TrapCast Express
TrapCast Express, it's Monday, September 19th, 2022.
Does the Holy Spirit still guide the Church?
That question was asked by Eric Sammons of Crisis Magazine on September 8th.
Considering that Sammons wrote a book called Deadly Indifference,
How the Church Lost Her Mission, and How We Can Reclaim It,
I'd say that is not the kind of fellow you'll want to consult about questions of whether or how
the Holy Spirit guides the Catholic Church.
And indeed, his write-up was the usual shallow treatment of a very serious and important topic,
with a predictable conclusion.
In conclusion, of course, it reaffirmed once more the popular recognize-and-resist position,
according to which the Vicar of Christ can teach or legislate or decree one thing,
and then a magazine editor like Eric Sammons can decide to disagree and go against that in public
and tell everyone else to follow suit because, hey, the Pope isn't always infallible,
and besides,
what about the Aryan crisis and, oh my gosh, we once had popes who were moral scoundrels?
That's pretty much the level of theology and Church history at which Sammons operates,
and it's utterly disgraceful.
Because these are really serious matters, and a Catholic cannot simply refuse submission
to the Roman pontiff and then point to some other bishop that he chooses to let go of.
Instead, whether that be Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre or Athanasius Schneider or Ted Strickland,
and then declare those bishops the safe norm to follow,
because that is not how it works in the Catholic Church.
The Pope has immediate universal jurisdiction over every single Catholic.
That is a dogma.
Okay?
You can look it up in Vatican I.
That means you are subject to the Pope, right, if you're Catholic.
So, if we assume for a minute, for the sake of argument,
that Francis is the Pope and his modernist establishment is the Catholic Church,
then you must submit to his rule.
And what he teaches, what he legislates and decrees,
at least in his official documents,
that is for you to...
to accept.
Okay?
Period.
If an auxiliary bishop from Kazakhstan says something different,
then you do not have the option of simply going by that instead.
Not even if you're in that diocese.
Now, of course, Eric Sammons just so happens to conclude
that the way the Holy Ghost still guides the Church,
and he means the Novus Ordo Church, of course,
that sorry heap of apostasy,
sacrilege, and blasphemy that continually leads souls to hell,
is by giving us shepherds just like the ones that he, Sammons,
happens to agree with.
Even if, or rather, precisely because,
they differ from Francis and oppose him to an extent.
This is nuts.
By the same token, one might as well disagree with Schneider,
or Strickland, and instead embrace, you know,
Blaise Cupich, or Robert McElroy, or Reinhard Marx.
Right?
They, at least, have the full approval of the supposed pope.
But no, no, no, says Sammons,
those individuals are not being led by the Holy Spirit.
They are being unfaithful to the Holy Ghost.
Let's look at what Eric Sammons says verbatim.
Having touched on some troublesome points of church history,
he says that the Holy Ghost guides the church only with a light touch.
Then he adds, very casually, the following, quote,
He allows sinful men to corrupt the church's institutions,
to proclaim heresy, and to degrade the witness of the church
to the point of near silence.
The Holy Spirit's guidance is just that,
guidance.
The church is not a puppet through which the Holy Spirit controls all the strings.
Such a setup would violate one of God's greatest gifts to mankind, free will.
So, how does the Holy Spirit guide the church?
Instead of controlling her,
he influences each individual member,
and particularly, but not exclusively,
each member of the hierarchy.
This influence can be either accepted or rejected by each individual.
If many individuals accept it,
the church will see good times,
with growth and examples of holiness shining through.
But if most individuals do not accept the Holy Spirit's guidance,
then we have times such as the Arian crisis,
or today's crisis, unquote.
In other words,
the office of the papacy,
the magisterium of the Holy See,
in the final analysis,
it's all basically useless,
because it can be corrupted by sinful men.
It means nothing,
and has no guarantees,
except perhaps that
once-in-a-blue-moon infallible ex cathedra pronouncement.
Now, what documentation,
what evidence from church teaching,
does Sammons provide in support of his thesis?
None, of course.
He is effectively asking the reader
to take his word for it all.
