Sedevacantism: The Only Logical Answer

by Rev. Fr. Benedict Hughes, CMRI

* Originally published in The Reign of Mary, Issue No. 150, Spring 2013

They think you are lepers!” These words were spoken by a good, traditional priest, who had been warned against us sedevacantists. Of course, this is nothing new. We have become accustomed to the persecution and isolation shown us by many of those who cannot seem to grasp the logic of our position. Once again, then, let us briefly review the reasons that have led us to reject the claim to papal authority by the modern Conciliar popes.

We have been faced since Vatican Council II with an unprecedented situation in the Church — namely, a situation in which men who claim to be lawful successors of St. Peter are teaching a new religion. They have been guilty of numerous heresies, which have been well-documented in various writings (e.g. Fr. Anthony Cekada’s article Traditionalists, Infallibility and the Pope, which can be read or downloaded for free at this link).

Yet a true pope could not possibly teach such errors. Further, one with lawful papal authority could not make laws that violate the tenets of our Faith, as these men have done. We are consequently obliged to ask ourselves whether this claimed authority is true Catholic authority or not. For it either is lawful authority or it is not. There is no middle ground, such as that proposed by those who are often labeled as the “recognize but resist” group. (They are traditional Catholics who “recognize” or accept these claimants as lawful popes, but then justify “resisting” their teachings and disciplines because their conscience tells them that they must.)

But this leads to a big problem: namely, how can a faithful Catholic refuse to obey a lawful pope? Indeed, there is no theological precedent for such a thing. Jesus clearly taught: “He who hears you, hears Me, etc.” and His Church has always taught the same. Again, there is no historical precedent for accepting the claim of one to be a true pope, while at the same time maintaining that Catholics are justified in refusing to submit to his supposed authority. St. Robert Bellarmine, that foremost doctor on questions concerning the papacy, put it quite succinctly in his work De Romano Pontifice, Book II, Chapter 30:

“The non-Christian cannot in any way be pope, as Cajetan himself admits. The reason for this is that he cannot be head of what he is not a member; now he who is not a Christian is not a member of the Church, and a manifest heretic is not a Christian, as is clearly taught by St. Cyprian, St. Athanasius, St. Augustine, St. Jerome and others; therefore the manifest heretic cannot be Pope....

“Therefore, the true opinion is the fifth, according to which the pope who is manifestly a heretic ceases by himself to be pope and head, in the same way as he ceases to be a Christian and a member of the body of the Church; and for this reason he can be judged and punished by the Church. This is the opinion of all the ancient Fathers, who teach that manifest heretics immediately lose all jurisdiction” (On the Roman Pontiff by St. Robert Bellarmine).

You would think, with such authoritative teaching, that those who disagree with us would at least acknowledge that the sede-vacantist solution to the great problem of our time is a tenable position, even if they do not hold it themselves. But no, they refuse to even admit is as a possibility. Many of these individuals are loud in their denunciation of those who embrace the sedevacantist solution. They cry out that we are schismatics, or worse. Yet it is they who hold a contradictory position.

One may ask then, why is it that they are so opposed to even considering the sede-vacantist solution? Perhaps it is because they worry about how true papal authority will be restored one day. Yet it is Christ’s Church, and He has given us the divine guarantee that the gates of hell will not prevail. It is not up to us to question how and when the Church will once again rise in all her splendor. As St. John the Baptist told the Pharisees: “God is able out of these stones to raise up children to Abraham” (Matt, 3:9). Surely, He can raise up a true pope in His good time, without any need for cardinals.

Or perhaps those who oppose the sedevacantist solution are concerned about the length of the current vacancy in papal authority, as though it could not be this long. My reply to them would be that, while there are many problems presented by today’s crisis, at least we do not adhere to a contradiction: namely, the contradiction of saying that there are true popes who are not only heretics, but who are teaching a new religion and doing all they can to destroy the Catholic Faith. Let us remember that the Church, the Immaculate Bride of Christ cannot defect from the Faith and remains always untainted by any error. She cannot possibly teach error or give evil disciplines to her members.

Let our opponents, then, not be swayed by a worry as to how there will again be a true pope. We sedevacantists are merely looking at today’s situation and applying the teachings of Catholic theology. We may be looked upon as lepers by some; nevertheless, we are content to be in the good company of St. Robert Bellarmine and the vast majority of Catholic theologians who address the possibility of a heretic claiming to be pope. At least let these opponents admit the logic of the sedevacantist conclusion, even if they cannot yet bring themselves to embrace it.