To Recognize and Resist the Pope

Right now, there is a tremendous amount of confusion out there about Pope Francis and what we, as Traditional Catholics, should think about him. I’ve written on this topic before, and I’ll provide links accordingly, so I’ll try to be as brief as possible. The most relevant article I’ve written about this, I think, is When Peter Has Fallen. You may want to read that one first, then come back here.

What precipitates this article, and motivates my composition, are three major events. The first is the ten-year anniversary of the Francis pontificate, which causes us to consider the decade of controversy and confusion that has marked his reign. The second is the heretical infiltration, and ideological colonization, of the Vatican by the German Bishops Synodal Way. The majority of the German bishops are in a state of Modernist heresy, which threatens to produce a massive schism in the Catholic Church of a Modernist nature. The third is the Traditionalist schism now underway, and led by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, former Vatican nuncio to the United States.

Some time back, I predicted that the leadership style of Pope Francis would not only produce a schism, but actually two. In that article I predicted that one of these schisms would likely be led by the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX). I was wrong, profoundly wrong, and in fact, I was so wrong, that I wish to apologize to the SSPX right now for that regrettable presumption. In fact, the SSPX will not lead one of these schisms, but in truth appears to be on the side of orthodoxy and full-communion with Rome. I am now 100% convinced that the end of this current crisis in the Church, whenever that day comes, will see the full canonical regularization of the SSPX, and the formal petition for the cause of canonization of the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.

The controversies of Pope Francis are well known, dare I say legendary, and I won’t delve much into them here. For the purpose of this article, I will only say this. On the one hand, he has coddled the Modernist heretics in Germany far too much, allowing them to go way too far, risking the very unity of the entire Catholic Church worldwide. It’s a reckless game, in my opinion, that cannot end well, and it would be wise for him to stop, and reverse course, before his fame becomes infamy. On the other hand, his animosity and pettiness toward Traditional Catholics is well known, especially among those whom it affects the most, and while on the one hand it has caused many Traditional Catholics to dislike him (I’m speaking mildly here), it has also caused a boom in Traditional Catholicism not seen in all of post-conciliar history. Archbishop Lefebvre himself could not have imagine the tectonic shift now underway in the Catholic world, as an unprecedented amount of young people have moved into, or are moving toward, the Traditional Catholic camp.

The German Synodal Way (Der Synodale Weg) has been nothing short of a slow-motion train wreck, causing a deep split in the German Church, with only a minority of bishops siding with orthodoxy, and the rest going along with the heretical proposals of the German synod. The strategy of the German bishops is to carry their proposals (ordination of women, blessing same-sex couples, and creating permanent-authoritative synods for national churches) into the Synod on Synodality in Rome. The idea here is to pressure the pope, as well as the other bishops, into accepting these things, at least for the German Church, if not for the Church worldwide. If they get what they want, it will be the “end of the Catholic Church“ according to Cardinal Gerhard Müller, former Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF). Considering he served as head of the Vatican’s doctrinal watchdog office for five years, under both Pope Benedict XVI and Pope Francis, he would probably know a thing or two about this. His final words on this topic are “we must resist“ this attempted hostile takeover of the Catholic Church by the German bishops, highjacking Pope Francis’ synodal process.

Recent actions by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò indicate that the second schism I predicted in 2022 has just begun, except it’s starting by a player I didn’t suspect at the time. As I predicted, it’s a Traditionalist schism, a real schism, but nothing like the canonical status problems of the SSPX. It’s not even close to that.

I want to say that I am still grateful to Viganò for exposing the lies of the pope and other churchmen on the Theodore McCarrick scandal. If that was all he ever did, and quietly faded into the sunset, his legacy as a hero of Catholic faith would have been secured. He didn’t though. In hiding, Viganò has buried himself in conspiracies about the Deep State and the Deep Church, which while some of it may be true, it serves no purpose to carry on publicly about it. (After all, what can any of us do about it?) Now Viganò is a functional sedevacantist, a schismatic who may deny that term, but there is no doubt he professes Francis to be an antipope. Thus, he is a sedevacantist, whether he admits it or not, and according to CREDO, the catechism of Bishop Athanasius Schneider, which is backed by Cardinal Robert Sarah, and has received an imprimatur by Bishop Peter Libasci (Diocese of Manchester), that puts Viganò in schism with Rome.