He thinks the church is guided by the Holy Spirit
in the sense that God sends graces,
and if people accept those graces,
then things turn out well.
And if they don't,
then you have hell on earth.
You have the papal magisterium teaching heresy
and leading the Catholic sheep astray.
And I guess it's then up to each individual believer
to figure out which way to go.
Which bishop, which cleric,
is currently acting in accordance with God's graces?
Which pope is currently teaching the truth?
And which pope is a heretic
who must be avoided under pain of damnation?
That's quite the arc of salvation, huh?
I mean, any Protestant could say that about his church.
And then if some bishops resist and others don't,
well, I guess then you have...
Then you have to decide which group of bishops is right,
or if even any of them is right,
and to what extent.
And we're supposed to believe that that is the church
outside of which there is no salvation?
It sounds like there's no salvation inside of it either.
But hey, Eric Sammons is there to help you sort it all out.
Folks, this is considered traditional Catholicism in our time.
It is beyond the pale.
So, what should you do then?
Should you take my word instead of Sammons' word?
No, not at all.
Rather, take, for example, the word of Pope Leo XIII.
Quote,
For he who is the Spirit of truth,
inasmuch as he proceedeth both from the Father,
who is the eternally true,
and from the Son, who is the substantial truth,
receiveth from Eve,
each both his essence and the fullness of all truth.
This truth he communicates to his church,
guarding her by his all-powerful help
from ever falling into error,
and aiding her to foster daily
more and more the germs of divine doctrine,
and to make them fruitful for the welfare of the peoples.
And since the welfare of the peoples,
for which the church was established,
absolutely requires that this office
should be continued for all time,
the Holy Ghost perpetually supplies life and strength
to preserve and increase the church.
I will ask the Father,
and he will give you another paraclete,
that he may abide with you forever,
the Spirit of truth."
Unquote.
And that last sentence is a quote from
St. John,
St. John's Gospel,
chapter 14,
verses 16 and 17.
So, that is from the encyclical
Divinum Illud,
published in 1897,
paragraph 5.
That was Pope Leo XIII.
Or, consider the following words
of Pope Pius XI,
who wrote in 1930,
quote,
A characteristic of all true followers of Christ,
lettered or unlettered,
is to suffer them all,
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,
who is himself guided
by Jesus Christ, our Lord.
Unquote.
And that's from the encyclical letter
Casti Canubii, paragraph 104.
Now, ironically, that encyclical
is quite popular among semi-trads
because, you know,
it's the great encyclical
on Christian marriage.
And, of course,
it includes a prohibition
of contraception.
But, somehow,
that part that I just quoted
doesn't get that much attention.
Ah, but,
the Pope isn't always infallible.
Right?
That's right.
But then, neither is Eric Sammons
or Athanasius Schneider
or Peter Kwasniewski.
Besides, God never told you
that you should listen
to any of these fellows.
But he did tell you
to listen to the Pope
and not just when he's infallible.
See, the deposit of faith
was entrusted to the apostles,
specifically to St. Peter
and his successors,
to guard and interpret
and guarantee.
It was not entrusted
to any other individual
of our choosing.
Whether his last name be Burke
or Lefebvre or Schneider
or anyone else.
And, see, that's why
it is so important
to understand
that Francis
is not a valid Pope.
There is no substitute
for a true Pope.
That is why
Sedevacantism is so important.
It's not a bunch of Sedevacantists
arrogantly making their view
into a dogma.
It's applying the correct
pre-Vatican II doctrine
and teaching on the papacy
to the current situation.
And that pre-Vatican II
understanding of the papacy
we have an obligation to retain.
It's not optional.
But once we apply that
to Jorge Bergoglio in particular,
we find out that the man
cannot be the Pope.
The papacy is not just
an empty label.
It is a reality
that has real consequences.
Now, let me briefly say
one thing about Pope Liberius
and St. Athanasius
and the Arian heresy.
Because a lot of people think
that Pope Liberius
sided with Arius
and that whereas
St. Athanasius remained Orthodox,
the Pope did not.
That is false.
But don't listen to me about that.
Listen to the Popes.
For example,
Pope St. Anastasius I
who reigned shortly after Liberius
from 399 to 401.
