|Recent Featured Videos and Articles||Eastern “Orthodoxy” Refuted||How To Avoid Sin||The Antichrist Identified!||What Fake Christians Get Wrong About Ephesians||Why So Many Can't Believe||“Magicians” Prove A Spiritual World Exists||Amazing Evidence For God||News Links|
|Vatican II “Catholic” Church Exposed||Steps To Convert||Outside The Church There Is No Salvation||E-Exchanges||The Holy Rosary||Padre Pio||Traditional Catholic Issues And Groups||Help Save Souls: Donate|
Canonizations Are Infallible
By Bro. Peter Dimond, O.S.B.
*Note: This article is the second part to newsletter #4, Antipope John Paul II’s Canonization of Josemaria Escriva reveals Schism among most “traditionalists”.
In this Article:
- Fr. Moderator says that Canonizations are not infallible
- St. Thomas Aquinas says that Canonizations are infallible
- St. Alphonsus, St. Bonaventure, and St. Robert Bellarmine say it is heresy to deny the infallibility of Canonizations
- The Apostate Mother Theresa of Calcutta
The “Father Moderator” of a very popular “traditional Catholic” website is telling people that Canonizations by Popes are not infallible. And he is influencing large numbers of people to this position. He is making the argument that Canonizations are not infallible in an attempt to justify his untenable position, which is to reject John Paul II’s Canonizations but still maintain that John Paul II is the Pope. Fr. Moderator knows that if Canonizations are infallible then John Paul II cannot be the Pope. Here is what he says.
First, notice that Fr. Moderator says that “Catholic theologians have provided a bailout,” but yet he doesn’t even directly quote one to prove his point. He describes his argument on the supposed fallibility of Canonizations as a “bailout” because he knows (as stated already) that if Canonizations by Popes are infallible then John Paul II is not the Pope.
Second, Fr. Moderator tells us that St. Thomas taught that Canonizations are not infallible and that the Pope can err in this matter. Is this true? Did St. Thomas Aquinas actually teach that Canonizations are not infallible?
Fr. Moderator also implies that St. Robert Bellarmine taught the same. Is this true? Did St. Robert Bellarmine indicate that a Pope could err in such a matter?
Before considering the answer to these questions, dear reader, please consider the illogic of the argument being made here by Fr. Moderator. Fr. Moderator is referencing a Saint (Thomas Aquinas) to “prove” that Saints may not really be “Saints.” Think about that.
But if Saints may not be Saints – in other words, if Canonizations are not infallible, as Fr. Moderator claims – then what does quoting Thomas Aquinas prove, for then “Tom” isn’t even a Saint! And, in fact, if Tom is not a Saint – if the Church could have erred in declaring him to be such, as Fr. Moderator says – then Tom is also not a Doctor of the Church, because (according to Fr. Moderator’s argument) the Church could have erred in that as well. Thus, if Canonizations are fallible then Thomas Aquinas is not “the Supreme Doctor, St. Thomas Aquinas” as Fr. Moderator illogically calls him – he would then be just good ole “Tom.” To put it simply: Fr. Moderator, don’t quote a Saint to “prove” your position when you don’t even believe that there are any definite Saints!
In fact, the main reason that St. Thomas’ opinion does hold considerable weight is precisely because he is a Saint and a Doctor of the Church. But he is neither if Canonizations are not infallible. Thus, one can see that Fr. Moderator’s argument is self-refuting and illogical.
Third, the question must be answered: is it even true that St. Thomas Aquinas said that Canonizations are not infallible, as Fr. Moderator claims? The answer is No. St. Thomas taught just the opposite!
We can see that Fr. Moderator is completely wrong. St. Thomas Aquinas stated that canonizations are infallible; and he even stated this in the very place (Quodlib. IX, a. 16) where Fr. Moderator says St. Thomas said the opposite!!!
Further, look at what St. Alphonsus had to say about this issue, in agreement with the teaching of St. Bonaventure, St. Robert Bellarmine and St. Thomas Aquinas.
But this should be obvious to any Catholic. For if Canonizations by Popes were fallible and non binding, one would be free to reject every single Saint in Catholic history. But such a notion is ridiculous; for if the Catholic Church can err in Canonizing Saints then it can err in promulgating the true Canon of Holy Scripture or proclaiming the Immaculate Conception or anything else.
When a true Pope Canonizes a Saint, he speaks from the Chair of Peter (ex cathedra). The formula for Canonizing Saints is below; and the formula below is the formula which was used before Vatican II. It is also the formula which is currently used by Antipope John Paul II, including when he “Canonized” Josemaria Escriva on Oct. 6, 2002.
