Author Topic: Archbishop Lefebvre on Sedevacantism (Read 34247 times)

TKGS · « **Reply #20 on:** February 18, 2011, 06:46:39 AM »

You're not crazy at all. Archbishop Lefebvre's position (even as it evolved over time as his understanding of the Crisis deepened over time) was different than that of Bishop Fellay today. At least it certainly appears to be different when I read back issues of The Angelus's monthly column, "The Archbishop Speaks...".

While I generally dislike hypotheticals, I am wondering what Bishop Fellay's reaction would be if the Vatican officially and unambiguously permitted the ordination of women as priests. I am sure groups like Catholic Answers would say that the pope has the power to bind and loose. A few months ago, I remember reading a comment to that effect (though it was implied rather than directly stated) on a traditional forum. I think both The Wanderer and The Remnant would take that view. I don't know how Catholic Family News would react. And frankly, I don't know what the Society's response would be either.

It would be an interesting thought-problem even if one maintains that such a thing simply could not happen. When one reads the writings of the saints and theologians of old, we find that many of them did indeed consider the question of whether the pope can fall into heresy and what would happen in such a case; but, I suppose, such questions are passé now.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #21 on:** February 18, 2011, 07:16:12 AM »

Quote from: Hermenegild

Do you mean sedevacantism or sede vacante?

He means that smoking weed is a sign of predestination...

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #22 on:** February 18, 2011, 02:30:33 PM »

What Roscoe means is that he thinks there is no such thing as sedevacantism, which is shocking considering the fact that he himself believes the Chair of Peter is empty. That should answer your question, Hermen. And welcome to CatholicInfo!

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #23 on:** February 18, 2011, 02:34:03 PM »

Quote from: Raoul76

SpiritusSanctus said:
Quote
More than believing the Chair of Peter is empty is needed to change the state the Church and world are in.

That is true. But the chair is still empty. Just because recognizing it as a fact isn't going to change anything, doesn't mean it's not a fact.

You could say "More is needed to change Hollywood than better studio presidents." And that's true, because to change Hollywood, you'd have to somehow stop it from being nearly entirely Jєωιѕн. Just changing the studio presidents wouldn't change that. But nevertheless, isn't it a fact that Hollywood studio presidents put out lousy, immoral movies?

In the same way, recognizing that Benedict isn't the Pope won't change the apostasy, blasphemy, heresy and just general lukewarmness of the masses. But all of those things are somehow connected to having no Pope. It's like God has allowed the people to deliver themselves to their tormentors.

So yes, there are two major things that are necessary: ( a ) For God to end the nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr, which we have been in, in my estimation, since roughly the end of World War I, and which is characterized by ʝʊdɛօ-Masonic democracies after the American model -- this will be surely be done via the Minor Chastisement and ( b ) For the world to finally recognize that the Vatican was taken over and that Vatican II was a sham.

But these two things are connected. The Chastisement is the shock that will snap people awake. Some of them, anyway. In the 20th century, the devil made people lazy and greedy with all of this fake money, that we are now beginning to realize never really existed, it was all playing with numbers, playing with debt. When that illusion fades, when reality sets in, people will come back to God and the Church -- one hopes.

I agree overall, but you can't exactly present sedevacantism as a fact. That is one highly debatable subject. Obviously the existance of God is a fact, as is the fact that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. But you can go either way on whether or not we have a true Pope. My opinion is that these are not anti-popes, these are just bad Popes.

roscoe · « **Reply #24 on:** February 18, 2011, 03:30:19 PM »

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus

What Roscoe means is that he thinks there is no such thing as sedevacantism, which is shocking considering the fact that he himself believes the Chair of Peter is empty. That should answer your question, Hermen. And welcome to CatholicInfo!

SS does not speak for me as i have never said that the Chair of Peter is empty. I Have Said that i do not know who the Pope Is at this time.