Post 1




Dear Thomas, and List,

I'm happy to kick this off, since I am one of those who has formed the judgement that Karol Wojtyla cannot be the Vicar of Christ.
I propose to establish these points:

1. Catholics may (and must in many cases) assess whether a claimed prelate really possesses authority in Christ's Church.
2. Heretics are baptised men who doubt or deny at least one dogma, whilst retaining the claim of being Christians.
3. Manifest heretics are heretics who have severed their external bonds of union with the Church, and are therefore not Catholics.
4. Manifest heretics can be known with certainty as such, by various external indicators.
5. Manifest heretics cannot possess authority in Christ's Church.
6. Karol Wojtyla is a manifest heretic - indeed, he is a notorious heretic.
7. Karol Wojtyla is not the pope.
8. If Karol Wojtyla is the pope, then Holy Church has defected, that is, failed. This is impossible.

I am happy to prove these points in any order whatsoever, except for where there is an obvious logical connection between them. Hence points 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 8, are sufficiently stand-alone points, and may be proved in any order one likes. Number 6 requires that the definitions of "manifest" and "heretic" be established first. Number 7 needs no proof at all if the rest are established - it follows necessarily from the first six points, and from the last point (#8) on its own.

However, I do strongly recommend that we examine the nature of heresy first, and how it is known.

Yours in JMJ,
John Lane.
www.sedevacantist.com

Home