Author Topic: Crossing the Sedehold of Hope. (Read 6793 times)

2Vermont · « **Reply #15 on:** October 04, 2013, 04:01:42 PM »

Quote from: Nishant

Well, sedevacantism is an error,

I have yet to see this proven.

Nishant · « **Reply #16 on:** October 04, 2013, 04:18:21 PM »

Quote

I have yet to see this proven.

It can be proven in many ways, two in particular, one shorter and one more lengthy. The first was discussed in the article, as according to the teaching of St. Alphonsus, Cardinal Billot and other most eminent authorities, the acceptance of a Papal election by the whole Church, in particular by the hierarchy, is an infallible sign and effect of a valid election, and therefore proves definitely that all the conditions required for validity, even in the internal forum, are satisfied.

The other is slightly more lengthy, and goes like this. It is received Catholic doctrine, recognized almost unanimously even by sedevacantists, that (i) Only a Pope can appoint a bishop to an office, thereby conferring on his person the power of ordinary jurisdiction attached to it (ii) All offices of the Church cannot be vacant, this being required by the Apostolicity of the Church. Formal Apostolic succession requires the succession of persons to an episcopal see.

Taking the two of these considerations from doctrine together, combined with the facts of the alleged ongoing vacancy in the Holy See since 1958, we are left with the following conclusion - Since just about every bishop appointed by Pope Pius XII has either died or resigned his office, the Catholic Church, under sedevacantism, has ceased to be Apostolic, does not have a hierarchy having formal Apostolic succession, which is impossible.

That is a sufficient demonstration of the impossibility of 55 year sedevacantism.

Jerry · « **Reply #17 on:** October 04, 2013, 05:01:19 PM »

Nishant,

The teaching of St. Alphonsus, Cardinal Billot et al, are fallible teachings. There are numerous examples of Doctors of the Church holding conflicting opinions. Cornelius Lapide points this out throughout his commentaries. So if you are considering what S. Alphonsus said on this, why are you not giving weight to what S. Bellarmine, S. Francis de Sales, S. Antonius stated in support of sedevacantism?

Why overlook what the popes themselves wrote in support of sedevacantism? See Eugene IV, Council of Florence Cantate Domino, Pius XII Mystici Corporis Christi, Leo XIII Satis Cognitum, Innocent III Eius exemplo in addition to the Bull I've already provided by Paul IV. I didn't quote them because anyone who rejects sedevactanism in the 1917 Code of Canon Law and the Papal docuмents I've already provided, it seems to me is intransigent in their thinking.

Papal elections are not infallible. Pope Paul IV declared that infallibly in Bull cuм ex Apostolatus officio, which I provided to you in full. Read #6. Are you rejecting the excathedra declaration of a pope?

Furthermore, this has already happened, and it is widely accepted that the Cardinals elected an antipope. In the 12th century Anacletus II reigned 8 years in Rome while rivaling the true Pope, Innocent II. Anacletus was elected by the majority of the cardinals.

During the great Western Schism 15 of the 16 cardinals who elected Pope Urban VI withdrew from his obedience on the grounds that the unruly Roman mob made the election uncanonical. There was only one cardinal who did not repudiate Pope Urban VI, Cardinal Tebaldeschi, who died shortly thereafter leaving a situation where not one of the cardinals of the Catholic Church recognized the true Pope, Urban VI. All of the living cardinals then regarded his election as invalid.

2Vermont · « **Reply #18 on:** October 04, 2013, 05:19:27 PM »

Quote from: Jerry

Nishant,

The teaching of St. Alphonsus, Cardinal Billot et al, are fallible teachings. There are numerous examples of Doctors of the Church holding conflicting opinions. Cornelius Lapide points this out throughout his commentaries. So if you are considering what S. Alphonsus said on this, why are you not giving weight to what S. Bellarmine, S. Francis de Sales, S. Antonius stated in support of sedevacantism?

Why overlook what the popes themselves wrote in support of sedevacantism? See Eugene IV, Council of Florence Cantate Domino, Pius XII Mystici Corporis Christi, Leo XIII Satis Cognitum, Innocent III Eius exemplo in addition to the Bull I've already provided by Paul IV. I didn't quote them because anyone who rejects sedevactanism in the 1917 Code of Canon Law and the Papal docuмents I've already provided, it seems to me is intransigent in their thinking.

Papal elections are not infallible. Pope Paul IV declared that infallibly in Bull cuм ex Apostolatus officio, which I provided to you in full. Read #6. Are you rejecting the excathedra declaration of a pope?

Furthermore, this has already happened, and it is widely accepted that the Cardinals elected an antipope. In the 12th century Anacletus II reigned 8 years in Rome while rivaling the true Pope, Innocent II. Anacletus was elected by the majority of the cardinals.

During the great Western Schism 15 of the 16 cardinals who elected Pope Urban VI withdrew from his obedience on the grounds that the unruly Roman mob made the election uncanonical. There was only one cardinal who did not repudiate Pope Urban VI, Cardinal Tebaldeschi, who died shortly thereafter leaving a situation where not one of the cardinals of the Catholic Church recognized the true Pope, Urban VI. All of the living cardinals then regarded his election as invalid.

Jerry, can you (or other SV's) respond to this part of Nishant's post:

Taking the two of these considerations from doctrine together, combined with the facts of the alleged ongoing vacancy in the Holy See since 1958, we are left with the following conclusion - Since just about every bishop appointed by Pope Pius XII has either died or resigned his office, the Catholic Church, under sedevacantism, has ceased to be Apostolic, does not have a hierarchy having formal Apostolic succession, which is impossible.

LaramieHirsch · « **Reply #19 on:** October 04, 2013, 05:31:10 PM »

Quote from: Jehanne

Quote from: Matto
So you are a sedevacantist now? :geezer:

Yes. I think that "Pope" Francis is a public heretic, and therefore, no longer a Catholic, and therefore, no longer Pope. The Chair of Peter is, IMO, empty. Given the sensus fidelium of the sede movement, it seems to me reasonable to conclude that Pope Pius XII was the last true Roman Pontiff.

I can't understand why anyone would object to my predictions. An increase of numbers in the sede movement is precicely what I think is coming down the pike.

It just seems to be the way things will go.