Is Feser wrong that the "Unanimous Acceptance [Universal Acceptance]... ensure[s] that he [Francis] really is Pope" according to Bishop Gracida?
On May 5, Dr. Edward Feser said that "arguments claiming to establish the invalidity of Benedict’s resignation are no good" for the "reason is that, for the Church as a whole corporate body to accept as pope a man who is not in fact the pope would be contrary to her indefectibility, and thus contrary to Christ’s promise that the gates of Hell will not prevail against her. This is just standard, traditional Catholic theology. (Robert Siscoe [and John Salza] provides a useful overview of the main points here and here.) Hence the morally unanimous acceptance [universal acceptance] of Francis as pope in the years immediately following his election is by itself enough to ensure that he really is pope." [[http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2022/05/benedict-is-not-pope-reply-to-some.html]
In 2020, John Salza claimed that Francis was "universally accepted"
"In
no case were any of these antipopes universally accepted by the entire
episcopacy following their election, as in the case with Pope Francis."
[http://www.trueorfalsepope.com/p/annbarnhardt-is-liar-and-fool-byjohn.html?m=1]
On March 23, 2019, Bishop Rene Gracida who would have to be part of such
a "universal acceptance" demonstrated that Salza's statement is false:
https://abyssum.org/2019/03/23/why-do-intelligent-men-pursue-the-application-of-an-obsolete-concept-universal-acceptance-to-the-problem-of-the-invalidity-of-the-papacy-of-francis-the-merciful-in-this-day-and-age-of-instant-elec/
WHY
DO INTELLIGENT MEN PURSUE THE APPLICATION OF AN OBSOLETE CONCEPT
“UNIVERSAL ACCEPTANCE” TO THE PROBLEM OF THE INVALIDITY OF THE PAPACY OF
FRANCIS THE MERCIFUL IN THIS DAY AND AGE OF INSTANT ELECTRONIC
COMMUNICATION AROUND THE WORLD
I am in receipt of an email from Steve Skojec, publisher of the website
OnePeterFive in which he defends his posts in which he argues for the
validity of the election of Francis the Merciful on the basis of the
“universal acceptance” of Francis’ election by the world’s Catholic
population.
The idea of “universal acceptance” of the election of popes of the past
may have had it’s origin in the first centuries of the Church when popes
were chosen by acclamation of the assembled citizens of Rome, and
perhaps later when the princes and kings of Europe decided on the
legitimacy of papal contestants in the time of the Avignon captivity of
the papacy.
But the idea of “universal acceptance” as the principle determining the
validity of Francis’ claim to the Chair of Peter is absurd in this day
of instant electronic communication. There is not a world-wide Pew or
Gallup poll that can determine the degree of “acceptance” of the
Bergolian regime as valid by the world’s Catholic population.
From the moment that Francis appeared on the balcony of St. Peter’s
Basilica improperly dressed and accompanied by men of known or suspected
homosexual orientation many Catholics besides myself were shocked and
dismayed.
Almost immediately almost every word publicly uttered by Francis shocked
Catholic sensibilities, such as telling the woman with several children
to “stop breeding like rabbits.” Many Catholics withheld their
“acceptance” and adopted a wait-and-see attitude.
Then the Amoris Laeticia debacle unfolded and now an even larger
percentage of Catholic around the world began to express reservations
about the ‘papacy’ of Francis the Merciful. There was never universal
acceptance of the validity of Jorge Bergoglio.
One thing is certain, the popes of the Twentieth Century were aware that
the election of future popes was now no longer subject to the
interference of kings and princes as in the past, now the corruption of
the democratic processes for choosing the heads of nations was
threatening the papal conclaves of the Church. Pope Paul VI, perhaps
alarmed by the forces for radical reform of the Church follow the lead
of his recent predecessor and published a revision of the Apostolic
Constitution which governs papal conclaves.
It is unthinkable that Pope Saint John Paul II was unaware of the
plotting that began with the St. Gallen Mafia in the early 1990s.
His magnificent Apostolic Constituion, Universi Dominci Gregis, was his
prescient action to head off the corruption of the conclaves of the
future. Yet, the rot at the center of the hierarchy had progress to
such point that Jorge Bergoglio was almost elected instead of Joseph
Ratzinger, but the St. Gallen conspirators succeed in 2013 with the
election of Francis the Merciful.
What is the sure test of the validity of the election of a cardinal to
the papacy? It is not the medieval concept of ‘universal acceptance.’
It is compliance with the law of the Church. The Apostolic Constitution
Universi Dominici Gregis is the only law in effect since it was
published by Pope Saint John Paul II in 1992.
