Author Topic: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?  (Read 2877 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline forlorn

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1806
  • Reputation: +717/-1007
  • Gender: Male
Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
« Reply #30 on: October 12, 2019, 07:39:41 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Unfortunately for you, the pope did not say "the man elected in instantly the true pope, but if you don't believe me, or if you need further verification, then you can confirm or reject my directive by using the idea of universal peaceful acceptance so as to give everyone the ability to decide for themself".

    Fortunately for me, I accept the directive of the pope as written as being entirely sufficient to give certainty of who the pope is and have no need for other verification.
    The man elected is instantly the true pope, yes, but just because the news tells you an election took place doesn't mean that election was actually valid. Anti-pope Clement VII was elected by real cardinals with much pomp and circumstance, and half of Europe would've told you that he was the validly elected true pope. Was he? Clearly not. You need to determine if an election was actually valid, which is not something your quote will help you with because that's not what it's even about. You just throw that quote out in every single thread without a single clue as to what it's actually referring to, and then act as if "the pope is the pope" is actually a useful or meaningful statement at all.

    The full quote, including the part that you ALWAYS cut out because it doesn't suit your agenda is:
    Quote
    After this agreement has been furnished within a time limit to be determined by the prudent judgment of the Cardinals by a majority of votes (to the extent it is necessary), the man elected is instantly the true Pope, and he acquires and can exercise full and absolute jurisdiction over the whole world . Hence, if anyone dares to challenge the documents prepared in regard to any business whatsoever that comes from the Roman Pontiff before the coronation, We bind him with the censure of excommunication to be incurred ipso facto
    Earlier in this thread you had the audacity to call me a liar because the quotes "doesn't mention coronation" at all, when it was you who cut that part out. The quote in full context is clearly addressing the issue of "when does the pope gain his jurisdiction - upon election or coronation?" and not "how do you know who the pope is?". 

    Offline Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 10179
    • Reputation: +4006/-960
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #31 on: October 12, 2019, 08:44:41 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The man elected is instantly the true pope, yes, but just because the news tells you an election took place doesn't mean that election was actually valid. Anti-pope Clement VII was elected by real cardinals with much pomp and circumstance, and half of Europe would've told you that he was the validly elected true pope. Was he? Clearly not. You need to determine if an election was actually valid, which is not something your quote will help you with because that's not what it's even about. You just throw that quote out in every single thread without a single clue as to what it's actually referring to, and then act as if "the pope is the pope" is actually a useful or meaningful statement at all.
    First off, the presumption is the conclave voted according to the law. That is the presumption. If you wish to continue to accuse the conclave, then you need to produce proof the election is illegal and submit to the hierarchy. Whether or not it did any good does not matter because you did your part.

    But you cannot do that, but that doesn't matter to you, but it matters to me. What you have to do is for the Church to determine if the conclave was invalid, until then, it was valid and Francis is the true pope. You do not like this, all I can say is too bad for you.

    Clement VII is ambiguous to our situation. He was elected by French cardinals only, not all of the cardinals, and there were other men claiming to be popes at that time. Either way, it was the Church that sorted the mess out, not sedevacantists. You also make a good case against the universal acceptance idea with your "half of Europe would've told you that he was the validly elected true pope".



    Quote
    The full quote, including the part that you ALWAYS cut out because it doesn't suit your agenda is:
    Quote
    Quote
    After this agreement has been furnished within a time limit to be determined by the prudent judgment of the Cardinals by a majority of votes (to the extent it is necessary), the man elected is instantly the true Pope, and he acquires and can exercise full and absolute jurisdiction over the whole world . Hence, if anyone dares to challenge the documents prepared in regard to any business whatsoever that comes from the Roman Pontiff before the coronation, We bind him with the censure of excommunication to be incurred ipso facto
    It fits "my agenda" perfectly. I am not the one challenging the documents, you are.When it comes to this subject, you are crazy.
    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man." - Fr. Hesse


    Offline forlorn

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1806
    • Reputation: +717/-1007
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #32 on: October 12, 2019, 08:56:42 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • First off, the presumption is the conclave voted according to the law. That is the presumption. If you wish to continue to accuse the conclave, then you need to produce proof the election is illegal and submit to the hierarchy. Whether or not it did any good does not matter because you did your part.

