|
+ Feast of St. Anthony of Padua, Hammer
of Heretics +
" The priest neglectful of his flock
is an idol…The praise of God is not heard from his
lips. What is there in common between the Church of Christ
and such a rotten image? …Thus the wolf, who is the
devil, scatters the flock; and the thief, who is the heretic
makes off with it…" — St. Anthony
It has been a month now since this site first
went up, and still there has been no reasoned explanation from
David Bawden for any of his heresies and errors. He offers
nothing from Church teaching and belief, scholastic proofs,
not even a proven probable opinion to justify his actions and
his statements. In pronouncing his excommunication of this
author as a "vitandus," in a ridiculous and fruitless
attempt to justify himself, Bawden not only has descended to
the very psychological tactics he has long condemned in others;
he has succeeded in violating the teachings of St. Thomas Aquinas,
his professedly revered patron. Not only does Aquinas disprove
Bawden's accusations of Gallicanism in the piece Bawden condemns,
but this saint and others deny that any solid basis could exist
for the assumption that a man could ever become a cleric at
the hands of lay people. And this was prior to the Church's
specific condemnation of the Protestant version of lay investiture,
which did not take place until after St. Thomas' death. (see True
and false jurisdiction, sidebar).
While Bawden may believe that he reigns undisturbed,
and sorrow he shall never see, St. Gregory explains why God
allows evil pastors to endure and what they may expect when
they leave this earth, (see Saints and Fathers on fitness
and examination). St. Thomas and others also contribute
to the necessity of fitness for pastors in this same piece.
St. Anthony, ever the scourge of heretics and evil pastors,
pray for us!
+ Feast of Sts. Peter and
Paul +
" Everyone sees that all ecclesiastical
discipline is overthrown if it is in any way lawful for one
to restore arrangements which are no longer valid because
the supreme authority of the Church long ago decreed otherwise. In
no sense do they excuse their way of acting by appealing
to another custom, and they indisputably prove that they
follow this line deliberately in order to escape from the
discipline which now prevails and which they ought to be
obeying." (Pope Pius XII, Ad Apostolorum
Principis, condemning the lay investiture of Chinese
bishops behind the Iron Curtain).
Many on this day mourn the absence of a true
pope and hierarchy or celebrate the existence of an antipope
and his minions. I refuse to do either. I choose to accept
God's punishment for our sins, His signified will expressed
in Daniel 8:12, since these sins, far from abating, have only
increased. The attempted restoration of the papacy in 1990
resulting in David Bawden's false claim ended in disaster for
a reason: God is clearly telling us that He will bring this
interregnum to an end when He chooses, not
as and when man chooses. The answer to the present crisis is
certainly not a man unfit or even ill suited for the papacy.
No less than a Pope St. Gregory the Great, a St. Pius X or
a Pope Pius XII is needed for the gargantuan task that must
now be accomplished. Or at the very least, if a holy but simple
pope could be elected, he would need to be surrounded by devout
clergy and advisors, well known and respected for their wise
and efficient management of those affairs in which every Pope
must be constantly involved. Trying to downplay the importance
of these contingencies being in place is a failure to accept
reality and a refusal to recognize the solemn dignity and all-encompassing
import of papal authority; the truly daunting task of rescuing
souls from all manner of error and corruption, the Church's
primary mission on earth. The obstacles preventing the restoration
of the papacy can be pushed aside only by God Himself. When
and if these obstacles are removed and all the above is in
place, then will God act, and not before.
Common error
Is Bawden being held to an impossible standard as some maintain? To answer
this question, consider the occupants of the papal see over the past two
millennia. Out of 258, perhaps as many as 30 of these (whose history we know
something about) were men not especially distinguished by any learning or
prior experience, clerical accomplishments or even extraordinary holiness.
Some were simple laymen when elected. Ambitious politicians or the Roman
nobility unduly influenced others and yet others were public sinners or are
remembered only for their weaknesses and/or unremarkable careers. This is
only one-eighth or 12 1/2 percent of all the popes who ever reigned. If we
include those whose histories are uncertain, let's increase this percentage,
say, to 20 percent. Nearly all of these men, even those dominated by political
and family interests, had access to learned advisors, theologians, researchers
and diplomats both among the clergy and the laity. If their elections were
invalid in some way; if they were weak in some area, incompetent, or evil,
the Church supplied for these defects. But this is only true
if such a person was generally accepted as validly elected and a true pope — the
canonical definition of common error — which most certainly is not
the case with Bawden. Common error does not exist unless it
truly IS common. Also, as we have noted elsewhere, the hierarchy and lesser
clergy — not the laity alone — must necessarily comprise the
Church which supplies, for one must always adhere to the Church's own definition
of itself. Otherwise, Canon 209 governing the principal of common error loses
its meaning, for the use of the word "Church" in this canon can
only mean the Church as She has always defined Herself. If those in Bawden's
corner wish to ignore the 80 percent of the pontiffs distinguished for their
exemplary holiness, knowledge, experience and accomplishments, focusing only
on the 20 percent, they do a grave injustice to ecclesiastical history and
right reason. If they wish to pretend that the hierarchy did not supply for
those popes who were in some way deficient, or supplies for Bawden when he
can never claim to have reigned by common error, they malign Canon Law and
theology. This also is demonstrated in the rremarks made by Rev. Journet
and medieval theologians concerning the eventual acceptance of the one elected,
(see sidebar on A doubtful pope). Bawden insists on being ranked equally
with past popes despite his lack of orders. He demands absolute obedience
and the respect due his "office." Yet on the other hand he considers
himself a special case, deserving special consideration and privileges, when
according to the laws and teachings of the Church he deserves none whatsoever.
