the thesis centre

Looking for a Price ? We have a handy Price Calculator for that.

The #1 bookbinders for university & college submissions in Ireland

Welcome to the Thesis Centre

The bookbinders of choice in Ireland. Est. 1989

Why choose us ?

We've offered the highest quality thesis and dissertation binding in Ireland for almost 30 years . All of our books are hand sewn for strength and durability, are crafted in Levant-grain leatherette, come with head and tail bands and are bound with traditional marbled endpapers.

We have the staff and experience to help you through your submission and to make everything as simple and straightforward as possible.

Our services are competitively priced , so you don't have to spend extra to avail of the best quality available.

Best of all, if you've any queries or would prefer to go through the process with a member of staff, you can visit our store in Dublin's city centre, where all printing and binding is carried out on site by our 20-strong staff. This allows us to offer an extremely quick service , while also offering assistance to anyone in need.

If you'd like one of our representatives to contact or call out to you, please let us know!

What makes us different ?

Where else can you go to finalise your dissertation, have space to make sure you're completely happy before you submit, speak to someone friendly and helpful to take the stress away and also have the best bound thesis by a mile?

Click here to see other Bookbinding Services we provide

Looking to bind your thesis?

Follow these four simple steps.

• Save your completed file as a PDF.
• Fill in our order form and attach your PDF.
• Relax. You've done the hard work and we'll take care of the rest.
• Once your books are ready, just come to our store to collect and pay.

Help with converting your file to PDF can be found in our Q&A section .

If you'd prefer to come into our Camden Street store with your PDF on a USB key, or with the pages already printed, that's no problem. Next day delivery to anywhere in Ireland is also available.

Think of yourself as a member of a jury, listening to a lawyer who is presenting an opening argument. You'll want to know very soon whether the lawyer believes the accused to be guilty or not guilty, and how the lawyer plans to convince you. Readers of academic essays are like jury members: before they have read too far, they want to know what the essay argues as well as how the writer plans to make the argument. After reading your thesis statement, the reader should think, "This essay is going to try to convince me of something. I'm not convinced yet, but I'm interested to see how I might be."

An effective thesis cannot be answered with a simple "yes" or "no." A thesis is not a topic; nor is it a fact; nor is it an opinion. "Reasons for the fall of communism" is a topic. "Communism collapsed in Eastern Europe" is a fact known by educated people. "The fall of communism is the best thing that ever happened in Europe" is an opinion. (Superlatives like "the best" almost always lead to trouble. It's impossible to weigh every "thing" that ever happened in Europe. And what about the fall of Hitler? Couldn't that be "the best thing"?)

A good thesis has two parts. It should tell what you plan to argue, and it should "telegraph" how you plan to argue—that is, what particular support for your claim is going where in your essay.

Steps in Constructing a Thesis

First, analyze your primary sources.  Look for tension, interest, ambiguity, controversy, and/or complication. Does the author contradict himself or herself? Is a point made and later reversed? What are the deeper implications of the author's argument? Figuring out the why to one or more of these questions, or to related questions, will put you on the path to developing a working thesis. (Without the why, you probably have only come up with an observation—that there are, for instance, many different metaphors in such-and-such a poem—which is not a thesis.)

Once you have a working thesis, write it down.  There is nothing as frustrating as hitting on a great idea for a thesis, then forgetting it when you lose concentration. And by writing down your thesis you will be forced to think of it clearly, logically, and concisely. You probably will not be able to write out a final-draft version of your thesis the first time you try, but you'll get yourself on the right track by writing down what you have.

Keep your thesis prominent in your introduction.  A good, standard place for your thesis statement is at the end of an introductory paragraph, especially in shorter (5-15 page) essays. Readers are used to finding theses there, so they automatically pay more attention when they read the last sentence of your introduction. Although this is not required in all academic essays, it is a good rule of thumb.

Anticipate the counterarguments.  Once you have a working thesis, you should think about what might be said against it. This will help you to refine your thesis, and it will also make you think of the arguments that you'll need to refute later on in your essay. (Every argument has a counterargument. If yours doesn't, then it's not an argument—it may be a fact, or an opinion, but it is not an argument.)

This statement is on its way to being a thesis. However, it is too easy to imagine possible counterarguments. For example, a political observer might believe that Dukakis lost because he suffered from a "soft-on-crime" image. If you complicate your thesis by anticipating the counterargument, you'll strengthen your argument, as shown in the sentence below.

Some Caveats and Some Examples

A thesis is never a question.  Readers of academic essays expect to have questions discussed, explored, or even answered. A question ("Why did communism collapse in Eastern Europe?") is not an argument, and without an argument, a thesis is dead in the water.

