Material Popes and Moral Unions

OUR LADY OF FATIMA

CATHOLIC CHURCH

"Material" Popes & Moral Unions

A variant form of sedevacantism is that originated in the philosophical speculations of Fr Guerard des Lauriers an eminent theologian. Recognizing that the Church needs a Pope as foundation to continue in existence but trying to avoid the extreme of an apparently heretical Pope on the throne of Peter, Guerard invented a theory that an heretical pope could occupy the chair in a material sense but not in a formal way. Approved standard theologians deny this:

"S. PETRI SUCCESSOR Romanus Pontifex esse intelligitur, non mere materialiter, sed etiam formaliter, id est, substitutor personae S. Petri in omni ordinaria potestate muneri Primatus annexa, sine ulla iuris mutatione."

Sacrae Theologiae Summa, Rev. Joachim Salaverri S.J., B.A.C., 1962, p 621

"Successio intelligitur non mere materialiter, sed vere formalis, i.e. suffectio unius in locum et munus alterius."

De Ecclesia Christi, Rev. Timothy Zapelena S.J., Rome, 1950, p 272

Concerning the gap between one pope and the next the same author writes:

"Primatus dicitur continuo durarturus usque in finem saeculorum. Sufficit continuitas moralis, quae no interrumpitur eo tempore quo novus successor eligitur."

De Ecclesia Christi, Rev. Timothy Zapelena S.J., Rome, 1950, p 259

From this it follows that the papacy is something essential to the Church and that a protracted vacancy would contradict this. As we have seen elsewhere it is of necessity that the Church possess a perpetual succession of popes otherwise she ceases to be the Church. How long of an interregnum can there be ? The theologians who address this issue speak of at least a moral union between one pope and his successor.

To illustrate the question of a moral union let us take a parallel case: during Lent we may have only one full meal and two light snacks. Theologians and moralists discuss the question of how long the main meal can be and whether it may be interrupted and resumed and still be considered the same meal. Most answer that an interval of half an hour would be sufficient for a person to consider he was continuing the same meal i.e. a moral union between the meal suspended and the meal resumed. From this it is clear that a short period of time may elapse and the meal remains one and the same. Once the period is extended then the "meal" becomes two distinct and separate meals.

Let us apply the analogy to the papal vacancy theory: by no stretch of the imagination can the death of Pius XII in 1958 and today (2005) be called any kind of a moral union More than a generation has passed since his death. Hence when theologians speak of a moral union between one pope and another they are referring to a relatively short period of time The greatest lapse between popes was between pope Clement IV and pope Gregory X (a lapse of three years) and this was because the cardinals had a hard time deciding which of their number to elect. Interestingly enough their tardiness and the subsequent disgust of the townspeople who walled them up until they decided the question is the origin of the practice of sealing the cardinals in the Sistine Chapel during the election of the pope.

An interregnum of 47 years is not a moral union as far as I am concerned. If Our Lord said He would build His Church upon this "Rock" then the absence of a pope for so long (the very constitutive element of the Church) would mean that He was a liar and that the "gates of hell" would indeed have prevailed. Those who maintain that the Church can exist without a pope need a crash course in the theological treatise De Ecclesia.