A Scriptural Defense for Sedevacantism
by Timothy O. McAleer
The belief of sedvacantists, which we explored briefly in the article "History Repeats Itself" seems amply provided for in Isaiah 22:22-25 of the Vulgate Douay-Rheims Haydock edition.
In Isaiah 22:22 we read a clear prophecy of the keys Jesus would give to Peter to establish the Papacy: "And I will lay the key of the house of David upon his shoulder: and he shall open, and none shall shut: and he shall shut, and none shall open," which was clearly fulfilled in Matthew 16:19 when Jesus told Peter: "And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven." A footnote to this verse in the Haydock Edition reads, "Thus we may gather what power Christ conferred on St. Peter, when he gave him the keys of heaven."
In the next verse, Isaiah 22:23 we read, "And I will fasten him as a peg in a sure place, and he shall be for a throne of glory to the house of his father," which sdeemingly refers to the fact that the First Pope, St. Peter, and all of his legitimate successors up to the death of Pope Pius XII in 1958, will be fastened as "a peg in a sure place" in Rome, the Vatican; the "throne of glory to the house of his father" seemingly referring to the "throne of Peter" from which the pope rules the whole spiritual world as Vicar of Christ and from which he may make infallible proclamations; while "the house of the father" may refer to the Catholic Church, or, more specifically, to St. Peter's Basilica.
In Isaiah 22:24 we read, "And they shall hang upon him all the glory of his father's house, divers kinds of vessels, every little vessel, from the vessels of cups, even to every instrument of music," which seemingly refers to all the glorious riches to be found in Catholic cathedrals, particularly the sterling gold chalices ("vessels" or "cups") that are used for the transubstantiation of the wine into the Blood of Christ; Haydock's footnote for this verse reads, in regards to the term "house," "He shall be the ornament of the priesthood, and in regards to the term "music," "All affairs in church and state shall be at his disposal," again, no doubt referring to the office of the papacy.
(Incidentally, if one follows the New American "Bible"--the "bible used in "masses" of the modern "Catholic" church and in "Bible studies" of same, unless outright Protestant "bibles" are being used instead--they will not get the same meaning as the Vulgate Douay Rheims, but rather a warmed over protestantization meant to diminish the clear symbolic indication of the glories of the Papacy and the Catholic Church and instead speak only of the historical Old Testament character of Eliakim within his private family: "I will place the key of the House of David on his shoulder; when he opens, no one shall shut, when he shuts, no one shall open. I will fix him like a peg in a sure spot, to be a place of honor for his family; On him shall hang all the glory of his family: descendants and offspring, all the little dishes, from bowls to jugs"--with a footnote lamely explaining the final verse as "If Eliakim should anger God, he and his family (compared here to dishes, bowls, and jugs) will suffer disaster.")
Certainly, my analysis of verses 22-24 may not be entirely accurate in all its particulars, but I think there is no doubt to the rational mind--especially with the supporting footnotes by Haydock in verses 22 and 24--that we are talking here about the Papacy of Rome likened to a peg in the wall on which hang all the glories of the Catholic Church. Now let's see what happens to this "peg" in verse 25: "In that day, saith the Lord of hosts, shall the peg be removed, that was fastened in the sure place: and it shall be broken and shall fall: and that which hung thereon, shall perish, because the Lord hath spoken it." And thus we see that the sedevacantist thesis is an entirely plausible one, especially in these times, the peg of the Papacy seemingly broken once and for all; and certainly those who humbly hold it are undeserving of the snide, arrogant, uncharitable attacks by such as Christopher Ferrara.
By contrast to the sedevacantists he attacks so lustily, Ferrara is from a group which we might call--in the felicitous term of one of my friends--"the fencesitters"; these fencesitters, too, seem to be provided for in Isaiah, just two chapters after that which seems to indicate the fall of the papacy. To wit, Isaiah 24 has the subheading, "The judgment of God is upon all the sinners of the world. A remnant shall joyfully praise him." But there is a third group which is introduced in verse 16--"the prevaricators." "From the ends of the earth we have heard praises, the glory of the just one. And I said: My secret to myself, my secret to myself, wo is me: the prevaricators have prevaricated, and with the prevarication of transgressors they have prevaricated." Now the root of the word "prevaricator" in Latin is "varicus," which literally means "straddling," in other words, "someone who is straddling the fence." A "transgressor," on the other hand, is someone who is not a fencesitter, but has clearly trangressed the Law of God, although they too may have their own "prevarications," such as we see in all the ambiguous statements we see from the "popes" since Vatican II and in the language of the Vatican II documents themselves.
Seen in this perspective, "The prevaricators have prevaricated" refers to Ferrara and his ilk, while the "prevarication of the transgressors" refers to the prevarications of those who have wholeheartedly accepted Vatican II, the New Mass, and the New Morality and with whom these chief prevaricators--led by Ferrara--have prevaricated.
This whole argument is completely lost, of course, in The New American "Bible" which doesn't even use the word "prevaricator" in this verse. (Is this not a great "transgression"?)
posted July 12, 2009
first revision July 13, 2009
second revision July 21, 2009