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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 13

Author Topic: Feb 2nd 2022, The Day RnR Admit Antipope Francis is Not in the Church?  (Read 13382 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 47082
  • Reputation: +27913/-5205
  • Gender: Male
Re: Feb 2nd 2022, The Day RnR Admit Antipope Francis is Not in the Church?
« Reply #30 on: February 04, 2022, 09:28:42 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • If these have been legtimate popes, then the Church has suffered a black eye from which she can never recover, and the gates of hell would have prevailed against the Church.  It's possible, so you say, for the Church's Magisterium and public worship to go corrupt for half a century.  It's OK for Catholics to effectively ignore the Magisterium and second-guess anything taught by the Church short of something that clearly has the notes of infallibility.  What then is left of Catholicism?  When the next group of heretics comes along, couldn't they just claim, "ah, well, the Church is just in error about this."  How do we know the Modernists weren't right after all in disobeying St. Pius X?  There's no guarantee apparently that Rome can't be gravely mistaken about faith and morals.  Why weren't they within their rights to second-guess the Magisterium?  You guys who promote this idea destroy the Catholic Church.
    Logged

    Offline bodeens

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1513
    • Reputation: +806/-160
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feb 2nd 2022, The Day RnR Admit Antipope Francis is Not in the Church?
    « Reply #31 on: February 04, 2022, 09:29:39 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on February 04, 2022, 09:07:41 PM
    No worries.  :laugh1:  R&R actually agree with these statements from Bergoglio:  heretics, apostates, it matters not, they're all within the communion of saints (aka the Church).

    Of course, let me distinguish here, as R&R is not monolithic.  Here are some schools of R&R:

    1) He's certainly a legitimate pope (it's dogmatic fact), and we obey him when we can and reject him only when we can't obey in good conscience.
    2) He's probably the pope, and, just to play it safe, we should obey him when we can ... etc.
    3) He's probably not the pope, but we don't have the authority to decide the matter (Archbishop Lefebvre's true position).
    4) He's almost certainly not the pope, but we don't have the authority to decide the matter, but let's play it safe and obey him when we can.
    5) He's a manifest heretic who lacks all authority and can and must be ignored entirely, but he remains visibly in possession of the office and only the Church can remove him from it (Fr. Chazal)

    #5 of course is effectively privationism.

    I myself am somewhere in betwen #4 and #5.
    By this definition I am RnR, I can accept this because I'm squarely #5 with other Privationists. This is why I also made the distinction earlier that Matthew and I are both Privationist so I agree with his statements, I just draw RnR as ending at #3 where you may not. He is clearly oscillating in the latter half of the continuum, as this is the Resistance position. With a lot of this thread I'm not disagreeing with poster's opinions as much as the classification of their beliefs. I think very few people on this forum (if any??) draw a hard line at #3.  It is good you articulated this as I'm getting at this point. I don't even see Meg or Sean as #3s.

    Quote from: DigitalLogos on February 04, 2022, 08:56:28 PM
    It's about intellectual pride; about being right more than anything. And this isn't just found on one side either, it's present on both. Which is why we can't agree to disagree until the restored Church settles the matter.

    And I hold to a sede vacante position myself, mind you (more or less closer to Cassiciacuм or Fr. Chazal's position).
    The point is I think almost everyone is in near agreement (and hold much closer positions than we'd like to admit to each other) and almost everyone is a #4 or #5 or SV. How we define RnR is actually interesting because I think everyone (on this forum in particular) has diverged from the "pure +ABL position" (which isn't as clear cut as we'd like to think but is articulated fairly well as #3). It's even more interesting when you look at Indult, which is almost de facto #2 but in actuality is leaning #3+ among most laity. I think there's a chance that we don't even actually have to "agree to disagree" if we all agree on almost everything because there is barely even a disagreement. After that point, I agree, the disagreements that do arise are pride (tribalism).
    Logged
    Regard all of my posts as unfounded slander, heresy, theologically specious etc
    I accept Church teaching on Implicit Baptism of Desire.
    Francis is Pope.
    NO is a good Mass.
    Not an ironic sig.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 47082
    • Reputation: +27913/-5205
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feb 2nd 2022, The Day RnR Admit Antipope Francis is Not in the Church?
    « Reply #32 on: February 04, 2022, 09:31:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: bodeens on February 04, 2022, 09:29:39 PM
    By this definition I am RnR, I can accept this because I'm squarely #5 with other Privationists.

