Post by Pacelli on Aug 8, 2016 12:46:00 GMT -5
I would ask all who wish to participate in this thread to first read THIS
Here are my reflections:
I have read and re-read this speech many times. For those who have read the above Address of Archbishop Lefebvre, I would urge you to take note of the following principles:
1. The Archbishop understood that a judgment could be made against these popes.
2. He understood that the criteria for judging them would be the evidence that stood against them.
3. He acknowledges that the heretical actions of John Paul are public.
4. He acknowledges that the actions of John Paul are grounds to make him suspect of heresy, and states that if he continues in these actions we could determine that he would be a public heretic. The Archbishop stated: " In which case, I cannot see how it is possible to say that the Pope is not suspect of heresy, and if he continues, he is a heretic, a public heretic. That is the teaching of the Church." Note carefully: Such a judgment would be made prior to the judgment of the Church, and that the judgement would be made with the external evidence of the "popes" actions. Secondly take note that the Archbishop bases this on the "teaching of the Church," not his opinion.
5. The Archbishop is clearly looking for more evidence to finally be certain that the John Paul was a public heretic and apostate. He gives a potential answer to that in the 1986 apostasy that was being planned by John Paul II.
6. The Archbishop states exactly what St. Robert teaches, that the Pope cannot be a public heretic. He stated: "it seems at first sight that it is impossible for a Pope to be publicly and formally heretical. Our Lord has promised to be with him, to keep his faith, to keep him in the Faith - how can he at the same time be a public heretic and virtually apostatize?"
7. Based on the principle that a public heretic cannot be a pope, and recognizing the fact of the continued public heresy of John Paul, the Archbishop concludes with: "So it is possible we may be obliged to believe this pope is not pope." (Note: The Archbishop is saying this based on the external evidence known to him, and this judgment could be made without any canonical warnings or council.)
8. The Archbishop gives the standard that is to be used to make the judgment against John Paul II: the evidence. He stated, "It is so important, so grave, so sad, that we prefer to wait until Providence gives us such evidence, that it is no longer possible to refuse to say that the Pope is a heretic." He states again after this that Assisi may be the evidence that he needs to judge the matter.
9. The next principle that the Archbishop gives is that Catholics cannot ignore the matter of the Pope issue. He specifically states that Catholics cannot content themselves with the Sacraments, the Mass, and the true doctrine, and then ignore the Pope. This is an error, and the Archbishop stated that. The reason why is that the Archbishop rightly knew that the Pope is the center of the unity of the Church.
10. The Archbishop then states again that we cannot ignore the heretical actions of the "pope," and that we must judge these acts, saying, "we can't be indifferent to these scandalous events in Rome, we must judge them in the light of our Faith and help Catholics, traditional Catholics, to see that this bad example of the Pope is a great scandal, very dangerous for their souls."
11. The Archbishop then states that the evidence is growing against these men by stating, " I pray for it to be clear beyond doubt, wholly evident. And I think that now we are in this time, I think that it is the answer of God. I would much prefer Providence to be showing us the Vatican returning to Tradition, but instead we see the Vatican plunging into darkness and error. And so it is sure that now it is not as difficult to see as it was one or two years ago, it is more clear and evident that they are no longer truly Catholic. No persecution or revolution in all history has so destroyed the Church as these years since the Council, because today the Faith is being destroyed by men of the Church, by the Pope himself, by Cardinals, by bishops, priests and nuns. It is the wholesale, worldwide and radical destruction of the Faith."
Two points to consider from #11:
He acknowledges that the Pope is destroying the Faith of men.
He acknowledges that in the year or two since the address that the matter has become more clear to him that John Paul II and his henchmen were not Catholic.
Final conclusion: The principles given by Archbishop Lefebvre on sedevacantism are identical to the teaching of St. Robert Bellarmine.
Here are my reflections:
I have read and re-read this speech many times. For those who have read the above Address of Archbishop Lefebvre, I would urge you to take note of the following principles:
1. The Archbishop understood that a judgment could be made against these popes.
2. He understood that the criteria for judging them would be the evidence that stood against them.
3. He acknowledges that the heretical actions of John Paul are public.
4. He acknowledges that the actions of John Paul are grounds to make him suspect of heresy, and states that if he continues in these actions we could determine that he would be a public heretic. The Archbishop stated: " In which case, I cannot see how it is possible to say that the Pope is not suspect of heresy, and if he continues, he is a heretic, a public heretic. That is the teaching of the Church." Note carefully: Such a judgment would be made prior to the judgment of the Church, and that the judgement would be made with the external evidence of the "popes" actions. Secondly take note that the Archbishop bases this on the "teaching of the Church," not his opinion.
5. The Archbishop is clearly looking for more evidence to finally be certain that the John Paul was a public heretic and apostate. He gives a potential answer to that in the 1986 apostasy that was being planned by John Paul II.
6. The Archbishop states exactly what St. Robert teaches, that the Pope cannot be a public heretic. He stated: "it seems at first sight that it is impossible for a Pope to be publicly and formally heretical. Our Lord has promised to be with him, to keep his faith, to keep him in the Faith - how can he at the same time be a public heretic and virtually apostatize?"
7. Based on the principle that a public heretic cannot be a pope, and recognizing the fact of the continued public heresy of John Paul, the Archbishop concludes with: "So it is possible we may be obliged to believe this pope is not pope." (Note: The Archbishop is saying this based on the external evidence known to him, and this judgment could be made without any canonical warnings or council.)
8. The Archbishop gives the standard that is to be used to make the judgment against John Paul II: the evidence. He stated, "It is so important, so grave, so sad, that we prefer to wait until Providence gives us such evidence, that it is no longer possible to refuse to say that the Pope is a heretic." He states again after this that Assisi may be the evidence that he needs to judge the matter.
9. The next principle that the Archbishop gives is that Catholics cannot ignore the matter of the Pope issue. He specifically states that Catholics cannot content themselves with the Sacraments, the Mass, and the true doctrine, and then ignore the Pope. This is an error, and the Archbishop stated that. The reason why is that the Archbishop rightly knew that the Pope is the center of the unity of the Church.
10. The Archbishop then states again that we cannot ignore the heretical actions of the "pope," and that we must judge these acts, saying, "we can't be indifferent to these scandalous events in Rome, we must judge them in the light of our Faith and help Catholics, traditional Catholics, to see that this bad example of the Pope is a great scandal, very dangerous for their souls."
11. The Archbishop then states that the evidence is growing against these men by stating, " I pray for it to be clear beyond doubt, wholly evident. And I think that now we are in this time, I think that it is the answer of God. I would much prefer Providence to be showing us the Vatican returning to Tradition, but instead we see the Vatican plunging into darkness and error. And so it is sure that now it is not as difficult to see as it was one or two years ago, it is more clear and evident that they are no longer truly Catholic. No persecution or revolution in all history has so destroyed the Church as these years since the Council, because today the Faith is being destroyed by men of the Church, by the Pope himself, by Cardinals, by bishops, priests and nuns. It is the wholesale, worldwide and radical destruction of the Faith."
Two points to consider from #11:
He acknowledges that the Pope is destroying the Faith of men.
He acknowledges that in the year or two since the address that the matter has become more clear to him that John Paul II and his henchmen were not Catholic.
Final conclusion: The principles given by Archbishop Lefebvre on sedevacantism are identical to the teaching of St. Robert Bellarmine.