Sean, unfortunately you seem to have forgotten the important word “peaceful”. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and attribute it to an accident, but it is plainly obvious that Bergoglio has had anything but a peaceful “reign”. Also, who are those that have “accepted” him as pope? The guy on the 6:00 news, Bıdɛn, or Cuomo? You need to make and prove the case that non-Catholics can be included in the criteria for universal acceptance. Are the heretics Bıdɛn and Cuomo Catholics in good standing in your book?
There are a significant number of REAL Catholics who don’t accept him as a true pope, so the percentage is not favorable to your case. If you include all those who are Catholic “in name only”, then half of your case is somewhat satisfied (the universal part), but the peaceful part will never be satisfied unless and until Mr. Bergoglio converts back to the Faith he was baptized in.
QVD-
Nope.
There are today 5,600 bishops exercising jurisdiction in the Church.
Not a single one of them rejects the legitimacy of Francis’s pontificate.
That’s pretty damn peaceful AND universal.
That a few schismatic sede bishops (?) reject that peaceful and universal assent is no more relevant that Lutheran or Old Catholic bishops doing so.
Peaceful means they accept his legitimacy.
Universal means a moral unanimity (and in this case, even mathematical unanimity).
It seems that to get out of the trap, you would seek to redefine “peaceful,” and make it analogous to “no crisis.” But in that case, you would also have to depose all the popes during the Arian and Protestant crises.
This should indicate to you that you have misunderstood (that’s me being charitable😀) the term.
Topic: Are there any anti una cuм people on cathinfo? (Read 27360 times)