Author Topic: Help me map the Sedevacantist world -- incl. all the freaks (Read 4579 times)

Matthew · « **on:** January 31, 2012, 02:26:11 PM »

Let's form a comprehensive list of ALL the groups/personas/movements in the Sedevacantist world.

Say a person DID want to consider Sedevacantism. If we wanted to help him, and we were totally detached/honest and wanted to be thorough, who should this person be informed about (so he could pick his "flavor") or even be warned against?

I'll start the brainstorming session:
(In no particular order)

CMRI and its allies/affiliated groups (in Mexico, etc.)
SSPV
Fr. Moderator and his dubious priesthood -- slander, etc. on Traditio
Lucio Mascarenhas and all the extreme dogmatic Sedes in India
Richard Ibranyi
Anti-Popes (Michael I, etc.)
Followers of the Siri thesis
Feeneyites
Bp. Dolan/Fr. Cekada
Bishop Sanborn & Seminary
Fr. Ramolla & Seminary
Eamon Shea/SJB
VOVwatch
John Lane, St. Robert Bellarmine forum
Omlor family
Joseph Charles McKenzie, Rob Sheehan (allies of Dolan/Cekada)
Gerry Matatics
Hutton Gibson
The Four Marks newspaper
Dr. Tom Droleskey, Christ or Chaos website
Bp. Petko
Bp. McKenna
Ryan Scott
David Landry ("CM", "Catholic Martyr") & Frank Pagnanelli -- dogmatic Sede/home-aloners; they know of no other Catholics than their two families, though they don't deny others might exist.
Dogmatic Home-aloners (all priests, even Sede, are not valid for some reason)
Dimond Brothers/Most Holy Family Monastery

Matthew · « **Reply #1 on:** January 31, 2012, 02:29:24 PM »

Quote from: s2srea

What does 'all the freaks' mean?

Pope Michael I, Dimond bros. -- extreme, not respected by most Sedes -- you get the idea.

s2srea · « **Reply #2 on:** January 31, 2012, 02:29:51 PM »

There are mexican Sede's who I believe have relations with CMRI, but are not CMRI.

MyrnaM · « **Reply #3 on:** January 31, 2012, 02:40:10 PM »

I get your point Matthew, but one good turn deserves another, now what if I wanted to join the mainstream catholic church.

I might start by looking at a directory for Catholic churches:

Novus Ordo catholics
BTW… Novus Ordo also has their share of stay at home catholics.

SSPX Ctholics
Bishop Fellay or Bishop Williamson

Charismatic/Evangelical Catholics

Eastern mystical" or "New Age" Catholicism

Liberal catholics

gαy catholics

Cultural catholics

American catholics

I bet I could break it down also to particular names just to get my list longer, but why bother.

Matthew · « **Reply #4 on:** January 31, 2012, 02:44:41 PM »

Quote from: MyrnaM

I get your point Matthew, but one good turn deserves another, now what if I wanted to join the mainstream catholic church.

I might start by looking at a directory for Catholic churches:

Novus Ordo catholics
BTW… Novus Ordo also has their share of stay at home catholics.

SSPX Ctholics

Charismatic/Evangelical Catholics

Eastern mystical" or "New Age" Catholicism

Liberal catholics

gαy catholics

Cultural catholics

American catholics

Myrna, we've been there done that. Eamon responded in almost the exact same way when I started the thread, "So you decided to be a Sedevacantist?" and listed about 3 dozen questions one pretty much has to answer (various positions, issues, cut-offs, etc. which divide the Sede world).

Nevertheless, this isn't about your good turn, it's about mine. So feel free to contribute the various personas/flavors of sedevacantism, or take it to your own thread.

That goes for every other self-conscious, defensive Sede reading this. If you're worried it might make the Sede world look like a freak show -- too bad. The truth is the truth. Most people can find this stuff out with 1/2 hour of Googling anyhow -- so it's not really a big deal.

Matthew · « **Reply #5 on:** January 31, 2012, 02:54:14 PM »

Quote from: MyrnaM

Take it to my own thread?

Sorry I must have misread, I thought this was the crisis section.

I'm not saying it doesn't belong here because it's Sede in nature.
I'm saying it doesn't belong here because it's rude to hijack a thread with irrelevant discussion.

There's a difference between "against the rules" and "rude".

Looking at the average CathInfo topic, forum etiquette seems to be lacking in a lot of members.

Catholics should possess social graces, in addition to Sanctifying Grace. The handful of saints who were gruff, blunt, or rude should not be imitated in their gruffness, bluntness, or rudeness.

It would be unjust of me to single you out -- so I'm not. I've only seen about 250+ members here that hijack threads. It's considered "bad manners", perhaps a light form of rude.

