IGNORANCE AND HERESY
One might wonder why we bring this question up again, after having already covered it. Our coverage was of necessity short and simple. On page 72, we prove that ignorance of law or fact does not excuse from the necessity of Profession of Faith, Abjuration of. Heresy and Juridical Absolution, given the external violation of the law. The Profession and Abjuration are possible as pointed out on pages 368 to 369. However, as we point out throughout the book, no one possesses the jurisdiction to absolve us in the external forum. Since we must proceed to posit a Papal Election without the absolution in the external forum, we must then provide a method whereby we can prove our membership in the Church. Also Canon 187 note 4 renders as incapable of voting all those who have formally left the Church, even if they have returned and been absolved, and under Canon 2200 we must assume one has formally left UNTIL THE CONTRARY IS PROVEN. All canonists hold that inculpable ignorance of fact excuses from the penalties of Canon 2314 and the irregularities incurred by heresy, so long as such ignorance can be proven in the external forum. (If it cannot be so proven the person censured, if he knows with a moral certainty that he was ignorant, is free from the censure in the internal forum.)Was the Laity Ignorant?
On page 70 we prove that the clergy are called to a higher level of sanctity and knowledge. The laity cannot be held to the same level of knowledge as the clergy. The laity must know the ordinary requirements for salvation, not Canon Law. (The laity is required to know that part of Canon Law which applies to them ordinarily, especially if it is a restatement of Divine Law, such as the law requiring Sacramental Confession before Holy Communion for ALL mortal sinners.) The laity are to be instructed by the clergy: according to their levels of understanding, as St. Pius X teaches in his encyclical on Catechetical instruction. Because the old law, and (implicitly the 1917 Code) exempts certain classes from a broad knowledge of the Canons, these people form presumptions based on the instruction they have received. The obligation of the laity to learn their Faith in more detail has now become apparent, because it can be demonstrated that we cannot rely on the clergy to teach us the truth. Remember, the laity has a strict right to the TRUTH from the clergy, whether this clergy possesses canonical mission or not. The clergy is bound under pain of grave sin to either present the true Faith, whole and entire, or to remain silent. (If they have canonical mission and jurisdiction over the laity, they are required to learn the Faith and present it, once learned!) The laity usually works on assumptions; assumptions which are based on dogma and the practice of the Church. These presumptions are not always well understood, so it is easy to check one jot or tittle and change the presumption from a beautiful dogma into an ugly heresy. We shall analyze these presumptions and the action which naturally followed:
1. The Church will never fail.Action: maintain connection with those, who possess the church buildings and call themselves Catholics. It was not long after the introduction of the Novus Ordo that it became apparent that the churches with the name Catholic on them were nothing more than dens of heretics, so another interpretation of this doctrine must necessarily be true.2. All priests have the right to administer the Sacraments indiscriminately.Action: seek out those priests using the old Rites of the Sacraments. This presumption was cultivated by lax clergy, who failed to explain the juridical nature of the Church and the necessity of jurisdiction in connection with the Sacraments. This juridical nature of the Church was not defended until late 1985, and not fully until 'WILL THE CATHOLIC CHURCH SURVIVE THE TWENTIETH CENTURY?' was printed.3. Clerics have superior knowledge.Action: Follow the opinion of a cleric, who is apparently holding the Faith, while rejecting the opinion of laymen Normally this would hold. However, the clergy, did NOT know their Faith. In one case I was more knowledgeable and demonstrably so than a priest, who a year after our meeting was promoted to the Episcopate in the Thuc line. This priest would not help me with my seminary studies nor provide me with a list of textbooks I should study. Such a priest, (and this kind of priest is common among the Traditionalists), is failing his duty of continued study in a serious and probablymortally sinful manner. If it is mortal sin for me, a laymen who hopes to present himself for admission to the seminary, to fail to study, how much more so a cleric?4. The Hierarchy will never fail.Action: While rejecting the false Popes, cling to a 'successor of the apostles'. Again a misunderstanding of the term 'bishop' coos into play. First bishops possess no jurisdiction from the reception of Episcopal Consecration. In fact they only become Successors of the Apostles in the full sense if they are consecrated in accordance with Ecclesiastical Law, which now requires a Papal Mandate.5. Religious are holy. Action: connect with a group of 'holy' religious. Since they appear holy, they must be Catholic, as heresy is usually visited with an onrush of the other sine and lack of holiness. This assumption is based on externals only. These men, like the Jansenists, are pure as angels and proud as devils, as the Catholic Dictionary describes them. Jansenism was the epitome of external religion, so it is not surprising to see its ugly head rise among the Traditionalists, who have attached to external religion because it is all they have left. It is my opinion that one cannot progress through internal religion, or the three steps of holiness, except in full communion with the Catholic Church TO PROPERLY PROGRESS OUR SOULS REQUIRE BOTH INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL RELIGION IN THEIR PROPER PLACES.Presumption Must Yield to Truth
