Post by Pacelli on Sept 3, 2017 16:39:22 GMT -5
This post is written to correct a false assumption by some that parishes in union with the antipope are by that fact automatically in union with the Conciliar sect.
Those that remain Catholic who are "under Francis" are by definition not part of the heretical Conciliar sect. It is a fact that countless Catholics who have failed to grasp the issues of this crisis have remained at least nominally under the antipopes.
It is also a fact that many parishes have not adopted the abominable Novus Ordo or some similar form of it. This fact is clear in all eastern rite parishes. Although some innovations can be found in some eastern rites, not even one of the 23 Catholic eastern rites have changed their liturgical rites into a radical novelty and break from the theology and liturgy of the Church as found in the Novus Ordo Missae.
This is further illustrated by the fact that in addition to the mass (Divine Liturgy) all eastern rite sacramental rites (baptism, confirmation, marriage, holy orders, penance and extreme unction) are completely intact and essentially unchanged.
With that said, the parishes of the Catholic Church that have kept the Faith remain legitimate canonical parishes of the Church. The grouping of Catholics in an assigned territory under a legitimate canonically appointed pastor constitute a parish. If some sectarians attend such a parish, then that fact would not mean the the parish as a whole sectarian. The few sectarians would be unlawful intruders at a Catholic liturgy.
The same principal applies to a diocese, the canonical diocese remains intact. The groupings of Catholics who live within the specific territories remain members of the diocese, even if the bishop has defected, and even if the rite is no longer Catholic. A Catholic cannot participate in the rites of heretics, and in many cases must not worship with a priest who is an undeclared heretic, so in almost all cases (if not all) Roman Rite Catholics must avoid their lawful parishes, and must withdraw from all men claiming to be their parish or diocesan authorities.
On the other hand, eastern rite eparchies (dioceses) did not adopt the new and uncatholic rites. Their eparchies and parishes remain intact, and publicly profess the Faith through the prayers of their public liturgies. Catholics remain united with each other through this common and public profession of Faith, and submission to lawful authority, and by this maintain the unity of Faith.
It is true that heretics and suspected heretics are present in the eastern rites. It is also certain that the greater majority of clergy and laity have given no public cause to suspect them of heresy, and therefore must be presumed innocent.
Even in cases where heresy may be suspected, as the person has given cause for suspicion, the person must not be presumed a heretic based only on grounds that cause a suspicion of heresy.
I contend that that these principles apply to most eastern Rite clerics who have allowed, participated in, or have condoned communicatio in sacris with schismatics. Such an act would make one suspect of heresy, but would not be conclusive evidence that one is a heretic.
With that said, I contend that the eparchies and parishes of the eastern rite are the public, lawful and authorized continuation of the the governance and authorized worship of the Catholic Church. They are not in toto part of the sect, and that presumption cannot be legitimately be formed against them. It is true that some members of the eastern rites may have embraced the sect, and by that fact are no longer Catholics. But, the evidence only indicts a small amount of bishops, priests and possibly laity. The vast majority must be presumed innocent, as there is no evidence to make a presumption of their guilt, and are living their Faith through the public and approved worship at their parish churches.
In my opinion, the visible unity of the Catholic Church has been maintained throughout this crisis in the eastern rites who profess the same true Faith, the same approved sacraments, and who have remained under their lawfully commissioned pastors within their eparchies.
There can be no doubt that the enemy is targeting this last holdout of hierarchical Catholicism, and the effects of this relentless attack are showing. Many eastern rites hierarchs and clerics are already heretics, some are flirting with heresy, and all are remaining silent in the face of it, even those who still firmly hold the true Faith, but are failing to defend it.
I think that your theory answers several objections that R&R Catholics would have against the sedevacantist position. I see that you haven't used the term "common error" in your explanation. Do you believe that the ordinary jurisdiction that the Eastern Rites possess comes to them through common error?
Hi Recusant,
Yes, the jurisdiction would be supplied by the antipope who is recognized by all eastern rites. The basis of why the jurisdiction is supplied would be the common error of the faithful.
IMO, I do not believe that this happens in the Latin rite, as of June 1969, as the holy orders (most especially the rite of consecration of bishops) are doubtful, and the common good is not served. In the eastern rites, the sheep are fed with valid sacraments and where the Faith is found, also fed with the true doctrine. The former, IMO never happens in the Latin rite, even among those who still have the Faith.