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

Author Topic: Evils of the Nine against the good SSPX  (Read 22483 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Quo vadis Domine

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 4750
  • Reputation: +2896/-667
  • Gender: Male
Re: Evils of the Nine against the good SSPX
« Reply #225 on: December 08, 2023, 07:55:28 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • I understand what you're saying, and you have a point, but I think we can all agree 65 years is too long. It's common sense.

    Even Fr. Oreilly's 40 year hypothetical interregnum has been dwarfed by the current 65 years. And his opinion was just the opinion of one priest to begin with; hardly anything definitive.

    That's why I keep saying "this isn't the 1980's". The Sede position was much more attractive and much more likely back then. The Sedevacantist position ages like milk. It gets more untenable and improbable with every passing year. When will Sedes give it up and admit they bet on the wrong horse? When we have 100 years of interregnum? 200 years?

    Meanwhile the +Lefebvre position, the "it's a mystery, so we'll just have to assume they hold the Papacy in some way for now, at the very least we don't have the authority to depose these Popes or declare them deposed" position ages like wine.


    I absolutely disagree. Here is what Father O’Reilly says:









    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 32544
    • Reputation: +28762/-569
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Evils of the Nine against the good SSPX
    « Reply #226 on: December 08, 2023, 08:22:12 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I think we can all agree 65 years is too long. It's common sense.

    And 65 years of errors from the supposed Vicar of Christ is so much better. :(

    No better, but certainly no worse. Yes, there's a Crisis in the Church. I'm pretty sure I've stated that several times publicly.
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com


    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11323
    • Reputation: +6293/-1087
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Evils of the Nine against the good SSPX
    « Reply #227 on: December 08, 2023, 09:13:00 AM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
  • No better, but certainly no worse. 
    Error being promulgated to the Church from the supposed Vicar of Christ is absolutely worse than the Chair being vacant.  The Chair being vacant at least doesn't attack the papacy.  

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 32544
    • Reputation: +28762/-569
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Evils of the Nine against the good SSPX
    « Reply #228 on: December 08, 2023, 09:17:49 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Error being promulgated to the Church from the supposed Vicar of Christ is absolutely worse than the Chair being vacant.  The Chair being vacant at least doesn't attack the papacy. 
    That's a matter of opinion. We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one.
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com

    Online Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14645
    • Reputation: +6032/-903
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Scandals of the Nine against the good SSPX
    « Reply #229 on: December 08, 2023, 09:25:11 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • And yet this CMRI nun was sedevacantist from well before 1985:
    Were you a trad in 1985? If you were, then you know that at that time, sedeism was a novelty - even to the Dimonds.
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse


    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 11975
    • Reputation: +7525/-2254
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Evils of the Nine against the good SSPX
    « Reply #230 on: December 08, 2023, 10:27:06 AM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    Yes, God allowed it, and really I think for reasons known only to Him. But you miss the forest Pax.
    If not for the sede movement (agree or disagree with sede-ism, i'm simply talking about the # of priests chapels they've produced), then every single Trad would be holding their breath, and praying white-knuckle that the new-sspx won't keep selling out to new-rome.  But, barring an intervention from God, the new-sspx is toast.  +Fellay will keep introducing new-rite/fake bishops/priests, keep cozying up to novus ordo diocese clerics, etc.

    Without the Nine, the sspx would have a monopoly on Tradition.  And hindsight being 20/20, we see that +Fellay and Co were infiltrators and destined to destroy it.

    So, God allowed the Nine to split off (however scandalous and wrong that breakup happened), but the CURRENT situation shows this split is a huge blessing.  Because the sspx is no longer Traditional. 

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11323
    • Reputation: +6293/-1087
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Scandals of the Nine against the good SSPX
    « Reply #231 on: December 08, 2023, 11:11:21 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Were you a trad in 1985? If you were, then you know that at that time, sedeism was a novelty - even to the Dimonds.
    No, but Sister Mary Bernadette of the CMRI was for almost 2 decades.  She was a traditionalist as early as 1967 and by 1970 she and others believed that Paul VI was not a true pope.  So, although "sedevacantism" may not have been coined, it was definitely in the Traditional Movement as early as the late 60's.

    Online Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14645
    • Reputation: +6032/-903
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Scandals of the Nine against the good SSPX
    « Reply #232 on: December 08, 2023, 12:11:04 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • No, but Sister Mary Bernadette of the CMRI was for almost 2 decades.  She was a traditionalist as early as 1967 and by 1970 she and others believed that Paul VI was not a true pope.  So, although "sedevacantism" may not have been coined, it was definitely in the Traditional Movement as early as the late 60's.
    Yes, I know it was around, few and far between tho they were, mostly they were the original home aloners but they never coined the term. Not sure who coined it, but by the early 80s someone did. I knew some home aloners, sad situation that.

    But that youtube shows a sermon given by a trad priest of about 30 years in about 1985, who prior to The Nine basically never heard of it or had any reason to consider it, decided that he needed to explain to his congregation something that they most likely either never heard of but would, or only knew so little about that they couldn't even pronounce it. The reason he even talked about it was as he explained - because the novel idea was spreading among priests and laypeople.

