Author Topic: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?  (Read 2873 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ByzCat3000

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1095
  • Reputation: +244/-89
  • Gender: Male
What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
« on: October 10, 2019, 07:26:11 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Ladislaus said the following on another thread:


    Quote
    Indeed, the dogmatic fact of papal legitimacy must be known a priori from some external criterion.  Theologians all agree that this criterion is the universal peaceful acceptance of the Church.  Question is whether such universal peaceful acceptance exists or existed in the case of the V2 papal claimants.  Now, the other thing is that there are OTHER possible explanations for what happened with Vatican II and the New Mass.  Could Paul VI have been blackmailed (on account of, say, his alleged homosexual activities)?  That too would have rendered any forced acts of his null and void.  We just don't know.

    With regard to Universal Acceptance, what happens in situations where the vast majority of the "Church" have succumbed to the same errors as the papal claimant?  When 90%+ of the Conciliar establishment are heretics (as demonstrated by their own polls), then how they heck can that count for anything?

    I still have questions about this.  How much dissent do you need to have before its really not universal anymore?  Why do only trads matter, and what exactly counts as a trad? (I could see only counting those who hold to all the dogmas, but the majority of those would still be Novus Ordo, even though the majority of Novus Ordos would not be included, if that makes sense.)  On the flip side, how do we *know* that the ordinary magisterium is as airtight as Novus Ordites and Sedevacantists think it is?  Usually sites like Novus Ordo Watch cite recent theology manuals, but what if most of the Church has been wrong about even this since Vatican *I* and it really takes centuries of consensus to really know for sure?

    I welcome any other thoughts anyone (who actually wants a discussion) has.  I'm not sure this is a completed thought.  I just wanted to basically pick this up somewhere besides a thread where the OP has asked to be closed.

    Offline Clemens Maria

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1394
    • Reputation: +888/-443
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #1 on: October 10, 2019, 08:35:03 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!2
  • If you have love for ecclesiastical authority/jurisdiction, you have only 2 choices.  Either Frank is the pope and you obey him and don’t worry about your salvation.  Or Frank isn’t the pope and you don’t worry about recognizing him or his minions. Anything else is lukewarm/straddling the fence/worthless hedging.  You don’t systematically resist the Vicar of Christ unless you have a death wish.


    Offline Clemens Maria

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1394
    • Reputation: +888/-443
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #2 on: October 10, 2019, 08:39:34 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • These same people who want you to resist the Vicar of Christ* have no authority whatsoever.  It’s not rocket science.

    * in their minds

    Offline Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 10179
    • Reputation: +4006/-960
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #3 on: October 11, 2019, 07:43:11 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Ladislaus said the following on another thread:


    I still have questions about this.  How much dissent do you need to have before its really not universal anymore?  Why do only trads matter, and what exactly counts as a trad? (I could see only counting those who hold to all the dogmas, but the majority of those would still be Novus Ordo, even though the majority of Novus Ordos would not be included, if that makes sense.)  On the flip side, how do we *know* that the ordinary magisterium is as airtight as Novus Ordites and Sedevacantists think it is?  Usually sites like Novus Ordo Watch cite recent theology manuals, but what if most of the Church has been wrong about even this since Vatican *I* and it really takes centuries of consensus to really know for sure?

    I welcome any other thoughts anyone (who actually wants a discussion) has.  I'm not sure this is a completed thought.  I just wanted to basically pick this up somewhere besides a thread where the OP has asked to be closed.
    I just want to say that you have good questions, and also this actually is not at all complicated, but the way the term is used makes it so.

    Whenever the Church speak of "Universal", She is referring to all those things which applies and has applied always (since the time of the Apostles) and everywhere to everyone. So in this sense, "Universal" cannot be applied to what Lad is talking about as it is not possible for the Universal Church to have a Universal Acceptance of the election of the pope, much less use it as a criterion for infallible proof that the pope is indeed the pope.

    That being said, there is the Universal Church. Sin is a Universal transgression against God. The Universal Mission of the Church is to save souls. The Universal Magisterium are those teachings which the Church has always (since the time of the Apostles) taught. And so on. Then there is the Universal body of the Church Militant - note that in this instance, it applies only to all of the living. So if Lad's idea were to said in an understandable manner, it would have to say something along the lines of: "The universal body of cardinals or perhaps the universal body of bishops or ? must peacefully accept..."         