A thesis is never a list.  "For political, economic, social and cultural reasons, communism collapsed in Eastern Europe" does a good job of "telegraphing" the reader what to expect in the essay—a section about political reasons, a section about economic reasons, a section about social reasons, and a section about cultural reasons. However, political, economic, social and cultural reasons are pretty much the only possible reasons why communism could collapse. This sentence lacks tension and doesn't advance an argument. Everyone knows that politics, economics, and culture are important.

A thesis should never be vague, combative or confrontational.  An ineffective thesis would be, "Communism collapsed in Eastern Europe because communism is evil." This is hard to argue (evil from whose perspective? what does evil mean?) and it is likely to mark you as moralistic and judgmental rather than rational and thorough. It also may spark a defensive reaction from readers sympathetic to communism. If readers strongly disagree with you right off the bat, they may stop reading.

An effective thesis has a definable, arguable claim.  "While cultural forces contributed to the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe, the disintegration of economies played the key role in driving its decline" is an effective thesis sentence that "telegraphs," so that the reader expects the essay to have a section about cultural forces and another about the disintegration of economies. This thesis makes a definite, arguable claim: that the disintegration of economies played a more important role than cultural forces in defeating communism in Eastern Europe. The reader would react to this statement by thinking, "Perhaps what the author says is true, but I am not convinced. I want to read further to see how the author argues this claim."

A thesis should be as clear and specific as possible.  Avoid overused, general terms and abstractions. For example, "Communism collapsed in Eastern Europe because of the ruling elite's inability to address the economic concerns of the people" is more powerful than "Communism collapsed due to societal discontent."

Copyright 1999, Maxine Rodburg and The Tutors of the Writing Center at Harvard University

• Walden University
• Faculty Portal

Writing a Paper: Thesis Statements

Basics of thesis statements.

The thesis statement is the brief articulation of your paper's central argument and purpose. You might hear it referred to as simply a "thesis." Every scholarly paper should have a thesis statement, and strong thesis statements are concise, specific, and arguable. Concise means the thesis is short: perhaps one or two sentences for a shorter paper. Specific means the thesis deals with a narrow and focused topic, appropriate to the paper's length. Arguable means that a scholar in your field could disagree (or perhaps already has!).

Strong thesis statements address specific intellectual questions, have clear positions, and use a structure that reflects the overall structure of the paper. Read on to learn more about constructing a strong thesis statement.

Being Specific

This thesis statement has no specific argument:

Needs Improvement: In this essay, I will examine two scholarly articles to find similarities and differences.

This statement is concise, but it is neither specific nor arguable—a reader might wonder, "Which scholarly articles? What is the topic of this paper? What field is the author writing in?" Additionally, the purpose of the paper—to "examine…to find similarities and differences" is not of a scholarly level. Identifying similarities and differences is a good first step, but strong academic argument goes further, analyzing what those similarities and differences might mean or imply.

Better: In this essay, I will argue that Bowler's (2003) autocratic management style, when coupled with Smith's (2007) theory of social cognition, can reduce the expenses associated with employee turnover.

The new revision here is still concise, as well as specific and arguable.  We can see that it is specific because the writer is mentioning (a) concrete ideas and (b) exact authors.  We can also gather the field (business) and the topic (management and employee turnover). The statement is arguable because the student goes beyond merely comparing; he or she draws conclusions from that comparison ("can reduce the expenses associated with employee turnover").

Making a Unique Argument

This thesis draft repeats the language of the writing prompt without making a unique argument:

Needs Improvement: The purpose of this essay is to monitor, assess, and evaluate an educational program for its strengths and weaknesses. Then, I will provide suggestions for improvement.

You can see here that the student has simply stated the paper's assignment, without articulating specifically how he or she will address it. The student can correct this error simply by phrasing the thesis statement as a specific answer to the assignment prompt.

Better: Through a series of student interviews, I found that Kennedy High School's antibullying program was ineffective. In order to address issues of conflict between students, I argue that Kennedy High School should embrace policies outlined by the California Department of Education (2010).

Words like "ineffective" and "argue" show here that the student has clearly thought through the assignment and analyzed the material; he or she is putting forth a specific and debatable position. The concrete information ("student interviews," "antibullying") further prepares the reader for the body of the paper and demonstrates how the student has addressed the assignment prompt without just restating that language.

Creating a Debate

This thesis statement includes only obvious fact or plot summary instead of argument:

Needs Improvement: Leadership is an important quality in nurse educators.

A good strategy to determine if your thesis statement is too broad (and therefore, not arguable) is to ask yourself, "Would a scholar in my field disagree with this point?" Here, we can see easily that no scholar is likely to argue that leadership is an unimportant quality in nurse educators.  The student needs to come up with a more arguable claim, and probably a narrower one; remember that a short paper needs a more focused topic than a dissertation.

