Author Topic: Papa dubius nullus papa  (Read 1326 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12446
  • Reputation: +6453/-1028
  • Gender: Male
Re: Papa dubius nullus papa
« Reply #60 on: December 09, 2017, 02:27:44 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Characteristic of all false beliefs and divided believers who ultimately end up at least agnostic, ladislaus is publicly promoting(aka practicing) a belief system of extremes that he himself cannot bring himself to practice and therefore believe.  So, what does he recommend?  Doubt.  He says we must be #1, or therefore either #7 by way of syllogism.  But, he cannot accept number #7 which in essence casts a doubt on #1.  His 4.5 reveals as I stated that doubtism lends itself to vacantism, being only .75 off of 50/50.  I round to evens, so that means ladislaus thinks it very probable that francis is not the pope.  He proves my point.  

    Catholics are guided by scripture and tradition.  We are not guided by probability and collegiality.  Both of which are mob rule and originate with at the very least, the jesuits.  

    None of what you wrote makes any sense whatsoever; it's unintelligible babble.  I'm not even sure where to begin unraveling it.  Every single word of it is wrong.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12446
    • Reputation: +6453/-1028
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Papa dubius nullus papa
    « Reply #61 on: December 09, 2017, 02:29:59 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • How is it that one can just start doubting the true status of a pope because you don't like what he says or does, or more importantly, teaches.

    :facepalm:

    What do you mean "don't like"?  Are you a Traditional Catholic or not?  Every Traditional Catholics starts with sensing that there's something non-Catholic about what they do and what they teach.  Then they start comparing their teaching with that of their predecessors and begin to see contradictions.  This has nothing to do with whether people "like" what he teaches.


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12446
    • Reputation: +6453/-1028
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Papa dubius nullus papa
    « Reply #62 on: December 09, 2017, 02:31:16 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Ladislaus' theology is a kiss up kick down theology.  We must kiss up a pope or kick him down.  He must either be an idol or an idolater.  Both of which are wrong.  And, worst of all, he errs on the side of kicking down.  Turn a pope on his head, the man whose faith Christ says he prays for.  Ladislaus ultimately turns things upside down.  

    Hermenigild - how is it?  It takes many centuries to accomplish such.  And, that is what has been going on for the past 5-10 centuries.  The 4 errors that the sspx have talked about are how.  However, you have to get to their cause.  And, V2 is not their cause.  V2 might be an arm wrestling victory, but the arm was invited to the table long ago.  Anyways, the big 4 are moral and doctrinal liberalism, full scale collegiality, a false mass/communion theology, and false ecumenism.

    And, I would explain causes of these, but too much of the past 500 years gives people the warm fuzzies. However, that is better for the little than algor rigor.  As for you, who sound somewhat new to tradition.  Read the bible and follow a bishop of moral authority.  For me, that means the resistance bishops.  Sedevacantism is laced with scandal, the cspv is better but not good enough.  Fellay and co have gone over to the bankers.  And, the ecclesia dei are dreaming.  So, support the four resistance bishops and strive to live a God fearing moral life.  

    Seriously, are you drunk or high or something as you type this?

    Offline Kreuzritter

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 110
    • Reputation: +76/-31
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Papa dubius nullus papa
    « Reply #63 on: December 09, 2017, 03:39:05 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Read the bible and follow a bishop of moral authority.  For me, that means the resistance bishops.  Sedevacantism is laced with scandal, the cspv is better but not good enough.  Fellay and co have gone over to the bankers.  And, the ecclesia dei are dreaming.  So, support the four resistance bishops and strive to live a God fearing moral life.  

    Can. 753 Although the bishops who are in communion with the head and members of the college, whether individually or joined together in conferences of bishops or in particular councils, do not possess infallibility in teaching, they are authentic teachers and instructors of the faith for the Christian faithful entrusted to their care; the Christian faithful are bound to adhere with religious submission of mind to the authentic magisterium of their bishops.

    Every time you open your mouth to speak on this you announce the fact that you're in formal schism.

    Submit to the atuhentic magisterium of bishops you are in communion with the true Pope and whom the Pope recognises as such.

    Offline Kreuzritter

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 110
    • Reputation: +76/-31
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Papa dubius nullus papa
    « Reply #64 on: December 09, 2017, 03:49:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • How is it that one can just start doubting the true status of a pope because you don't like what he says or does, or more importantly, teaches.
    Yet you refuse to accept anything that a pope teaches which you do not like, even when it is his authentic magisterium.
    Canon law aside, that effectively renders him reundant to your life as a Catholic, except to make you feel better about yourself in your nominal "recognition" of him - though it is nothing more than empty lip service. This is far worse than getting the question of who is pope wrong in a time of reasonabel doubt surrounding that question.


