“In this article we will deal with one of the most commonly expressed fears of concluding that Francis is not the pope, namely, the worry that an extended vacancy of the Holy See is incompatible with the promises of Christ and the constitution of his Church.”
(LifeSiteNews) — “Is Francis really the pope?”
This is the question being asked by an increasing number of Catholics whether online, amongst family and friends, in conversations with trusted clergy, or in the privacy of their own troubled hearts and minds.
The immediate causes of this questioning are the objective words and actions of Francis himself. Many Catholics, on considering what Francis has said and done in light of the Catholic Church’s doctrine, and the principles propounded by her theologians, have concluded that we can have moral certainty that Francis is not the pope, and that the Holy See is currently vacant. Others disagree with these conclusions.
It is undoubtedly the case that a growing number of Catholics hold that the See of Rome is currently vacant, though there are disagreements as to when this vacancy began.
This position is held by sincere men and women who are trying to interpret the realities they are witnessing in light of Catholic teaching, and to preserve the faith at a time of unprecedented crisis. It is right that views held by sincere Catholics should be openly and responsibly discussed by a media organization like LifeSiteNews, which is dedicated to seeking the truth about the underlying causes of the crisis in the Church and the modern world.
There is an urgent need for faithful Catholics – all those who look to the magisterium of the Catholic Church as their rule of faith – to work together to come to a deeper understanding of what has happened in the Church in recent decades and how we ought to respond to it. This requires engaging with the Church’s teaching and seeking, as best we can, to apply it to the facts of our times; it requires openly discussing and debating opposing positions with the mutual intention of arriving at the truth.
We will not always agree with each other, but we need to remain charitable, even when we disagree. We must not condemn others for holding positions which the Church herself does not condemn, even if we believe those who hold to them have made a mistake in the application of theological principles.
I have expressed some of my own views in a number of articles on LifeSiteNews. I have argued that Francis is not the pope due to his public heresy and I have also summarized a number of other arguments that lead to the same conclusion. Furthermore, I have set out (here and here) why, in my opinion, arguments from “universal and peaceful acceptance” fail to prove that Francis is the pope. LifeSiteNews has also published opposing opinions in an effort to foster open debate.
Catholics who publicly express the view that the Holy See is vacant should expect that their attempts to reach the truth will often be met with hostility and derision, rather than with openness and respect. Perhaps surprisingly, hostile reactions will often come from some of the most trenchant public critics of Francis and his recent predecessors…
Read the rest HERE.
Truth is breaking out all over.
WM Review on Substack had a translation of John of St. Thomas’s treatment of “universal peaceful acceptance”. He is quite clear that UAP means the moral unanimity of the Church accepts the papal claimant as 1) the proximate rule of Faith, and 2) the Supreme Legislator.
The first means that we accept what the claimant officially teaches as religiously binding and trustworthy to believe (it won’t lead us astray). The second means that we accept the interpretation of the papal claimant as authoritative and binding. UAP means we treat a claimant as the Vicar of Christ and head of the Church on Earth. It means when we call JPII “pope” we accept that Unitatis Redintegratio means that heretics and schismatics are NOT separated from the Church and thus are paths to salvation…because he interprets UR in that light. It means we accept that, contrary to the universal ordinary Magisterium of thr Church, a bishop’s jurisdiction comes from his “ordination”, not the pope, as Paul VI interpreted Lumen Gentium.
Every claimant since the death of Pius XII has NOT been universally and peacefully accepted as pope, because every claimant has not been seen as the proximate rule of Faith or the Supreme Legislator. See the above examples. The fact that people ignore how JPII, Paul VI, BXVI, etc interpreted V2, and go right to V2 means they are NOT accepting them as the proximate rule of Faith or Supreme Legislator.
In essence, UAP has not been seen since Pius XII, and thus cannot be used as an argument.
Mark – off topic, but here a couple more links, that you probably caught & your readers might enjoy.
1. Dr John Campbell takes on The Shroud of Turin.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YT1R2kDPHFA
2. Dr Steven Hatfill, CDC bomb-thrower, presents his view of covid & other pandemics.
https://rumble.com/v5hxgj7-the-fight-for-early-drug-treatment-and-sanity-during-the-covid-91-pandemic.html
(Note: YouTube had it, then removed it. Those of you who call Trump an Antichrist-Deceiver might be on YouTube’s side, because Hatfill’s account is more balanced, or not all that negative on Trump. But on Fauci & Birx, Hatfill dishes it hard.)