    Then there is this, as Pope Pius IX states: we owe our religious assent to certain points of doctrine that have "The common and constant consent of theologians as being of the faith" - which means simply that certain points of doctrine enjoy the nearly unanimous approval or consent of the Fathers since the time of the Apostles.

    So saying that "the dogmatic fact of papal legitimacy must be known a priori from some external criterion. Theologians all agree that this criterion is the universal peaceful acceptance of the Church" is not only terribly confusing, it's terribly misleading and at least inadequate.
     
    The external criterion he looks for, is right in the Conclave's Legislation where it plainly states that "the man elected is instantly the true Pope, and he acquires and can exercise full and absolute jurisdiction over the whole world". Nothing complicated here.


    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 SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6239
    • Reputation: +4934/-1810
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #4 on: October 11, 2019, 07:56:28 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • “Universal” pertains to the moral unanimity of bishops accepting the legitimacy and authority of a papal claimant.

    “Universality” is a different concept pertaining to teachings of the ordinary magisterium extending over time and geographic space (Sedes dispute that universality of time constitutes a criteria of true magisterial teaching, because they say all teachings of popes are magisterial, whereas R&R distinguish between UOM and the merely “authentic” magisterium, in which are contained all magisterial teachings lacking universality of time, like V2; tge UOM being binding; the authentic magisterium not being binding).

    Just want to be sure we don’t mix the two concepts in order to steer clear of confusion.
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-


    Offline forlorn

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1806
    • Reputation: +717/-1007
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #5 on: October 11, 2019, 08:16:05 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    the man elected is instantly the true Pope, and he acquires and can exercise full and absolute jurisdiction over the whole world.

    This quote taken as you read it, Stubborn, would be entirely redundant. The man who's elected pope is pope - duh! It doesn't address the issue of whether or not the election was actually valid. So it's an entirely pointless statement if you interpret it as some test to tell if the man claiming to be pope actually is.

    The quote is actually about when the pope gets his authority - it's a correction of people who believed the pope only gains his authority upon coronation rather than election.

    Offline Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 10179
    • Reputation: +4006/-960
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #6 on: October 11, 2019, 08:57:58 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • This quote taken as you read it, Stubborn, would be entirely redundant. The man who's elected pope is pope - duh! It doesn't address the issue of whether or not the election was actually valid. So it's an entirely pointless statement if you interpret it as some test to tell if the man claiming to be pope actually is.

    The quote is actually about when the pope gets his authority - it's a correction of people who believed the pope only gains his authority upon coronation rather than election.
    No, it is about the election, just exactly as it says. It's about the coronation? Seriously? He gets his authority when he accepts the election, which is before his coronation.

    Being as how we don't even know what goes on behind closed doors, we certainly don't know what went on or goes on in the conclave, the presumption is that they adhered to the legislation therefore the election is valid, unless you can prove otherwise - which you can't do. Because you can't prove otherwise, "the man elected in instantly the true pope", as Pope St. Pius X said.
     
    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 ByzCat3000

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1095
    • Reputation: +244/-89
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #7 on: October 11, 2019, 09:41:53 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I did forget, but I understand that some posters here, like Stubborn, do not accept the universal peaceful acceptance criteria at all.  That’s fine and maybe they’re right.  But I was asking particularly because of a discussion between two people who did accept it, but interpreted it differently


    Offline forlorn

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1806
    • Reputation: +717/-1007
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #8 on: October 11, 2019, 10:24:39 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • No, it is about the election, just exactly as it says. It's about the coronation? Seriously? He gets his authority when he accepts the election, which is before his coronation.

    Being as how we don't even know what goes on behind closed doors, we certainly don't know what went on or goes on in the conclave, the presumption is that they adhered to the legislation therefore the election is valid, unless you can prove otherwise - which you can't do. Because you can't prove otherwise, "the man elected in instantly the true pope", as Pope St. Pius X said.
     
    Thank you for repeating my own words back to me???

