Author Topic: A Couple of Questions on Sedevacantism  (Read 1394 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Luker

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 507
  • Reputation: +639/-0
  • Gender: Male
A Couple of Questions on Sedevacantism
« on: October 19, 2013, 09:08:07 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Hello, I was hoping some of the very good posters here on Cathinfo could help me with a couple of questions on the timeline of when the Chair of Peter became vacant.  As I understand there is some different theories explaining this but I am hoping to get a starting point to begin considering these questions:

    1. John XXIII: As I understand this is where most of the controversy lies.  Was John XXIII elected an anti pope or did he fall sometime during his pontificate? Perhaps when he signed off on the first heretical council document?

    2. Paul VI: In light of what happened with John XXIII was the conclave that elected him valid? Was he at anytime a valid pope?

    3. John Paul I: Not much is said about him because his pontificate (or lack thereof) was so short, but again, was the conclave invalid or something or did he do something that confirmed himself as a public heretic? Could he have been a valid pope?

    I guess the overriding question here is what are the Catholic principals that govern what has happened to the papacy during and after the Vatican II council?

    Thank you in advance for any help with these questions.

    Luke
    Pray the Holy Rosary every day!!

    Offline Malleus 01

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 484
    • Reputation: +447/-0
    A Couple of Questions on Sedevacantism
    « Reply #1 on: October 19, 2013, 11:43:55 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • What does scripture say about wolves in sheeps clothing.  Your question seems to be when did this wolf dress like a sheep.  Its like asking when did Luther decide to cease being a monk and form his own religion.  

    The larger question is - Why and or for an individual to acknowledge that the event is undeniable and has occurred.

    There are thousands of examples of Heresy from the Novus Ordo Hierarchy and the Novus Ordo is for all intents and purposes promulgating a new religion.

    Unfortunately - many lay Catholics havent been given a choice as to whether or not they want to be in that new religion.


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 18392
    • Reputation: +10197/-4834
    • Gender: Male
    A Couple of Questions on Sedevacantism
    « Reply #2 on: October 19, 2013, 12:17:05 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Siri was most likely elected Pope in 1958; IMO he accepted but was forced to resign under threats from Communist / Masonic / Jewish agents within the Conclave.

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4673
    • Reputation: +2164/-1044
    • Gender: Female
    A Couple of Questions on Sedevacantism
    « Reply #3 on: October 19, 2013, 06:16:46 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Hermenegild
    Quote from: Ladislaus
    Siri was most likely elected Pope in 1958; IMO he accepted but was forced to resign under threats from Communist / Masonic / Jewish agents within the Conclave.


    If he definitely was elected would a forced resignation be null and void?


    From what I read, yes.  It is also what would negate any substitute pontificate (ie. anti-pope).

    I watched a really good video about this.  I'll have to try and find it.

    Here it is (a 12 parter):



    "For there is not any thing secret that shall not be made manifest, nor hidden, that shall not be known and come abroad."- Luke 8:17

    Offline songbird

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3498
    • Reputation: +1286/-99
    • Gender: Female
    A Couple of Questions on Sedevacantism
    « Reply #4 on: October 19, 2013, 10:57:40 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Vatican council I says it all!  In order to come to Papal Infallibility, definition of "Pope" had to be understood.  Then nominating, must be a "catholic", if outwardly and manifestly showing fruits of anti-catholic, then they were not to be nominated. If they were and made pope, it would be invalid.  So read on Vatican I.  Thank god Vatican I took place!!


    Offline songbird

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3498
    • Reputation: +1286/-99
    • Gender: Female
    A Couple of Questions on Sedevacantism
    « Reply #5 on: October 19, 2013, 10:59:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Thank God!

    Offline JohnAnthonyMarie

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1297
    • Reputation: +603/-61
    • Gender: Male
      • TraditionalCatholic.net
    A Couple of Questions on Sedevacantism
    « Reply #6 on: October 19, 2013, 11:07:12 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Catholics,

    1. It is well known that Angelo Roncalli, aka John XXIII, maintained anti-Catholic Masonic associations (i.e. Édouard Herriot, Vincent Auriol).




    2. It is plainly obvious that Giovanni Battista Montini, aka Paul VI, was a freemason before, during, and after the Second Vatican Council.





    I do not intend any offense to any one that may read this post; I am simply stating my observations.  I do not consider any one who does not share the logical conclusion of these observations to be any less Catholic.  I am not selling any material on the subject matter, nor do I have any vested interest in sharing these observations other than that of a historian. Alright?

