Editor’s Note: Over at Canon212.com where a former saxophone player and stand up comedian, Frank Walker, has continued to publish news of all the scandals in the Church day by day, year by year, the end result was long ago predictable: that he and his followers would become sedevacantists. A sedevacantist is a Catholic who has fallen into the triple heresy of denying the special Divine Providence over the Church, denying that Christ will give the Church popes at Rome until the end of Time, and espouses the heretical presumption that “I, by accusing a pope of heresy, acquire the right to put him out of the Church”
The traditional Catholic Faith, which is defended with zeal by many, including here at the pages of FromRome.Info, holds, on the contrary, that which the Church has always believed, and which in this regard was defined infallbly at the First Vatican Council, to wit:
Pastor Aeternus
Chapter 2. On the permanence of the primacy of blessed Peter in the Roman pontiffs
- That which our lord Jesus Christ, the prince of shepherds and great shepherd of the sheep, established in the blessed apostle Peter, for the continual salvation and permanent benefit of the church, must of necessity remain for ever, by Christ’s authority, in the church which, founded as it is upon a rock, will stand firm until the end of time [45] .
- For no one can be in doubt, indeed it was known in every age that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the apostles, the pillar of faith and the foundation of the catholic church, received the keys of the kingdom from our lord Jesus Christ, the saviour and redeemer of the human race, and that to this day and for ever he lives and presides and exercises judgment in his successors the bishops of the holy Roman see, which he founded and consecrated with his blood [46] .
- Therefore whoever succeeds to the chair of Peter obtains by the institution of Christ himself, the primacy of Peter over the whole church. So what the truth has ordained stands firm, and blessed Peter perseveres in the rock-like strength he was granted, and does not abandon that guidance of the church which he once received [47] .
- For this reason it has always been necessary for every church–that is to say the faithful throughout the world–to be in agreement with the Roman church because of its more effective leadership. In consequence of being joined, as members to head, with that see, from which the rights of sacred communion flow to all, they will grow together into the structure of a single body [48] .
- Therefore,
- if anyone says that
- it is not by the institution of Christ the lord himself (that is to say, by divine law) that blessed Peter should have perpetual successors in the primacy over the whole church; or that
- the Roman pontiff is not the successor of blessed Peter in this primacy:
let him be anathema.
- if anyone says that
Thank you for telling us. I will remind my local TLM fellowmen since the old ones are avidly reading Canon212.com.
I have often enjoyed your commentary, but in this instance, I must disagree.
just two points: 1. then Cardinal Mc Carrick and his chosen associates met beforehand and conspired to select a Pope to their liking in clear violation of JP II standards, and were thereby disenfranchised. They couldn’t vote but did vote, and thus the process was invalidated. There was no valid election.
2, B. XVI was attempting a bifurcation of the papacy for which there was inadequate historical and doctrinal preparation. He, of whom I am quite fond, made a very significant error. Enough said?
Neither of the things you said ever happened, first because a man remains pope until he abdicates what the law requires, and thus there was no Conclave in 2013 and Bergoglio was not elected to anything back then, and second because Bergoglio was elected Pope on January 30th of this year.
I think you are being rather disingenuous.
One of several problems with the poll – but arguably the most important here – is the fact that the answer options given in the poll did not cover all possible positions, including yours.
So if you, or someone who agreed fully with your position, were to have attempted to respond to the poll, they could not honestly select any of the options given.
Being unaware of your current position, or uncertain of it – which in fairness changed only a few months ago – does not a heretic make.
The mechanics of the poll are one thing, the will to participate is another. A Catholic should never respond to a poll where the correct answer is not presented. But being a public heretic by disagreeing with a defined dogma, does not put one outside of the Church, since they have have chosen the heretical answer for the reasons you state. Here, we must remember that the dissonence of expression with faith may not always signify a dissonence of mind with the Church, it may mean only incapacity of will or mind to express the truth.
I’ll vote however I please. I don’t need your guidance on anything. Every morning while drinking coffee it’s a delight to read Frank’s titles on Canon212. Not sure he plays the saxophone but the comedian part is believable. Some of his titles are hilarious. Of course you must know that Zelensky, Prez of Ukraine, was a TV comedian. Maybe Frank should run for office. I’d vote for him. Would that make me even more of a heretic than you already say I am?
He does play the Saxophone, just as I do too. He said as much in one video a few years back.
Why is the election of Cardinal Siri as Pope Gregory XVII in 1958 being completely ignored by everyone exept perhaps by the FBI?
Because it never happened.
Former saxophone player and comedian? Wow, that’s some rather damning evidence against him isn’t it? Or maybe its poor debate form with various straw men, including ad hominem attacks.
I too am a saxophone player, and that was a compliment. What do you have against us and comedians?