Summary

Rev. Michael DeSaye’s talk addresses the growing recognition of sedevacantism due to statements made by Jorge Bergoglio (Francis), particularly his claim that “all religions are paths to God.” This has led many Catholics to question whether he is truly the pope. DeSaye argues that sedevacantism is not merely an opinion but a theological and moral necessity based on Catholic dogma.

He presents and critiques two key arguments used to justify sedevacantism:

1. The "Heretical Pope" Argument

   • This argument states that a heretic cannot be a member of the Church, and therefore, cannot be its head.

   • While this argument seems logical, DeSaye points out that the Church has no formal teaching or canon law on how to handle a heretical pope.

   • Theologians have speculated on the issue, but none have concluded that the faithful must simply assume the See of Peter is vacant and set up an alternative apostolate.

   • Because of this lack of official support from the Magisterium, this argument alone does not fully justify sedevacantism.

2. The "Infallibility and Indefectibility" Argument (The Irrefutable Argument)

   • The Church teaches that the pope cannot promulgate error in faith or morals to the Universal Church.

   • Vatican I (1870) infallibly declared that the faith will always be preserved in the See of St. Peter and that the pope, as Supreme Teacher, will never officially teach heresy.

   • The post-Vatican II claimants—Paul VI, John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and Francis—have all promulgated doctrinal errors, including the idea that all religions lead to God.

   • Since this contradicts the Church's indefectibility, it proves that these men never truly held the papacy.

   • The conclusion is inescapable: if a man teaches error to the Universal Church, he cannot be the pope, because the Holy Ghost prevents the pope from doing so.

DeSaye also refutes the claim that Catholics only need to accept ex cathedra statements (e.g., the Immaculate Conception). He argues that even encyclicals and ecumenical councils require assent. If a pope could frequently err in ordinary teachings, the Church would be reduced to just another fallible Protestant denomination, where each believer decides what to accept.

He concludes that rejecting sedevacantism would mean accepting that the Church has defected, which is impossible. Therefore, sedevacantism is not a reactionary position but a necessary conclusion drawn from Catholic dogma.

Key Quotes

1. On the Growing Recognition of Sedevacantism

   • "Many years ago, it was common to hear people dismiss sedevacantists as lunatics... but now one sees serious articles and even well-researched books written on the subject."

2. On the Heretical Pope Argument

   • "The Church does not have any official teaching on what to do if the pope becomes a heretic."

   • "We must avoid people or situations which would cause us to compromise our faith or morals... but this is not the same thing as saying the pope is not the pope."

3. On Infallibility and Indefectibility

   • "If anyone should promulgate or publish errors against faith or morals to the Catholic Church universally, then it is impossible that that man be the Roman Pontiff."

   • "Vatican I teaches that in the See of St. Peter, the Catholic faith will always be preserved."

   • "If the teachings of the Church could in any way be false, then God himself would be the author of error in man."

4. On the Vatican II Crisis

   • "If one submits to Vatican II, one would have to conclude that the Catholic Church has come to an end."

   • "The Catholic Church can never become a temple of lies."

5. On Sedevacantism as a Moral Imperative

   • "Sedevacantism is not only justified morally as an acceptable position to hold, it is necessary as a certain conclusion drawn from dogmatic premises."

   • "If I felt I had a choice whether I wanted to be a sedevacantist or not, I would not have chosen it."

Analysis

Rev. DeSaye’s talk presents a robust theological defense of sedevacantism, solidly grounded in pre-Vatican II Catholic teaching, particularly on the topics of papal infallibility and indefectibility.

1. The Heretical Pope Argument – An Insufficient Justification

• While the idea that a heretic cannot be pope is commonly cited, DeSaye correctly points out that no formal Magisterial teaching exists on this issue.

• Theologians like St. Robert Bellarmine and Francisco Suárez speculated that a heretical pope would lose his office, but this is not an official dogma.

• However, this does not mean sedevacantism is incorrect—only that this particular argument lacks absolute theological certainty.

2. The Infallibility and Indefectibility Argument – The Irrefutable Proof

• Vatican I infallibly taught that the pope will never officially teach error to the Universal Church.

• Post-Vatican II “popes” have not only spoken heresy casually but have enshrined it in their official teachings, particularly in Vatican II documents and their encyclicals.

• This is the fatal flaw of the Recognize-and-Resist (R&R) position: if Vatican II popes have officially taught heresy, then they cannot be true popes.

• DeSaye’s argument aligns with Pope Pius XII, who stated that even non-infallible papal teachings require assent, meaning they cannot contain heresy.

3. The Novus Ordo Religion is a False Church

• The statement that "all religions are paths to God" is not an isolated Bergoglian heresy but an official Vatican II doctrine.

• Paul VI, John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and Francis have all promoted interreligious worship and ecumenism.

• The Catholic Church cannot teach a false religion—therefore, the Vatican II sect cannot be the Catholic Church.

• To claim that the Church can mix truth with error is to deny her indefectibility, which is impossible.

4. The Recognize-and-Resist (R&R) Error

• Some traditionalists claim that only ex cathedra teachings are infallible, allowing popes to err in most of their teachings.

• DeSaye refutes this by citing Pope Pius XII, who declared that papal encyclicals require assent and cannot contain error.

• The notion that the pope can frequently err reduces the Church to Protestantism, where individuals judge doctrine for themselves.

5. Sedevacantism as a Necessary Conclusion

• To reject sedevacantism, one must either accept that the Catholic Church has failed (which is impossible) or claim that it can officially teach heresy (which is also impossible).

• Therefore, sedevacantism is not just a personal opinion but a theological certainty.

• The Novus Ordo is a false church, and Vatican II popes were never true popes.

Key Takeaways

1. Vatican II and its Popes Have Officially Promulgated Heresy

   • The claim that "all religions are paths to God" is not just an error but a heretical doctrine officially enshrined in Vatican II.

   • Vatican II popes have universally promulgated heresy, proving that they are not true popes.

2. The Church is Indefectible and Cannot Teach Error

   • If Vatican II were legitimate, the Catholic Church would have defected—which is impossible.

   • The Catholic Church remains indefectible, meaning Vatican II popes were never valid.

3. Recognize-and-Resist is Theologically Untenable

   • The idea that Catholics can ignore most papal teachings is absurd and contradicts Catholic dogma.

   • Papal teachings, even non-infallible ones, must be free from heresy.

4. Sedevacantism is a Theological Necessity, Not an Opinion

   • It is the only logical conclusion that preserves Catholic dogma.

   • To reject sedevacantism is to either accept a heretical pope or to claim the Church has failed—both are impossible.

Rev. DeSaye’s presentation is a powerful, logical, and theologically rigorous defense of sedevacantism, showing that it is not just a reaction to a crisis but a necessary conclusion demanded by Catholic dogma.