    I only included #5 because it's the position of Father Chazal who flatly denies being a Privationist ... even tough I disagree.

    I have zero problem wtih Father Chazal's position and find it rather persuasive.

    Really the difference is one of emphasis.  Father Chazal puts more emphasis on the material possession of office, whereas the SV-leaning privationists reduce it to a mere technicality.
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feb 2nd 2022, The Day RnR Admit Antipope Francis is Not in the Church?
    « Reply #33 on: February 04, 2022, 09:32:32 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on February 04, 2022, 09:28:42 PM
    If these have been legtimate popes, then the Church has suffered a black eye from which she can never recover, and the gates of hell would have prevailed against the Church.

    They are legitimate quoad nos and de jure today.

    But it’s also possible they will be declared illegitimate in the future, and that would remove the black eye.
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline bodeens

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1513
    • Reputation: +806/-160
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feb 2nd 2022, The Day RnR Admit Antipope Francis is Not in the Church?
    « Reply #34 on: February 04, 2022, 09:36:32 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on February 04, 2022, 09:18:27 PM
    Oh, stop it already.  Ratzinger is as big of a heretic as Bergoglio; he's just less flamboyant and open about it. 
    This is why he's a bigger problem too. They might try this strategy again, by having a ridiculous apostate like JPII followed by Rat. Bergs followed by someone "more orthodox" that is another one of these shadowy modernists like Rat who had the nerve to try to deny successors to +ABL, thereby forcing his hand and the excommunications.
    Logged
    Regard all of my posts as unfounded slander, heresy, theologically specious etc
    I accept Church teaching on Implicit Baptism of Desire.
    Francis is Pope.
    NO is a good Mass.
    Not an ironic sig.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 47082
    • Reputation: +27913/-5205
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feb 2nd 2022, The Day RnR Admit Antipope Francis is Not in the Church?
    « Reply #35 on: February 04, 2022, 09:39:12 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on February 04, 2022, 09:32:32 PM
    Not so, because if one day the Church declares that God had deposed them (ie., they were not legitimate popes), all their acts and teachings would be retroactively nullified.

    ... then they wouldn't have been legitimate popes, as per my comment.

    I clearly stated the hypothetical if a confirmation by the Church that these had been legitimate popes all along.

    Do you then agree with this statement, that if it were to turn out these were legitimate popes, then the Church would have lost all credibility?
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 47082
    • Reputation: +27913/-5205
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feb 2nd 2022, The Day RnR Admit Antipope Francis is Not in the Church?
    « Reply #36 on: February 04, 2022, 09:46:41 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on February 04, 2022, 09:32:32 PM
    They are legitimate quoad nos and de jure today.

    But it’s also possible they will be declared illegitimate in the future, and that would remove the black eye.

    So you're saying that it's possible that they will  NOT be declared illegitimate?
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feb 2nd 2022, The Day RnR Admit Antipope Francis is Not in the Church?
    « Reply #37 on: February 04, 2022, 10:06:58 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on February 04, 2022, 09:39:12 PM
    ... then they wouldn't have been legitimate popes, as per my comment.

    Disagree: They are legitimate until/unless they are declared illegitimate.
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feb 2nd 2022, The Day RnR Admit Antipope Francis is Not in the Church?
    « Reply #38 on: February 04, 2022, 10:08:22 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on February 04, 2022, 09:46:41 PM
    So you're saying that it's possible that they will  NOT be declared illegitimate?

    Certainly.