    But you cannot do that, but that doesn't matter to you, but it matters to me. What you have to do is for the Church to determine if the conclave was invalid, until then, it was valid and Francis is the true pope. You do not like this, all I can say is too bad for you.


    And who does this? Right, the pope. And Clement would've told you that Urban's election was invalid due to the Roman riots putting the cardinals under duress. Urban would likewise tell you that Clement's election was invalid because he himself had already been validly elected. How was a Catholic meant to know who was right based off that? They couldn't. Just telling people "whoever is elected pope is pope" doesn't tell you who the pope is, because it doesn't tell you if the election was actually valid in the first place.

    It fits "my agenda" perfectly. I am not the one challenging the documents, you are.When it comes to this subject, you are crazy.

    You were the one cutting off half the quote and then saying it had nothing to do with coronation, so yes clearly you are challenging the documents. As the part you cut off clearly shows, the quote is about when the pope obtains his jurisdiction, not how you determine who the pope is as you claimed.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 21236
    • Reputation: +11721/-6016
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #33 on: October 12, 2019, 09:05:09 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Here's how I answer the question posted by the OP.

    I pretend that I'm living during the reign of Pope Pius XII, say, in 1950.  Is there a Catholic anywhere in the world who thinks that Pius XII is not Pope?  There's no dispute, no disagreement, no doubt, just peace of mind and calm regarding this identity.

    Is this really what we have with Jorge Bergoglio ... when some even in the Novus Ordo are wondering if he's Catholic?

    Examples of there NOT being universal peaceful acceptance?  We have that of the so-called "Western" Schism.

    Are we closer to the Pius XII scenario or to the Schism?

    Clearly to the latter.

    Offline Clemens Maria

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1394
    • Reputation: +888/-443
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #34 on: October 12, 2019, 09:08:29 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The case of Pope Leo V:

    http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09159b.htm

    https://archive.org/details/thelivesofthepop01platuoft/page/n269

    It is supposed that Leo was universally and peacefully accepted, otherwise why would the Roman Pontifical list him as the 118th pope?  Is that a dogmatic fact?  But if it was a dogmatic fact, how did Christopher get possession of the Roman See after he put Leo in prison?  Prior to 1961 (John XXIII), Christopher was listed in the Roman Pontifical as a true pope.  So what does dogmatic fact mean?  If the history of the papacy doesn't support the definition of dogmatic fact as proposed by the R&R folks, how do the R&R folks handle that?  Do they just dismiss out of hand any contrary evidence?

    And it gets worse, Sergius III was elected in opposition to Christopher (and presumably Leo too since he was still alive in prison) and according to some, Sergius put both Leo and Christopher to death.  The Roman Pontifical (prior to 1961) listed all three of them as true popes.  Leo -> Christopher -> Sergius.  I'm not sure how the dogmatic fact theory can fit with this evidence.  I guess you could deny that there was universal peaceful acceptance of Leo.  But I could deny that there is universal peaceful acceptance of Frank.  Not even the entire Novus Ordo hierarchy accepts him as a true pope.  Is your opinion that there is universal peaceful acceptance of Frank also a dogmatic fact?  Also, is it a dogmatic fact that the Novus Ordo hierarchy is the hierarchy of the Catholic Church?  If it is, then Religious Liberty and Ecumenism and "for many" are also universally peacefully accepted.  And if there isn't universal peaceful acceptance, Frank can remedy that by excommunicating those who don't peacefully accept him.  Problem solved?

    Or how about this case?:

    John XII -> Antipope Leo VIII (Leone) -> John XII (same J12) -> Benedict V -> (now true pope but same guy as antipope) Leo VIII

    Figure that one out.

