Do I recognize all popes up to and including Pius XII?
I recognize all who Pius XII recognized.
It would be impossible to recognize all under the loose definition of “pope”, for there can only be one at a time and at one time in history there were three thought by various groups to be a valid pope!
There is another time when Saint Bernard led the Church in invalidating all the works of an imposter who seemed to reign eight years due to illicit politics, and was of no service to the flock.
Other than that I am not possessing of omniscient powers to know all the details of all New Testament history. Anyone who met the qualifications consistent with those recognized by Pope Pius XII I would recognize, for valid popes recognize other valid popes, for that is why God even gave popes to us, to lead. Valid leaders are true shepherds (whose voice the sheep recognize).
I am learning more history nearly daily and if I read the life of a saintly man whose life and works were consistent with the written gospels and the consistent teaching of the Church, and that man appeared to be validly a reigning pope with the declared saints of his day recognizing him as such, and all presenting these facts appeared to be historically authentic sources, I hope that I would recognize that pope as valid, and would seek to learn from him as time would allow.
This sort of evaluation has taken place here with popes such as Saint Pope Gregory the Great, Saint Pope Leo XIII, Saint Pope Pius V, Saint Pope Pius X, Pope Pius IX, Pope Pius XI, and Pope Pius XII, for example.
How about you New Yorker? What is your criteria for belief and trust in Vicars of Christ on earth?
Can you please list them AND provide a link that documents Pope Pius XII so stating.
The problem with your statement is that it is based on unspecified criteria, hence my questions. Which popes met the supposed criteria of Pope Pius XII and how was this criteria established.
In its 2000 year history, the Catholic Church has had more than 200 popes. Do you recognize Alexander VI, Stephen VI, Benedict IX or Leo X as valid popes? Do they appear on Pius XII's list? Following your established standard, any pope that followed Pius XII would be considered invalid since Pius XII is no longer here to adjudicate, right? All of this is predicated upon the idea that a hypothetically "calamitous pope" is currently reigning. Who decides that? Who judges that "the instructions of the Pope . . . [deviate] from the treasure of the Church"? Do we each become our own judge of what is part of the teaching magisterium of the Church? Or do we place our trust in bloggers on the Internet to tell us when it is time to withhold just obedience and support for the Church?
You asked: What is your criteria for belief and trust in Vicars of Christ on earth?
I think Traditionalist complaints with post Pius XII popes, boil down to disagreeing with a pope's non-infallible interpretations of Church doctrine and the moral law, with his prudential judgments, and with features of his personality (e.g., in John Paul's case, his showmanship; in Francis's case, his informality). And it is within legitimate bounds for Catholics to have issues with an individual pope's public remarks, with his actions on the world stage, or with his personality quirks. However, we have the assurance of Christ himself that the "gates of hell will not prevail" against his Church. In it's 2000 year history, there have been many good popes and some whose actions were calamitous, yet not one ever erred in his teachings on faith and morals ... not one! That is testimony to the work of the Holy Spirit. After all, "to whom shall we go" (John 6:67–69)?