Better: Roderick's (2009) theory of participatory leadership  is particularly appropriate to nurse educators working within the emergency medicine field, where students benefit most from collegial and kinesthetic learning.

Here, the student has identified a particular type of leadership ("participatory leadership"), narrowing the topic, and has made an arguable claim (this type of leadership is "appropriate" to a specific type of nurse educator). Conceivably, a scholar in the nursing field might disagree with this approach. The student's paper can now proceed, providing specific pieces of evidence to support the arguable central claim.

Choosing the Right Words

This thesis statement uses large or scholarly-sounding words that have no real substance:

Needs Improvement: Scholars should work to seize metacognitive outcomes by harnessing discipline-based networks to empower collaborative infrastructures.

There are many words in this sentence that may be buzzwords in the student's field or key terms taken from other texts, but together they do not communicate a clear, specific meaning. Sometimes students think scholarly writing means constructing complex sentences using special language, but actually it's usually a stronger choice to write clear, simple sentences. When in doubt, remember that your ideas should be complex, not your sentence structure.

Better: Ecologists should work to educate the U.S. public on conservation methods by making use of local and national green organizations to create a widespread communication plan.

Notice in the revision that the field is now clear (ecology), and the language has been made much more field-specific ("conservation methods," "green organizations"), so the reader is able to see concretely the ideas the student is communicating.

Leaving Room for Discussion

This thesis statement is not capable of development or advancement in the paper:

Needs Improvement: There are always alternatives to illegal drug use.

This sample thesis statement makes a claim, but it is not a claim that will sustain extended discussion. This claim is the type of claim that might be appropriate for the conclusion of a paper, but in the beginning of the paper, the student is left with nowhere to go. What further points can be made? If there are "always alternatives" to the problem the student is identifying, then why bother developing a paper around that claim? Ideally, a thesis statement should be complex enough to explore over the length of the entire paper.

Better: The most effective treatment plan for methamphetamine addiction may be a combination of pharmacological and cognitive therapy, as argued by Baker (2008), Smith (2009), and Xavier (2011).

In the revised thesis, you can see the student make a specific, debatable claim that has the potential to generate several pages' worth of discussion. When drafting a thesis statement, think about the questions your thesis statement will generate: What follow-up inquiries might a reader have? In the first example, there are almost no additional questions implied, but the revised example allows for a good deal more exploration.

Thesis Mad Libs

If you are having trouble getting started, try using the models below to generate a rough model of a thesis statement! These models are intended for drafting purposes only and should not appear in your final work.

• In this essay, I argue ____, using ______ to assert _____.
• While scholars have often argued ______, I argue______, because_______.
• Through an analysis of ______, I argue ______, which is important because_______.

Words to Avoid and to Embrace

When drafting your thesis statement, avoid words like explore, investigate, learn, compile, summarize , and explain to describe the main purpose of your paper. These words imply a paper that summarizes or "reports," rather than synthesizing and analyzing.

Instead of the terms above, try words like argue, critique, question , and interrogate . These more analytical words may help you begin strongly, by articulating a specific, critical, scholarly position.

Read Kayla's blog post for tips on taking a stand in a well-crafted thesis statement.

Related Resources

Didn't find what you need? Email us at [email protected] .

• Previous Page: Introductions
• Next Page: Conclusions
• Office of Student Disability Services

Walden Resources

Departments.

• Academic Residencies
• Academic Skills
• Career Planning and Development
• Customer Care Team
• Field Experience
• Military Services
• Student Success Advising
• Writing Skills

Centers and Offices

• Center for Social Change
• Office of Academic Support and Instructional Services
• Office of Degree Acceleration
• Office of Research and Doctoral Services
• Office of Student Affairs

Student Resources

• Doctoral Writing Assessment
• Form & Style Review
• Quick Answers
• ScholarWorks
• SKIL Courses and Workshops
• Walden Bookstore
• Walden Catalog & Student Handbook
• Student Safety/Title IX
• Legal & Consumer Information
• Website Terms and Conditions
• Cookie Policy
• Accessibility
• Accreditation
• State Authorization
• Net Price Calculator
• Contact Walden

Walden University is a member of Adtalem Global Education, Inc. www.adtalem.com Walden University is certified to operate by SCHEV © 2024 Walden University LLC. All rights reserved.

Writing the Thesis

• First Online: 02 January 2020

Cite this chapter

• Susan Carter 4 ,
• Cally Guerin 5 &
• Claire Aitchison 6  

1963 Accesses

The independent researcher, with sophisticated writing skills and need for a career, is one outcome of the doctorate. The text itself, the thesis, is another. This chapter swings focus onto that textual artefact, still concerned with the human experience of producing it, but aware that, for most candidates, the doctoral period of their life is dominated by the research and the writing of the thesis. That document itself takes centre stage.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research. (2007). Retrieved from https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/about-us/publications/australian-code-responsible-conduct-research-2007 .

