Not that I have immediate plans to form a religious congregation, but in these times of emergency, I find there is a need for people who hold the SV position to have somewhere to go if they want to live in religion. If there were enough people an order could be started or if there was enough monks perhaps we could found a monastery - for genuine religious life and prayer, not like the dimonds one that is for trying to convert the world. They are more Dominican than Benedictine. I don't see why they call themselves Benedictine, they have not got the practice of the Benedictine order, they are more like Dominicans whose mission is to combat heresy. Starting an order is something I wonder about. People who hold the Sedevacantist position just have to have somewhere to go.

Sounds good to me.  I wish the SV Bishops and Priests would unite.  The Devil is winning so far.  We should unite and offer Masses, prayers and every thought word and action of each day for the salvation of souls.  In my view there really would be nothing wrong with agreeing to disagree on the:

1.  Una cuм

2.  Pre and post 1955 liturgy (and disciplines)

3.  Or even those who accept the new guys are Material "Popes" but are SV in thought word and action even when offering the Mass as they do not offer it in union with the head heretic of the anti-Catholic Church.

4.  NFP

5.  Those who accept harvesting organs from brain "dead" people would have to be mum on that topic though.

I would also think that they would tackle the above topics one by one and come to a definitive conclusion on them even if that definitive conclusion is that there is no definitive conclusion that they can agree on and we just have to wait for a valid Pope to set us straight.  But they would have to present their thesis and parse it and present the objections and responses to those objections and sort the above out as far as possible and share their findings with the laity.  

No public Feeneyites allowed either.  We can't pretend error is okay but we can admit that we are not sure about some things and that the pro and con arguments for or against number 1 - 4 have at least seeming validity.  

You already have two to choose from
The Society of St Pius V and the Congregation of Mary Queen Immaculate.

Good point :o)  But it would be great if they united.  Had a united front.  I forgot to mention the Thuc Line above.  They would have to agree on that and the answer is obvious.  Also the SSPV seems to hide their SV.  I went to a chapel were regulars did not know they were SV [I was a little shocked at the time but realized that is the protocol] and they have a rule not to preach about it in their Chapels.  Better not to preach on it at all than to preach against it.  But I would think they would clarify their stance for their parishioners if their main goal is truth over numbers.

Quote from: Lover of Truth

Quote from: poche

You already have two to choose from
The Society of St Pius V and the Congregation of Mary Queen Immaculate.

Good point :o)  But it would be great if they united.  Had a united front.  I forgot to mention the Thuc Line above.  They would have to agree on that and the answer is obvious.  Also the SSPV seems to hide their SV.  I went to a chapel were regulars did not know they were SV [I was a little shocked at the time but realized that is the protocol] and they have a rule not to preach about it in their Chapels.  Better not to preach on it at all than to preach against it.  But I would think they would clarify their stance for their parishioners if their main goal is truth over numbers.

I have a little something of an issue with the Thuc line.  My biggest deal is that the consecrations and ordinations seem il-docuмented.  Perhaps this is simply an erroneous impression that I have.  I don't exactly follow why Archbishop Thuc's people would be invalid if Archbishop Lefebvre's are valid.  I am simply more comfortable with Archbishop Lefebvre people because I perceive that the line is better docuмented and am concerned the other line may have imposters.

I am afraid that if all traditionalist (sede & non-sede) don't unite we are going to be strewn to the winds like Old Catholics and other protestants.  Thus, I have a great deal of appreciation for how you say the SSPV chapels handle the sede question.

Here you go buddy:

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=10&ved=0CIsBEBYwCQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thucbishops.com%2FOpen_Letter_to_%2520Bp_Kelly_FULL.pdf&ei=fXFlUs7AHofD2AXukoG4Cg&usg=AFQjCNEfI2z1szOMLEsjTRRwJ3xK03T4qw&sig2=ng6jXfcmPV-7jFK1Fc_JoQ&bvm=bv.54934254,d.b2I

I hope you can open it.  Do a search for "An Open Letter to Bishop Clarence Kelly on the ... - ThucBishops.com"

or better yet got to www.ThucBishops.com

Very thorough.  If you want to get to the bottom of this you will enjoy the above piece.  

4.  NFP

5.  Those who accept harvesting organs from brain "dead" people would have to be mum on that topic though.

I think these two issues are too important to just agree to disagree about. About NFP. some priests promote it and some priests condemn it as a mortal sin. I don't think the priests who disagree about this can be on the same side. And the issue of harvesting organs from living "brain dead" people is even more important because one side claims it is a good thing and saves lives and the other side claims it is murder. People who disagree on such an important matter would have trouble working together if every once in a while the issue comes up.

OHCA wrote:

I have a little something of an issue with the Thuc line.  My biggest deal is that the consecrations and ordinations seem il-docuмented.  Perhaps this is simply an erroneous impression that I have.  I don't exactly follow why Archbishop Thuc's people would be invalid if Archbishop Lefebvre's are valid.  I am simply more comfortable with Archbishop Lefebvre people because I perceive that the line is better docuмented and am concerned the other line may have imposters.

When it comes to some Thuc line bishops, I have my reservations, such as those that derived through the Palma de Troya group.  

I am absolutely certain of the validity of the consecrations of Carmoma, Zamora, and  Guérard des Lauriers.  

I would urge you to read the book that Lover of Truth recommended.  There are other good studies on this as well, but in my opinion Mario Derkson's is the most thorough and is irrefutable.

A monastery where free but respectful debate in search of wisdom is allowed would be in keeping with the true spirit of the Benedictine order. Their monasteries were known as places of learning.

It does not even have to be SV, it could allow holders of either opinion join, but have as its main policy to reject or never implement Vatican 2.

I like this idea TCat.

OHCA wrote:

Quote

I have a little something of an issue with the Thuc line.  My biggest deal is that the consecrations and ordinations seem il-docuмented.  Perhaps this is simply an erroneous impression that I have.  I don't exactly follow why Archbishop Thuc's people would be invalid if Archbishop Lefebvre's are valid.  I am simply more comfortable with Archbishop Lefebvre people because I perceive that the line is better docuмented and am concerned the other line may have imposters.

When it comes to some Thuc line bishops, I have my reservations, such as those that derived through the Palma de Troya group.  

I am absolutely certain of the validity of the consecrations of Carmoma, Zamora, and  Guérard des Lauriers.  

I would urge you to read the book that Lover of Truth recommended.  There are other good studies on this as well, but in my opinion Mario Derkson's is the most thorough and is irrefutable.

Indeed.  He is incredibly thorough.  He gave them close to three years to come up with some kind of response and they are obligated to do this if they believe they are still correct but they cannot refute him.  

Truth wins and Mario has the good fortune of presenting it.  He left absolutely no stone unturned that I could see.  I wish he would write more.  He wrote a series in Daily Catholic "3 Blind Mice [?]" or something along those line that was absolutely wonderful and entertaining.  

In fact I need present the link now:

Oops its "The Blind Leading the Blind"

http://www.dailycatholic.org/issue/05Oct/oct7mdi.htm

Wonderful.  Wonderful.  Wonderful.