Sedevacantism is True

A Primer on
Sedevacantism

I
Sedevacantist Catholicism is the true Catholic Faith as it stands today. The conclusion follows if one
accepts (1) Pope Paul IV's Cum ex Apostolatus Officio, which states infallibly that no heretic can be a
valid pope and (2) that all the "pope's" since Vatican II have been heretics. Let us begin first with Pope
Paul IV's Cum ex Apostolatus Officio, the full text of which can be read here:
http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/cum_ex.php.
At the start of the document, the Pope wrote
"By virtue of the Apostolic office which, despite our unworthiness, has been entrusted to Us
by God, We are responsible for the general care of the flock of the Lord. Because of this, in
order that the flock may be faithfully guarded and beneficially directed, We are bound to be
diligently watchful after the manner of a vigilant Shepherd and to ensure most carefully that
certain people who consider the study of the truth beneath them should be driven out of the
sheepfold of Christ and no longer continue to disseminate error from positions of authority. We
refer in particular to those who in this age, impelled by their sinfulness and supported by their
cunning, are attacking with unusual learning and malice the discipline of the orthodox Faith, and
who, moreover, by perverting the import of Holy Scripture, are striving to rend the unity of the
Catholic Church and the seamless tunic of the Lord."
From this paragraph we see that the pope both intended this constitution to be infallible and universally
binding. For he mentioned that this document proceeded "By virtue of the Apostolic office..." that "the
flock may be faithfully guarded and beneficially directed.... For when the Pope speaks infallibly he must
unequivocally imply that he speaks as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, which he did in the above.
Further he must speak by virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, and to define a doctrine or precept
concerning faith or morals. And of course, that this document will be addressing a matter of morality, in
this case of a persons authority within the Church, we shall come to shortly see.
Pope Paul IV then continued, "6. In addition, [by this Our Constitution, which is to remain valid in
perpetuity We enact, determine, decree and define:-] that if ever at any time it shall appear that any
Bishop, even if he be acting as an Archbishop, Patriarch or Primate; or any Cardinal of the aforesaid
Roman Church, or, as has already been mentioned, any legate, or even the Roman Pontiff, prior to his
promotion or his elevation as Cardinal or Roman Pontiff, has deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen
into some heresy:
(i) the promotion or elevation, even if it shall have been uncontested and by the unanimous
assent of all the Cardinals, shall be null, void and worthless;
(ii) it shall not be possible for it to acquire validity (nor for it to be said that it has thus acquired
validity) through the acceptance of the office, of consecration, of subsequent authority, nor

through possession of administration, nor through the putative enthronement of a Roman

Pontiff, or Veneration, or obedience accorded to such by all, nor through the lapse of any period
of time in the foregoing situation;
(iii) it shall not be held as partially legitimate in any way;
(iv) to any so promoted to be Bishops, or Archbishops, or Patriarchs, or Primates or elevated as
Cardinals, or as Roman Pontiff, no authority shall have been granted, nor shall it be considered
to have been so granted either in the spiritual or the temporal domain;
(v) each and all of their words, deeds, actions and enactments, howsoever made, and anything
whatsoever to which these may give rise, shall be without force and shall grant no stability
whatsoever nor any right to anyone;
(vi) those thus promoted or elevated shall be deprived automatically, and without need for any
further declaration, of all dignity, position, honour, title, authority, office and power."
So here Pope Paul IV clearly meant to establish a constitution for the Church, and he was clearly
speaking about the moral category of heresy and the moral value of heretics who hold Church office.
Therefore he taught on faith and morals. I believe that these points teach contrary to what many
"Catholics" believe, namely, that the Roman Pontiff cannot be a heretic or cannot be removed. Yet the
above document clearly stated both that if "even the Roman Pontiff...has deviated from the Catholic
Faith or fallen into some heresy..." and "the promotion or elevation even if it shall have been
uncontested and by the unanimous assent of all the Cardinals...shall not be held as partially legitimate in
any way..."; statements which together refute those above positions. For no other Church official is
elected by unanimous consent or consent in general, by the Cardinals except a Pope, so that the assent
of the Cardinals is illegitimate for an already elevated heretic-pope.
Here in article seven, Pope Paul IV wrote, "7. Finally, [by this Our Constitution, which is to remain
valid in perpetuity, We] also [enact, determine, define and decree]:- that any and all persons who would
have been subject to those thus promoted or elevated if they had not previously deviated from the
Faith, become heretics, incurred schism or provoked or committed any or all of these, be they members
of anysoever of the following categories:
(i) the clergy, secular and religious;
(ii) the laity;
(iii) the Cardinals, even those who shall have taken part in the election of this very Pontiff previously
deviating from the Faith or heretical or schismatical, or shall otherwise have consented and vouchsafed
obedience to him and shall have venerated him;
(iv) Castellans, Prefects, Captains and Officials, even of Our Beloved City and of the entire Ecclesiastical
State, even if they shall be obliged and beholden to those thus promoted or elevated by homage, oath

or security; shall be permitted at any time to withdraw with impunity from obedience and devotion to
those thus promoted or elevated and to avoid them as warlocks, heathens, publicans, and heresiarchs
(the same subject persons, nevertheless, remaining bound by the duty of fidelity and obedience to any
future Bishops, Archbishops, Patriarchs, Primates, Cardinals and Roman Pontiff canonically entering)."
Here the misperception that belabors many Catholics today, that the Pope cannot become a heretic,
is again refuted and his automatic loss of authority upon being exposed as a heretic is supported. For
"the Cardinals, even those who shall have taken part in the election of this very Pontiff...or shall
otherwise have consented and vouchsafed obedience to him...shall be permitted at any time to
withdraw with impunity from obedience and devotion to those thus promoted...", says as much.