Belcher, W. (2009). Writing your journal article in 12 weeks: A guide to academic publishing success . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Google Scholar  

Cargill, M., & O’Connor, P. (2009). Writing scientific research articles: Strategy and steps . Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

Carter, S. (2011). Doctorate as genre: Supporting thesis writing across campus. Higher Education Research and Development, 30 (6), 725–736.

Carter, S., Kelly, F., & Brailsford, I. (2012). Structuring your research thesis . Houndmills, UK: Palgrave MacMillan.

Book   Google Scholar  

Crotty, M. (1998). The foundation of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process . London, UK: Sage Publications.

Elbow, P. (1998). Writing without teachers . Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Feak, C. B., & Swales, J. M. (2011). Creating contexts: Writing introductions across genres. Retrieved from https://www.press.umich.edu/elt/compsite/ETRW/9780472034567-commentary.pdf .

Frank, L., Basch, E., & Selby, J. V. (2014). The PCORI perspective on patient-centered outcomes research. JAMA Network Open, 312 (15), 1513–1514. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2014.11100 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Glatthorn, A. A. (1998). Writing the winning dissertation: A step-by-step guide . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Goodson, P. (2016). Becoming an academic writer: 50 exercises for paced, productive, and powerful writing . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Graff, G., & Birkenstein, C. (2014). ‘They say / I say’: The moves that matter in academic writing . New York, NY: W. W. Norton.

Hart, C. (1998). Doing a literature review: Releasing the social science imagination . London: Sage.

Holbrook, A., Bourke, S., Fairbairn, H., & Lovat, T. (2007). Examiner comment on the literature review in PhD theses. Studies in Higher Education, 32 (3), 337–356.

Johnston, S. (1997). Examining the examiners: An analysis of examiners’ reports on doctoral theses. Studies in Higher Education, 22 (3), 333–347.

Kamler, B., & Thomson, P. (2014). Helping doctoral students write: Pedagogies for supervision (2nd ed.). Oxon, UK: Routledge.

Kempe, S. (2005). A conversation on conversation: A research journey with Professor Anne Sigismund Huff. Journal of the Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management, 11 (2), 4–12.

Kiley, M. (2009). ‘You don’t want a smart Alec’: Selecting examiners to assess doctoral dissertations. Studies in Higher Education, 34 (8), 889–903.

MacLure, M. (2010). The offence of theory.  Journal of Education Policy ,  25 (2), 277–286.  https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930903462316 .

MacLure, M. (2013). The wonder of data. Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies, 13 (4), 228–232.

Mullins, G., & Kiley, M. (2002). ‘It’s a PhD, not a Nobel Prize’: How experienced examiners assess research theses. Studies in Higher Education, 27 (4), 369–386. https://doi.org/10.1080/0307507022000011507 .

Paltridge, B., & Starfield, S. (2007). Thesis and dissertation writing in a second language: A handbook for supervisors . London, UK: Routledge.

Poulsen, A. K. I. (2009). Another way with words: Language as twentieth-century art practice. Doctoral dissertation, University of Auckland, New Zealand.

Rankin, E. (2001). The work of writing: Insights and strategies for academics and professionals . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Reeves, M. (2000). Telling the tale of the rise of the novel. Clio: A Journal of Literature, History, and the Philosophy of History, 30 (1, Fall), 25–49.

Rudestam, K. E., & Newton, R. R. (2001). Surviving your dissertation: A comprehensive guide to content and process (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (1994, 1996, 2004). Academic writing for graduate students. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. (2000). English in today’s research world: A writing guide . Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

Swedberg, R. (2012). Theorizing in sociology and social science: To the context of discovery. Theory and Society, 41 (1), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-011-9161-5 .

Tinkler, P., & Jackson, C. (2004). The doctoral examination process: A handbook for students, examiners and supervisors . Berkshire, UK: Open University Press.

Trafford, V., & Leshem, S. (2002). Starting at the end to undertake doctoral research: Predictable questions as stepping stones. Higher Education Review, 34 (4), 43–61.

Trafford, V., Leshem, S., & Bitzer, E. (2014). Conclusion chapters in doctoral theses: Some international findings. Higher Education Review, 46 (3), 52–81.

White, B. (2011). Mapping your thesis: The comprehensive manual of theory and techniques for masters and doctoral research . London, UK: ACER.

Wisker, G. (2005). The good supervisor: Supervising postgraduate and undergraduate research for doctoral theses and dissertations . Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Wisker, G. (2012). The good supervisor: Supervising postgraduate and undergraduate research for doctoral theses and dissertations (2nd ed.). London, UK: Macmillan International Higher Education.