    Or how about the case of Pope St. Eugene I?:

    http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05598a.htm

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Eugene_I

    https://archive.org/details/thelivesofthepop01platuoft/page/n181

    He was universally peacefully accepted by the entire hierarchy of the Church.  Except there was one problem.  His predecessor, Pope Martin I was still alive and in prison and had not abdicated!  The Roman Pontifical has Pope SAINT Eugene I ascending to the papacy a full year after he had been universally and peacefully accepted by the hierarchy.  Not until after Pope Martin I died in prison did he officially become the pope.  So when did it become a dogmatic fact that Pope Eugene was the true pope?

    So you dogmatic facters have some explaining to do.  How can you in good conscience call traditionalists heretics for not believing that it is a dogmatic fact that Frank the Clown is the pope?  I'm a heretic for not believing that a manifest heretic is a pope?  That's rich!


    Offline forlorn

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1806
    • Reputation: +717/-1007
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #35 on: October 12, 2019, 09:10:35 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Here's how I answer the question posted by the OP.

    I pretend that I'm living during the reign of Pope Pius XII, say, in 1950.  Is there a Catholic anywhere in the world who thinks that Pius XII is not Pope?  There's no dispute, no disagreement, no doubt, just peace of mind and calm regarding this identity.

    Is this really what we have with Jorge Bergoglio ... when some even in the Novus Ordo are wondering if he's Catholic?
    To play devil's advocate, the Old Catholics would assert there certainly was dispute and disagreement.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 21236
    • Reputation: +11721/-6016
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #36 on: October 12, 2019, 09:10:59 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Let's take the current case of one Jorge Bergoglio.

    We have a small group of Novus Ordo Cardinals who called him out for heresy regarding communion for those living in sin.  What was it, about 6 of them?  Now, clearly these men are objectively correct, that Jorge's teaching is in fact heretical.

    Where are the other hundreds of Cardinals and thousands of bishops.  Silent.  Why?  It's either because they themselves are heretics who agree with Bergoglio or they are too pusillanimous so speak up or they just don't care about things like doctrine.

    Let's say that Bergoglio IS in fact a heretic, and these Cardinals are correct.  How do you get rid of him ever if 99% of the putative hierarchy are either in lock step with him or worthless cowards?

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 21236
    • Reputation: +11721/-6016
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #37 on: October 12, 2019, 09:12:37 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • To play devil's advocate, the Old Catholics would assert there certainly was dispute and disagreement.

    Well, that was a different era.  Which is why I used Pius XII.  Now, I'm not sure the Old Catholics ever questioned that he was the Pope.  They just didn't accept his teaching.  I'm not sure that's the same thing.

    Now, let's say that the Old Catholics had gone all sedevacante, and argued that Pius IX was no longer pope due to being guilty of heresy on the infallibility question.  Their opinion would not matter, since they would have been heretics.  That's similar to how I feel about the vast majority of the Novus Ordo hierarchy who refuse to reject Bergoglio as a non-Catholic.  Why should their opinion be taken into any more account than that of, say, these hypothetical sedevacantist Old Catholics?


    Offline Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 10179
    • Reputation: +4006/-960
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #38 on: October 12, 2019, 09:14:13 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • So you dogmatic facters have some explaining to do.  How can you in good conscience call traditionalists heretics for not believing that it is a dogmatic fact that Frank the Clown is the pope?  I'm a heretic for not believing that a manifest heretic is a pope?  That's rich!
    I agree with this.
    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man." - Fr. Hesse

    Offline forlorn

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1806
    • Reputation: +717/-1007
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #39 on: October 12, 2019, 09:19:53 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Well, that was a different era.  Which is why I used Pius XII.  Now, I'm not sure the Old Catholics ever questioned that he was the Pope.  They just didn't accept his teaching.  I'm not sure that's the same thing.