    This is why he was explaining it - because except for a minuscule fraction of trads, nobody else ever heard of it. Nobody ever heard of it because it was something new, a new idea that was added into the crisis. The reason it was a novel idea because it is found nowhere in tradition. And although it was around, essentially sedeism did not exist prior to The Nine.   
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse


    Offline MiracleOfTheSun

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 775
    • Reputation: +341/-140
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Scandals of the Nine against the good SSPX
    « Reply #233 on: December 08, 2023, 12:26:38 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 1. ...decided that he needed to explain to his congregation something that they most likely either never heard of... The reason he even talked about it was as he explained - because the novel idea was spreading among priests and laypeople.

    2. ...The reason it was a novel idea because it is found nowhere in tradition.

    1. Makes perfect sense that no one had ever heard of it as the Church is protected in her faith, laws, disciplines, etc., and you have (now canonized) popes spreading the foulest of errors far and wide, on a regular basis ('chronic').

    2. Precisely why it's called 'the Great Apostasy' - which 'begins at the top'.

    Online Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14645
    • Reputation: +6032/-903
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Scandals of the Nine against the good SSPX
    « Reply #234 on: December 08, 2023, 01:52:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 1. Makes perfect sense that no one had ever heard of it as the Church is protected in her faith, laws, disciplines, etc., and you have (now canonized) popes spreading the foulest of errors far and wide, on a regular basis ('chronic').

    2. Precisely why it's called 'the Great Apostasy' - which 'begins at the top'.
    1. Regardless of who the ones are spreading error and who the ones are hungrily eating them up, the idea itself was a novel idea because it is not found in Church tradition.  It is that respect that it still is a novel idea.

    2. The Great Apostasy could happen a billion different ways, but could never happen without the aid of and involving a multitude of people sinning, iow, teamwork in evil is required.
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6790
    • Reputation: +3467/-2999
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Evils of the Nine against the good SSPX
    « Reply #235 on: December 08, 2023, 02:30:08 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!2
  • Some might say, though not on this forum of course, that sedevacantism was founded by a pedophile. His name was Francis Schuckardt. I believe that he was already practicing sedevacantism in the 1960's, in Washington state. 

    But of course it's the SSPX who are the bad guys, and always have been. At least the founder of the SSPX wasn't a pedophile. 
    "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 MiracleOfTheSun

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 775
    • Reputation: +341/-140
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Scandals of the Nine against the good SSPX
    « Reply #236 on: December 08, 2023, 02:39:04 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 1. Regardless of who the ones are spreading error and who the ones are hungrily eating them up, the idea itself was a novel idea because it is not found in Church tradition.  It is that respect that it still is a novel idea.

    2. The Great Apostasy could happen a billion different ways, but could never happen without the aid of and involving a multitude of people sinning, iow, teamwork in evil is required.

    1. Of course it's a novel idea (but not really because theologians discussed it) but not because 'regardless of who the ones are spreading error' but precisely because of the ones who are spreading the error.  Novel ideas that aim to wreck the Church (Sillonism or Modernism, for example) are different than theological ideas which aim to preserve the papacy and indefectibility of the Church (Sedevacantism).

    2. If it was a case of a pontiff making an error in some book that would be something but really that isn't what's being talked about.  It's the universal enforcing (which he can do) of false / condemned principles, a new faith, new sacraments, new theology, new priesthood, new 'mass', new vestments, etc. (which he can't do because the Church is protected by the Holy Ghost and can't be an institution that teaches, promotes and enforces error).

    Offline MiracleOfTheSun

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 775
    • Reputation: +341/-140
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Evils of the Nine against the good SSPX
    « Reply #237 on: December 08, 2023, 02:42:03 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!1
  • Some might say, though not on this forum of course, that sedevacantism was founded by a pedophile. His name was Francis Schuckardt. I believe that he was already practicing sedevacantism in the 1960's, in Washington state.

    But of course it's the SSPX who are the bad guys, and always have been. At least the founder of the SSPX wasn't a pedophile.

    I always get a chuckle when Meg drops in her .02 - pure comedic gold and a blue star for getting off the trail and into the weeds (again).

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4750
    • Reputation: +2896/-667
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Evils of the Nine against the good SSPX
    « Reply #238 on: December 08, 2023, 03:19:22 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • Some might say, though not on this forum of course, that sedevacantism was founded by a pedophile. His name was Francis Schuckardt. I believe that he was already practicing sedevacantism in the 1960's, in Washington state.

    But of course it's the SSPX who are the bad guys, and always have been. At least the founder of the SSPX wasn't a pedophile.


    You are really a pathetic simpleton. I truly feel sorry for you. :pray:
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline Giovanni Berto

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1305
    • Reputation: +1054/-80
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Evils of the Nine against the good SSPX
    « Reply #239 on: December 08, 2023, 07:49:59 PM »
  • Thanks!4
  • No Thanks!0
  • Some might say, though not on this forum of course, that sedevacantism was founded by a pedophile. His name was Francis Schuckardt. I believe that he was already practicing sedevacantism in the 1960's, in Washington state.

    But of course it's the SSPX who are the bad guys, and always have been. At least the founder of the SSPX wasn't a pedophile.

    You make it sound like sedevacantism is some kind of witchcraft.

    I see Sedevacantism as merely a thesis. We have several thesis to explain the Crisis in the Church. As I see it, it is not reasonable to be dogmatic about any of them.