Young, M., & Muller, J. (2014). On the powers of powerful knowledge. In E. Rata & B. Barrett (Eds.), Knowledge and the future of the curriculum: International studies in social realism (pp. 41–64). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave MacMillan.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Zeiger, M. (2000). Essentials of writing biomedical research papers (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

Susan Carter

University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia

Cally Guerin

University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia

Claire Aitchison

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Susan Carter .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Carter, S., Guerin, C., Aitchison, C. (2020). Writing the Thesis. In: Doctoral Writing. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1808-9_5

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1808-9_5

Published : 02 January 2020

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-15-1807-2

Online ISBN : 978-981-15-1808-9

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Bahasa Indonesia
• Eastern Europe
• Moscow Oblast

Elektrostal

Elektrostal Localisation : Country Russia , Oblast Moscow Oblast . Available Information : Geographical coordinates , Population, Area, Altitude, Weather and Hotel . Nearby cities and villages : Noginsk , Pavlovsky Posad and Staraya Kupavna .

Information

Find all the information of Elektrostal or click on the section of your choice in the left menu.

• Update data

Elektrostal Demography

Information on the people and the population of Elektrostal.

Elektrostal Geography

Geographic Information regarding City of Elektrostal .

Elektrostal Distance

Distance (in kilometers) between Elektrostal and the biggest cities of Russia.

Elektrostal Map

Locate simply the city of Elektrostal through the card, map and satellite image of the city.

Elektrostal Nearby cities and villages

Elektrostal weather.

Weather forecast for the next coming days and current time of Elektrostal.

Elektrostal Sunrise and sunset

Find below the times of sunrise and sunset calculated 7 days to Elektrostal.

Elektrostal Hotel

Our team has selected for you a list of hotel in Elektrostal classified by value for money. Book your hotel room at the best price.

Elektrostal Nearby

Below is a list of activities and point of interest in Elektrostal and its surroundings.

Elektrostal Page

• Information /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#info
• Demography /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#demo
• Geography /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#geo
• Distance /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#dist1
• Map /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#map
• Nearby cities and villages /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#dist2
• Weather /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#weather
• Sunrise and sunset /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#sun
• Hotel /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#hotel
• Nearby /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#around
• Page /Russian-Federation--Moscow-Oblast--Elektrostal#page
• Terms of Use
• Copyright © 2024 DB-City - All rights reserved
• Change Ad Consent Do not sell my data

TheThesis.us

Understanding the Changes in the Catholic Church

GENERAL OVERVIEW

The material below is an overview of the problems caused by the vatican ii crisis, and the solution given by the thesis. the individual points are more thoroughly developed in the pages of this website specifically dedicated to them., first article, what is wrong with vatican ii, 1. what is wrong with the second vatican council.

The Second Vatican Council taught doctrines which had been already condemned by the Church, and enacted disciplines which are contrary to the Church’s teaching and constant practice.

2. What doctrines did it teach that were already condemned?

There are four principal areas of Catholic doctrine against which Vatican II introduced errors: (1) the unity of the Church; (2) ecumenism; (3) religious liberty; (4) collegiality.

3. What is wrong with the disciplines which have emanated from Vatican II?

The 1983 Code of Canon Law contains the heresy of Vatican II concerning the Church, mentioned above. It also permits sacrilege to the Blessed Sacrament, by approving of its reception by non-Catholics, which is a mortal sin, and permits communicatio in sacris (common public worship) with non-Catholics, which is a mortal sin. In addition, the Ecumenical Directory of 1993 permits ecumenical practices which have always been taught by the Church to be mortally sinful. The facility with which hundreds of thousands of marriage annulments are granted for no serious reason is a form of “Catholic divorce” in disguise, permitted by novelties in the Code of 1983.

4. What is wrong with the liturgy which has emanated from Vatican II?

The New Mass of Paul VI, which has replaced the traditional Catholic Mass, contains elements borrowed from Protestant worship. It is an innovative rite in which the Catholic doctrine on the nature of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass as it was taught by the Council of Trent has been systematically expunged and replaced by false doctrines concerning the Mass, the Real Presence, and the priesthood.

5. What are the consequences of these changes of Vatican II?

It means that Vatican II and its subsequent reforms have given us a new religion, a religion which is substantially different from the Roman Catholic Faith founded by Christ. The reformers have substantially altered the three main components of religion: doctrine, worship, and discipline. As a result, the religion which Catholics find in their local parishes and schools, although in name Catholic, is a new, non-Catholic religion already condemned by the Catholic Church.

