Historical tidbit from 1954…
No False Unity: Cardinal Stritch’s Rebuff of the Ecumenical Movement
His Eminence Cardinal Samuel Alphonsus Stritch (1887-1958) was the Archbishop of Chicago, Illinois, from 1940 until 1958.
In 1910 he was ordained a priest in Rome at the young age of 22 after Pope St. Pius X had granted him a special dispensation. Pope Benedict XV appointed him bishop of Toledo, Ohio, and named him a Domestic Prelate of His Holiness in 1921. Bp. Stritch became Archbishop of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, in 1930, and was appointed Archbishop of Chicago nine years later. Pope Pius XII elevated him to the status of cardinal in 1946.… READ MORE
Response to theological sophistry…
Is Francis the Pope?
A Devastating Refutation of Eric Sammons
Is Francis the Pope?
That is the question Eric Sammons asks in a recent article on the One Peter Five web site. Of course even without reading it you already know what his conclusion is; for were it anything other than affirmative, One Peter Five wouldn’t have published it to begin with. To test the merits of the author’s arguments is the purpose of this post.
Sammons’ essay “Is Francis the Pope?”, released on Oct. 29, 2019, follows a common pattern among writers of the recognize-and-resist (aka semi-traditionalist) camp: It’s got plenty to say but is woefully short on documenting assertions made from traditional Catholic teaching.… READ MORE
Lefebvrist leadership misleads souls again…
Better to be Wrong with the Pope – or Right with Tradition against Him?
Response to a recent SSPX Article
On March 10, the official news and communications web site of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), founded by Abp. Marcel Lefebvre in 1970, posted a brief article entitled, “Is It Preferable to Be Wrong with the Pope or to Be Right with Tradition against Him?” Predictably, what they offered as argumentation in support of their position is nothing short of a theological disaster.
Let’s go ahead and dissect their little propaganda piece:
… READ MORE
This is an objection that is often made to “Tradition”: a Catholic must be in complete union with the pope.
The case of Galatians 2:11-14…
The “St. Paul resisted St. Peter to his Face” Objection
Time and again we hear from those we call Semi-Traditionalists the argument that a Pope can lead the faithful astray into errors against the Faith through the exercise of his non-infallible Magisterium; and when that happens, it is then the right and the duty of the victim faithful to resist him, clinging to “Tradition”.
Those who defend this position often point to an incident that occurred between St. Paul and St. Peter recorded in Galatians 2:11-14, as supposed historical precedent for an error-teaching Pope being corrected and resisted by his inferiors.… READ MORE
Another R&R error goes down in flames…
The “St. Peter Denied Christ Three Times” Objection:
St. Robert Bellarmine Refutes another Recognize-and-Resist Error
Time and again we hear the objection, typically made by those who try to justify their pathological refusal to countenance Sedevacantism, that St. Peter denied Christ three times (see Mt 26:69-75) and didn’t thereby cease to be Pope. Ergo, so we are asked to believe, it is absurd to say that Francis is not the Pope just because he is not a Catholic and continually disseminates heresy.
To demonstrate that this objection is untenable, three main points must be kept in mind:
… READ MORE
- The incident concerns St.