    Offline Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 10179
    • Reputation: +4006/-960
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #9 on: October 11, 2019, 10:43:40 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Thank you for repeating my own words back to me???
    You will *never* solve your problem.
    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 Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 10179
    • Reputation: +4006/-960
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #10 on: October 11, 2019, 11:17:26 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • I did forget, but I understand that some posters here, like Stubborn, do not accept the universal peaceful acceptance criteria at all.  That’s fine and maybe they’re right.  But I was asking particularly because of a discussion between two people who did accept it, but interpreted it differently
    It's not that I don't accept it, it's that the term "universal peaceful acceptance" is in itself unacceptable because it does not exist. If it does, then what is it?

    At the same time, why doesn't the pope's words saying that the man elected "is instantly the true pope" do what they are intended to do, namely, settle the matter?
    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 ByzCat3000

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1095
    • Reputation: +244/-89
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #11 on: October 11, 2019, 12:30:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It's not that I don't accept it, it's that the term "universal peaceful acceptance" is in itself unacceptable because it does not exist. If it does, then what is it?

    At the same time, why doesn't the pope's words saying that the man elected "is instantly the true pope" do what they are intended to do, namely, settle the matter?
    The first bit is exactly what I’m trying
    To figure out.  Like even if we exclude the Professing Catholics who knowingly deny dogmas, we are still looking at 50 million or so novus ordo Catholics who at least never doubted the pre Francis conciliar popes, vs maybe a couple million trads, tops, some of which have probably never doubted them but most of whom probably have.  Is that really not universal acceptance?  Idk.

    The second part is easy.  How is that order from Pius XII infallible?  Also it doesn’t answer certain ridiculous possibilities.  What if the conclave literally elected Osama bin laden instead of Benedict XVI?  Would he really be eligible to take the office because of Pius X words? 

    Offline SimpleMan

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 607
    • Reputation: +223/-51
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #12 on: October 11, 2019, 12:42:40 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Indeed, the dogmatic fact of papal legitimacy must be known a priori from some external criterion.  Theologians all agree that this criterion is the universal peaceful acceptance of the Church.

    Never heard this before.  I thought that the criterion was that the College of Cardinals (or whatever other mechanism the Church might use to select a pope) elects a male Catholic, he accepts, and he becomes pope.  No assent of the faithful required.  Nice, but not necessary.

    Offline Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 10179
    • Reputation: +4006/-960
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #13 on: October 11, 2019, 12:56:53 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The first bit is exactly what I’m trying
    To figure out.  Like even if we exclude the Professing Catholics who knowingly deny dogmas, we are still looking at 50 million or so novus ordo Catholics who at least never doubted the pre Francis conciliar popes, vs maybe a couple million trads, tops, some of which have probably never doubted them but most of whom probably have.  Is that really not universal acceptance?  Idk.

    The second part is easy.  How is that order from Pius XII infallible?  Also it doesn’t answer certain ridiculous possibilities.  What if the conclave literally elected Osama bin laden instead of Benedict XVI?  Would he really be eligible to take the office because of Pius X words?
    The first bit is a theological opinion which in all likelihood, is termed incorrectly on this forum, the only thing that is certain about it, is that it is not a teaching of the Church.

    We presume the election is valid and carried out in accordance per the legislation mandated by the pope unless proven otherwise. Full stop. As such, the man elected is the true pope.
    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 SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6239
    • Reputation: +4934/-1810
    • Gender: Male
    Re: What is Universal Peaceful Acceptance?
    « Reply #14 on: October 11, 2019, 01:13:44 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The part I don’t get is why there is any confusion about universal acceptance.

    The theologians who used the term explained what it was (moral unanimity among the bishops), yet some still declare their mystification?

    I’m also confused by Stubborn’s position that a papacy is a dogmatic fact, but contrary to the unanimous opinion of approved theologians who opine that it is this consent which imparts to the papacy the quality of being a dogmatic fact, he says they are wrong.  I doubt he can cite a theologian saying otherwise (since they are unanimous against him), but he offers no other explanation in its place, such that to be at least consistent, he should be arguing that either there is something about the conciliar papacies which is fundamentally different from all other papacies which robs them of the quality of being dogmatic facts, or that no papacies are dogmatic facts (a position he seems to comes close to several times when he notes the term has only been around 150 years).
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-


     

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