6. Is not the Church infallible in her doctrine, her discipline, and her liturgy?

The supreme authority of the Church is indeed infallible when defining a doctrine of faith and morals. In addition, the Church cannot impose universally a pernicious doctrine in her authentic, official teaching. The Church is infallible in her discipline and liturgy, in the sense that the universal discipline and liturgy of the Church is holy and sanctifying, and cannot harm the faith and morals of the faithful. The Church is also infallible in the solemn canonizations of saints.

This observation causes a crisis of conscience for Catholics. On the one hand, as good Catholics they ought to submit with religious obedience to the authority of the Church. On the other hand, they understand the necessity of preserving the traditional doctrine, worship, and discipline of the Church. This crisis requires Catholics to examine the issue of the “Vatican II popes” whose supreme authority should have guaranteed the orthodoxy of the said reforms.

SECOND ARTICLE

What solution should catholics give to the current problem of authority in the church, 7. what answers have been proposed on the problem of authority.

Faced with the changes of Vatican II and the subsequent reforms, the following solutions have been proposed:

• The “Vatican II popes” enjoy the supreme authority of the Church, and one is obliged to obey and submit, while somewhat denouncing the said doctrines and reforms. This is the position of groups such as the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter and the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest.
• The “Vatican II popes” enjoy the supreme authority of the Church, but one should resist and openly reject the said doctrines and reforms, and exercise an unauthorized apostolate to save souls. This is the position of the Society of Saint Pius X, known as the “Recognize and Resist” position.
• The “Vatican II popes” do not have the authority of Christ, they are not true popes, and are already juridically deposed. This is the position of totalism , or complete sedevacantism .
• The “Vatican II popes” do not have the authority of Christ, they are not true popes, but this real fact has not yet been juridically established and recognized in the universal Church. This is the solution proposed by the Thesis, sometimes referred to as material-formal sedevacantism or sedeprivationism.

8. Why are the first two positions, which recognize authority in the “Vatican II popes,” not viable solutions?

They are not viable for any Catholic because they destroy the indefectibility of the Church by ascribing to her all the non-Catholic doctrines and reforms coming from Vatican II. It further forces one either to cooperate in these non-Catholic doctrines and reforms, or to profess and practice open disobedience to the Roman Pontiff, which is a schismatic attitude condemned many times by the Church.

9. Is the third position (“complete sedevacantism” or “totalism”) a viable solution?

On the one hand, this third position is absolutely correct in denying authority to the “Vatican II popes,” thus preserving the infallibility of the Church by not attributing to her authority the abominations of Vatican II. This position is therefore correct in its essential part. On the other hand, it fails to make the proper distinction between the real order and the juridical order. For example, one is indeed a murderer by the very fact of killing an innocent person, but this crime must still be established in a court of law in order that its legal consequences and juridical penalties be applied. In a similar way, a marriage publicly celebrated enjoys a legal presumption of validity. If the marriage is in fact discovered to be invalid, it still keeps its valid status de jure (before the law) until declared invalid in a court of law. In the meantime, the spouses may not contract another marriage, and may not act as husband and wife, since in fact they are not married. The “totalist” position is also unable to provide a satisfying answer to the problem of the perpetual Apostolic succession of the Roman See, which is demanded by the Church’s indefectibility and taught by the Vatican Council (1870) in the Dogmatic Constitution Pastor Aeternus: “That which the Prince of Shepherds and great Shepherd of the sheep, Jesus Christ our Lord, established in the person of the Blessed Apostle Peter to secure the perpetual welfare and lasting good of the Church, must, by the same institution, necessarily remain unceasingly in the Church; which, being founded upon the Rock, will stand firm to the end of the world.”

10. Why is the fourth position (the Thesis) a viable solution?

The Thesis does not attribute to the Church’s authority the abominations of Vatican II, thus not offending the Church’s infallibility in this regard. At the same time, while the “papacies of Vatican II” are null in reality, their nullity has not yet been juridically established and declared by a competent authority in the Church. Hence, while the Roman See is vacant in fact, i.e., these men were not and are not true popes, nonetheless they retain a legal designation to be popes, until such time as it is legally removed from them.

This distinction between the real order ( de facto ) and the legal order ( de jure ) allows the Thesis to provide a logical solution to the problem of the perpetual Apostolic succession of the Roman See, which is demanded by the Church’s indefectibility.

Let us now present the Thesis in its different parts.

THIRD ARTICLE

What solution does the thesis give to the current problem of authority in the church, 11. is francis the pope.

Answered simply, the answer is no. He is not the pope, he has no authority over the Church, and therefore does not enjoy the infallibility promised by Christ to Saint Peter’s successors. We should not submit to his teaching, his laws, and the liturgy he promulgates. He is a wolf in sheep’s clothing, against which Our Lord has warned us, or even, we may say: a wolf in shepherd’s clothing.

