Novus Ordo Watch Excommunicates Archbishop for Resisting Pope in 1700's
#1
http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.ph...-in-1700-s

Novus Ordo Watch Excommunicates Archbishop for Resisting Pope in 1700's

Written by  Chris Jackson | Remnant Columnist

On January 12th I authored a short blog post entitled, “Resisting Papal Errors: Another Historical Precedent for Cardinal Burke.”  In it I recounted a little known tale of the Archbishop of Paris, Christophe de Beaumont, resisting the tragic 1773 brief of Pope Clement XIV suppressing the Jesuits. The post apparently hit a nerve, stoking the ire of the sedevacantist website Novus Ordo Watch.  So much so that the site published an almost 5,600 word tome condemning my piece entitled, “Resisting the Pope? “The Remnant” and the Suppression of the Jesuits.

The author, presumably Mario Derksen, attempts to point out various supposed flaws in my Remnant blog post; a post consisting primarily of quotations from two Catholic historians. The blog post was written not as an exhaustive research paper, but in order to make the historical letter of resistance from Archbishop Beaumont to Pope Clement XIV, which even Mr. Derksen admits is authentic, more widely known to Catholics. 

As it turns out, Abp. Beaumont’s letter of resistance was far more objectionable to Mr. Derksen than it was to Pope Clement XIV. This is evident as Mr. Derksen used 5,600 more words than the late pope to respond to it. Although I don’t normally make a habit of acknowledging such erroneous rebuttals, I believe in this case responding to some of the more outlandish claims in his piece might be beneficial to any confused readers.


Dr. Warren Carroll

First, Mr. Derksen spends five paragraphs explaining that famed Catholic historian Dr. Warren Carroll, who I cite in my post, was a Novus Ordo conservative or Neo-Catholic.  This is correct.  However, Mr. Derksen misses the significance of this point entirely. Novus Ordo conservatives, just like Mr. Derksen and other sedevacantists, hold the position that the pope’s official legislation, and in most cases whatever he says, is never to be contradicted or resisted in any manner whatsoever by the faithful.

This is precisely why Dr. Carroll, who even condemned Archbishop Lefebvre’s own resistance to Paul VI and John Paul II, coming out in favor of Abp. Beaumont’s resistance to Clement XIV was so striking and persuasive. For in the case of the Jesuit Suppression even a Novus Ordo conservative like Dr. Carroll could see and admit that resistance was called for and morally justified. Thus, far from lessening the credibility of the argument, Dr. Carroll admitting Archbishop Beaumont acted rightly only strengthens the resistance argument.

Read the rest here: http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.ph...-in-1700-s
Reply
#2
This looks like an interesting read. I'll read the article soon. Thank you for posting. :)
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)