But I will say this: I've also seen MANY pagans, non-Catholics, agnostics, etc. that seem to "get" Net Etiquette. They are polite, stay on-topic, and stay on various message boards for years without ever getting kicked off. Why should Catholics lack social graces such as how to behave on a forum? The Faith sure doesn't make us impolite by its very nature...

MyrnaM · « **Reply #6 on:** January 31, 2012, 02:58:26 PM »

Your the second person today that called me rude, I better examine my conscience.

Matthew · « **Reply #7 on:** January 31, 2012, 03:11:06 PM »

I just read the Wikipedia article --

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedevacantism

I was pleasantly surprised how thorough my brainstorming session was, without looking at any websites. I guess that comes from running CathInfo for several years :wink:

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #8 on:** January 31, 2012, 03:18:29 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

CMRI and its allies/affiliated groups (in Mexico, etc.)
SSPV
Fr. Moderator and his dubious priesthood -- slander, etc. on Traditio
Lucio Mascarenhas and all the extreme dogmatic Sedes in India
Anti-Popes (Michael I, etc.)
Followers of the Siri thesis
Feeneyites
Bp. Dolan/Fr. Cekada
Bishop Sanborn & Seminary
Fr. Ramolla & Seminary
Eamon Shea/SJB
Omlor family
Joseph Charles McKenzie, Rob Sheehan (allies of Dolan/Cekada)
The Four Marks newspaper
Dr. Tom Droleskey, Christ or Chaos website
Bp. Petko
Bp. McKenna
Ryan Scott
CM ("Catholic Martyr") & Frank Pagnanelli -- dogmatic Sede/home-aloners; they know of no other Catholics than their two families, though they don't deny others might exist.
Dogmatic Home-aloners (all priests, even Sede, are not valid for some reason)
Dimond Brothers/Most Holy Family Monastery

I'm not familiar with most of the people/groups you have listed.

Of course, I would advise caution with CM and Pagnanelli, the Dimonds, home-aloners, "Pope" Michael I, and Rob Sheenan. As for everyone else, they're either ok, or I know little to nothing about them.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #9 on:** January 31, 2012, 03:19:27 PM »

Quote from: MyrnaM

Liberal catholics

gαy catholics

You can't be liberal OR gαy and be Catholic.

Matthew · « **Reply #10 on:** January 31, 2012, 03:25:12 PM »

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus

Quote from: MyrnaM
Liberal catholics

gαy catholics

You can't be liberal OR gαy and be Catholic.

I hate to paraphrase Bill Clinton, but that depends on what "Catholic" is.

Are you saying a womanizer can't be Catholic either? What about a robber?

We're not talking GOOD GUY, SAINT or IN THE STATE OF GRACE -- we're talking CATHOLIC. There's a big difference.

The Old World had things very straight -- you had plenty of men who were "bad Catholics" who left their wife, got remarried, were living in sin, etc. They had the Faith, just not Charity. Many identified themselves as Catholics, and often admitted what they were doing was wrong.

Just because you lose Sanctifying Grace (charity) doesn't necessarily mean you lose the Faith. One often leads to the other -- but they aren't intrinsically connected.

I hate to say it, but this is what Sedevacantist thinking has done to many of us. They start thinking "They're a bad guy...they're not Catholic! I cut them off. There!"
I guess you could call it a "Schismatic mentality"?

Elizabeth · « **Reply #11 on:** January 31, 2012, 03:35:27 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

I guess you could call it a "Schismatic mentality"?

And you would be correct often enough.

Too often the Church Suffering and the Church Triumphant are neglected in favor of

a bitterly zealous Church Militant.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #12 on:** January 31, 2012, 03:41:03 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

Just because you lose Sanctifying Grace (charity) doesn't necessarily mean you lose the Faith. One often leads to the other -- but they aren't intrinsically connected.

I agree that loss of charity does not mean one is not Catholic. Of course, being liberal or gαy doesn't really have much to do with charity. A gαy can't be Catholic for obvious reasons. A liberal can't be Catholic because to be liberal you would practically have to reject the Faith itself! The Catholic Faith condemns liberalism (and ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity).

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #13 on:** January 31, 2012, 03:43:46 PM »

Quote from: I

Of course, I would advise caution with CM and Pagnanelli, the Dimonds, home-aloners, "Pope" Michael I, and Rob Sheenan. As for everyone else, they're either ok, or I know little to nothing about them.

To add to my post here, I'm not a Feeney-ite or a "Sirinite", though I would only warn against people who make these positions a Dogma.

Thorn · « **Reply #14 on:** January 31, 2012, 04:55:21 PM »

Gerry Matatics and Hutton Gibson should be on the list of Sedes, too.