Is Taylor Marshall a sedevacantist? Yes.

I would say, “Yes.” His book “Infiltration” accuses every Pope from Pius 12th to Pope Francis of grave errors on doctrine and discipline, and accuses Vatican II of teaching heresy. A heretical Pope cannot be valid. So, having accused the Council and the successive Popes before, during, and after the Council of heresy, Marshall is left with only two possible positions. Either these Popes and this Council were valid, or they were invalid.

1. invalid leaves Marshall in a state of Sedevacantism – the heretical Popes and the heretical Council were not valid, and so no valid Pope or valid Council has gone astray, and the Church remains indefectible. Invalid Popes (antipopes) and invalid Councils are not a defection of the Church.

2. valid leaves Marshall in a state of heresy and schism – refusing submission to valid Popes and a valid Council is schism, and accusing valid Popes and a valid Council of going far astray from the true faith is a denial of the dogma of the indefectibility of the Church, which is heresy. Also, the First Vatican Council taught the dogma of the never failing faith of the Pope, so accusing a valid Pope of grave failures of faith, such as heresy or idolatry, implies a rejection of that dogma as well.

From my point of view, all these Popes and the Councils (Vatican I and II) were valid, and therefore, Dr. Taylor Marshall is a heretic and schismatic for rejecting their teachings and authority. But as he states his own position, he can only be a sedevacantist, for his accusations imply that these Popes and the Council must be invalid. He cannot possibly hold them all to be valid and reject their teachings and authority as extensively as he does.

This is the problem with the current papal accusers. They imply necessarily that Vatican II and Pope Francis, and really all the Popes who supported Vatican II, are invalid. They can’t claim that these Popes and the Council are valid, and yet erred so extensively as is claimed, as this could be an admission, on their part, of their own heresy of rejecting the indefectibility of the Church and of open schism. If Pope Francis is valid, you may not “recognize and resist” for that is nothing but schism. You can only resist an antipope, so you have to find some way to conclude that Francis in invalid, such as an invalid election, or loss of validity due to sins against faith.

RLCJ

Gallery | This entry was posted in commentary. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Is Taylor Marshall a sedevacantist? Yes.

  1. If you don’t mind my asking, have you actually read his book? He answered most of your arguments in it.

    • Ron Conte says:

      Yes, I’ve read the book, Infiltration. It accuses Pope after Pope and Vatican II of being part of a conspiracy of freemasons and other evil and malicious persons. His claims imply that the Church is not indefectible, and that the Popes do not have the gift of truth and a never failing faith (Vatican I), and that the Church has been taken over by an evil plot. That is heretical and schismatic. “Answered most of your arguments?!!” No, he does not.

    • From what I could tell he seemed to like Benedict XVI. Firstly papal infallibility only works Ex Cathedra, such as when people are declared saints. This also occurred in the cases of the Immaculate Conception and the bodily Assumption of our Lady into heaven. Pope Francis said himself that he welcomes criticism, and, considering that Dr. Marshall got the phrase “accept and resist” from Galatians 2, that can’t technically be heretical in itself if he means what St. Paul meant, that is, rebuke the Holy Father when he does something wrong. Pope Paul VI said at Vatican II’s closing that they hadn’t made any dogmatic statements. I thought that made sense as, unlike the other ecumenical councils, it didn’t deal with heresies. If you have any insights as to what that means, I’ll listen.

    • Ron Conte says:

      Pope Francis is a valid Pope because he has been accepted by the body of Bishops as Pope. Every valid Pope has the divinely conferred charism of truth and never failing faith. So even when a Pope is not teaching infallibly, he cannot err gravely in any magisterial teaching, and he cannot fail in faith by heresy or idolatry or any other grave failure of faith, not even personally. Peter’s error was not grave, it was eating only with Christians who were former Jews. This was not a teaching error, but a personal error. And Peter did not impose this as an erroneous rule of discipline, so it was not an error of his acts or teachings as Pope, but only his personal behavior.

      It seems like you haven’t read any of my posts on this subject, and I can’t reproduce them all here. Marshall is not merely criticizing the Pope. Marshall said: “The Catholic Church is in crisis because the enemies of Christ plotted organized efforts to place a pope for Satan on the Roman Chair of Saint Peter.” The Church is in crisis right now because of those efforts; is the Church in crisis because those efforts failed or succeeded? She wouldn’t be in crisis if they failed, would She? Marshall is strongly implying that Pope Francis is that “pope for Satan on the Roman Chair of Saint Peter.” Another phrasing Marshall uses to refer to Francis is “a Satanic revolution with the pope as puppet”.

      That is not correcting the Pope for an error like Paul correcting Peter. That is schism and heresy.

  2. I just found your blog, so don’t expect me to have seen everything. What do you mean by saying he cannot commit a grave error even personally? Also, are you saying that John XII, Benedict IX, and others were incapable of personally committing any grave failures of faith? It is true that the gift of unfailing truth, but since one can only be anathematized by disagreeing with statements Ex Cathedra, I would assume that means that otherwise he is still able to refuse that grace and commit heresy and there has always been a theological hypothesis of a heretical pope. According to St. Robert Bellermine it would be possible for a pope to commit heresy and in the case that there were a heretical pope, he would cease to be Catholic and therefore cease to be pope.

    • Ron Conte says:

      That is not what Bellarmine taught. He specifically taught: “THE FOURTH proposition. It is probable and may piously be believed that not only as ‘Pope’ can the Supreme Pontiff not err, but he cannot be a heretic even as a particular person by pertinaciously believing something false against the faith. It is proved: 1) because it seems to require the sweet disposition of the providence of God. For the Pope not only should not, but cannot preach heresy, but rather should always preach the truth. He will certainly do that, since the Lord commanded him to confirm his brethren, and for that reason added: “I have prayed for thee, that thy faith shall not fail,” that is, that at least the preaching of the true faith shall not fail in thy throne.”

      2) It is proved ab eventu. For to this point no [Pontiff] has been a heretic, or certainly it cannot be proven that any of them were heretics; therefore it is a sign that such a thing cannot be.”

      Bellarmine, Robert. On the Roman Pontiff, vol. 2: Books III-V (De Controversiis) (p. 171). Mediatrix Press. Kindle Edition.

      Bellarmine also considered the hypothetical, if a Pope committed heresy, he would cease to be Pope. But all the papal accusers today claim that Pope Francis is the valid Pope and that he commits heresy. So they contradict Bellarmine’s belief, dogmatized by Vatican I, that Popes cannot teach or commit heresy, and his hypothetical that an heretical Pope would cease to be Pope.

      Popes can sin, even gravely, but not any sin of grave failures of faith.

Comments are moderated.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.