Fr. Kramer Refutes Pseudo Traditionalists Salza & Siscoe Pt. II
Re: My Reply to John Salza
Numquid adhæret tibi sedes iniquitatis: qui fingis laborem in præcepto? (Ps. 93)
There is a saying in Catholic theology: Ubi non est veritas non est caritas. Where there is not truth, there is not charity. It is not I but those who oppose Catholic truth who are lacking charity.
The debate with John Salza is not about Francis or the conciliar popes, but is focused on the errors of the sedevacantist movement. What Salza & Siscoe have done is to falsify and totally invert Catholic moral doctrine in order to refute error with error -- exactly as Martin Luther, who combatted the abuse of selling indulgences by heretically denying both indulgences and purgatory.
St. Alphonsus wrote, "The Law of God is already strict; we must not make it stricter". Salza & Siscoe have erred gravely against Catholic teaching; inverting moral and canonical doctrine in order to bind the Catholic conscience to falsehood. This is the work of devilish iniquity: Numquid adhæret tibi sedes iniquitatis: qui fingis laborem in præcepto? (Ps. 93)
The Sedevacantist Movement errs gravely by presuming formal heresy on the basis of the patent matter of heresy alone. As gravely as the conciliar popes have contradicted Catholic dogma, that fact alone does not justify the Catholic to declare the pope or anyone else guilty of the crime of heresy unless the malice of unbelief is manifestly evident to the point that it is impossible to deny.
However, when the evidence of public formal heresy or apostasy is conclusive and certain; it is the right and duty of the Catholic to reject the infidel's claim on the papacy. It is also the unanimous teaching of canonists that if there is positive and probable doubt about the person of the pontiff, or the validity of his election; one may withdraw from obedience without becoming schismatic. (“Finally one can not consider as schismatics those who refuse to obey the Roman Pontiff because they would hold his person suspect or, because of widespread rumours, doubt fully elected (as happened after the election of Urban VI) ...” Wernz-Vidal, Ius Canonicum, Rome, Gregorian Univ. 1937, Vol. II, p. 398.)
Eminent authorities (whom I will quote in my next installment of my reply to Salza) also teach that if a pope is professing heresy, he is not to be obeyed. This principle applies not only to the case of a formal heretic like Bergoglio; but even to a presumably true pope like John Paul II who loved the Church, but unintentionally carried out the work of destroying the Church because of his material heresy.
St. Robert Bellarmine says in De Romano Pontifice, that if the pope were to attack the faith, he must be resisted, and his will must be thwarted. This is the only real means by which Catholics can combat those who would destroy the Church, whether intentionally or unwittingly. Under such circumstances, the virtue of obedience requires resistance; and to obey popes who attack the faith, litrurgy, and discipline of the Church is a sin against the virtue of obedience -- it is the sin of "servile or indiscreet obedience", as Prümmer explains. It is precisely this sin which Salza & Siscoe promote in their misguided attempt to combat Sedevacantism.
The result of the errors of Salza & Siscoe is something far worse than the damage that the Sedevacantists have done to the Church; since their error attempts to deprive the Catholic of the only defense of the faith against the abomination of desolation, which St. Jerome explains is "perverse doctrine in the Holy Place": “Abominatio desolationis intelligi potest et omne dogma perversum: quod cum viderimus stare in loco sancto, hoc est in Ecclesia.” (Liber IV, Comment. in cap. XXIV Matthei.)
The magnitude of this abomination which is about to be consummated and is already taking place in our days was prophetically foretold by Pope Leo XIII, in his prayer to St. Michael which he published in the Raccolta and the Roman Ritual (and was subsequently removed acter his death); and therefore is a document of his ordinary magisterium. This is what he foretold in the prayer:
"Ecclesiam, Agni immaculati sponsam, faverrrimi hostes repleverunt amaritudinibus, inebriarunt absinthio; ad omnia desiderabilia ejus impias miserunt manus. Ubi sedes beatissimi Petri et Cathedra veritatis ad lucem gentium constituta est, ibi thronum posuerunt abominationis et impietatis suæ; ut percusso Pastore, et gregem disperdere valeant."
"Behold the Church, the Spouse of the Immaculate Lamb, filled with bitterness and inebriated with gall by the most crafty enemies; who have laid impious hands on all that is most sacred. Where the See of the most blessed Peter and the Chair of the truth, was constituted as the light of the nations, there they have set up the throne of their abominable impiety, so that the shepherd being struck, the sheep may be dispersed."
When I explained that precisely this is what will take place (that the visible, material apparatus of the Church will for a time be taken over by the enemy); Salza publicly accused me of heresy. Yet, one of the most learned of popes has affirmed that this will indeed take place. It is in scripture and tradition.
Fundamentalists like Salza think such a belief violates the indefectibility and visibility of the Church. They err by making an overly strict application of literalism in their interpretation of dogma that contradicts and does violence to the nuanced doctrine of scripture, the Fathers, and the common belief of Catholics throughout the ages.
These are the kind of people who are too cowardly to make a judgment of conscience; and prefer to blindly follow an authority figure -- even a devilish counterfeit. They will pay for their sinful, cowardly fear with hell fire -- because what ultimately determines whether one will be saved or damned is how one has made or failed to make the proper judgments of conscience. One can seek to inform one's conscience on the advice of another, but ultimately the law of God demands that we make a judgment of conscience and follow it. Those who deceive themselves by saying, "Who am I to judge?", condemn themselves. You cannot say, "this is for a future pope to judge", while the vicar of Satan dressed in white cassock demands your submission, and the law of God demands you reject him.