    Their legitimacy is not a conundrum for R&R as it is for sedes.
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14850
    • Reputation: +6149/-916
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feb 2nd 2022, The Day RnR Admit Antipope Francis is Not in the Church?
    « Reply #39 on: February 05, 2022, 05:38:24 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SperaInDeo on February 04, 2022, 08:40:30 PM
     You are correct. But I would like to point out that the sede interpretation of Bellarmine is actually incorrect. Bellarmine argues R&R - He said a heretical pope should be "resisted" and "who will depose him since he is a sovereign?" and "an ecuмenical council cannot even do it". If you don't believe me, then go read the pertinent chapters of "On the Roman Pontiff"

    Yet here we have laymen who will depose him, and uncharitably attack those who actually hold the position of the Saint they claim as their own. Others take it even further and make it a new dogma that you must hold and even change the canon of the Mass. How isn't that the slyest manifestation of Modernism in existence?

    All this over what? As has already been pointed out ad nauseam - there isn't a practical difference between the R&R and sede approaches to the crisis. R&R already knows that Rome has lost the Faith. They already operate outside the Conciliar Church. Maybe the sedes should go bark at the local Novus Ordo church, or FSSP if they want to evangelize. But I have a feeling evangelization isn't what this is really about...

    Quote from: DigitalLogos on February 04, 2022, 08:56:28 PM
    It's about intellectual pride; about being right more than anything. And this isn't just found on one side either, it's present on both. Which is why we can't agree to disagree until the restored Church settles the matter.
    SperaInDeo nailed it, and DigitalLogos has a great reply, and I'm willing to be corrected here, but I disagree that "this isn't just found on one side" because it is the sedes who are the ones out to prove the impossible, namely, that their opinion is most likely true, or that their opinion is indisputable fact, or heck, some sedes even elevate this opinion as being a divinely revealed dogma. And since this fact of sedeism has somehow eluded R&R, then R&R need to be convinced about it so they can accept that the heretic claiming to be pope is not the pope.

    Meanwhile, R&R fend off the opinion attempted to be forced on us and simply accept the indisputable fact that aside from keeping the faith, praying for him and not listening to him, there's nothing more we can do about heretical popes.

    What is the risk to salvation for RnR if they're wrong, and what is the risk to salvation for sedes if they're wrong?

     


     

     

    Logged
    "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 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11527
    • Reputation: +6477/-1195
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Feb 2nd 2022, The Day RnR Admit Antipope Francis is Not in the Church?
    « Reply #40 on: February 05, 2022, 06:55:07 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on February 04, 2022, 09:15:34 PM
    I've repeatedly pointed this out.  At the end of the day, if Jorge Bergoglio were running around spewing heresy in Rome, had Vatican II never happened and the NOM had never happened, I really could hardly care less.  Doesn't affect me.  Not my problem.  Let the Cardinals deal with him.  Unfortunatley due to V2 and the NOM, it became our problem.

    This isn't about personal heresy.  This isn't about personal wickedness.  This isn't even about the quarrel over the strict limits of infallibility.  It's about the indefectibility of the Church.  Archbishop Lefebvre clearly, emphatically, and repeatedly stated that this Conciliar Church lacks the marks of the One True Church.

    If the Church could teach error, teach heresy even, lead countless souls to loss of faith and loss of their souls through its official teaching, if the Church could produce a rite of public worship that offends God and cannot be attended in good conscience, our Catholic faith is in vain. What is it that we believe in?  How are we different than, say, the Old Catholics?  How are we different from the Protestants, when we say it's OK to "protest" and reject the teaching of the Church and hold that the Catholic Rite of Mass leads to impiety (a proposition of the Prots anathematized by Trent).

    Unfortunately, R&R has left many Traditional Catholics holding on to the Catholic faith only by the skin of their teeth.

    Let's throw Holy Mother Church under the bus to rescue Bergoglio.  It's more important for us to have some guy walking around dressed in white than to defend the honor and integrity of the Holy Mother Church and the prerogatives of her Magisterium.
    Exactly.  It's hard for me to believe that people are still barking up the personal heresy tree...especially those who have been a part of this debate for years.  These men aren't just guilty of personal heresy.  They teach heresy to the Universal Church since they promulgated and subsequently taught Vatican II.  If the Vicars of Christ can do such a thing with no end in sight, why aren't the Protestants correct about the Catholic belief that Our Lord gave us the Papacy?
    Logged

