The article above expresses well a position advanced by those of the sedevacantist movement, which most strongly affirm the authority of the papal office, not only in teaching dogma, but (as stated in the article above) as pertains to "any given matter pertaining to Faith, morals, or discipline, or by presuming to make his teachings, laws, or disciplinary decisions subject to review, revision, or validation by another." And which authority means including protection from deposition by inferiors who judge him to be a heretic . But which therefore means they must exclude a deviant (based on their judgment) pope from actually being a pope.
Thus, while they labor to substantiate that no one can judge the pope and his judgments, yet they essentially do so by judging papal teaching as being heretical, so that the pope has deposed himself: "that if a Pope were to become a public heretic, he could then be judged by his inferiors because he would no longer be Pope."
In short, the sede argument is that the pope cannot be judged by any inferiors so as to be deposed, nor his judgments, but sedevacantists can judge that his judgments render him to be no pope.
In contrast to sedevacantists, modern magisterial RCs are to hold that the correct understanding of past RC teaching is that of the latest magisterium, despite the contrasts . And such hold that sedevacantists are are schismatics by those who hold that Francis is a valid pope.
A clear contrast btwn the two is most manifest as regards the issues of required membership in the Church, Church and state, religious freedom, ecumenism, and non-Christian religions” “The Traditionalist tends to see a conflict btwn the past (esp. Vatican 1 until Vatican 2) while the modern magisterial RCs see Vatican 2 as "clarifying" the past, with its (however contradictory) understanding being the authoritative voice of the RCC. For as stated by Cardinal Dulles, "Even in the case of definitive teaching, development occurs through a kind of dialectic of proclamation and response.” And "the Profession of Faith states that the Catholic must adhere to authentic but non-definitive teaching with ‘religious submission will and intellect." (Cardinal Avery Dulles, SJ, “Magisterium: Teacher and Guardian of the Faith,” (Sapientia Press 2007) (pp. 93, 106).
Then you also have divisions among traditional Catholics. https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3755297/posts?page=6#6
And schismatics calling other schismatics schismatic and heretical. https://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/catholicchurch/beware-heresy/ https://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/catholicchurch/society-of-st-pius-v/
Meanwhile, others contend that "The Catholic Church has thus existed for decades in a condition of objective and grave disunity over matters of de fide doctrine. Another way to say this is that the Catholic Church has existed in a de facto state of schism." - https://www.crisismagazine.com/2017/catholic-church-de-facto-schism
All of the above is a result of Catholics interpreting church leaders and teaching differently, despite the Catholic model for ascertaining Truth and obedience to it being one that seeks to avoid division by exhorting the flock to depend upon the magisterium to tell them what to believe and explain it* , not only in "infallible" teaching but in lower magisterial levels (though what level a teaching belongs to can itself be a subject to variant interpretations), rather than engaging in much interpretation.
For in in Catholic theology people cannot discover the contents of revelation unless they are told by the stewards of such, for in Catholic theology such as expressed in the 1914 Catholic Encyclopedia, "the believer cannot believe in the Bible nor find in it the object of his faith until he has previously made an act of faith in the intermediary authorities..." meaning her. Thus, "when we appeal to the Scriptures for proof of the Church's infallible authority we appeal to them merely as reliable historical sources, and abstract altogether from their inspiration." (Catholic Encyclopedia>Tradition and Living Magisterium)
Therefore ,
It follows that the Church is essentially an unequal society, that is, a society comprising two categories of per sons, the Pastors and the flock, those who occupy a rank in the different degrees of the hierarchy and the multitude of the faithful. So distinct are these categories that with the pastoral body only rests the necessary right and authority for promoting the end of the society and directing all its members towards that end; the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors. 9VEHEMENTER NOS, Encyclical of Pope Pius X promulgated on February 11, 1906)
And yet traditional Catholics overall censure evangelicals for engaging in "private judgment" (erroneously invoking 2 Pt. 1:20 as forbidding that) since we subject the validity of church teaching to our judgment of whether such corresponds to ancient (NT) church teaching, yet in principal they do the same. Except that for them ancient church teaching is not supremely based on the only wholly inspired substantive infallible authoritative record of what the NT church believed, which is Scripture, especially Acts thru Revelation (revealing how they understood the OT and gospels), but is selectively whatever past RC teaching they choose represents "authentic" Catholic faith.
