John XXIII Pope (2) Election and Acceptance (P.U.A.)

John XXIII Pope (2)

Election and Acceptance (P.U.A.)

 

Table of Contents

 

1. Preliminaries: Plan for Examining the Papacy of John XXIII
2. Introduction
3. Certain Principle of Theology and Canon Law
4. Certain Historical Facts
   1. a) Election of 28 October 1958
   2. b) Immediate and Universal Acceptance
      1. By the Cardinals
      2. By the Clergy and the Faithful
      3. By the States

1. 1. c) Absence of Notable Opposition
      1. No Organised Dissidence
      2. The Entire Church Acts as if John XXIII Were the Legitimate Pope

5. Logical Conclusion

 

1. Preliminaries:

 

To determine whether Cardinal Joseph Roncalli truly became and remained pope, we shall verify in him all the conditions of the papacy in several chapters:

 

– 1st Chapter: “Election and Acceptance (PUA)”: first, a pope must be elected by the conclave and accepted by the Church, to receive the papacy from God Himself.

 

– 2nd Chapter: “Impediments and Causes of Loss of the Papacy”: next, we shall verify the impediments and causes of loss; indeed, we have seen in a previous chapter the causes of impediment or loss of the office of pope. They are six: Death, Abdication, Insanity, Public Heresy, Public Apostasy, and Public Schism. This second chapter concerns Monsignor Roncalli before his election.

 

– 3rd Chapter: John XXIII after His Election

 

– 4th Chapter: John XXIII “Occult Heretic, Discovered after Death”: finally, we shall examine evidence advanced after his death that John XXIII had been initiated into a heretical sect before his election.

 

So let us begin with this 1st Chapter: “Election and Acceptance P.U.A.”

 

2. Introduction:

 

We shall investigate whether Cardinal Joseph Roncalli was accepted by the Church, for the PUA, the Peaceful Universal Acceptance of a pope (see the chapter on PUA) constitutes a dogmatic fact which provides certainty (see the chapter on Dogmatic Facts).

 

3. Certain Principle of Theology and Canon Law

 

Saint Thomas Aquinas teaches that papal authority proceeds immediately from God, but that the designation of the person of the pontiff is mediated by the Church, via canonical election followed by peaceful and universal acceptance. The pope is legitimate if, after his election, he is recognised as such by the entire Church without notable and lasting opposition.

 

The Code of Canon Law of 1917 in canon 109 decrees that a valid election, followed by peaceful acceptance, confers the plenary jurisdiction of the papacy:

 

“Those who are admitted into the ecclesiastical hierarchy do not derive their power from the consent of the people nor from designation by secular authority; but they are constituted in the degrees of the power of order by holy ordination; in the sovereign pontificate, directly by divine right, through legitimate election and acceptance of the election; in the other degrees of jurisdiction, by canonical mission.”

 

This is confirmed by the doctrine of Cardinal Billot with clarity in positing that the universal and peaceful adherence of the Church to the designated Peter is an infallible sign that the latter is the true Peter (Louis Billot, S.J., De Ecclesia Christi).

 

4. Certain Historical Facts

 

Election of 28 October 1958: Angelo Roncalli is elected at the conclave by the cardinals present (51 voters, required majority: 35 votes). He immediately accepts the election and announces his name: “Accipio electionem et vocabo me Ioannem XXIII” (I accept the election and I will call myself John XXIII) (Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 50, 1958, p. 909). No cardinal contests the formal validity of the election at the time.

 

1. A) Immediate and Universal Acceptance:

 

a)

By the Cardinals: All the cardinals present at the conclave render him obedience in the Sistine Chapel, according to the traditional rite (see the official accounts in L’Osservatore Romano of 29 October 1958).

b)

By the Clergy and the Faithful: From 29 October 1958, the dioceses of the entire world announce his election and order prayers for the new pontiff. Examples:

i.

In Paris, Cardinal Feltin celebrates a Mass of thanksgiving and inserts the name of John XXIII in the canon of the Mass from 30 October (La Croix, 30 October 1958).

ii.

In New York, Cardinal Spellman does the same (The New York Times, 29 October 1958).

iii. In Latin America, Africa, and Asia, the apostolic nunciatures receive telegrams of allegiance from all the bishops.

c)

By the States: More than 80 heads of state and government send official congratulations and recognise John XXIII as Sovereign Pontiff (Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. 50, 1958, pp. 915-920). No Catholic state contests.

 

1. B) Absence of Notable Opposition:

 

– No organised dissidence appears in 1958-1959. The rare isolated voices (such as that of Father Saenz y Arriaga, who will contest later) emerge only in 1963 and remain marginal, without adherence from bishops or faithful in significant number.

– The Entire Church – clergy, faithful, hierarchy – acts as if John XXIII were the legitimate pope: insertion of his name in the canon of the Mass everywhere, publication of accepted encyclicals (Mater et Magistra, 1961; Pacem in Terris, 1963), and convocation of the council announced on 25 January 1959 and prepared without contestation.

 

5. Logical Conclusion

 

Since the peaceful universal acceptance is a certain historical fact (recognition by all bishops, insertion in the liturgy, effective obedience without notable schism), Angelo Roncalli was constituted legitimate pope by the PUA, according to traditional Catholic doctrine. Any subsequent contestation (after 1959) cannot retroactively invalidate this initial peaceful acceptance, for legitimacy is acquired at the moment of the PUA.

 

Note:

 

Since in the sedevacantist world several confreres, including a certain number of bishops and priests, hold an opinion different from mine, I accept and apply the adage “in fide unitas, in opiniis libertas, in omnibus caritas” (unity in faith, freedom in opinions, charity in all).

 

Since they are quite numerous, one must take into account an “extrinsic evidence” in their favour, although the strength of the arguments that I employ in the text above seems to give it the value of an “intrinsic evidence”. In any case, I submit in advance to any decision of the Church in this matter.