Fri, 15 Apr 2016 | Cover | Page 22

Debating the Relevant Issues...

Sedevacantist Errors on Fact and Law:

Unraveling the Anti-Catholic Thesis

By John Salza & Robert Siscoe

PART I

In our book True or False Pope?, as well as our latest articles at www.

trueorfalsepope.com (under the "Sedevacantist Watch" tab),

1 we have discussed the critical distinction between questions of fact and law regarding the loss of office for a heretical Pope. In this material, we have demonstrated that Sedevacantists have consistently overlooked this distinction as they attempt to defend their position (you will not find this distinction mentioned in any of their articles, and it’s no wonder why). This article summarizes the key concepts regarding fact and law, which will help the reader to understand one of the most fundamental errors of the Sedevacantist position.

An Overview of the Sedevacantist Error

Sedevacantists generally maintain that Sedevacantism is solely a "question of fact" (i.e., whether the Pope is a heretic), which they claim is to be discerned by the private judgment of individuals, rather than a question of

1 See "Mario Derksen’s Elementary Error on Fact vs. Law" and "Sedevacantist Bishop Dan Dolan Concedes the Church is the Judge of the Question of Fact" at www.trueorfalsepope.com.

Church law to be judged by the proper ecclesiastical authorities. But this amounts to running to second base before crossing first base. Whether the Pope is a heretic is indeed a "question of fact" (second base), but who is authorized to judge the facts is a question of law (first base) that must be resolved first, as reason and logic demand. Furthermore, questions such as if, when, and how a Pope who fell into heresy would lose his office are additional questions of law, which the Church alone has the authority to decide. The following illustrates the critical distinction between the questions of law versus fact, which Sedevacantists have consistently overlooked: First Base: Question of Law – Can a Pope lose his office for heresy? If so, when and how does the loss of office happen (does the Church depose him, or does he lose his office ipso facto?), and who possesses the authority to judge the matter?

Second Base: Question of Fact – Is the Pope a formal, manifest heretic?

Now, let’s look at these questions of law and fact in more detail.

Questions of Law

As stated above, questions relating to precisely how and when a heretical Pope loses his office (or if he even can lose his office) are questions of law.

In his book De Romano Pontifice, St.

Robert Bellarmine said there were five different opinions concerning these questions, all of which fall into the category of law or speculative theology. 2

These five opinions have been debated by theologians for centuries, and have never been settled by the Church – who alone has the authority to settle them.

What this means is that no one can claim that just because a certain theologian held an opinion concerning a question of law, that their opinion must be correct; nor can an individual draw a conclusion based upon the theological opinion and then declare their conclusion to be a fact. Many Sedevacantists may be surprised to learn that the leading Sedevacantist clerics of our day have admitted that the Church alone has the

2 Four opinions pertain to how a heretical Pope would lose his office, or if a Pope can lose his office for heresy. The other opinion addresses whether a Pope can fall into formal heresy in the first place.

Continued Next Page