SS, I believe Fr.Celier wrote an article recently addressing what you are talking about. It of course disagrees with you, have you seen
it and what do you think?
In fact, Telesphorus, the purpose of such theological considerations is not somehow to make the problem disappear but only to arrive at the correct explanation of the reality we see, by first of all eliminating what is demonstrably false. Once the idea of an extended sede vacante where all apparent Popes have lost or never had their office is proven false (what you call an "indirect" or "technical" refutation), we can look at the only other alternative, "the evil Pope" and the proper response to it.
Such elimination itself shows that the remaining alternative, the so called "recognize and resist" position must therefore necessarily be correct, in the face of a Pope who gives a public scandalous example, or otherwise by grave sins whether of omission or commission harms the Faith and the Church - the precise limits of such resistance alone remaining to be delineated.
Here too, St.Thomas remarks following the incident of St.Paul and St.Peter that prelates may be rebuked even publicly by their inferiors when there is danger to the Faith. St.Robert in describing resistance to unjust commands says it is lawful to resist the Pope "by not doing what he commands and by hindering the execution of his will".
The eminent Cardinal Cajetan. in agreement with the best theologians, who had seen the reign of Pope Alexander VI (this Pope was also accused by Savonarola "this Alexander VI is in no way Pope and cannot be. The man is not a Christian") and had opposed the bad theologians who had thought the Church ought to be able to depose such a Pope said,
So, if a Pope hardened in evil ways appears, his subordinates, without leaving their own vices, content themselves with daily murmurings against the evil regime; they do not seek to avail themselves, save perhaps in a dream and without faith, of the remedy of prayer; so that what Scripture predicts comes about by their fault, namely that it is due to the sins of the people that a hypocrite reigns over them, holy in respect of his office, but a devil at heart. . . We have become blind to the point of refusing to pray as we ought, while yet desiring the fruit of prayer; of refusing to sow, while still wanting to reap. Let us not call ourselves Christians any longer! Or if we do, let us turn to Christ; and the Pope, were he frantic, furious, tyrannical, a render, dilapidator and corrupter of the Church, would be overcome.
Indeed in reading the theologians, one is struck by the fact that they say in many words only in essence what Our Lady already explained with profound simplicity to the three children of Fatima, unpleasant though it may be to some to think that that is all the "solution" consists of - (and later in Akita, to those who accept that, as His Excellency Bishop Williamson does) - that such a Pope and such wayward shepherds in general are the preferred instrument of divine Justice in punishing an unfaithful people (as seen often in the Old Testament), and that prayer and penance for our sins which brought it about and for the Holy Father as well is the only and fitting recourse for the Church at large.
Topic: News from the front... (Read 21289 times)