(page 26 #6) Many have followed this route out of the wrong application of dogma and the falsehood of non-dogmatic presumptions. Some have denied dogma in their pursuit of 'truth'. Many of these have done so in good faith, but when confronted by the dogma yet cling to their error, or CHOOSE to remain in error and therefore become formal heretics. Others have unwittingly fallen from one heresy into another, while seeking to work out the truth of the current situation. (The authors of 'WILL THE CATHOLIC CHURCH SURVIVE THE TWENTIETH CENTURY?' include themselves in this category) What then was required of us?One is required to act when a doubt presents itself. That is, one must work to resolve that doubt, regardless of the difficulty and expense this effort will entail. If it requires buying a seminary library and studying it, then do so. (This is how 'WILL THE CATHOLIC CHURCH SURVIVE THE TWENTIETH CENTURY?' was written!) If it requires consulting others more learned, whether clergy or lay, then by all means consult. We know that it is a matter of Faith that we WILL be given the graces necessary to save our souls. We must cooperate with and ask for these graces. God does not condemn anyone to hell without giving them an opportunity to be with Him in Heaven. God does 'condemn' us to years of prayer and study of our Faith, and such is actually a requirement of the natural law; a requirement which has NOT been explained to us by the clergy over the past-100 years. (see part I, section 1, especially page 16) Let us outline the requirements:1. Prayer. Especially prayer to the Holy Ghost. However, this is not sufficient as prayer without works is dead. (ora et labora)2. Study. Here we start with the simple catechism and work our way up to a more thorough knowledge of the dogmas of our Holy Faith. Many misunderstand meditation as contemplation of some even in the life of Our Lord or Our Lady. This is only one aspect of this practice. Meditation is contemplation of truth through prayer. Because of the seriousness of the current Church crisis, our meditation must be on Doctrine. We must use our meditation, time to contemplate the various doctrines of the Faith, especially those which have been obscured and confused by the enemy. For instance the hierarchical constitution of the church and the necessity of the Papacy will make fruitful subjects for meditation. Again we are back to, 'know, love and serve God.' We must know EVERYTHING we can about His, not just the various parables, but all the doctrine upon which He founded His Holy Church! How can one know a person if he refuses to know one part of His mind? The more we know God, the more we know the Doctrine He taught us. Only with a true knowledge of God can we progress to loving God. After we have begun to truly love God, we begin to serve Him. Only after perfecting the three virtues of knowing, loving and serving God, can we reap the reward promised in the catechism, 'and be happy with Him in the next world.'Lay Obligations and Ignorance
The laity are required to save their souls. However, many will protest that what we propose here is impossible for them. They could amass the numerous resources, but to no avail. What then must they do? When one cannot fulfill an obligation personally, one is obliged to seek another to assist him in fulfilling his obligation. If you cannot do the study, then you must find someone to help you; someone to instruct you in :the Faith. In 'The Priesthood of the Laity' we described the dominative power of the laity. This power is given to us, the laity, for the sole purpose of saving our souls. We have an unrestricted right to the truths of the Faith. We have a right to demand these truths, not only from our pastors, but from the other clergy and even from the more educated laity. The whole basis of Catholic Action was to educate members of the laity, so they in turn could render the ultimate act of charity to their brothers by teaching their fellow Catholics and non-Catholics the truths of our Holy Faith. You have a right to the truth and to be instructed in the truth. You have a right to demand that we do this. Because of the confusion of this time, you have a right to demand the proof be presented to you in a manner you can understand. Unfortunately, when we came to a question, we ran to the nearest priest and took his word for 'Gospel' truth. In the beginning this is understandable, but today when 12 different priests will give 12 different answers on matters of Faith, we must demand that they prove their point. I our own case, we found several priests in disagreement, so we were unable to obtain the necessary moral certainty. Therefore, we rejected the opinion of priests for the solid opinion of Theologians and Canonists, who have been long approved by the Church. You must demand that ANYONE'S reasoning, whether he be layman, priest or bishop, be from these sources. This is where the clergy is suppossed to go for the answers, and is the only sure source of truth. In such important matters you must demand sure sources.Michael Fighting
"Michael…who standeth for…thy people," — Dan. 12:1-12
