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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 28

Author Topic: I am considering sedevacantism  (Read 23493 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DZ PLEASE

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2928
  • Reputation: +741/-787
  • Gender: Male
  • "Lord, have mercy."
Re: I am considering sedevacantism
« Reply #195 on: November 02, 2017, 06:07:51 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on November 02, 2017, 06:05:06 AM
    It all starts at the dogma. Go from there and your confused conclusion above should clear right up. All we need to do is remain the popes' good subject (but God's first), or no human creature will never make it to heaven.
    Which presupposes the very point which is under contention, which is the DEFINITION OF QUESTION BEGGING, which the LIAR, and HERETIC Stubborn, will merely obfuscate by more of same.
    Logged
    "Lord, have mercy".

    Offline DZ PLEASE

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2928
    • Reputation: +741/-787
    • Gender: Male
    • "Lord, have mercy."
    Re: I am considering sedevacantism
    « Reply #196 on: November 02, 2017, 06:10:52 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Cowards are first on Hell's waiting list.
    Logged
    "Lord, have mercy".

    Offline Recusant Sede

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 313
    • Reputation: +155/-120
    • Gender: Male
    Re: I am considering sedevacantism
    « Reply #197 on: November 02, 2017, 06:11:55 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on November 02, 2017, 06:05:06 AM
    It all starts at the dogma. Go from there and your confused conclusion above should clear right up. All we need to do is remain the popes' good subject (but God's first), or no human creature will never make it to heaven.
    I guess, according to your “logic” a great many people went to hell during the Great Western Schism for being subject to a false pope, right?
    Logged

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13823
    • Reputation: +5568/-865
    • Gender: Male
    Re: I am considering sedevacantism
    « Reply #198 on: November 02, 2017, 06:13:24 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: DZ PLEASE on November 02, 2017, 06:07:51 AM
    Which presupposes the very point which is under contention, which is the DEFINITION OF QUESTION BEGGING, which the LIAR, and HERETIC Stubborn, will merely obfuscate by more of same.
    You really are such an idiot. You think your opinion that he lost his office is a dogmatic fact - you place way, way too high a value on your own opinion. Regardless, unless you are the popes' subject, you will never make it to heaven.

    Now I completely understand that to you, this is heresy - but being that it is dogma, that fact in and of itself should tell you how screwed up you are, but you won't let it, it's much easier to spew ridiculous accusations all over the place.
    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 DZ PLEASE

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2928
    • Reputation: +741/-787
    • Gender: Male
    • "Lord, have mercy."
    Re: I am considering sedevacantism
    « Reply #199 on: November 02, 2017, 06:14:44 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on November 02, 2017, 06:13:24 AM
    You really are such an idiot. You think your opinion that he lost his office is a dogmatic fact - you place way, way too high a value on your own opinion. Regardless, unless you are the popes' subject, you will never make it to heaven.

    Now I completely understand that to you, this is heresy - but being that it is dogma, that fact in and of itself should tell you how screwed up you are, but you won't let it, it's much easier to spew ridiculous accusations all over the place.
    And there it is, the deterministic pathology of the pit.
    Logged
    "Lord, have mercy".

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13823
    • Reputation: +5568/-865
    • Gender: Male
    Re: I am considering sedevacantism
    « Reply #200 on: November 02, 2017, 06:17:59 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Recusant Sede on November 02, 2017, 06:11:55 AM
    I guess, according to your “logic” a great many people went to hell during the Great Western Schism for being subject to a false pope, right?
    That not my logic at all. Do you understand that to even compare a time when there were 3 or 4 popes running around to today when there is only one, is in fact illogical? There is no logic whatsoever in comparing the two, none whatsoever.
    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 Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13823
    • Reputation: +5568/-865
    • Gender: Male
    Re: I am considering sedevacantism
    « Reply #201 on: November 02, 2017, 06:19:34 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: DZ PLEASE on November 02, 2017, 06:14:44 AM
    And there it is, the deterministic pathology of the pit.
    Ah, see, I knew you and Freedom both agree that dogma is from the pit - by the way, how long were you a NOer? - or are you still?
    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 Recusant Sede

