Post by John Lewis on Jul 26, 2023 7:12:20 GMT -5
Are the "anti-opinionists" you referring to persons such those who belong to Bp Sanborn's "Roman Catholic" Institute?
From their declaration of theological principles for members:
From their declaration of theological principles for members:
I consequently hold that it is a certain theological conclusion, flowing directly from the infallibility and indefectibility of the Roman Catholic Church, that the hierarchy which promulgates the new and false religion of the Second Vatican Council and its reforms, does not have the authority to teach, rule, and sanctify the Church. I hold that it is necessary to conclude that the modernist hierarchy, the promulgators of Vatican II and its reforms, is formally a false hierarchy, and must be regarded as such, and treated as such, by every Catholic. I hold that the modernist promulgators of Vatican II and its reforms are stripped of any ecclesiastical authority owing to their intention to promulgate to the Roman Catholic Church the substantial transformation of her doctrines, liturgy and essential disciplines, and that those elected or appointed to positions of authority, however legitimately, must be regarded as false popes and false bishops. I consequently reject those known as John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and Francis as false popes, as well as anyone in the future who may claim to be pope but who, at the same time, intends to promulgate Vatican II and its reforms.
Accordingly I reject the notion, commonly known as opinionism, that the formal vacancy of the Roman see and the episcopal sees in the aforementioned circumstances is merely a theological opinion, as if the opposite opinion had theological merit, namely the opinion which holds that these same promulgators of Vatican II and its reforms constitute the true Catholic hierarchy, and could be held by a Catholic with impunity. For to assert, even as an opinion, that the promulgators of Vatican II and its reforms constitute the true hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church, is to assert implicitly that the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church, in the name of Christ and by His divine authority, could promulgate to the universal Church false doctrine, evil laws and disciplines, and a false and blasphemous liturgy. To even hold this as an opinion is to implicitly deny the infallibility and indefectibility of the Roman Catholic Church, which is heresy.
I also reject as false the notion of those who allege in support of opinionism, that priests do not have the authority to require the faithful to assent to the formal vacancy of the Roman see and the episcopal sees in the present circumstances. For it requires no ecclesiastical authority to insist that the faithful be consistent in their rejection of Vatican II and its reforms, and that they avoid the implicit heresy of associating the promulgation of Vatican II and its reforms with the authority of Jesus Christ, the Head of the Church, vested in the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church. It requires no authority to require that Catholics regard as a false pope him whom they reject as the living rule of faith."
Accordingly I reject the notion, commonly known as opinionism, that the formal vacancy of the Roman see and the episcopal sees in the aforementioned circumstances is merely a theological opinion, as if the opposite opinion had theological merit, namely the opinion which holds that these same promulgators of Vatican II and its reforms constitute the true Catholic hierarchy, and could be held by a Catholic with impunity. For to assert, even as an opinion, that the promulgators of Vatican II and its reforms constitute the true hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church, is to assert implicitly that the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church, in the name of Christ and by His divine authority, could promulgate to the universal Church false doctrine, evil laws and disciplines, and a false and blasphemous liturgy. To even hold this as an opinion is to implicitly deny the infallibility and indefectibility of the Roman Catholic Church, which is heresy.
I also reject as false the notion of those who allege in support of opinionism, that priests do not have the authority to require the faithful to assent to the formal vacancy of the Roman see and the episcopal sees in the present circumstances. For it requires no ecclesiastical authority to insist that the faithful be consistent in their rejection of Vatican II and its reforms, and that they avoid the implicit heresy of associating the promulgation of Vatican II and its reforms with the authority of Jesus Christ, the Head of the Church, vested in the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church. It requires no authority to require that Catholics regard as a false pope him whom they reject as the living rule of faith."