I don't want to reopen this debate on this thread.

please provide a source for your contention that all the sees being vacant at the same time is equivalent to an end to the mark of apostolicity for the Church.

Thank you. I've been asking this same question for years and I still haven't gotten a reply. All you get is a statement that it is dogma that the Church will always have a hierarchy. I agree, and the Church has a hierarchy now as well. It has an authority structure and a government and a means of teaching infallibly. It is just that those functions are not operative in the Church right now (which is something we all agree on, anyway, since nobody here treats what they call the hierarchy now as if they were the hierarchy) because those offices are vacant.

But a specific doctrinal definition that there will always be someone, somewhere holding the office of ordinary in the Church -- that is the R&R's "missing link" argument. They're sure it's out there; it has to be! Because their system doesn't work if it isn't. And one of these days they're going to find it!

Oh, and as I implied above, any argument that someone would want to make about why there has to be someone out there with jurisdiction would also have to explain how they are able to disobey such a person that they claim has jurisdiction, since that truly is a dogma of the Church, that Catholics must obey the hierarchy both in discipline and doctrine.

But, this is not what he said.  The Pope is the Vicar of Christ on earth not the King of England.  This is a significant distinction which changes your example to not exactly being Catholic at all.  St. Thomas More was, “the King’s good servant, but God’s first.”  And we all know that he was a martyr because of this, for being subject to God in His Vicar of Christ on earth, the Pope.

Yes, the pope is not the king of England, the pope is the vicar of Christ on earth, not Christ Himself - Who *is* the head of the Church - which is why we owe our obedience to Him before anyone else. Very simple. 

It's the principle involved that is wholly Catholic and it's that principle as Catholics that applies to all aspects each and every day of our lives. I could give a million examples but prefer to hope you already understand it.

It's this simple: God always comes first because we will stand before God, not the pope. We will answer to God not the pope, hence the need to remain God's good subject before anyone else's. It is because God comes first that we do not follow anyone who will not leads us to Him no matter who it is, especially when we know they are leading everyone who chooses to follow them down the path to hell. And remember - those who follow choose to do so of their own free will, they are not forced into it. No matter how you look at it, their obedience to God is misplaced - whether knowingly or unknowingly we cannot say with certainty, but that it is misplaced we can say with certainty.

Because we are obedient to God first, and knowing they are leading the followers to hell, it makes no difference if he's not a pope, actually a pope, or an angel from heaven re: Gal 1:8.