If there is one characteristic that is common to the leadership of the
Church since the Second Vatican Council is disregard for law, all law,
divine law and canon law. Men who would be architects of the Church of
the Future ignore the law of God and the law of His Church. That is why
some cling to the outmoded concept of ‘universal acceptance’ of a man
who obtained the Chair of Peter through the manipulations of many who by
their immoral lives reveal their contempt for law, all law, including
Divine Law.
His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, having known a prodigious amount of information on this,
was fully knowledgeable in the details of dogmatic and doctrinal principles which previous
to his Apostolic Constitution, Universi Dominici Gregis, could and would be applied to resolve
questions about the validity of a particular historic Papacy, and that His Holiness categorically
and specifically intended to dispense with, and utterly to preempt, the need for, and use of,
any principles which had been applied historically to resolve ambiguities and doubts
about the incumbency of any Pontiff putatively emerging from a Conclave to which His
Apostolic Constitution, Universi Dominici Gregis applied.
This means that because the status of Monsignor Bergoglio can be determined completely
by a fair and just application of Universi Dominici Gregis without reference to any guidance
external or extrinsic to such Constitution, having recourse to such historic doctrinal and
dogmatic concepts, e.g., universal acceptance, is neither material nor relevant, and never
necessary or proper for the rational discernment of the question of whether or not
Monsignor Bergoglio was validly elected as a true Roman Pontiff. The “scienter” Promulgation
determines this certainty of discernment confined within the “four corners” of the Constitution:
“This Constitution . . . is to be fully and integrally implemented and is to serve as a guide
for all to whom it refers. As determined above, I hereby declare abrogated all Constitutions
and Orders issued in this regard by the Roman Pontiffs, and at the same time I declare
completely null and void anything done by any person, whatever his authority, knowingly
or unknowingly, in any way contrary to this Constitution.”[Promulgation
Clause, Apostolic Constitution, Universi Dominici Gregis]
This language does not admit of any exception, and certainly not an exception based on
the degree to which a putative Pope has “acceptance” as such. “Universal acceptance”
originated in an age before the printing press, a time when what was required was known
by few and what was performed was understood by even less. It simply has no place
in discerning a Conclave called subject to Universi Dominici Gregis. What Skojec,
Does not seem to understand is that, long in advance and lawfully, His Holiness, Pope
John Paul II, has forbidden anyone from resorting to “universal acceptance”
or any other principle extrinsic to Universi Dominici Gregis to discern the outcome of papal election.
Thus, His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, having known a prodigious amount of information on this,
was fully knowledgeable in the details of dogmatic and doctrinal principles which previous
to his Apostolic Constitution, Universi Dominici Gregis, could and would be applied to resolve
questions about the validity of a particular historic Papacy, and His Holiness categorically
and specifically intended to dispense with, and utterly to preempt, the need for, and use of,
any such principles which had been applied historically to resolve ambiguities and doubts
about the incumbency of any Pontiff putatively emerging from a Conclave to which His
Apostolic Constitution, Universi Dominici Gregis applied.
This means that because the status of Monsignor Bergoglio can be determined completely
by a fair and just application of Universi Dominici Gregis without reference to any guidance
external or extrinsic to such Constitution, having recourse to any such historic doctrinal and
dogmatic concept, e.g., universal acceptance, is neither material nor relevant, and never
necessary or proper for the rational discernment of the question of whether or not
Monsignor Bergoglio was validly elected as a true Roman Pontiff. The “scienter” Promulgation
determines this certainty of discernment confined within the “four corners” of the Constitution:
“This Constitution . . . is to be fully and integrally implemented and is to serve as a guide
for all to whom it refers. As determined above, I hereby declare abrogated all Constitutions
and Orders issued in this regard by the Roman Pontiffs, and at the same time I declare
completely null and void anything done by any person, whatever his authority, knowingly
or unknowingly, in any way contrary to this Constitution.” [Promulgation
Clause, Apostolic Constitution, Universi Dominici Gregis]
This language does not admit of any exception, and certainly not an exception based on
the degree to which a putative Pope has “acceptance” as such. “Universal acceptance”
originated in an age before the printing press, a time when what was required was known
by few and what was performed was understood by even less. It simply has no place
in discerning a Conclave called subject to Universi Dominici Gregis.
Some do not seem to understand that, long in advance and lawfully, His Holiness, Pope
John Paul II, has forbidden and anyone from resorting to “universal acceptance”
or any other principle extrinsic to Universi Dominici Gregis in order to discern the outcome.
[https://abyssum.org/2019/03/23/why-do-intelligent-men-pursue-the-application-of-an-obsolete-concept-universal-acceptance-to-the-problem-of-the-invalidity-of-the-papacy-of-francis-the-merciful-in-this-day-and-age-of-instant-elec/]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pray an Our Father now
for the restoration of the Church as well as for the Triumph of the
Kingdom of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
Pray an Our Father now for reparation for the sins committed because of Francis's Amoris Laetitia.