"This authority, however, (though it has been given to man and is exercised by man), is not human but rather divine, granted to Peter by a divine word and reaffirmed to him (Peter) and his successors by the One Whom Peter confessed, the Lord saying to Peter himself, ‘Whatsoever you shall bind on earth, shall be bound also in Heaven‘ etc., [Mt 16:19]. Therefore whoever resists this power thus ordained by God, resists the ordinance of God [Rom 13:2], unless he invent like Manicheus two beginnings, which is false and judged by us heretical, since according to the testimony of Moses, it is not in the beginnings but in the beginning that God created heaven and earth [Gen 1:1]. Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff."- Unam Sanctam, Pope Boniface VIII
Hardly a sedevacantist invention, right? The fact that novus ordo types still have that sensus fidelium, which btw. R&R knocked out of of most traditionalists passing through their camp, is a natural default position that every catholic should hold on to.
Meg is right. The problem, as Bishop Williamson so often pointed out, is the failure of sedevacantism and conciliarism, to make distinctions.
What does it mean, to be subject to the Roman Pontiff? There lies the issue. Here are some considerations:
"If the faith were endangered,
a subject ought to rebuke his prelate even publicly. Hence
Paul, who was Peter's (the Pope's!) subject, rebuked him in public on account of the imminent danger of scandal concerning faith" -
St Thomas Aquinas,
S Th IIa IIae Q33 A4 ad2 Is St Thomas in error?
Children are commanded by God and the law of nature to be subject to their parents: "Children", says St Paul, "obey your parents
in all things, for that is pleasing to the Lord" - Col 3:20
The Holy Ghost bids servants be subject to their masters: "Servants,
be subject to your masters with all fear, not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward" ('froward' is rendered 'wicked' in some translations) - I Peter 2:18.
Immediately before this, St Peter admonishes us all: "
Be ye subject therefore to
every human creature for God's sake; whether it be to the king as excelling, or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evil doers, and for the praise of the good. For so is the
will of God... as free and not as making liberty a cloak for malice, but as the servants of God" - I Peter 2:13-16
And again, St Paul addressing us all: "Let everyone
be subject to higher authorities: for there exists
no authority but from God... therefore he that resisteth the authority,
resisteth the ordinance of God. And
they that resist purchase to themselves damnation" - Rom 13:1-2
Now how could the Lord God command us to obey all authorities in all things and not to resist them, since to do so would be to resist God himself, under threat of eternal damnation? Such a literal understanding of this passage would have us obey even sinful commands.
Obviously, that is not the meaning of the Word of God. We must understand words in the sense they are meant, according to our Catholic Faith, and according to true obedience. The Holy Ghost doesn't give us the exceptions:
"unless the authority commands you to do something contrary to the law of God, in which case you are duty-bound to resist". Nor does the Holy Ghost, nor our Holy Catholic Faith, nor our common sense, tell us that by so commanding the authority ceases to exist. Our parents are still our parents, worthy of our honour and respect; the king is still the king, worthy of our honour and respect; the priest is still a man of God, worth of our honour and respect; the Pope is still the Pope, worthy of our honour and respect. Not on account of their unworthy words or deeds are they worthy of our honour, but because of Whom they represent in the
office they hold. We remain their subjects, but we must "resist them to their face" if need be, respectfully and humbly, in order not to make "liberty a cloak for malice" and to "obey God rather than men". Perhaps we even have to separate ourselves from them for our own protection, as might be the case with a father who is an alcoholic, or the exceptional situation today with the Pope. Clearly, it is the exception.
To take the words of Pope Boniface VIII in
Unam Sanctam to mean that a Catholic must obey a Pope in all things, or that a Pope can never command something sinful that ought to be resisted, or that he can never teach heresy outside the confines of his Infallibility is not what the words say, it is not what the words mean, and it is not what the Church teaches. Such a literal interpretation could just as well argue that if there is no Roman Pontiff today to be subject to, no one can be saved.
So we must be careful, like Archbishop Lefebvre, to think with the Church, with a true understanding of the virtue of obedience and what the Church teaches on the infallible magisterium, and being careful not to pontificate on matters that are not certain.
Topic: Possible neo-SSPX strategy for Consecrations (Read 445 times)