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11527
    • Reputation: +6477/-1195
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Feb 2nd 2022, The Day RnR Admit Antipope Francis is Not in the Church?
    « Reply #41 on: February 05, 2022, 07:13:40 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: bodeens on February 04, 2022, 09:36:32 PM
    This is why he's a bigger problem too. They might try this strategy again, by having a ridiculous apostate like JPII followed by Rat. Bergs followed by someone "more orthodox" that is another one of these shadowy modernists like Rat who had the nerve to try to deny successors to +ABL, thereby forcing his hand and the excommunications.
    I am willing to bet this is exactly what will happen when Bergoglio finally dies.  And then everyone who was finally starting to catch on will get sucked back into the Conciliar sect.  Who are the so-called conservative/traditional leaning Novus Ordo bishops these days? One of them will probably be "elected".
    Logged

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14850
    • Reputation: +6149/-916
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feb 2nd 2022, The Day RnR Admit Antipope Francis is Not in the Church?
    « Reply #42 on: February 05, 2022, 07:27:58 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on February 04, 2022, 09:15:34 PM
    I've repeatedly pointed this out.  At the end of the day, if Jorge Bergoglio were running around spewing heresy in Rome, had Vatican II never happened and the NOM had never happened, I really could hardly care less.  Doesn't affect me.  Not my problem.  Let the Cardinals deal with him.  Unfortunatley due to V2 and the NOM, it became our problem.

    This isn't about personal heresy.  This isn't about personal wickedness.  This isn't even about the quarrel over the strict limits of infallibility.  It's about the indefectibility of the Church.  Archbishop Lefebvre clearly, emphatically, and repeatedly stated that this Conciliar Church lacks the marks of the One True Church.

    If the Church could teach error, teach heresy even, lead countless souls to loss of faith and loss of their souls through its official teaching, if the Church could produce a rite of public worship that offends God and cannot be attended in good conscience, our Catholic faith is in vain.  What is it that we believe in?  How are we different than, say, the Old Catholics?  How are we different from the Protestants, when we say it's OK to "protest" and reject the teaching of the Church and hold that the Catholic Rite of Mass leads to impiety (a proposition of the Prots anathematized by Trent).

    Unfortunately, R&R has left many Traditional Catholics holding on to the Catholic faith only by the skin of their teeth.

    Let's throw Holy Mother Church under the bus to rescue Bergoglio.  It's more important for us to have some guy walking around dressed in white than to defend the honor and integrity of the Holy Mother Church and the prerogatives of her Magisterium.

    Some of this is laughable, but overall, this is a great example of the bs that R&R are stuck arguing against. 

    Logged
    "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 Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 47082
    • Reputation: +27913/-5205
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feb 2nd 2022, The Day RnR Admit Antipope Francis is Not in the Church?
    « Reply #43 on: February 05, 2022, 07:28:35 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on February 04, 2022, 10:06:58 PM
    Disagree: They are legitimate until/unless they are declared illegitimate.

    You can't retroactively determine ontology.  You're abusing and misunderstanding John of St. Thomas et al.  I urge you to look into Father Chazal's position.

    They are real legitimate popes now, but then in the future it'll be true that in the past they were not legitimate.  That's bonkers.

    It's like a marriage annulment.  Let's say a woman was baptized and got a civil marriage.  10 years later the Church declares the marriage null.  Was it legitimate during those 10 years simply because the Church didn't pronounce on it later.  Church's declaration doesn't determine the reality.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 47082
    • Reputation: +27913/-5205
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Feb 2nd 2022, The Day RnR Admit Antipope Francis is Not in the Church?
    « Reply #44 on: February 05, 2022, 07:30:13 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on February 04, 2022, 10:08:22 PM
    Certainly.

    Their legitimacy is not a conundrum for R&R as it is for sedes.

    Yeah, because some of you R&R have a heretical view of the Church.  For you it's "no problem" that the Church's Magisterium and Public Worship have become corrupt and offensive to God.  Had you spouted this nonsense during the time of St. Pius X, you would have been excommunicated so fast that your head would be spinning.
    Logged
    Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 13
    « previous next »