Prerequisites for genuine apostolicity
The theologian Msgr. G. Van Noort, following the common and constant teaching
of the Church, writes: "The original Protestants…took refuge
in an appeal to the theory of an 'extraordinary mission.' They maintained
that God could at some time raise up a group of men by an extraordinary
vocation and confer on them apostolic functions if current
apostolic pastors should become viciously corrupt…. It is clear,
however, if any such extraordinary mission were ever to be granted by God,
it would have to be proven by miracles, or other clearly divine trademarks
[and this is the teaching of St. Francis de Sales in his The Catholic Controversy].
The plain truth is, however, that Christ's own promises completely rule
out the possibility of any such extraordinary mission… Obviously
a man does not become a genuine successor to the apostles merely by arrogating
to himself the title of "bishop," or by carrying on in some fashion
a function once performed by the apostles. Neither is it enough
for a man merely to possess some one, individual power, say for example,
the power of orders, [or the power of jurisdiction only]…What
is required for GENUINE APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION is that a man enjoy THE COMPLETE
POWERS (i.e., ordinary powers, not extraordinary) of an apostle, [in
this case, the Apostle Peter]. He must, then, in addition to
the power of orders, possess also the power of jurisdiction, [and
vice versa].
"Jurisdiction means the power to teach and govern.
This power is conferred only by a legitimate authorization and, even though once
received, can be lost again by being revoked, [or as Cum ex explains, lost by
the discovery of pre-election heresy]… The man in question [must be] connected
with one of the original apostles by a never-interrupted line of predecessors
in the same office. One must also prove that in this total line no
one of his predecessors either acquired his position illicitly, or even though
he may have acquired it legitimately, ever lost it. For a purely physical succession
proves nothing at all." In other words, a woman cannot be "somewhat" pregnant
any more than a man without orders can be a "halfway" pope. This is
why Pope Pius XII insisted in his 1957 address, Six ans se sont, that the layman
elected must be fit for the priesthood, since Orders immediately succeeds acceptance
of the papacy, as it must to guarantee that the one elected is a genuine successor
of the Apostles. Pope Pius XII was referring to this necessity in Six ans se
sont when he said, "It must be remembered that Christ granted His Apostles
a two-fold power: first, the priestly power to consecrate, which was given in
its fullness to all the Apostles; and second, the power to teach and govern,…passed
on to the pope and bishops…Pope, bishops and priests necessarily belong
to the clergy." In other words, Christ gave immediately to His Apostles
this two-fold power which they then transmitted to
their successors. To deny that this is the case is to contradict the de fide teaching
of the Church.
"The successors of the Apostles as regards the
power of teaching, ruling and sanctifying the faithful are the bishops collectively
taken, who have their authority by Divine right. The thesis is historically
certain and theologically de fide, being proposed as an object
of faith by the ordinary magisterium," (Rev. Adolphe Tanquerey,
Dogmatic Brevior). Ergo, to truly be a genuine successor of the Apostles, one
must possess this two or threefold power: To sanctify (consecrate) and to teach
and govern. To deny that one is any more than a lay pope-elect, (hence not in
full possession of the papal power), before the reception of Orders, is to implicitly
deny that both orders and jurisdiction must be joined to establish unquestionable
apostolic succession, as the Church infallibly teaches. Orders
and jurisdiction are two separate entities that must merge into one to create
a valid member of the hierarchy. In swinging violently away from his rejection
as a seminarian and in deploring the Traditionalist abuse of epikiea, so injurious
to jurisdiction, Bawden fell into the opposite error of injuring the Church's de
fide teaching on the hierarchy. He minimalized the absolute necessity of
and the importance of Orders — even the indispensability of periodic examinations
for fitness and the proper training of seminarians — to justify his position.
But even had Bawden found a fully acceptable bishop, he could never have been
validly or licitly ordained, having committed heresy pre-election and lacking
fitness for the priesthood in other areas. Therefore his ordination could never
have assured apostolic succession.