However, the principal that is espoused by both the traditional and modern magisterial camps but violated by both, that the validity of a man of God and or what he teaches is subject to testing by a higher standard is itself Scriptural. For the NT church did not begin upon the novel and unScriptural premise of ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility as per Rome (and essentially in primary cults). Including the principal that the magisterial discerners and stewards of Scripture are that infallible magisterium.
For the church actually began in dissent from those who sat in the seat of Moses over Israel, (Mt. 23:2) who were the historical instruments and stewards of Scripture, "because that unto them were committed the oracles of God," (Rm. 3:2) to whom pertaineth" the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises" (Rm. 9:4) of Divine guidance, presence and perpetuation as they believed, (Gn. 12:2,3; 17:4,7,8; Ex. 19:5; Lv. 10:11; Dt. 4:31; 17:8-13; Ps, 11:4,9; Is. 41:10, Ps. 89:33,34; Jer. 7:23)
And instead they followed an itinerant Preacher whom the magisterium rejected, and whom the Messiah reproved them Scripture as being supreme, (Mk. 7:2-16) and established His Truth claims upon scriptural substantiation in word and in power, as did the early church as it began upon this basis. (Mt. 22:23-45; Lk. 24:27,44; Jn. 5:36,39; Acts 2:14-35; 4:33; 5:12; 15:6-21;17:2,11; 18:28; 28:23; Rm. 15:19; 2Cor. 12:12, etc.)
The problem, then is two-fold. 1.: the lack of the degree of Scriptural warrant needed to persuade Godly souls of good conscience, who, like the noble Bereans, subjected even the veracity of the apostle's preaching to the test of conformity with Scripture. And 2.: the lack of such souls, but who instead make some other source their supreme and sure standard.
Not that anything close to comprehensive doctrinal unity was ever realized by the NT church, much less would be today, for not all doctrines have the same degree of warrant. Yet there is a hierarchy of Truths, and the core teachs are those who the clearest Scriptural substantiation.
And thus despite differences, those for who attests to most strongly affirming the authority and integrity of Scripture also attest to far greater unity and commitment in basic beliefs than the fruit of Rome, and thus are the religious enemy #1 for traditional Catholics and the liberal media alike.
Meanwhile, distinctive Catholic teachings are not manifest in the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed
* 'the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors," "to suffer themselves to be guided and led in all things that touch upon faith or morals by the Holy Church of God through its Supreme Pastor the Roman Pontiff," "of submitting with docility to their judgment," with "no discussions regarding what he orders or demands, or up to what point obedience must go, and in what things he is to be obeyed... not only in person, but with letters and other public documents ;" and 'not limit the field in which he might and must exercise his authority, " for "obedience must not limit itself to matters which touch the faith: its sphere is much more vast: it extends to all matters which the episcopal power embraces," and not set up "some kind of opposition between one Pontiff and another. Those who, faced with two differing directives, reject the present one to hold to the past, are not giving proof of obedience to the authority which has the right and duty to guide them," "Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent." (Sources http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3578348/posts?page=14#14)
ping
IMHO, with “Francis” driving the selection/appointment of new bishops and cardinals (who will select the next Pope) we may never again see a true Pope. I hope I’m being too pessimistic.
Get rid of him by Papel Impeachment. It’s obvious he’s a commie. Blame it on Russian Collusion. Easier to prove on the Pope than Trump!
The pope is "infallible", only when teaching on dogma "ex cathedra",
as I understand it.
You will know an anti-Christ by it’s acts.
2 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
To paraphrase Yoda:
There IS no 'true' pope;
there is only pope.
Perhaps no one can depose the pope, but they sure should judge him since he isn’t speaking of God but of matters of man.
Surprised the calendar policy haven’t showed up!
In English history, the solutions were armed rebellion to force concessions (Magna Carta), refusal of Parliament to vote taxes until reforms were made (many cases), or execution (Charles II).
As for the Holy Spirit guiding conclaves... The Holy Spirit may provide guidance or inspiration, but the cardinals do not necessarily follow it.
Pray for the conversion of the Pope to Catholicism. In the meantime, put in the appropriate mental reservations if you pray for the intentions of the Pope.