The Papal Accusers’ Version of the Church

{7:24} Therefore, everyone who hears these words of mine and does them shall be compared to a wise man, who built his house upon the rock.
{7:25} And the rains descended, and the floods rose up, and the winds blew, and rushed upon that house, but it did not fall, for it was founded on the rock.
{7:26} And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them shall be like a foolish man, who built his house upon the sand.
{7:27} And the rains descended, and the floods rose up, and the winds blew, and rushed upon that house, and it did fall, and great was its ruin.”
{7:28} And it happened, when Jesus had completed these words, that the crowds were astonished at his doctrine.
{7:29} For he was teaching them as one who has authority, and not like their scribes and Pharisees.

If you accept the teaching of the Church — the teaching of the Popes and Councils, the teaching of the body of Bishops in communion with the Pope — then you are the wise man who built his house upon the Rock who is Peter and his successors. Not some of his successors. Each one of them, and all of them.

Do you really think that Jesus founded His Church in such a manner that the faithful would be like wandering lost sheep, not knowing who or what to believe? Or are the truths of the faith based on the majority opinion of the grains of sand, who cry out against the one Rock? God would not found His Church in such a manner that the faithful would have no way of knowing what to believe.

Let’s consider the version of the Church proposed by the papal accusers.

They claim that any Pope can teach or commit heresy. They also claim that an Ecumenical Council can teach heresy or grave error, and therefore need to be revised or nullified. They have made claims not only against Pope Francis and Vatican II, but against other Popes (see the book “Infiltration”) and against other Councils (see Peter K.’s remarks at OnePeterFive). How then can we know what to believe?

If any Pope or Council’s teaching can be a grave error or a heresy, how do we even judge that a Pope has taught heresy? Is his teaching heresy because he contradicts a past Pope? But maybe it is the past Pope who is in heresy? Or is it because he contradicts a past Council? But supposedly Councils can also err gravely. If a Pope or Council can teach grave error, then the papal accusers have no basis on which to claim that a Pope or Council has erred gravely, as every Pope and Council’s teaching could also be a grave error. In consequence, the surety of the faith is lost. We are then left with only each person’s own interpretation of Tradition and Scripture, since the Magisterium is subject to accusations of teaching grave error, even at the highest levels.

The proposal of papal accusers is that the faithful depend upon tradition as a way to tell which Popes and Councils to believe. The Church teaches that the Magisterium is the authoritative interpreter of Tradition. But the papal accusers want to take that role for themselves. They tell us not to trust the Popes or Councils, as the Church has supposedly been “infiltrated” by evil. That is the same as accusing Jesus Christ of having a demon. Accusing the Church of having been infiltrated at the highest levels, at the level of Popes and Councils, by evil is the sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. It is the same as accusing Jesus Christ of being possessed by the devil.

The entire Catholic faith falls apart, and the sheep are left with no one to trust or follow — except the self-proclaimed leaders of conservative or traditionalist Catholics. They sow distrust of Popes and Councils so that people will follow them instead of Christ. The Church becomes untrustworthy, and the faithful then flock to bloggers, authors, speakers, and dissident Bishops. That is the fruit of the plan for the Church of the papal accusers.

If the Pope is capable of teaching or committing heresy, then no Pope or Council can be trusted, and the faith would lose its surety.

But if the Pope is made incapable of teaching or committing heresy, through the charism of truth and never failing faith, as taught by Vatican I, then no Pope can teach grave error, no Council can teach any error on faith or morals, no Pope or Council can harm the indefectibility of the Church nor lead the faithful away from the path of salvation. And the Church remains firm upon the one Rock.

So which plan do you think Jesus chose for His Church? The foolish plan that falls apart so easily, like a house built on sand? Or the unfailing plan that can withstand any storm? Jesus already taught us the answer, from the Gospel of Matthew (quoted above). His plan for the Church is that no Pope can teach or commit heresy (Mt 16:18).

I really do not see why the papal accusers are constantly throwing these temper-tantrums. Nothing Pope Francis has said or done merits even asking the question as to whether it could be heresy. And then, as soon as they establish in their own minds that the Pope is guilty, they go on to accuser Pope after Pope, all the way back to Pius XII, and Council after Council as well. What is left of the Church, after the papal accusers are done sowing distrust? Nothing but they themselves as the only leaders you can supposedly trust. It is very self-serving. And the implicit claim is that the papal accusers themselves are incapable of teaching or committing heresy. If it were true that a Pope could teach or commit heresy, which would be more likely, that the Roman Pontiff taught heresy, or that a collection of pride-filled ignorant bloggers and extremist far-right ideologues taught error? Even on human terms, it is far less likely that the Pope is the one who is in error.

And then when we examine the teachings of Saint Robert Bellarmine and the First Vatican Council, it is certain that Pope Francis never taught or committed heresy. For his papacy is approved by the body of Bishops. The indefectibility of the Church therefore ascertains that Francis is the true Roman Pontiff. For the body cannot go astray following a false head, or else the indefectibility of the Church would be lost. But the papal accusers have torn apart the dogma of the indefectibility of the Church. And as the true Roman Pontiff, Pope Francis cannot teach or commit heresy.

It is a simple as that. Trust the Pope and the body of Bishops, and you will not be led astray.

Do not be alarmed at what the Pope teaches at Assisi. The Holy Spirit teaches through each and every Roman Pontiff.

Ronald L. Conte Jr.

This entry was posted in commentary. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to The Papal Accusers’ Version of the Church

  1. Matt says:


    I’d add that I’ve followed John Martignoni over at the Catholic apologetics organization, the Bible Christian Society for what must be a couple of decades now. He has always taught that the first question to ask an accuser of Catholicism is, “What’s your authority?” As a longtime resident of Birmingham, AL, Martignoni has typically directed that question at Protestants who attack the Church for all sorts of reasons. Typically, they’ll respond with some kind of answer like, “the Holy Spirit spoke into my heart”, or “the Bible is my authority.” Then you ask them, “What does the Bible say is the pillar of truth?” They never know.

    The answer, according to 1 Tim 3:15 is that the Church is the pillar of truth. Yet Protestants uniformly point to something other than the Church as their authority.

    In that sense, I’m beginning to refer to the Father James Altmans and the Taylor Marshalls out there as “neo-protestants”. They are simply today’s Luthers and Zwinglis. What do they hope to accomplish other than schism?

    They make themselves their own authorities while a hallmark of a faithful Catholic is submission to Church authority. That is straight-up demonic.

Comments are closed.