Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]

Author Topic: Contra Cekadam: A response by Fr Cekada  (Read 6135 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Meg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6173
  • Reputation: +3147/-2941
  • Gender: Female
Re: Contra Cekadam: A response by Fr Cekada
« Reply #75 on: June 15, 2018, 03:15:06 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Cantarella on June 15, 2018, 02:40:41 PM
    Monsignor Guerard des Lauriers = French

    Your argument is invalid.

    Yeah, well, he's the one exception. That doesn't make my argument invalid. And I imagine that des Lauriers has a larger following in the U.S. than in Europe. Is that right?

    After all, it's all about the FREEDOM to decide who is or isn't pope. The founding fathers of the U.S. would be proud. 
    Logged
    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41868
    • Reputation: +23920/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Contra Cekadam: A response by Fr Cekada
    « Reply #76 on: June 15, 2018, 03:21:51 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Watch the video I posted above.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41868
    • Reputation: +23920/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Contra Cekadam: A response by Fr Cekada
    « Reply #77 on: June 15, 2018, 03:28:56 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Meg on June 15, 2018, 03:15:06 PM
    After all, it's all about the FREEDOM to decide who is or isn't pope. The founding fathers of the U.S. would be proud.

    To say nothing of your freedom to reject their Magisterium and Universal Discipline.
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10305
    • Reputation: +6216/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Contra Cekadam: A response by Fr Cekada
    « Reply #78 on: June 15, 2018, 04:14:26 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    To say nothing of your freedom to reject their Magisterium and Universal Discipline.
    In your opinion, did +ABL reject the Magisterium and Universal Discipline?  Please explain in detail. 
    Second question, if someone doubts the legitimacy of new-rome, does that automatically allow them to 'reject the magisterium and universal discipline' and not contradict themselves? 
    Third question, can you name a person, either dead or alive, who holds "R&R" without contradiction and without schism, according to your viewpoint.
    I'm really trying to understand what you believe.  I need specifics, please.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41868
    • Reputation: +23920/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Contra Cekadam: A response by Fr Cekada
    « Reply #79 on: June 15, 2018, 05:02:55 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on June 15, 2018, 04:14:26 PM
    In your opinion, did +ABL reject the Magisterium and Universal Discipline?  Please explain in detail.

    He held them to be of doubtful authority ... since he held the V2 papal claimants to be of doubtful authority.  Consequently, he rejected something he held to be DOUBTFULLY the Magisterium and Universal Discipline.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41868
    • Reputation: +23920/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Contra Cekadam: A response by Fr Cekada
    « Reply #80 on: June 15, 2018, 05:05:43 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on June 15, 2018, 04:14:26 PM
    Second question, if someone doubts the legitimacy of new-rome, does that automatically allow them to 'reject the magisterium and universal discipline' and not contradict themselves?

    Indeed.  There's the old theological maxim Papa dubius papa nullus., that for all intents and purposes a doubtful pope is no pope and cannot have authority.  I saw at least one authority on Canon Law explicitly state that one is not a schismatic if he refuses submission to the Pope based on substantial positive widespread doubts about his legitimacy or his person (i.e. whether he's Catholic).
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41868
    • Reputation: +23920/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Contra Cekadam: A response by Fr Cekada
    « Reply #81 on: June 15, 2018, 05:10:01 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on June 15, 2018, 04:14:26 PM

    Third question, can you name a person, either dead or alive, who holds "R&R" without contradiction and without schism, according to your viewpoint.
    I'm really trying to understand what you believe.  I need specifics, please.

    +Lefebvre (if you want to call him "R&R") and Father Chazal (if you want to call him R&R).  Father Schmidberger once articulated a similar position that he doubted legitimacy but gave them benefit of the doubt according to the principle of law melior est conditio possidentis (benefit of doubt leans in favor of the one in possession).  In fact, anyone who holds this doubt but just feels that until the Church officially deposes him, he retains a certain amount of status or authority ... is not in contradiction with Catholic principles.  I've known people in R&R who think they are not popes but feel that this can only be decided by the Church (a very legitimate opinion).  That's my beef with the dogmatic sedevacantists, as I've explained before, since there are indeed uncondemned Catholic opinions that heretics retain office until they're officially declared such by the Church.

    On the other hand, if someone says that it's certain with the certainty of faith that these men are legitimate popes, that's when schism rears its head.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41868
    • Reputation: +23920/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Contra Cekadam: A response by Fr Cekada
    « Reply #82 on: June 15, 2018, 05:15:40 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • I agree that at the very least these men remain in office materially until declared heretical or illegitimate by the Church.  I strongly lean in favor of the position that they are probably not legitimate popes, formally speaking, that they have NO authority (as per Father Chazal) ... and not that they have authority when they're right but no authority when they're wrong (that contradicts pre-Vatican II theology).  But, at the end of the day, I recognize that all these conclusions flow from my private judgment (assessment that V2 contradicts Tradition, that the Novus Ordo Mass displeases God, etc.) ... and consequently all the conclusions remain in that realm and in a state of doubt, not certainty ... and absolutely without certainty of faith.  I reject +Sanborn's essay against "opinionism".
    Logged

    Offline Last Tradhican

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6293
    • Reputation: +3327/-1937
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Contra Cekadam: A response by Fr Cekada
    « Reply #83 on: June 15, 2018, 06:03:47 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Meg on June 15, 2018, 02:37:11 PM
    The main difference is that Fr. Cekada is American, and Fr. Chazal is French. Sedevacantism and sedewhateverism is an American phenomena.
    There's sedes in Spain, Mexico, Brazil and many other countries, the Americans like Cekada learned it from foreigners who are now dead. The only reason you know Cekada and the others in the USA is because they write in English.
    Logged
    The Vatican II church - Assisting Souls to Hell Since 1962

    For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. Mat 24:24

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10305
    • Reputation: +6216/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Contra Cekadam: A response by Fr Cekada
    « Reply #84 on: June 16, 2018, 10:36:17 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Thanks, Lad, for explaining your views.  I think they are overly-complex and unnecessarily so, but that's another topic.  It's unfortunate that many of you argue under the assumption that most trads have the knowledge (or care) about the microscopic differences in the sede world and you give labels to each of these differences (which you create yourselves), creating a new language which most are unaware of.  And as you said on the Fr Chazal thread, all of these viewpoints (sede-doubtism, sede-privationism, sede...I can't remember them all) are the same, from a practical standpoint.

    If you would remember that most catholics don't know about all these terms, you might save yourself a lot of time in the future from debating with people who are unaware of your sede-language.
    Logged

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 10057
    • Reputation: +5252/-916
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Contra Cekadam: A response by Fr Cekada
    « Reply #85 on: June 16, 2018, 11:12:35 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on June 15, 2018, 02:55:41 PM
    Why won't you answer the question?  Just takes a yes or a no.
    Because Meg knows she can't answer with an unequivocal "yes" and that would make her what she abhors: another dreaded "sedewhatever".
    Logged
    For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. (Matthew 24:24)
    Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]
    « previous next »