Finally the document ends at article ten wherein the late pope stated,"10. No one at all, therefore, may
infringe this document of our approbation, re-introduction, sanction, statute and derogation of wills and
decrees, or by rash presumption contradict it. If anyone, however, should presume to attempt this, let
him know that he is destined to incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the blessed Apostles, Peter and
Paul. Once more determining that this law was indeed a binding and infallible one and applicable to all
times.

II
Vatican II pope's are heretics. The first piece of evidence which leads to this conclusion is a
particular act of "Pope" John XXIII. As stated on page 19 of "When A Pope Asks Forgiveness" by Luigi
Accattoli, John XXIII said to the non-Catholic Roger Schutz, "You are in the Church, be at peace."Schutz
exclaimed: "But then, we are Catholics!" John XXIII said: "Yes; we are no longer separated." So John XXIII
has claimed that one who is outside the Church is part of the Church. Yet it was Pope Eugene IV's,
"Cantate Domino, that affirmed, Therefore it [the Church]condemns, rejects, anathematizes and
declares to be outside the Body of Christ, which is the Church, whoever holds opposing or contrary
views. So whereas the so-called Pope John XXIII claimed that a non-Catholic was a believer, Pope
Eugene at the Council of Florence had already stated that this was impossible. They cannot both be
correct, and the only conclusion that can be drawn is that "Pope" John XXIII was a heretic. But for even
more astonishing documentation of this and other facts, see the link below to the Most Holy Family
Monasterys website.
The Second piece of evidence that leads us to conclude that Vatican II "Popes" were heretics is
"Pope" Paul VI's evaluation of religious liberty. For Paul VI, on July 9, 1969 said, She [the Church] has
also affirmed, during Her long history, at the cost of oppression and persecution, freedom for everyone
to profess his own religion. No one, She says, is to be restrained from acting, no one is to be forced to
act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs...As we said, the Council (Vat II) demanded a true and public

religious freedom...i. Yet this directly contradicts Pope Pius IX's, infallible Syllabus of Errors, # 78:Hence
in certain regions of Catholic name, it has been laudably sanctioned by law that men immigrating there
be allowed to have public exercises of any form of worship of their own. Condemned. Once again a
Vatican II anti-pope contradicted a traditional Pope's words and revealed himself to be a heretic.
The third piece of evidence that leads us to conclude that the Vatican II anti-popes were heretics is
an action of "Pope" John Paul I. For, according to the same Luigi Accattoli in "When A Pope Asks
Forgiveness" pg.44, he said, "The Church should not have power nor possess wealth...How beautiful it
would have been if the pope had himself voluntarily renounced all temporal power!" This again exposes
the rank heresy of this man, since his sentiments are opposed to those condemned by Pope Pius IX in his
Syllabus of Errors "76. The abolition of the temporal power of which the Apostolic See is possessed
would contribute in the greatest degree to the liberty and prosperity of the Church. -Condemned."
The same pattern can be seen in the next three anti-popes. For brevities sake then, let me merely
list without further comment, those statements of legitimate magisterial authority and those opposing
them by the heretic-"popes".
John Paul II in Redemptor Hominis: Does it not sometimes happen that the firm belief of the
followers of the non-Christian religions a belief that is also an effect of the Spirit of truth
operating outside the visible confines of the Mystical Body...
VS.
Pope Pius IX, Qui Pluribus
"...They pretend that men can gain eternal salvation by the practice of any religion, as if there
could ever be any sharing between justice and iniquity, any collaboration between light and
darkness, or any agreement between Christ and Belial."

Benedict XVI, on October 27, 2011, prayed with members of false religions as a part of his Assisi
III meeting. http://www.osservatoreromano.va/en/news/the-train-for-assisi
VS.
In addition to the above prohibition on associating with members of false religions (e.g. on
associating with protestant cults), there is also the authority of the Council of Elvira which
stated, It has been decreed that those who in adult age after receiving Baptism shall go into the
pagan temples to worship idols, which is a deadly crime and the height of wickedness, shall not
be admitted to communion even at death.

Francis I, address, on May 18, 2013: promote religious freedom for everyone, everyone!

Every man and every woman must be free in his or her profession of religion, whatever it may
be.
VS.
Pope Pius IX, Syllabus of Errors: "Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which,
guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true." -- Allocution "Maxima quidem," June 9,
1862; Damnatio "Multiplices inter," June 10, 1851.
So finally, clear as crystal, bright as day, the Vatican II "popes" are heretics and anti-popes.

III
So given that all the "popes" from John XXIII, are all heretics, and due to the content of Pope Paul
IV's infallible and perpetual constitution, that all heretics are to be automatically refused respect and
authority even if the heretic is considered a pope, it follows that these present popes are
unauthoritative and that "The Seat is Vacant".
For more information on this issue and other issues crucial in our times go to www.vaticancatholic.com
i

L'Osservatore Romano, July 17, 1969, p. 1