    Faithfully yours,
    In Christ Jesus,
    John Anthony Marie
    TraditionalCatholic.net
    Omnes pro Christo

    Offline Ambrose

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3447
    • Reputation: +2424/-11
    • Gender: Male
    A Couple of Questions on Sedevacantism
    « Reply #7 on: October 19, 2013, 11:33:04 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Luker wrote:

    Quote
    1. John XXIII: As I understand this is where most of the controversy lies. Was John XXIII elected an anti pope or did he fall sometime during his pontificate? Perhaps when he signed off on the first heretical council document?


    There is not too much controversy with John XXIII.  He did things which cast grave suspicion on his orthodoxy, but there is no smoking gun, with which someone can say with absolute certainty, "he defected, he's a public heretic."  I think most Sedevacantists just say, "let's retreat to the last certainly orthodox pope."

    This question of John XXIII will remain a gray area until the Church decides it, in by opinion.  I do not believe that there is strong enough evidence to say with certainty that he defected and became a public heretic.

    Quote
    2. Paul VI: In light of what happened with John XXIII was the conclave that elected him valid? Was he at anytime a valid pope?


    On December 7, 1965, Paul VI publicly professed heresy and grave error to the universal Church in Council.  There can be no doubt that he was not a pope on that day.  The argument against him from the time of his election, June 21, 1963, was that since he showed clearly only about two and a half years later that he was a heretic, and there was no known change in his thinking, that one could form moral certainty that he was a heretic right from the start of his "pontificate."

    I have no doubt that when the Church reforms Paul VI's "pontificate" will be declared null and that he was a heretic, a destroyer and an antipope.  

    Quote
    3. John Paul I: Not much is said about him because his pontificate (or lack thereof) was so short, but again, was the conclave invalid or something or did he do something that confirmed himself as a public heretic? Could he have been a valid pope?


    He will also remain a mystery.  I do not know of him professing public heresy.  He didn't do anything of any significance during his time, so it is not really a pressing question.   The Church will judge him in due time, but I see no reason that anyone must concern themselves with him.

    Quote
    I guess the overriding question here is what are the Catholic principals that govern what has happened to the papacy during and after the Vatican II council?


    The governing principle is found in the answer to these questions:  Is it a public and provable fact that these men (Paul VI, John Paul II, Benedict XVI and Francis) have defected from the Faith?  Is there strong enough evidence against them which can lead a Catholic to moral certainty that they are not popes?  Is it a fact that these Popes have done things that Popes cannot do, such as promulgate a sacramental rite that leads to impiety, or bind the Church to heretical communion rules.  

    If you answer "yes" to those questions,then you have the basis to withdraw from these men and sever communion with them. Catholics are strictly forbidden to remain in communion with heretics.  At the same time, however, you are bound to remain in communion with all Catholics who have not formed this judgment and remain under the undeclared heretical antipopes.
    The Council of Trent, The Catechism of the Council of Trent, Papal Teaching, The Teaching of the Holy Office, The Teaching of the Church Fathers, The Code of Canon Law, Countless approved catechisms, The Doctors of the Church, The teaching of the Dogmatic


    Offline Luker

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 507
    • Reputation: +639/-0
    • Gender: Male
    A Couple of Questions on Sedevacantism
    « Reply #8 on: October 20, 2013, 04:06:55 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Ahh thank you so much Ambrose.  That was the help I was looking for.  I will continue studying and praying about these questions.

    Luke
    Pray the Holy Rosary every day!!

    Offline songbird

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3498
    • Reputation: +1286/-99
    • Gender: Female
    A Couple of Questions on Sedevacantism
    « Reply #9 on: October 20, 2013, 06:31:27 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Thank You Ambrose for your much needed post.

    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8480
    • Reputation: +1093/-825
    • Gender: Male
    A Couple of Questions on Sedevacantism
    « Reply #10 on: October 21, 2013, 12:08:27 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I believe the theory that [Novebmer 21, 1964?] when Lumen Gentium was "officially" "approved" as being the date is difficult to refute.

    That being said, I take the 1958 approach for all practical purposes.  John 23 got V2 started and broke the unbreakable canon of the Mass and also got the processes of gutting the Mass really rolling.  He may have been a Material Pope.  

    But certainly by 1965 when V2 was approved and 1967, yes two years before the new Mass of instituted there was a previous new mass was approved which was also of doubtful validity.  

    From a practical standpoint look at 1958.  The question as to when it actually happened is less relevant now as whenever it happened it has been that way for a VERY long time with seeming no end in site.  

    The question now is where do we go from here?  Hope and pray.  Unite and fight?  Get our bishops to elect a Pope?  Wait for a miracle?

    Individually we must make sure we are ready to meet our Maker every second of our lives.  Live a holy life.    
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church


     

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