🧵 Congratulations to @CatholicPods @PhilCatholic and @MScarince on their paper about Morello. It includes the following:

"We cite The WM Review’s articles on Pico and St. Thomas More for their well-sourced research, while not subscribing to that publication’s sedevacantism." We may have more material to share on this in due course. Here are the articles mentioned.

First, an overview if the controversy up until that time:

wmreview.org/p/occultism-es…

Two old feasts:

18 Jan: St Peter's Chair at Rome
22 Feb: St Peter's Chair at Antioch

John XXIII "amalgamated" them into a single feast of St Peter's Chair, on 22 Feb. In other words, he abolished the feast of St Peter's Chair at Rome.

What do you think he meant by this? On 13 November 1964, Paul VI dramatically set aside the papal tiara and donated it to a museum, in order to feed the poor. From then on, he wore the simple mitre of a bishop.

What do you think he meant by this?

Item: The problematic docs from Vatican II appeared from 1965.

🧵Some comments:

1. Before all else, as said before, new converts like @langluigi_ (whether to EO or RC or anything )shouldn't set themselves up as online religious influencers. It's an absolutely incredible phenomenon.

2. There are some questions to be asked here. Let's go...

https://twitter.com/langluigi_/status/1756488156084613230

From a discussion with a friend about a similar prayer.

🧵 More on "I don't have the authority to judge."

In many states, someone isn't legally dead until they have been certified as such by a doctor. Many aspects of their estate can't be dealt with until the death is registered with the state.

Get ready for some absurdity. Let's see what would happen if we applied this "humble" idea of not having authority to judge here.

We're going to give the body the benefit of the doubt until doctor comes, and assume the person is still alive.

After all, we don't have authority or training to declare a death.

Though we, an angel from heaven, or anyone, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, which you have received...

A. Accept the good in it, resist the bad, continue to call him an angel from Heaven, and condemn those who disagree?

B. Let him be anathema? Though we, an angel from heaven, or anyone, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, which you have received...

C. Claim you don't have the authority to recognise someone's giving you a new Gospel, & bury your head in the sand?

D. Let him be anathema?

🧵 on "I don't have the authority"

If you can...

- Recognise one man is the pope
- Recognise that everybody else is not the pope

... then obviously you have the ability to recognise whether or not someone is the pope or not, and some criteria for making this judgement. Cont. Now, you might say your recognition of Francis is based on the fact that he was elected, that the cardinals say he is the pope, or the whole Church, etc.

This is to concede the point. You have the ability to recognise these criteria are fulfilled, and judge he is the pope. Cont.

It is commonly said that excommunication does not cause a man to lose his office, unless it is declared and enforced.

We believe that this is... correct!

But also irrelevant to the question of the papacy and Francis' legitimacy. Read on to see why... 🧵 Some effects of automatic excommunication are indeed automatic in the forum of conscience.

Some effects await a declaration. Loss of office. certainly seems to be one of the latter.

But wait, there's more.

Confused by everyone losing their head in the face of Fr James Altman's statement that Francis isn't the pope?

It's like we are seeing damage control from almost ever single outlet, coming out to repeat the solemn magic words: "We recognise Pope Francis."

It's weird. 👇 What do people think's at stake with this Pope Question?

We wrote this in answer to that, responding to an article by our now friend @kennedyhall.

We haven't publicised it - we hope he'll forgive us for doing so now, as it clarifies the current issues.

wmreview.co.uk/2022/10/21/wor…

Around 1511, Cajetan wrote his famous work on The Pope and the Council.

But in 1521, he wrote this, expressing what became Bellarmine's Fifth Opinion.

Don't be deceived by "before God" or judgments. He is saying: *because* he can be judged, we can know he is not the Pope. It is curious that Bellarmine only refers to the earlier text.

This doesn't *prove* that an openly heretical pope ipso facto loses office, but it does mean that Cajetan cannot really be marshalled in defence of the Fourth.

amzn.to/40lkgiP #CommissionsEarned

Rosary Novena IV - 15 decades, 54 days
12 March
Day 39/54 - Novena 5/6

In thanksgiving for the graces obtained for this intention: That Almighty God swiftly fills the Chair of St Peter with a worthy occupant who will restore all things in Christ.

Lk 8.43-48: And there was a certain woman having an issue of blood twelve years, who had bestowed all her substance on physicians, and could not be healed by any. She came behind him, and touched the hem of his garment; and immediately the issue of her blood stopped.

Rosary Novena IV - 15 decades, 54 days
11 March
Day 38/54 - Novena 5/6

In thanksgiving for the graces obtained for this intention: That Almighty God swiftly fills the Chair of St Peter with a worthy occupant who will restore all things in Christ. He said to Simon: Launch out into the deep, and let down your nets for a draught. And Simon answering said to him: Master, we have labored all the night, and have taken nothing: but at thy word I will let down the net.

Happy Feast of St Francis de Sales:

"When [a Pope - or anyone] is explicitly a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church..."

Writing centuries ago, what's next is left open, but let's follow St Francis: a heretic is a non-Catholic & has no authority. See here for why external profession of faith is an absolute necessity for membership in the Church: wmreview.co.uk/2021/08/16/mem…

In this vein, Pius XII is much maligned. No one's perfect: but measures that took place in his pontificate really were providential in terms of setting things up to survive the crisis. Whatever criticisms some might have, we'd do well to thank God for these things (Thread):

https://twitter.com/NovusOrdoWatch/status/1484164166516719625

Under Pius XII we had the following providential things:
- Clear definition of membership of the Church in Mystici Corporis
- Freeing up measures around time of Mass and the fast, which has greatly facilitated trad priests with large mass circuits

"What Augustus had in the temporal order, that, and much more, has Peter in the spiritual."

Cardinal Newman, papal maximalist.

newmanreader.org/works/miscella…

https://twitter.com/EricRSammons/status/1483547644760842241

"The voice of Peter is now, as it ever has been, a real authority, infallible when it teaches, prosperous when it commands, ever taking the lead wisely and distinctly in its own province, adding certainty to what is probable, and persuasion to what is certain."

Cardinal Newman: "If, on the one hand, we believe that a Pope can add to our articles of faith, so, on the other, we hold also that a heretical Pope, ipso facto, ceases to be Pope by reason of his heresy, as I have said." Letter to Duke of Norfolk p 377. "Others, and they the highest Ultramontane theologians, hold that a Pope who teaches heresy ipso facto ceases to be Pope." Ibid 359. NB Newman says this in *defence* of the Church against Gladstone's idea of arbitrary papal rule. "Ultramontane" is not disrespectful here.