Hate mongers
In his desperate attempt to escape scrutiny since his heresies were exposed
and refocus the spotlight elsewhere, Bawden has repeatedly stooped to personal
invective and has even enlisted the cooperation of others with personal
axes to grind. The rules of scholastic argument bind everyone but
this "most (un)holy Father" ! This is the man who (would) be
Pope, who can offer no proofs to support his departure from the faith and
failure to be recognized by remaining Catholics, and hence can only resort
to what logicians refer to as the chosen tactics of those who cannot prove
their case. This is the man who presents himself as the prayerful and ultra-charitable
leader of Catholics worldwide, yet resorts directly or indirectly to the
type of whispering campaign and vicious back-street gossip practiced most
often by female members of the lowest classes. Forget that he harms others
and for a moment remember only that he harms most importantly the noble
image of the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church, of which
he is not even a member! No wonder one Jesuit instructor in formal logic,
teaching in the 1950s, refers to these types as demagogues, who seek only
to stir up discontent, fuel prejudices and more deeply entrench animosity
among the common people. Such individuals succeed only by appealing to
those who harbor some deep-seated resentment or rancor, not any legitimate
complaints or objections, and rally them against their intended victim.
In other words, they appeal to the base vices of hatred and grudge-bearing
to accomplish their goals. Those thus stirred up, now rushing to Bawden's
defense cannot seem to understand that the sins and failings of others
have no bearing on his own failures, and cannot in any way detract from
the strength of the theological proofs that condemn him. Bawden, not his
accusers, is held to a higher standard of holiness and conduct, learning
and refinement. To argue that he is unable to rise to the standard of the
80 percent mentioned above is only to prove the case for his lack of fitness
for both priesthood and episcopacy, but most importantly the papacy.
A Traditionalist speaks
It is precisely as one Traditionalist who has engaged Bawden in debate in the
past rightly observed. Had Bawden done what he could and contented himself
with the little he had, not coveting the clerical state, he could have
gained many signal graces. Had he humbly continued his studies, prayed
and suffered like the rest of the laity and offered up his inability to
become a priest and obtain the fullness of the papacy, he could have inspired
others. Then he might at least have earned the grudging respect of Traditionalists
and eventually gained a following. But by boasting of his upcoming ordination/consecration,
heretically insisting on his de facto clerical status and refusing
to submit to the scrutiny in the ordination ceremony, Bawden revealed his
true agenda: to gain the papacy solely to become a "cleric" and
avoid the examinations required by Divine law for all those entering the
priesthood. It is not enough that St. Francis of Assisi himself refused
the dignity of the priesthood solely on the basis of his unworthiness,
even though Bawden is putatively a member of the Third Order of St. Francis.
Nor is it enough that St. Gabriel Possenti, eminently qualified for ordination
but never complaining when it was repeatedly delayed, failed to receive
his most fervent desire before he was carried away to heaven. As Bawden
has said more than once, the clerical state was his due, the priesthood
is his right, and his use of the papacy to acquire orders illegally cannot
be questioned because no one can judge the "pope." Contrast this
unCatholic stance with that of these endearing saints, and you will see,
as the Traditionalist referred to above also noted, why Bawden's attitude
of entitlement concerning clerical matters, minus any corresponding qualifications,
is so offensive.
A wicked prince
Proverbs 28: 15-16 warns, in the apocalyptic language of Daniel, against an
evil prince placed over subjects. "As a roaring lion and a hungry
bear, so is a wicked prince placed over the poor people. A prince devoid
of prudence shall oppress many by calumny." What a far cry from what
this man pretends to be — the prince Michael who stands for the people!
Many times the revelation of some grave fault will occasion first resistance,
then protest, and finally resignation and repentance. Many great saints
have been made through their willingness to admit and address their errors.
When this is not the case then it is clear that the sinner is obstinate
and beyond the help of any but God Himself. When evil follows evil and
even calumny is resorted to, that guilt not be admitted and power be enhanced,
then is true wickedness proven according to Scripture. The truth will out
in such cases, as the guilty scramble to defend themselves at all costs
and eventually throw caution to the wind. They do not realize that their
attempts to vindicate themselves, especially at the expense of others,
is the very thing that drives those of good will away and alerts them to
the true intentions of the guilty one. The emperor is obviously naked for
all to see save those whose misplaced loyalty and inflamed passions have
blinded them to the truth. Now that the final act of this doomed production
has played out for the audience, there is no need to elaborate further
on the subject. Bawden has proven his own animosity and ill will towards
others by his unCatholic reaction to his proven errors. In the final analysis,
what he IS speaks so loudly we can no longer hear what he is saying.
(Please do re-read carefully the section
on choosing a suitable spiritual guide under the Shepherd
or Hireling, sidebar. Further comments or questions can
be forwarded to the author via the contact link above.)
|
