Pope Pius XII on the Papacy…
Does this Apply to Francis?
These days a lot of semi-traditionalist bloggers and journalists love to excuse their absurd acceptance of the public apostate Jorge Bergoglio as the Vicar of Christ (“Pope Francis”) on the grounds that the “human element” of the Church is subject to all sorts of errors, weaknesses, and failures.
In its May 2017 issue, Inside the Vatican just published a speech of Pope Pius XII, also available online, that is indeed “still relevant today”, as editor-in-chief Robert Moynihan says (p. 4). The most relevant portion of the text, we believe, is this part:
The Pope has the divine promises; even in his human weaknesses, he is invincible and unshakable; he is the messenger of truth and justice, the principle of the unity of the Church; his voice denounces errors, idolatries, superstitions; he condemns iniquities; he makes charity and virtue loved.
(Pope Pius XII, Address Ancora Una Volta, Feb. 20, 1949; underlining added.)
What do you think, dear reader? Can these words be applied to Francis? Can they still be said to be true under the supposition that Francis is the legitimate Pope of the Catholic Church? Whom will you side with — Pope Pius XII or “Pope” Francis?
Our Lord promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against His Church. It is time to realize, therefore, that the only way they have not prevailed against His Church today, is if Francis isn’t a valid Pope:
It is entirely possible, and not incompatible with the divine promises, that the Catholic Church should be without a true Pope even for several decades. But it is not possible that the Church should be transformed from the Ark of Salvation into a barque of damnation; from the Bride of Christ into a whore; from the pillar and ground of the truth (cf. 1 Tim 3:15) into the Synagogue of Satan. Neither can the Pope cease to be the Vicar of Christ and suddenly become the Vicar of Judas.
We all must choose, therefore, between two alternatives: the Papacy or Francis.
The two are mutually exclusive.
Image source: shutterstock.com
It is hard to believe that bloggers along with “comboxers” will state JB is a heretic and yet the pope. They simply do not understand the contradiction of those terms, that he or any other person cannot be both a heretic and valid pope at the same time. He may sit in the seat, but a heretic is by definition no longer Catholic. And try to use a logical argument or point out what previous Saints and/or Doctors of the Church have said or written…watch out! They’d rather stand by the heretic.
On another note, I found it laughable when JB said of President Trump that he wouldn’t judge POTUS before he heard what POTUS had to say, yet he’s already previously stated, “Who am I to judge?”
The team at NOW is awesome and thank you for your outstanding and hard-hitting work!
Perfect! Simple, clear, and logical.
If we can have a true pope who is a heretic then we belong to a false church that teaches heresy.
You left off the third option….becoming Orthodox.
Defecting from the Faith is not an option.
No Pope (sedevacantism or heretical Pope) = No Catholic Church
So theoretically the Catholic Church could continue another 2,000 years without a Pope (sedevacant or heretical Popes in succession)? By that time I would imagine adherence to the Catholic Church’s dogmatic teachings regarding Petrine authority would be pretty much extinguished.
There is no such thing as a heretical Pope. That’s the first thing to remember. Secondly, I am not aware of there being a limit per the divine law as to how long the Holy See can be vacant. What I do know is that the extended vacancy of the Apostolic See was pretty much foretold in 2 Thess 2 (the Pope is the one who will be “taken out of the way”), and that we must not be too quick to pronounce on what God would or wouldn’t permit. The following two links will establish this:
Fair enough…so in theory there are no time constraints as to how long God would/will permit the Apostolic See to be vacant. One can easily understand why such a permitted vacancy extending decades, centuries, or perhaps millennium might prove Catholic claims superfluous.
As of right now, the vacancy has lasted less than 60 years. In the grand scheme of things, it is not a very long time. Perhaps there even has been a valid Pope since, or is even now, but if so, we do not know of his identity of his whereabouts. It is clear why our Blessed Lord warned that in the end even the elect would be deceived if it were possible — because so many people are so willing to abandon the Faith simply because there is a difficulty somewhere with which they are not “comfortable”.
“But ah, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith left on the earth?” (Lk 18:8)
Yes, there is plenty of reason to believe that it won’t turn into 600 or 6000 years: and that is that God’s revelation is true. You are behaving like someone in Jerusalem arguing on Holy Saturday: “Resurrection? Give me a break! There’s no reason your Lord won’t still lie in the grave in 40 years, 400 years, 12,000 years!”
If 60 years hasn’t extinguished the reasonable belief that the Papacy will resurrect, then what would be the rough time table for such a miracle to be made manifest? Within the next decade? Within the next 60 years? Have noted Sedevacantist theologians given reasoned timeframes? On what authority do they base their positions? If the speculated timeframe(s) come and go without a restored Papacy do the Sedevacantists simply “move the goal line” ala the Jehovah Witness’ end of the world predictions…or do they at some point “wave the white flag” and acknowledge the reality of a false position?
Lori, since the matter is theological, and not empirical, you cannot use empirical arguments to attempt to refute it. Divine revelation simply does not tell us how long a vacancy can last. Our job is to adhere to the Faith. What we do know from divine revelation is that certain signs will precede the end of the world. They include the fact that the Gospel will be preached to all nations (this has happened); that there would be a great apostasy (this has happened and is still continuing today); and that there would be a reign of the antichrist (this is still to come).
The challenges of our day serve to separate the wheat from the chaff. They test men’s faith. Faith is firm adherence, aided by grace, to what God’s has revealed, because He has revealed it. (Not because we find it empirically verified, or because we like it, or because it makes sense to us.)
Would you please tell me, by the way, what religion you are?
Baptized Lutheran as an infant, began questioning my beliefs as a teenager, became a Nietzschean atheist in college, had a life changing born again experience in 1987, attended evangelical Baptist church for over a decade, became Catholic in 2002. Still a Catholic, who clings to the hope that Ann Barnhardt’s theory of an invalid resignation is true and that Francis will eventually be declared, by a valid authority (not Ann or any individual), an anti-pope.
Don’t stop at resignationalism Lori! You’ve come so far towards the Truth, you might as well come all the way home.
Ratzinger aka Bennedict is a modernist heretic and a foul one at that. He wasn’t a valid pope either as he’s never been validly ordained as a Bishop. Franco, wasn’t even ordained a valid priest by the way. Validity matters, but so does the FACT that these heretics can’t possibly hold office in the Catholic Church being as they are non-Catholics.
Are you are supporting the so-called “orthodox” position out of curiosity or perhaps scruples and temptations to your faith? Seeing as you have no formal ties to these schismatic, heretical and nationalistic groups, your argument towards abandoning the True Orthodoxy of the Holy Catholic Church is confounding.
Another issue here Lori that might be hindering your journey to Truth is that your entire life of “faith” has been formed under heretical influence. It would appear, looking at your resume above, that you have never held the Catholic faith, whole and entire. This may be your first step in coming to terms with the difficulty of our current situation i.e. the eclipse.
Catechisms like Pope St. Pius X’s Catechism, the Trent Catechism and Rev. Joseph Deharbe’s Catechism are an excellent place to start with what MUST be believed to be a member of the Church.
Praying the (3) mystery Rosary every day is a SURE way to bring down God’s graces and assist in discernment in this time of intense chaos and disinformation. Also, cutting the Novus Ordo away entirely, like removing a gangrenous foot, is the only way to save you Catholic faith (assuming you have it). They are NON-catholics of the worst kind and all associations with them are damaging to the soul, ESPECIALLY their blasphemous excuse for a “mass”.