Neil Obstat
Reputation: 3513
(Likers: 0 / Critics: 0)
Posts: 4,250
|
I'm sorry for everyone here making all these great posts but I was not here to respond. I was out for most of the day today.
Let me say this, to clear up some concerns: I am not presenting myself as an authority on the question of authority (is there a word for that???). But I have never heard a group of knowledgeable sede's answer this, and I am looking for some kind of consensus here on this forum, for my own information. I don't represent anyone.
It seems to me that in order to elect a true pope, the electors must have the requisite authority. As far as I have heard, in today's world, that means the Catholic cardinals, each of whom has a cathedral in Rome, have to unanimously agree on who is to be Bishop of Rome.
Maybe this is where the disagreement is. Because sede's do not accept the legitimacy of those cardinals because they are all Novus Ordo cardinals, who have been consecrated bishop using a defective formula, and are therefore not even bishops, so they say.
We should sort that out, right?
But beyond that, it seems this forum is saying that the world's legitimate and traditional bishops must convene for the purpose of electing a Pope, and their authority would have nothing to do with electing the true Bishop of Rome? I mean, if all the sede bishops of the world got together, could they elect a new Bishop of Rome even while the NO cardinals are holding their own conclave to do the same thing?
I'd like to hear the specifics of how that would work, A) if it takes place on the occasion of the current pope's demise, or B) if the sede's don't wait for Benedict XVI to die, but hold a conclave anyway, while he's still living.
Because there are ramifications of either option.
|
|
| Posted May 31, 2012, 7:06 am |
|
Ignored by: 0
|
|
|
Neil Obstat
Reputation: 3513
(Likers: 0 / Critics: 0)
Posts: 4,250
|
| Capt McQuigg said: | If a Bishop of the spiritual calibre of a St. Pius V or St. Pius X were to be elected Pope, the sedevacantists would fly back to the Holy Church but as it is now, they are burdened with carrying the yoke of Catholic Tradition. It's a light and holy and joyful burden and they lovingly carry it. I do include the other traditionalists in this group because they are keeping the Catholic faith without corruption and will pass it on to the next generation.
The Conciliarist Church is sick with cancer. It's true that the cancer cells are Vatican II and its rotten fruit, but the core of this cancer is modernism in general and subjectivism in particular. We will always have a few bad priests and even bishops here and there, but the complete takeover is, I am coming to believe, a punishment from God. It's shocking in its completeness.
It times of spiritual disruption like these, where there is brightness to be found in the traditionalist circles, we really just have to live our Catholic faith. Pray constantly. Pray for the holy souls in purgatory. Ask God for forgiveness for sins we know we've done and for sins we may be too ignorant to know we have committed. Make an oblation of some sort, whether it's donating to a traditionalist organization or fasting. Pray in front of a crucifix. Live your Catholic faith with integrity and joy. It's not on your shoulders to unnecessarily burden yourself with worries about a pope, who, God willing, will come.
Partake of the Blessed Sacrament. Increase or strengthen your prayer life. Go to confession. Write a letter to a traditionalist convent or seminary and ask if there is any particular seminarian or postulant or novice who needs your prayers or who may even need financial support in any way. Buy a devotional book that you've been meaning to read. Live out your Catholic faith. It's our responsibility, our duty, our calling and it is a truly sweet and harmonious life to live as a Traditional Catholic.
|
I don't mean to ignore your beautiful post, Capt McQuigg, it's just that it appears to me that you're bowing out of the discussion with this. Not to say I disagree with you, it's just that I'd like to understand the sede approach to this problem better; which is something I thought this thread could answer, since its title succinctly raises the question. But having read the whole thread, I don't find satisfactory answers here, yet. You seem to provide an easy way out, for those who want to take that route, but I, for one, would appreciate having more perceptive replies to the question that is left unanswered. We haven't really done much more than scratch the surface IMHO.
For I have heard several knowledgeable Trads claim that sedevacantism is a dead end, because there is no means to provide a legitimate successor to the papacy if all the cardinals are ineligible.
IF that is true, AND if sede's really do desire to have a pope one day, THEN there must be a few ideas kicking around as to what means could possibly be employed to achieve that end. I would like to know what those ideas are, if I may be so forward to ask here. I would like to become informed. I desire to learn.
|
|
| Posted May 31, 2012, 7:56 am |
|
Ignored by: 0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