To deny something that a Pope proclaims on Faith with this formula is outright heresy.
A Canonization is an ex cathedra (infallible) pronouncement because it fulfills the three conditions required for a Pope to speak infallibly, as defined by Vatican I above. The three conditions are as follows:
1) Speaking as Supreme Pastor in Virtue of Apostolic Authority – When a Pope Canonizes a Saint, he speaks as Supreme Pastor and in virtue of his apostolic authority, which is the first requirement for an ex cathedra pronouncement.
2) Faith or morals – When a Pope Canonizes a Saint, he speaks on a point of faith, which is the second requirement for an ex cathedra pronouncement.
3) To Be Held by the Universal Church – A Canonization is to be held by the universal Church because the Pope explicitly says so in canonizing. He says: “…we establish that in the whole Church he [x] should be devoutly honored among the Saints.” In Canonizing, the Pope further “declares and defines” that the Saint is in heaven, which demonstrates that the declaration and definition is binding on the Church. Thus, Canonizations fulfill the third and final requirement for an ex cathedra pronouncement.
Thus, a Canonization is unquestionably an ex cathedra (infallible) declaration, as the Saints above attest to. To obstinately call it into question is a mortal sin against faith; it is heresy; it is a denial of Papal Infallibility; and it is a denial of the indefectibility of the Catholic Church, as the above Saints and Doctors of the Church – including St. Bonaventure, St. Robert, St. Alphonsus and St. Thomas Aquinas – confirm. And it should be noted that even if one or more of these Saints did teach that Canonizations were fallible (which they didn’t), it wouldn’t change the fact that Canonizations are infallible because it is a demonstrable fact that Canonizations are ex cathedra pronouncements when declared with the form above.
But this “sin” and “heresy” of rejecting the infallibility of Canonizations, as the Doctors of the Church describe it, is spreading through the “traditionalists” with alarming rapidity, simply because large numbers of the “traditionalists” recognize that John Paul II’s “Canonizations” are obviously false; but many of them refuse to see the truth that he is not a Pope. Thus, by refusing to accept the truth that John Paul II is a non-Catholic Antipope, they are falling into the position of rejecting the solemn Canonizations of the one they deem to be the Pope, which is a “sin” and “heresy,” according to the Doctors of the Church.
We were truly appalled that there was basically no outrage or even commentary on the SSPX’s rejection of John Paul II’s Canonizations among the so-called “traditionalists.” The SSPX declares that Canonizations are no longer infallible, but who cares? That was the attitude of most of the heretical “traditionalists.” Who cares if the SSPX is calling into question all the Saints? Who cares if they think a Pope can err when speaking from the Chair of Peter? Who cares: they offer a valid Latin Mass – is the attitude of most in the Traditionalist movement today. But this attitude is not pleasing to God; it is quite displeasing to Him, as it rejects the divine protection that He Himself conferred upon St. Peter and his successors.
With their declaration that they no longer accept the infallibility of Canonizations, the SSPX has reached a new low. They have become quite similar to the Eastern Orthodox. They have thoroughly rejected the dogmatic truths on the Papacy and Papal Infallibility. And their wicked heresy is spreading quickly because of priests like Fr. Moderator who reject Papal Infallibility. The heresy is also spreading because many of the laypeople don’t care much about the Faith and continue to support the heretical SSPX.
One of the ways by which Fr. Moderator was able to mislead his readers on this issue was to pervert the nature of the question. In attempting to articulate his heretical argument that Canonizations are not infallible, the reader will notice that Fr. Moderator speaks about how St. Thomas and St. Robert supposedly said that a Pope can err in a decision based upon human testimony. That may be true, but that is irrelevant. The issue is not whether or not a valid Pope can make a mistake on a decision purely based on human testimony; no one disputes this. The issue is whether a Pope can err on a matter of Faith proclaimed to the whole Church and declared in virtue of his apostolic authority. And the answer to this, as St. Thomas, St. Robert and the rest agree, and as I have shown, is a resounding no. And this is why Fr. Moderator could not even bring forward one direct quote from any Saint stating that Canonizations are not infallible; but he effectively and slyly misled his readership by switching the nature of the question and misrepresenting the authorities he claimed to reference.
I now quote again the incredible declarations of Bishop Williamson and Fr. Peter Scott of the Society of St. Pius X on this issue. These declarations by these two leading SSPX voices are incredible simply because of how heretical they are.