    Now, let's say that the Old Catholics had gone all sedevacante, and argued that Pius IX was no longer pope due to being guilty of heresy on the infallibility question.  Their opinion would not matter, since they would have been heretics.  That's similar to how I feel about the vast majority of the Novus Ordo hierarchy who refuse to reject Bergoglio as a non-Catholic.  Why should their opinion be taken into any more account than that of, say, these hypothetical sedevacantist Old Catholics?
    Well I mean, they were still around during Pius XII's reign - and even today, for that matter(although their beliefs and practices have changed wildly since - they're a good example of "know a tree by its fruits", with their female priests and unity with Protestants).

    But anyway, Old Catholics as they were in the wake of the First Vatican Council believed every dogma the Church taught UNTIL V1. So a sedevacantist Old Catholic back then would've been in the exact same boat as a modern sedevacantist who calls V2 a false council.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 21236
    • Reputation: +11721/-6016
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #40 on: October 12, 2019, 09:22:08 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Well, those are interesting case studies, Clemens.

    Now, I am in fact a dogmatic facter, in the sense that it's logically (theologically) certain that the legitimacy of a pope must be dogmatically certain, or else nothing they define as dogma can be dogmatically certain.

    What's at issue is what criterion determines whether the legitimacy of any given pope is dogmatic fact.  It has always been held to be universal peaceful acceptance, but I will read up on and consider the case studies you posted.

    But even while upholding universal peaceful acceptance, I do not consider rejecting Bergoglio to be heresy, since he decidedly lacks such universal peaceful acceptance by Catholics.


    Offline Clemens Maria

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1394
    • Reputation: +888/-443
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #41 on: October 12, 2019, 09:24:36 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Well, those are interesting case studies, Clemens.

    Now, I am in fact a dogmatic facter, in the sense that it's logically (theologically) certain that the legitimacy of a pope must be dogmatically certain, or else nothing they define as dogma can be dogmatically certain.

    What's at issue is what criterion determines whether the legitimacy of any given pope is dogmatic fact.  It has always been held to be universal peaceful acceptance, but I will read up on and consider the case studies you posted.

    But even while upholding universal peaceful acceptance, I do not consider rejecting Bergoglio to be heresy, since he decidedly lacks such universal peaceful acceptance by Catholics.
    And who decides that the criteria are met and is that decision also a dogmatic fact?

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 21236
    • Reputation: +11721/-6016
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #42 on: October 12, 2019, 09:29:19 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Perhaps the answer is that John of St. Thomas did not correctly think through the quoad se vs. quoad nos distinction.

    If a Pope were elected and universally accepted, then he's Pope by dogmatic fact.  When a subsequent man comes along, deposes him, puts him in jail, assumes the See with new "universal acceptance", the universal acceptance means nothing, for the quoad nos cannot override the quoad se.  No subsequent universal acceptance of another man can cause the deposition of the original pope, for that would be a flavor of Conciliarism, where the Church can effectively depose popes.

    Offline Clemens Maria

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1394
    • Reputation: +888/-443
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #43 on: October 12, 2019, 09:33:05 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Perhaps the answer is that John of St. Thomas did not correctly think through the quoad se vs. quoad nos distinction.

    If a Pope were elected and universally accepted, then he's Pope by dogmatic fact.  When a subsequent man comes along, deposes him, puts him in jail, assumes the See with new "universal acceptance", the universal acceptance means nothing, for the quoad nos cannot override the quoad se.  No subsequent universal acceptance of another man can cause the deposition of the original pope, for that would be a flavor of Conciliarism, where the Church can effectively depose popes.
    That effectively nullifies the whole purpose of asserting universal peaceful acceptance.  The underlying premise is that if the hierarchy couldn't be assured of being attached to the true pope, they could become separated from him.  But history shows that this has in fact happened.  I can't remember which pope during the GWS (maybe Pope Martin V?) was almost universally not accepted as the true pope.  And yet he was the true pope!

    Offline Clemens Maria

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1394
    • Reputation: +888/-443
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #44 on: October 12, 2019, 09:34:11 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Could be the Pope Siri theory is true, right?


     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16