12. How do we know that Francis is not the Pope?

Francis and the “Vatican II popes,” since John XXIII, have striven to change the Church from within, by imposing the errors of modernism in doctrine, in discipline, and in the liturgy. Christ could not give the supreme authority of the Church to an individual who objectively intends to thus impose modernist ideology on the faithful.

In addition, we have a confirmation that these “Vatican II popes” do not in fact enjoy the supreme authority of the Church because they have proven in many cases to be fallible in situations where, had they been true popes, they should have been infallible; since infallibility is an inseparable charism attached to the supreme office of the papacy.

13. Does not the Thesis say that he is a pope-elect?

Yes, because Francis was elected to the Papacy by a conclave. Francis’ election is presumed to be valid, because it is a juridical fact, and the opposite would have to be proven and established juridically, which up to now has not been accomplished. In addition, general acceptance by the whole Church would convalidate any defective election. Theologians agree that the universal acceptance of a newly elected pope would always supply any possible defect in the election process.

14. Why should the invalidity of the election be established juridically?

This is so because in any perfect society, such as a civil state or the Church, a fact is binding on a multitude of subjects when it is authoritatively established, either by law or by legal judgment. A murderer, for example, is by law liable to condemnation and deprivation of certain rights in society. But for as long as the fact of the crime has not been juridically recognized, he is not yet a murderer before the law , and therefore the exercise of his rights has not yet been restrained.

15. Since Francis is a heretic, why do you say that his election is presumed to be valid?

Because while a heretic incurs an automatic excommunication by the very fact of a delict of heresy, this excommunication has no legal consequences for as long as the person does not observe them and that they are not enforced by the person’s superior. Ecclesiastical Law clearly indicates that unsentenced heretics can validly elect and be elected.

Unsentenced heretics are only illicitly placed in office, while sentenced heretics whether tolerati or vitandi, are invalidly elected or appointed, and do not receive the office at all. [1]

16. Does not the Thesis speak about matter and form, when explaining the present situation of the papacy?

Indeed the Thesis does employ these theological terms, following the teaching of approved theologians, such as Saint Robert Bellarmine, Saint Antoninus, Cardinal Cajetan, etc. The meaning of these analogous concepts is to explain that in the papacy there is a certain composition. Indeed the pope is elected by men, and upon acceptance, he receives the supreme authority from Christ. In the philosophical concepts of matter and form, the matter means something which receives a further determination called the form. Thus, a priest is a man being determined by the character of the priesthood. In this example, the matter is the man; the form is the priesthood. When the matter and the form are united together, they constitute a priest. Hence the form is what makes a composite to be what it is, by determining the matter. Thus in the case of the pope, the pope-elect is a subject or matter, namely a man elected and having accepted. What makes him the pope, however, which we call the form of the papacy, is the supreme authority, given by Christ. Therefore, a pope does not receive his authority by the election, or even by the acceptance on the part of the elected person. These are only human determinations of the subject which dispose him to receive the papacy. But the supreme authority of the Church does not come from men, it comes from God. It is given by God to this person, and it is what makes him the pope. Hence the Thesis says that Francis (and the “Vatican II popes” before him) is not formally pope, although he is said to be materially pope, that is, he has been validly elected, but does not possess the power to teach, rule, and sanctify the Church in Christ’s name, and as His vicar.

17. What do you mean by saying that Francis is not formally the pope?

Theologians like Saint Robert Bellarmine refer to the supreme authority over the Church, given to Saint Peter’s successors as the formal aspect (or form ) of the papacy. It is what makes someone who has been legitimately elected and has accepted the election to be the pope. It does not come from men, but from Christ, Head of the Church. Indeed the pope is the vicar of Christ, and the visible head of the Church. Someone is therefore a true pope only if he has the authority of Christ and acts in His name.

18. What do you mean by saying that Francis is still materially the pope?

The same theologians who refer to the supreme authority given to the pope by Christ as the form of the papacy speak of the subject who receives this form as the matter or material aspect of the papacy. Indeed, to have a pope, you need not only Christ’s authority, but also a subject to receive this authority: the person who is elected. To say that Francis is materially the pope therefore means that he has been determined in a particular way, by his election, to receive the form of the papacy, namely the supreme authority of the Church. Francis has indeed been elected to the papacy, although he has not received its supreme authority from Christ. Despite not being the pope formally , therefore, we can say that he is pope materially . In other words, he has been chosen to become the pope, despite not having become one. Similarly, the president of the United States is elected in November, but he receives legitimate authority only in January, when he takes the oath of office. In the meantime, therefore, he is a president-elect, but has no authority, until he swears to uphold the constitution of the United States:

I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

19. How is this possible?

This is explained in greater detail in a dedicated part. The election of the pope is not completed until the pope-elect accepts his election. Only then does he receive the supreme authority to teach, rule, and sanctify the Church in Christ’s name, for which purpose he is assisted by the Holy Ghost. We can observe on the one hand that Bergoglio was elected; but on the other hand that he in fact does not possess the authority of Christ and is not assisted by the Holy Ghost. This leads us to question Bergoglio’s acceptance of the papacy, which acceptance is an absolutely necessary condition to the completion of the election and the communication of the supreme authority from Christ.

