Better a vacant Chair than a defected Chair!
A Church without Popes forever?
Response to an Inquiring Writer at One Peter Five
On July 23, 2020, an article appeared on the One Peter Five web site that is addressed to sedevacantists:
The piece was written by Mr. Nishant Xavier, and it represents a reasonable and evidence-based challenge to the sedevacantist position. This is unusual for One Peter Five, which in the past (and also since then) has revealed itself to be a theological comedy site more than anything.… READ MORE
Why some Catholics hold to the ‘Material-Formal Thesis’…
Apostolic Succession after Pope Pius XII:
Where is the Catholic Hierarchy?
In recent weeks there has been a considerable amount of online controversy among sedevacantists about the so-called “Material/Formal Theory” regarding the status of the Novus Ordo hierarchy, especially its so-called “popes”. Some cling adamantly to this thesis because they believe it to be significantly helpful or even essential to a proper understanding of the situation in the Catholic Church today, whereas others repudiate it because they judge it to be misleading or even a danger to the Faith. There are also those “in the middle” who do or don’t subscribe to the thesis but simply consider it a possible theological option, one that it would not be prudent to spend much time fighting over.… READ MORE
Does Vatican I disprove Sedevacantism?
The “Perpetual Successors” Objection
After the objection that “you guys are just a bunch of Protestants!!”, probably the most frequently-made argument against Sedevacantism is that our position contradicts the teaching of the First Vatican Council that St. Peter will have “perpetual successors”. If there hasn’t been a true Pope in decades, how then can we maintain that there is a perpetual succession of Popes?
We have addressed this argument on this site before, but a dedicated post on the issue is in order.
Our response will be twofold. We will demonstrate that (1) the objection from perpetual successors is actually based on a misunderstanding of the teaching of Vatican I; (2) even if the objection were not based on a misunderstanding, it would still not refute the sedevacantist position.… READ MORE