2 thoughts on “Archbishop Lefebvre Was Open to the Idea that a Putative Pope May Not Be a True Pope”

  1. Here’s an issue regarding the legitimacy/illegitimacy of popes that bothers me:

    Billot says that a claimant enjoying universal peaceful acceptance is undoubtedly a pope, and said universal acceptance sanates any defect in the election process.

    Moreover, Fr. Berry, Msgr. Van Noort et al., say the identity of the pope is a dogmatic fact, and therefore at least theologically certain.

    On the other hand, some later canonists like Wernz-Vidal except those from the charge of schism who question the legitimacy of a pontiff due to irregularities in the election.


    How can Wernz-Vidal except from the charge of schism those who reject the legitimacy of the pope because of election irregularities (or for any reason at all), if it is true according to Billot that election irregularities are sanated by universal consent, and per Van Noort, the identity of a pope is a dogmatic fact?

    • I am not sure how to answer this question. At this point, I can only say that I think I would have accepted Jorge Bergoglio as pope after the death of Pope Benedict XVI if Jorge Bergoglio were Catholic.


Leave a Comment