20. Did not Francis accept the election?

He did in appearance and in words but he did not truly and in reality. He has posited an obstacle to a valid consent which is incompatible with a sincere acceptance, this obstacle being the intention to substantially change the Church and impose upon her the modernist heresy, as explained above. This is manifested by his countless outrageous statements and actions.

21. In saying so, are you not judging his internal intention, which only God could know with certainty?

No, because we are considering not his subjective and internal intention, but his objective and exterior intention. Strictly speaking, we are not judging the reasons which motivate him to do what he does, but merely the habitual tendency of the actions he posits. The personal motives are extrinsic to one’s actions, and often uncertain. The objective end of external actions is, however, intrinsic to it and can be easily judged upon examination of the person’s words and actions. Hence, one may sometimes be uncertain as to why a person desires to marry: would it be to found a Catholic family, or for the sake of the future spouse’s money? In either case, the person would still intend to marry. Hence, while one might not be sure as to why a person wants to marry, it could be clear that this person does indeed want to marry. In the same way, why someone would accept to become the pope is in itself irrelevant to the present argument: would it be sincerely for the greater glory of God? Would it be motivated by pride and ambition? Would it be motivated by the love of comfort and riches? These personal motives, which could coexist to some extent, are subjective and often difficult to judge. But what is common in all of these cases is that the person objectively accepts to become the pope anyway. This is the objective intention, manifested by the very action itself.

22. What is wrong in the intention of Francis?

The Thesis maintains that the objective intention of Francis is incompatible with the acceptance of the papacy, because this intention does not correspond to what the papacy is. The act of acceptance of the papacy is an act which must not only be manifested externally, but which must also be internal, just like any other moral action. If you commit a sinful action without any knowledge or consent, for example, you do not truly sin. If you eat meat on a Friday thinking it was a Tuesday, you do not truly sin. Thus, to express the fact that you did not truly sin, moral theologians say that you did not sin formally , but only materially (that is, as to merely the external action). In a like manner, if someone should accept to become the pope thinking that the papacy is some sort of humanitarian leadership, that person would not have truly accepted the papacy, because his consent was not given to what the papacy truly is, but to this false notion. The Thesis maintains that Francis, when giving an external acceptance to his election, did not truly accept the papacy as it is, as it was established by Christ, but rather, he accepted some sort of humanitarian worldwide enterprise, as is evident by his many statements and actions. This is particularly evident in his renouncing the title of vicar of Christ. For to be the vicar of Christ is not for the pope a mere honorific title, but its very definition. Someone who does not want to be the vicar of Christ manifestly does not want to be the pope.

By analogy, a man who accepts to be the captain of a ship, but who has the intention of deliberately sinking it, would forfeit any authority over the ship itself. The office of captain is essentially ordered to convey a ship safely to its destination. To be the captain, it is necessary to intend this end.

23. In this situation, how should we behave towards Francis?

Since he is not formally and truly the pope, he has no authority in the Catholic Church, and we should therefore ignore any of his teachings and decisions. And since he is actually imposing modernism on the faithful, he should be denounced as a danger to the faith and as a wolf killing the sheep.

For if he is truly the pope, then all of the Vatican II reforms are in perfect accord with the Catholic Faith, and must not be rejected or resisted. In other words, you cannot reject Vatican II but accept him as pope; conversely you cannot accept him as pope but reject Vatican II. Or as Bp. Robert McKenna used to say: “You cannot have your pope and eat him too.”

On the other hand, since he has been elected to become the pope, we cannot in the meantime elect another pope.

24. What are the practical consequences for me as a traditional Catholic?

In the practical order, one must continue to believe the traditional faith, observe the traditional disciplines of the Church, and receive the traditional sacraments. In particular, one must go only to the traditional Mass, offered by priests who do not mention Bergoglio’s name in the Canon of the Mass ( non una cum ), since to name him in the Canon of the Mass is tantamount to recognizing him as the legitimate vicar of Christ, and therefore implicitly recognizing the legitimacy of the Vatican II reforms and heresies.

[1] MacKenzie, The Delict of Heresy , The Catholic University of America, Canon Law Studies n. 77, Washington D.C. 1932, p. 91.