This, by itself would be inconsequential were we just talking about Viganò, but that is no longer the case. Viganò has formed an organization called Exsurge Domini, with the assistance of Count Giuseppe Vannicelli Casoni, and Viganò has just announced that it will be starting a House of Formation (a priestly seminary) for the purpose of ordaining men to the priesthood, presumably by Viganò himself. While drawing parallels between his effort, and that of Archbishop Lefebvre, who founded a similar House of Formation in Écône, Switzerland in 1970, it should be pointed out that Archbishop Lefebvre never questioned the legitimacy of any pope, and tried to keep all aspects of the SSPX within canonical legitimacy, whenever possible. At the time he formed the seminary in Écône, he was still an Archbishop in good standing as well. Viganò’s project will likely take place entirely outside the normal canonical structures of the Catholic Church from the very beginning, and he is much older than Lefebvre was when he started the SSPX. Thus, it stands to reason that if Viganò wants to keep this project going beyond his years, he’s going to have to ordain some bishops, presumably without permission from Rome, in the very near future. This will guarantee his formal excommunication and solidify the schism. What makes this different from the SSPX is that Viganò is a sedevacantist, while Lefebvre was not. The SSPX recognizes Francis as the pope, and Exsurge Domini presumably will not. If this isn’t schism, I don’t know what is. Perhaps a future pope could attempt to rescue Viganò and Exsurge Domini by declaring Francis an antipope at some future date, but the question still remains: will they also deny the legitimacy of that future pope as well?

In comparison to Viganò’s group, the SSPX is nearly in perfect standing. I’m not kidding here! All the problems with the SSPX could be solved literally overnight if Pope Francis just does what he’s already done with the SSPX on so many other occasions. He recognizes most of their sacraments as licit (legal), and has ordered all the bishops of the world to cooperate with them on such things as marriages, confirmations, etc. All Francis would have to do is just unilaterally declare their organization “recognized,” calling it a prelature, an ordinariate or something, and tell the DDF to rubber-stamp it with a document that the pope alone will sign. Done! The SSPX is literally one papal signature away from full and regular status within the Catholic Church and it always has been, because nothing needs to be done on the part of the SSPX. They have always recognized Francis as the pope. They have always prayed for him during the holy sacrifice of the Mass, and they do recognize the Second Vatican Council as legitimate. They just have issues with parts of it and seek orthodox clarification. This is not an unreasonable request.

In the face of a coming three-way schism, with the German bishops taking a portion of the Church in the Modernist direction, and the Viganò group taking a much smaller portion of the Church in the hyper-traditionalist and sedevacantist direction, it leaves the conservative and traditional Catholics (people like us) hanging somewhere in the middle, wondering if Pope Francis will stay with us or not. Will we soon be abandoned entirely? It’s a most extraordinary time in Church history.

So what do we do?

As I pointed out in my previous article, When Peter Has Fallen, there is only one thing to do. We must imitate the Apostle Paul when he rebuked St. Peter publicly for acting hypocritically and failing to fulfill the mission of his Petrine office (Galatians 2:11-14). It’s the only way. However, Paul was an apostle, we the laity are not, so it’s not our place to “play Paul.” That’s the job of bishops, archbishops and cardinals. While there is nothing wrong with questioning a teaching of a pope if it appears to run against Scripture and Tradition, it’s not our place to point fingers and start calling the pope a heretic, or worse, declaring him an antipope. As I have said previously, only a future pope can do that, and unless that happens, we are all obliged to regard Francis as the pope. Furthermore, there is no way to legitimately depose a pope. As someone who I highly respect once told me (and I am NOT approving this): the only way to legitimately and effectively depose a pope is to hand him a “special drink.”