All of this is a clear rejection of Papal Infallibility; and it is a “sin” against faith and it is “heresy,” as St. Alphonsus calls it. It is declaration that the Catholic Church has officially erred, an idea which, according to St. Francis De Sales, is a “great blasphemy.” Here is how Fr. Scott of the SSPX articulated his heresy.
All of those who agree with or support the SSPX, after being aware of these facts, are sinning gravely against Faith.
MOTHER THERESA OF CALCUTTA
Mother Theresa of Calcutta was recently “beatified” by Antipope John Paul II, and he plans on “Canonizing” her soon. It is no exaggeration to state that Mother Theresa of Calcutta was one of the greatest apostates in history. After John Paul II held his idolatrous interreligious prayer meeting in Assisi in 1986 where, among other abominations, the Dalai Lama placed a Buddhist statue on top of the Tabernacle, Mother Theresa referred to the day as “the most beautiful gift of God” (Time Magazine, Nov. 10, 1986).
A recently released book, Everything Starts From Prayer, Mother Teresa’s Meditations on Spiritual Life for People of all Faiths, also shows Mother Theresa’s thorough rejection of the Catholic Faith and the necessity of Christ for salvation. In the foreword, Anthony Stern quotes one of her most famous statements, which reveals the demonic spirit of Mother Teresa’s work:
This is apostasy from Jesus Christ and the Catholic Faith. Mother Theresa also stated:
The false gods of the non-Christian religions are demons (1 Cor. 10:20; Psalm 95:5), as 2000 years of Catholic Tradition have taught. So, in short, Mother Theresa believed that God (the Most Holy Trinity) and demons (the false gods of the heathens) are one and the same. She’s quite a candidate for Canonization, isn’t she? Mother Theresa manifested her approval of demon worship and religions of the devil (non-Christian religions) consistently, as the following quotation points out.
In Mother Theresa, A Pictorial Biography by Joanna Hurley, we read the following on page 68 about Mother Theresa’s Order, The Missionaries of Charity:
Ladies and Gentlemen, this means that the nuns of Mother Theresa’s Order not only approved of but actually participated in the pagan rites of non-Christian religions. This is Satanic! On page 68 of this book, there is a picture of the nuns of Mother Theresa’s order lighting the sparklers for the Hindu festival of Diwali and they have gigantic smiles on their faces! This is sin against the Faith of the worst kind; nay, it is religion of Antichrist – where man (and his personal preference for false religions) supersedes and replaces Jesus Christ.
A friend of ours from Canada recently called the Superior of one of Mother Theresa’s convents there. Our friend said, “How come Mother Theresa never tried to convert anyone?” The “Mother Superior” responded: “It is the ultimate respect for the human person to respect his religion.” “Mother Superior” told our friend that these non-Catholics are going to heaven even if they reject Christ, as long as they are “good people,” for that’s what matters, according to her. This means that man and his choice of religion are greater and more important than Christ. It actually means that man is God; it is therefore the Gospel of Antichrist, and Mother Theresa was its main false prophet and exemplar (outside of Antipope John Paul II), who cloaked her apostasy in purely natural works which gave her the appearance of true charity when in fact she had none.
Mother Theresa fed and clothed the bodies of many people, but she left their souls starving for what they needed most, Our Lord Jesus Christ. She deprived these souls of the only thing that really mattered, and therefore was not their true friend, but their enemy.
I bring up this issue because it is likely that Antipope John Paul II will soon “Canonize” the apostate Mother Theresa, who exemplified some of the worst religious indifferentism of any of the members of the Vatican II sect.
So, what will the “traditionalists” under Antipope John Paul II do then? Will they actuallyaccept her as a “Saint”? If they are willing to believe that Mother Theresa is a Saint, who promoted and participated in Satanic false religions, then they might as well admit that they think that the Church of Christ = the Church of Antichrist, since they would be honoring as a glorified Saint one who exemplified and believed the doctrine of Antichrist to the fullest. Truly, they might as well accept the Dalai Lama as a Saint or the founder of the Church of Satan.
Or perhaps when Mother Theresa is “Canonized” by Antipope John Paul II the false traditionalists will adopt the same heresy as the SSPX, rightly condemned by the Saints and Doctors as “sin” and “heresy,” which simply rejects the infallibility of “Canonizations”?
Or perhaps they will wake up and realize that Rome has lost the faith and become the Seat of the Antichrist (Our Lady of La Salette) and break communion with Antipope John Paul II and his counterfeit Vatican II sect and realize that he has no authority to Canonize because he is not the Pope?
Sign up for our free e-mail list to see future vaticancatholic.com videos and articles.