Have you been keeping up with all the latest PTL (Pretzel Twist Logic) from Trad Inc, Sammons, et al, trying to square the circle, how do you solve a problem like (Jorge) Mario, er Luuucy… you’ve got some splaining to do, because how can a heretic be pope? Isn’t the pope supposed to be protected from teaching heresy? Or at minimum, isn’t it impossible for the pope to promulgate heresy as official magisterial teaching of the Church? If the purported pope were to do something like this, wouldn’t this very act call into question his claim to the papacy? If not, why not? Shouldn’t his acts of arch heresy call for an investigation into the events of Feb-Mar 2013, to determine what exactly happened, and what didn’t happen? If not, why not? Millions of souls are at risk, and care for souls is supposed to be the first law of the Church.
While we are at it, Trad Inc, if a true pope CAN promulgate heresy in matters of faith and morals, binding the faithful to submit themselves and assent, then what good is a pope, what good is the papacy itself, and what good is the Church? Millions of people are falling prey to heresy, or else being scandalized out of the Church completely, and why shouldn’t they be? Trad Inc.’s solution is to tear down the papacy, to deny Vatican I and Pastor Aeternus, so they can justify a Marxist apostate soul-murderer being pope. Ubetcha.
Oh, and all the while we just so happen to have a validly elected pontiff, who never validly resigned, who doesn’t think really resigning is even possible, who kept his Fisherman’s RIng and coat of arms, still living inside the Vatican, still wearing white, still being addressed as Holy Father, still writing letters and publishing books, and still imparting HIS Apostolic Blessing.
But Fwancis is Definitely Pope, we just have to wait for him to die, shut up you stupid scandalist schismatic sedevacantist.
The sheer force of Confirmation Bias in play will be written about for centuries.
h/t Fred Martinez…
We thank Dr. Ed Mazza and Patrick Coffin for giving the Catholic Monitor permission to transcribe the show and post on our site. Below is a brief taste of the show:
Dr. Edmund Mazza:
I’ll tell you Patrick, I tried to get my article on this published by a prominent editor in a prominent Catholic journal whose names I will not name. But I got an email back telling me that people who are thinking along these lines are leading people out of the church, and he didn’t use the word “schism,” but that was the implication. And so I just want to clear that up.
And first, I’ll say two things. The first one is that I think people are leaving the Church already, and going into schism because they think Francis is Pope. Because they think that he’s a monster Pope, that’s destroying the Church and teaching things that are not Catholic. That all religions, that God wills, all religions, for example, as in the Abu Dhabi declaration, which on the face of it is heresy.
I’ll give you an example who I think is the poster boy of this, Sean Hannity, Right? From Fox News, the conservative commentator, He left the Catholic faith. I think it’s probably the catalyst that pushed him over the edge was having a Marxist Pope; thinking that Francesco is running the show here.
So I would differ. I talk sometimes with Ann Barhardt, she says her inbox is flooded with people who thank her for looking into this subject, because it’s keeping them in the church rather than encouraging them to leave the church.
And the second thing that I would want to say is that technically, if you look at the statements of the different saints and scholars on the subject, just because you suspect the Pope might not be the Pope, doesn’t put you into a schism.
Dr. Edmund Mazza:
Or Sedevacantism, that’s another thing they call you a sedevacantist. But I’ve got two quick quotes here. Here is one from Saint Cardinal Thomas Cajetan... He wrote a multi-volume commentary on the Summa Theologica. And this is what Saint Cajetan says, “If someone for a reasonable motive holds the person of the Pope in suspicion and refuses his presence, even his jurisdiction, he does not commit the delict of schism, nor any other whatsoever, provided that he’d be ready to accept the Pope were he not held in suspicion. It goes without saying that one has the right to avoid what is harmful and to ward off dangers. In fact, it may happen that the Pope could govern tyrannically, and that is all the easier as he is the more powerful and does not fear any punishment from anyone on earth.”
And the second quote is from, back before Vatican II, the most respected commentary on Canon law was an eight volume set by Francis Xavier Wernz and Peter Vidal. And this is what they wrote in volume seven of their commentary on Canon Law. “Finally, they cannot be numbered among the schismatics who refuse to obey the Roman pontiff because they consider his person to be suspect or doubtfully elected on account of rumors in circulation.”
I think we have a lot more than rumor to go on here.
I do too…