Thesis statement of Canon law: “Now, however, the law can no longer be unknown. Pastors have at their disposal secure norms by which they may correctly direct the exercise of the sacred ministry. To each person is given a source of knowinghis or her own proper rights and duties. Arbitrariness in acting can be precluded. Abuses which perhaps have crept into ecclesiastical discipline because of a lack of legislation can be more easily rooted out and prevented.” (Thesis statement)
My Thesis statement: To publicly and clearly declare that I, with moral certitude, in obedience to the oath of fidelity that I solemnly swore, declare that Benedict XVI is the true Sovereign Pontiff, that he never resigned the office of the papacy, and is still the true Pope. Bergoglio has never been pope, and is in fact, an anti-pope. Catherine of Siena, my patron saint, “Proclaim the truth and do not be silent through fear.”
- My Journey: My long refusal, with mental conflicts and law of non-contradiction, had to choose between accepting valid ecclesiastical councils and past papal encyclicals or Benedict XVI never leaving the See of Peter. The Petrine privilege in effect the one teaching error is not pope. Truth cannot contradict itself. There is One Truth as the Lord declares and TA affirms following the trajectory of Augustine.
Some might wonder, Karen your journey to certitude is different than the two other sources that I will discuss. In fact, your journey will differ from mine. That is to be expected. Epistemology, the study of knowledge is instructive on this point as well as a cursory knowledge of law.
Epistemology 101: There is a mysterious leap for each individual between opinion, facts or data, and authoritative sources, that finally leads to knowledge of an individual. The process of knowing is thus unique to each individual given that person’s past reservoir of knowledge and experience. https://karen-early.com/faith-reason/plato-and-aristotle-a-comparison-ofepistemologies/ & https://karen-early.com/faith-reason/confidently-following-christ-an-apologia-on-the-divinity-of-christ-with-application-to-the-new-evangelization-part-ii-2/
At a trial, jurors are given the charge ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’. Reasonable is a mysterious term which is inherent to an individual. Facts and data alone are not sufficient though it is indeed helpful. We are rational beings, created for a desire for truth. This predisposition of the person must also have familiarity with truth and discernment. Discernment comes from a connection to the source of Truth, Jesus through the operation of the Holy Spirit.
A lively connection to the Holy Spirit does not guarantee a freedom from error for a person, rather, it provides for a smaller number of errors. In our fallen state, that is good enough. As it turns out, the longer one walks with the Holy Spirit, which necessarily means living a graced filled and holy life as enumerated by the Decalogue, and the traditional moral norms as taught by the Church throughout the ages, the ability to trust one’s own judgment increases and the leap to knowing is made more secure.
Thus, my reasoning could be different from yours and still be of value to others on a similar journey. We can also ‘agree to disagree’ without acrimony. I must be true to my oath of fidelity which is to witness to the Fullness of Truth.
In this declaration, just as Benedict XVI made a declaration, I will follow Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s lead and use his baptismal name. Bergoglio said both to the UN and to the Church that he comes in his own name. I honor his lead and refer to him as Bergoglio. Benedict never renounced his throne name of Benedict XVI. I honor that as well.
 In his gloss on these words of Psalm 11 (v. 2), “Truths are decayed from among the children of men,” Augustine writes” that the truth of the divine intellect is one, and from it are drawn the many truths that are in the human intellect– “just as from one man’s face many likeness- es are reflected in a mirror.” Now, there are many truths in things, just as there are many entities of things. But truth predicated of things because of their relation to the human intellect is, as it were, accidental to those things; for, supposing that the human intellect did not or could not exist, things would still remain essentially the same. But truth predicated of things because of their relation to the divine intellect is inseparably attendant on them, for they cannot exist except by reason of the divine intellect which keeps bringing them into being. Again, truth is primarily in a thing because of its relation to the divine intellect, not to the human intellect, because it is related to the divine intellect as to its cause, but to the human intellect as to its effect in the sense that the latter receives its knowledge from things. For this reason, a thing is said to be true principally because of its order to the truth of the divine intellect rather than because of its relation to the truth of a human intellect.
So, if truth in its proper sense be taken as that by which all things are primarily true, then all things are true by means of one truth, the truth of the divine intellect. This is the truth which Anselm writes about. https://truthdefined.com/PDFs/Aquinas-Truth-Q1.pdf pg 21 accessed May 18, 2020