Cardinal Manning wrote: “The apostasy of the city of Rome from the vicar of Christ and its destruction by Antichrist may be thoughts very new to many Catholics, that I think it well to recite the text of theologians of greatest repute. First Malvenda, who writes expressly on the subject, states as the opinion of Ribera, Gaspar Melus, Biegas, Suarrez, Bellarmine and Bosius that Rome shall apostatize from the Faith, drive away the Vicar of Christ and return to its ancient paganism. ...Then the Church shall be scattered, driven into the wilderness, and shall be for a time, as it was in the beginning, invisible; hidden in catacombs, in dens, in mountains, in lurking places; for a time it shall be swept, as it were from the face of the earth. Such is the universal testimony of the Fathers of the early Church.”- Henry Edward Cardinal Manning, The Present Crisis of the Holy See, 1861, London: Burns and Lambert, pp. 88-90)
The eminent theologian, Fr. E. Sylvester Berry writes on the Apocalypse:
"“The dragon is seen in heaven which is here a symbol of the Church, the kingdom of heaven on earth. This indicates that the first troubles of those days will be inaugurated within the Church by apostate bishops, priests, and peoples, — the stars dragged down by the tail of the dragon “ . . . The dragon stands before the woman, ready to devour the child that is brought forth. In other words, the powers of hell seek by all means to destroy the Pope elected in those days."
Fr. Berry continues: "The ‘mystery of iniquity’ gradually developing through the centuries, cannot be fully consummated while the power of the Papacy endures, but now he that ‘withholdeth is taken out of the way.’ During the interregnum ‘that wicked one shall be revealed’ in his fury against the Church.” "It is a matter of history that the most disastrous periods for the Church were times when the Papal throne was vacant, or when anti-popes contended with the legitimate head of the Church. Thus also shall it be in those evil days to come."
“The Church deprived of her chief pastor must seek sanctuary in solitude there to be guided by God Himself during those trying days . . . In those days the Church shall . . . find refuge and consolation in faithful souls, especially in the seclusion of the religious life.
“ . . . Our Divine Savior has a representative on earth in the person of the Pope upon whom He has conferred full powers to teach and govern. Likewise, Antichrist will have his representative in the false prophet who will be endowed with the plenitude of satanic powers to deceive the nations. “ . . . As indicated by the resemblance to a lamb, the prophet will probably set himself up in Rome as a sort of antipope during the vacancy of the papal throne . . .
“ . . . The ‘abomination of desolation’ has been wrought in many Catholic churches by heretics and apostates who have broken altars, scattered relics of martyrs and desecrated the Blessed Sacrament. At the time of the French Revolution a lewd woman was seated upon the altar of the cathedral in Paris and worshipped as the goddess of reason. Such things but faintly foreshadow the abominations that will desecrate churches in those sorrowful days when Antichrist will seat himself at the altar to be adored as God." ". . .Antichrist and his prophet will introduce ceremonies to imitate the Sacraments of the Church. In fact there will be a complete organization - a church of Satan set up in opposition to the Church of Christ. Satan will assume the part of God the Father; Antichrist will be honored as Savior, and his prophet will usurp the role of Pope. Their ceremonies will counterfeit the Sacraments . . .” (Published in 1921 by Father E. Sylvester Berry in, The Apocalypse of St. John.)
I do not say that Jorge Bergoglio is that false prophet, but the events since the Second Vatican Council have been moving in that direction, and at present the "one who withholdeth" has been "taken out of the way". I have demonstrated quite conclusively in my writings that Pope Benedict's renunciation is null & void due to defect of intention and fatal equivocation. He expressly stated his intention to partially retain the petrine "munus", and declared only his relinquishing of the power of governance. Subsequently he has repeatedly stated only that he had renounced the "exercise of the ministry", while very pointedly abstaining from stating unequivocally that in his act of renunciation he was abdicating the OFFICE. The defect of intention is patent.
The fatal equivocation consists in Benedict's juxtaposing his stated intention to partially retain the official munus with the statement that this partial renunciation by which he intends to relinquish the power of governance has the juridical effect of vacating the Chair, and necessitating a conclave to elect a successor. That can only happen when a pope unequivocally and totally abdicates the OFFICE. The equivocation renders the act null & void -- without any juridical effect or force of law; since equivocation is opposed to the very nature of law, which must not be rendered dubious by equivocation: Lex dubia lex nulla.
Salza/Siscoe and their ilk say that Catholics must bow down in submissive obedience to the apocalyptic abomination where the Chair of Peter was established -- that we must remain in communion with this "throne of abominable impiety". God commands the opposite: "And I heard another voice out of the heaven saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye have not fellowship in her sins" - Apoc. 18:4)
Please see my articles on the danger of the pseudo traditionalists:
TradCatKnight: There are fundamentalists both in the sedevacantist camp and likewise in the pseudo traditionalist camp. Maybe John Salza wants an endorsement (on top of Scott Hahn) from Francis for his book as well!
Pseudo trad argument destroyed...