    Offline Kreuzritter

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 110
    • Reputation: +76/-31
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Papa dubius nullus papa
    « Reply #65 on: December 09, 2017, 03:55:53 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/canon-law-tradition-says-a-pope-who-commits-formal-heresy-ceases-to-be-pope
    Obviously. Ironically, the "Novus Ordo" bishops recognise the fact that a heretic pope loses his office.
    Only R&R'ers deny this.

    Offline PG

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1291
    • Reputation: +349/-121
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Papa dubius nullus papa
    « Reply #66 on: December 09, 2017, 04:56:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • No, I was actually a #1 at one point.  While I was Novus Ordo, I just didn't give it much thought so I could have been implicitly #7 I suppose.  I simply took it for granted that they were legitimate popes.
    More evidence that ladislaus is on the wrong theological path.  He was a dogmatic vacantist.  Insists that we must be dogmatic plenists.  Cannot bring himself to practice either.  So he tries to settle in the middle, which is doubt.  But, worst, he spreads his doubt around for others to join him.  And, if you doubt, why in the world would you become a catholic, who has to follow the " " personality cult of a man dressed in white from Rome?  Not likely, so you favor vacantism, but only minimally.  You are at the end of your road, instead of dragging others there, admit you are wrong and follow the moral authority.  
    Scrap 1 and 7.  And, be faithful to your state in life.  You are a married man with children.  God is not going to shower you with a contemplative's grace, no matter how hard you try.  
    "A secure mind is like a continual feast" - Proverbs xv: 15

    Offline Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8241
    • Reputation: +2967/-550
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Papa dubius nullus papa
    « Reply #67 on: December 09, 2017, 04:58:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Can. 753 Although the bishops who are in communion with the head and members of the college, whether individually or joined together in conferences of bishops or in particular councils, do not possess infallibility in teaching, they are authentic teachers and instructors of the faith for the Christian faithful entrusted to their care; the Christian faithful are bound to adhere with religious submission of mind to the authentic magisterium of their bishops.

    Every time you open your mouth to speak on this you announce the fact that you're in formal schism.

    Submit to the atuhentic magisterium of bishops you are in communion with the true Pope and whom the Pope recognises as such.
    You do not understand the Canon Law you posted, which is one of the reasons why you falsely accuse non-dogmatic sedes of schism.

    OTOH, if you actually had an ounce of faith in, and believed what your understanding appears to be of what you yourself posted to in fact be true, you would either be in schism yourself, or an avid NOer - there is no other choice. 
    I say that it is licit to resist the Roman Pontiff by not doing what he orders and by impeding the execution of his will; it is not licit, however, to judge, punish or depose him, since these are acts proper to a superior." St. Robert Bellarmine


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12446
    • Reputation: +6453/-1028
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Papa dubius nullus papa
    « Reply #68 on: December 09, 2017, 05:43:58 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • More evidence that ladislaus is on the wrong theological path.  He was a dogmatic vacantist.  Insists that we must be dogmatic plenists.  Cannot bring himself to practice either.  So he tries to settle in the middle, which is doubt.  But, worst, he spreads his doubt around for others to join him.  And, if you doubt, why in the world would you become a catholic, who has to follow the " " personality cult of a man dressed in white from Rome?  Not likely, so you favor vacantism, but only minimally.  You are at the end of your road, instead of dragging others there, admit you are wrong and follow the moral authority.  
    Scrap 1 and 7.  And, be faithful to your state in life.  You are a married man with children.  God is not going to shower you with a contemplative's grace, no matter how hard you try.  

    Again, not a single word of this makes the least bit of sense.  So, because I was a dogmatic sedevacantist for a couple years, oh, about 28 years ago, this to your weak mind is proof that I am mistaken now.  I am not trying to "settle" for anything.  Anyone who knows me knows that when I believe in something I believe in it zealously ... and I don't compromise on middle grounds.  But what I have told you is simple fact.

    Basically, I think that this goes completely over your head.  None of this is mere speculation.

    Papal legitimacy is dogmatic fact.  Period.  If we did not know with the certainty of faith that Pius XII was a pope, then we cannot believe the dogma of the Assumption with the certainty of faith.  If you do not accept Bergoglio as pope with the same certainty of faith, then you do not accept him as pope in the manner that Catholics must accept a pope.  In other words, you are not a sedeplenist even if you think you are or say you are.