So what do we do? We call it the “Recognize and Resist” strategy. (No, I didn’t come up with the name.) We recognize that Francis is the pope, but we resist any agenda he may have if it appears to contradict Scripture and Tradition. Furthermore, we as laypeople don’t rely solely on our own judgement in regard to this. Whenever a real contradiction happens, some clergy will inevitably stand up to resist as well. We have seen this in such men as Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Müller, Cardinal Sarah, Bishop Schneider, Bishop Strickland, and many more. Some bishops have resisted openly and publicly. Others have resisted quietly and discretely. In both cases, wherever a bishop resists, the faithful laity have resources to draw upon. They can help us discern exactly where a pope has deviated from Scripture and Tradition, and indeed they have, each in their own way and with their own tact. The good news we often take for granted is that resistance is happening, at every level of the Church from cardinals to archbishops, from archbishops to bishops, from bishops to priests, and from priests to the laity. It’s happening and it’s working. The German bishops are not getting what they thought to be a “slam dunk” under this pontificate. The pope himself is forced to backpedal on things he probably would prefer not to. In a very real sense, Paul is rebuking Peter again, and it’s having an effect. Francis’ petty removal of Bishop Strickland from his diocese, and Cardinal Burke from his apartment, shows that their high-profile witness is working, and Francis is finding difficulty getting what he wants. He’s having so much difficulty, he feels the need to “remove” his opposition in any way he can. He did the same thing on a macro level with Traditionis Custodes, just because a few people were allegedly abusing Summorum Pontificum. A good pope would have just dealt with the alleged abusers. A bad pope would do what Francis did, and just punish everyone attached to the 1962 Missal (Traditional Latin Mass).

If this looks like infighting within the Church it’s because it is, and that’s okay. St. Paul publicly rebuking St. Peter was a direct case of infighting within the Apostolic Era. This is no different. Again, it’s okay. The Church is a family, and sometimes families fight. It happens, it’s normal, and sometimes that’s the only way conflicts can be resolved. As long as the family keeps communication open, even if it’s unpleasant communication, it’s still a family. It’s only when family members start cutting each other off, becoming estranged from one another, then the family ceases to be a family. This is a form of domestic schism. The same holds true in the Catholic Church. Right now, there is a huge fight going on within the Church and it’s a dispute over doctrine, but as long as everyone keeps communication open (even fighting, quarreling or acting in petty ways), it’s still a Church. There is no schism. It’s only when we begin to disown each other, cast each other away, and go out on our own independently, that there is schism. This is what Viganò is already doing. This is what a majority of the German bishops are prepared to do, and have threatened to do, if they don’t get their way in Rome next year. Once you recognize what a schism is, and what it is not, you begin to understand that a fight is not a schism. While some fights can lead to schism, other fights simply do not.

The Recognize and Resist strategy plays out among the laity in more humble ways, or at least it should, and that can be a struggle sometimes. I confess that, as a Catholic apologist and catechist, it’s been a challenge for me to find balance. I don’t profess to have fully achieved it yet, but I think I’ve learned a lot along the way. What I have learned is this. For the laity, Recognize and Resist simply means living a fully sacramental Catholic life, keeping the old Faith, as it’s always been, and not giving into the compromises coming from Rome or any local clergy. It means recognizing Francis as the pope and praying for him to repent of errors and fulfill his duty as the successor of St. Peter. It means seeking ways to express one’s Catholic faith in the most traditional ways possible and supporting traditional liturgies (regardless of the form) as well as orthodox homilies and the pastors who preach them. For the average Catholic, it might mean correcting and explaining things when a friend, or family member, has gotten the wrong idea about what’s happening in the Church today. For Catholic apologists and catechists, it’s a bit more tricky (as I can personally attest), as we have a responsibility to a lot more people which we have voluntarily taken upon ourselves. Thus, a bit more correction and explanation may be in order. That’s part of what this article is for.

There are two kinds of people in a family feud. There are those who enjoy the fight, and those who can’t wait for it to end. Sedevacantists tend to be the former, using the fight as a means to justify and promote schism and their own programs. Recognize and Resist people tend to be the latter. I know that’s true with me. I truly hate this. I can’t wait for the day when I can finally say this crisis is finished, the pope has acted appropriately, and we don’t need to talk about this anymore. I long for the day when I can tell my future grandchildren: “Yep, I lived through that difficult time, I did what little I could, and I’m glad it’s over.” Maybe some important lessons will have been learned, and maybe the Church will be stronger because of it. Until then, we Recognize and Resist. We stay within the Church. We refuse to leave. We refuse to go into schism with the pope. We refuse to say we have the authority to declare this pope, or any pope, an antipope. Only a future pope can do that. And we refuse to go along with any compromise of the Historic and Traditional Catholic Faith.

Shane Schaetzel is an author of Catholic books and an Evangelical convert to the Catholic Church through Anglicanism. His articles have been featured on LifeSiteNews, The Remnant Newspaper, Forward in Christ, and Catholic Online. You can read Shane’s books at ShaneSchaetzel.Com