In his letter
Dat Mihi Plurinum,
St. Anastasius mentions
Pope Liberius in a list of
holy people who endured exile
for the Catholic faith.
And you can find that
in Denzinger No. 93.
Or listen to Pope Pius IX.
He said this, quote,
And previously,
the Arians falsely accused
Liberius, also our predecessor,
to the Emperor Constantine
because Liberius refused
to condemn St. Athanasius,
Bishop of Alexandria,
and refused to support
their heresy.
Unquote.
That's from the encyclical letter
Quartus Supra of Pius IX
released in 1873.
That's paragraph 16.
And lastly,
let's look at Pope Benedict XV.
Not only does he name
Pope Liberius as one of those
who preferred exile
to compromising the faith,
he specifically notes
that St. Athanasius was confirmed
in the Orthodox faith
because he relied on
the papal judgment of Liberius.
Here's the quote
from the encyclical of
Pope Benedict XV.
Quote,
The ancient fathers,
especially those who held
the more illustrious chairs
of the East,
since they accepted
these privileges
as proper to the
pontifical authority,
took refuge
in the apostolic sea
whenever heresy
or internal strife
troubled them.
For it alone
promised safety
in extreme crises.
Basil the Great did so,
as did the renowned defender
of the Nicene Creed,
Athanasius,
as well as John Chrysostom.
For the great
of these inspired fathers
of the Orthodox faith
appealed from the councils
of bishops
to the supreme judgment
of the Roman pontiffs,
according to the prescriptions
of the ecclesiastical canons.
Who can say
that they were wanting
in conformity to the command
which they had from Christ?
Indeed,
lest they should prove
faithless in their duty,
some went fearlessly
into exile,
as did Liberius
and Silvarius.
So that's Pope Benedict XV,
the encyclical
Principi Apostolorum Petro,
published in 1920,
paragraph 3.
So there we have it.
The Holy Ghost guides
the Catholic Church above all
by keeping the apostolic sea
from defecting.
The Roman sea alone
has that guarantee.
Vatican I,
the first Vatican,
Vatican Council,
teaches that explicitly,
quoting the words
of the Fourth Council
of Constantinople,
as follows,
quote,
Since that saying
of our Lord Jesus Christ,
You are Peter,
and upon this rock
I will build my church,
cannot fail of its effect
the words spoken
are confirmed
by their consequences.
For in the apostolic sea,
the Catholic religion
has always been preserved
unblemished,
and sacred doctrine
been held in honor.
Since it is our earnest desire
to be in no way separated
from this faith and doctrine,
we hope that we may deserve
to remain in that one communion
which the apostolic sea preaches,
for in it is the whole
and true strength
of the Christian religion.
Unquote.
All other dioceses in the world
can defect from the true faith,
but the Sea of Rome cannot.
But if Francis is the Pope,
then the Sea of Rome has defected.
Ergo, he cannot be the Pope.
That is the only possible conclusion
without giving up the Catholic faith.
And therefore,
we embrace Sedevacantism
rather than recognize
and resist traditionalism,
because while the Sea of Rome
cannot defect,
it can be vacant.
And yes, that raises
a lot of other questions
and difficulties,
and we have to leave
a number of things to mystery,
trusting and believing
in God and his promises.
But what we can say with certainty
is that the solution
is not found
in accepting a defected apostolic sea
and just picking some other bishop
to follow.
That other bishop
or priest
or whatever
doesn't have
the divine assistance.
And if you think he does,
well, then that's based
on your own private judgment
and contradicted
by the teaching
of the Catholic Church.
Ladies and gentlemen,
the key takeaway here today
is what Vatican I
and Constantinople IV
teach so beautifully
and so clearly,
that the divine assistance,
the promises of Christ,
to St. Peter
and his lawful successors,
cannot fail in their effects
and are therefore confirmed
in their consequences.
Now it's time
to acknowledge
the consequences.
Tradcast Express
is a production of
Novos Ordo Watch.
Check us out at tradcast.org
and if you like what we're doing,
please consider making
a tax-deductible contribution
at novosordowatch.com.
That's novosordowatch.org slash donate.