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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 23

Author Topic: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?  (Read 31385 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
« Reply #75 on: October 21, 2019, 01:57:55 PM »
Quote
We have case studies where the Universal Church got it materially wrong down the road.
Let's face it:  The major pushers of this exaggerated UA theory are the sedes, who in their rabid quest to destroy anyone who sees the world differently, view UA in an extreme way, and use it as a "gotcha" test.  They want to trap Trads into a false dichotomy where you either reject a V2 pope right off the bat, or you have to accept him for a lifetime...no ifs, ands, or buts (as is usual with their over-simplistic thinking).  No theologian worth his salt would define UA in such a rigid manner.  
Logged

Offline Clemens Maria

Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
« Reply #76 on: October 21, 2019, 02:08:57 PM »
Quote from: Pax Vobis on October 21, 2019, 01:47:43 PM
The case of Anacletus II vs Innocent II is not like what we have today.  In that example, there were 2 different elections, by 2 different groups of Cardinals.  I don't know how anyone can say that it is an example of "universal acceptance".
.
Not a single Cardinal disputes the election of JPII or Benedict.  (John XXIII, with the white smoke, and Francis, with Benedict's abdication are a different story).
And, by the way, Innocent, Anacletus, and Victor were all CATHOLIC as were the Cardinals who supported them.  But now we are supposed to believe that the support/acceptance of the hierarchy of the non-Catholic Conciliar sect is a dogmatic guarantee of the legitimacy of a non-Catholic's election to the papacy.  The Conciliar hierarchy has not consecrated a valid bishop in the Roman Rite since 1969 at the latest.  And, Sean, a doubtful sacrament must be treated as if it were certainly invalid.  You can't risk the salvation of souls when you have a well-reasoned positive doubt.
Logged

Offline Clemens Maria

Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
« Reply #77 on: October 21, 2019, 02:12:18 PM »
Quote from: Pax Vobis on October 21, 2019, 01:57:55 PM
Let's face it:  The major pushers of this exaggerated UA theory are the sedes, who in their rabid quest to destroy anyone who sees the world differently, view UA in an extreme way, and use it as a "gotcha" test.  They want to trap Trads into a false dichotomy where you either reject a V2 pope right off the bat, or you have to accept him for a lifetime...no ifs, ands, or buts (as is usual with their over-simplistic thinking).  No theologian worth his salt would define UA in such a rigid manner.  
I can't believe how stupid you are.  No sede is pushing universal acceptance of Conciliar popes.  Who are the people pushing it here on CathInfo?  It's XavierSem, Praeter, Salsa and Disco.  All SSPX people.  Get your head out of your ass!
Logged

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
« Reply #78 on: October 21, 2019, 02:13:24 PM »
Quote from: Pax Vobis on October 21, 2019, 01:52:33 PM
Stubborn, you're looking at this the wrong way.  Universal Acceptance (UA) is not a NECESSARY criterion for a papal election.  If it was, then a papal conclave would have to have a unanimous vote.  But a conclave only requires 2/3rds at first, and then after a few days, the majority needed declines.
.
But, UA is a POSITIVE aspect which shows the pope is the pope.  If a pope does not have UA, he could still be the pope; it depends on what the opposing side is disputing.  If they simply just don't like him, that's not a valid dispute.
I personally can't see where UA can possibly be a criterion for anything since all it is, is everyone saying they agree that the pope is the pope. "He must be the pope, after all, everyone says so" makes no sense. Any more than "he might not be pope because we all cannot agree on it" makes any sense.  

Imaginative theories and far out conspiracy theories aside, the pope's death or resignation are the only universally accepted ways to know with dogmatic certainty when there is *not* a pope, otherwise, the default goes to whoever gets elected and accepts the election, that guy is the pope.

 
Logged

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
« Reply #79 on: October 21, 2019, 02:42:13 PM »
1.  I don't think that UA is determined by the laity, or priests, since they have no business in electing him.
2.  It would be determined by the Cardinals, and if they accept him, then it's a sign he's the pope, since it's their job to elect him to begin with.
3.  The fact that many theologians, including +Bellarmine, say that the Cardinals would declare a pope a heretic, gives some credence to the fact that they have the highest priority in all of this.
4.  Regarding +Francis, we already know that 4-5 Cardinals signed the "dubia" letter, as a sign that there is not UA concerning his orthodoxy.  I do not know if there are any Cardinals who think that +Benedict's resignation is null.
5.  I don't think any Trads have to worry about proving any V2 popes were not elected (except for sedes).  I'm perfectly fine with the theory that they were validly elected, but immediately spiritually impaired due to heresy (either before or after the election, and most likely, both).
6.  UA is not really important, for our present situation.  What matters more is the litmus test of orthodoxy, which all V2 popes fail in miserably.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 23
« previous next »