    I'd bet that the vast majority of R&R do NOT have certainty of faith regarding Bergoglio as pope but have entertained some doubts about him.  Consequently, that doubt is enough to suspend submission to him ... until the Church resolves this doubt.  This would in fact absolve them of schism.  Except that they won't articulate it this way.  Instead, they come up with a completely un-traditional caricature of the Church and the Magisterium.  Kreuzritter is correct that it's schismatic and completely non-Catholic.  You're the one who's wrong, PG, so wrong that you barely qualify as a Catholic ... except for your confusion and befuddlement.  Your thinking sounds more like what a practitioner of schismatic Orthodoxy would articulate.

    Offline B from A

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 458
    • Reputation: +344/-3
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Papa dubius nullus papa
    « Reply #69 on: December 09, 2017, 05:45:35 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • ... Insists that we must be dogmatic plenists. ...




    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12446
    • Reputation: +6453/-1028
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Papa dubius nullus papa
    « Reply #70 on: December 09, 2017, 05:47:05 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Yet you refuse to accept anything that a pope teaches which you do not like, even when it is his authentic magisterium.
    Canon law aside, that effectively renders him reundant to your life as a Catholic, except to make you feel better about yourself in your nominal "recognition" of him - though it is nothing more than empty lip service. This is far worse than getting the question of who is pope wrong in a time of reasonabel doubt surrounding that question.

    Yeah, that's my problem with the R&R position; they completely warp any Catholic notion of how Catholics must submit to and accept the Magisterium.  Sedevacantists are absolutely on target with their criticism of this point.  No Catholic theologian would have recognized this attitude and this posture as Catholic.


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12446
    • Reputation: +6453/-1028
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Papa dubius nullus papa
    « Reply #71 on: December 09, 2017, 05:50:53 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0



  • Yep.  I "insist" that everyone MUST be a dogmatic plenist when I myself am not.  PG doesn't get any of what I'm trying to say.  First of all, I don't "insist" on ANYTHING.  I am simply telling you what I think.  I have no authority over anyone.  Secondly, I have grave doubts about the legitimacy of the V2 papal claimants and have never advocated dogmatic plenism.

    Offline PG

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1291
    • Reputation: +349/-121
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Papa dubius nullus papa
    « Reply #72 on: December 09, 2017, 07:23:30 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It's not about whether his opinions are reliable; my only point is to demonstrate that IF YOU SPECULATE about whether the V2 popes COULD BE illegitimate, as +Lefebvre did, then you do not really accept them the way Catholics need to ... because we're required to have certainty of faith regarding their legitimacy, which precludes any speculation that it might not be the case.


    Kiss up and kick down ecclesiology again.  Just as the sspx has always taught that the new mass is valid but illicit.  In the same sense, pope francis is valid, but illicit.  This is why I pray for his resignation.  This is the basis for our argument against religious liberty when it comes to rights.  God does not give the church a right to elect such wicked prelates.  But, God tolerates such wicked prelates.  

    So, there is nothing wrong with speculating whether a pope is illicit or not.  That is fundamental to the survival of the church.  It is the blind obedience which has brought us such problems.  And, such blind obedience is what ladislaus is preaching.  It is the state we die in that matters, not the state we may have lived our life at some isolated point.  These sentiments of +Lefebvre were early on and very limited.  And, his actions speak much louder than his words, which is ideal for a man of his position.  +Lefebvre was a plenist.  He was not confused on the matter, as ladislaus is.  

    "A secure mind is like a continual feast" - Proverbs xv: 15

    Online Hermenegild

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 536
    • Reputation: +152/-35
    Re: Papa dubius nullus papa
    « Reply #73 on: December 09, 2017, 08:31:30 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I would go into detail about why I question their orthodoxy ... list their errors/heresies.
    That seems like putting the cart before the horse.

    Online Hermenegild

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 536
    • Reputation: +152/-35
    Re: Papa dubius nullus papa
    « Reply #74 on: December 09, 2017, 09:11:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • :facepalm:

    What do you mean "don't like"?  Are you a Traditional Catholic or not?  Every Traditional Catholics starts with sensing that there's something non-Catholic about what they do and what they teach.  Then they start comparing their teaching with that of their predecessors and begin to see contradictions.  This has nothing to do with whether people "like" what he teaches.
    Perhaps I poorly worded that. As Catholics we should not have to qualify what kind of Catholic we are. There can't be anything non-Catholic about what a pope does and teaches.
    Are Catholics supposed to open up their Denzingers before submitting to papal teaching to make sure there's no contradictions/errors etc.

     

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16