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 313
    • Reputation: +155/-120
    • Gender: Male
    Re: I am considering sedevacantism
    « Reply #202 on: November 02, 2017, 06:22:42 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on November 02, 2017, 06:17:59 AM
    That not my logic at all. Do you understand that to even compare a time when there were 3 or 4 popes running around to today when there is only one, is in fact illogical? There is no logic whatsoever in comparing the two, none whatsoever.
    There are several antipopes today, Bergoglio being the most prominent. What about those who are subject to “pope” Michael?
    Logged

    Offline DZ PLEASE

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2928
    • Reputation: +741/-787
    • Gender: Male
    • "Lord, have mercy."
    Re: I am considering sedevacantism
    « Reply #203 on: November 02, 2017, 06:30:09 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on November 02, 2017, 06:19:34 AM
    Ah, see, I knew you and Freedom both agree that dogma is from the pit - by the way, how long were you a NOer? - or are you still?
    Says an agent of antithesis, which means that it is a "NOer" itself, hiding behind its own accusatory, tribal finger.

    The Jєω ever wanders.
    Logged
    "Lord, have mercy".

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13823
    • Reputation: +5568/-865
    • Gender: Male
    Re: I am considering sedevacantism
    « Reply #204 on: November 02, 2017, 06:32:36 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Recusant Sede on November 02, 2017, 06:22:42 AM
    There are several antipopes today, Bergoglio being the most prominent. What about those who are subject to “pope” Michael?
    They will no doubt be lost forever if they die in that state. That is dogma.
    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 Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13823
    • Reputation: +5568/-865
    • Gender: Male
    Re: I am considering sedevacantism
    « Reply #205 on: November 02, 2017, 07:51:30 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Recusant Sede on November 02, 2017, 07:41:41 AM
    That begs the question of why does that not apply to the followers of false popes during the GWS?
    Because today and for the last 600 years, there is and has only ever been one pope at a time.
    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 Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13823
    • Reputation: +5568/-865
    • Gender: Male
    Re: I am considering sedevacantism
    « Reply #206 on: November 02, 2017, 08:02:01 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Bellator Dei on November 02, 2017, 07:42:53 AM
    You keep saying this - "All we need to do is remain the popes' good subject (but God's first)..."

    But you've admitted that you believe that the "pope" is a heretic.  

    What you're actually saying is this - "All we need to do is remain the popes' heretics' good subject (but God's first)..."

    Your mind is twisted, man, and everyone can see it but you.    
    What I am actually saying is the EXACT same thing as the dogmas and papal teachings already decreed numerous times throughout the history of the Church. I wholly surrender my opinion to the judgement of the Church, which judgement states that nobody gets into heaven who says the pope is not the pope and who is not subject to him. As you did above, you change the dogma, not me - then you claim I'm the twisted one. :confused:

    For me, I have no doubt the pope is a heretic - that and $1.00 will buy you any size coffee at McDonalds. This means that my opinion doesn't mean a hill of beans when it comes to the popes' status. God made the law, not me - but to hear you crazy sede's talk, you would think God's law is my own novel invention.



    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 Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13823
    • Reputation: +5568/-865
    • Gender: Male
    Re: I am considering sedevacantism
    « Reply #207 on: November 02, 2017, 10:03:23 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Lastdays on November 02, 2017, 09:50:44 AM
    Vatican II promotes the public expression of false religions (as long as public order is preserved) which is outright heresy and an insult to God and His religion. Therefore just by this heresy alone, Vatican II is exposed as heretical, blasphemous and non-Catholic.

    Your turn.
    Of course V2's teachings are heretical, blasphemous and non-Catholic, but it does not bind religious liberty on the whole Church, it doesn't even bind religious liberty on anyone at all.

    You may have missed this post:

    I thought perhaps you needed a little example, so here is an example of a pope binding the whole Church for all time under pain of mortal sin (anathema) - from V1:

    "Therefore, if anyone says that it is not by the institution of Christ the lord himself (that is to say, by divine law) that blessed Peter should have perpetual successors in the primacy over the whole church; or that the Roman pontiff is not the successor of blessed Peter in this primacy: let him be anathema."

    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 Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13823
    • Reputation: +5568/-865
    • Gender: Male
    Re: I am considering sedevacantism
    « Reply #208 on: November 02, 2017, 10:13:03 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Lastdays on November 02, 2017, 09:50:44 AM
    Also, all the docuмents in Vatican II were officially promulgated, and an extraordinary definition is not required from a Catholic General Council in order to require adherence. Anything declared or delivered (see the Tridentine Creed) must be also considered infallible (just in case you try to use that excuse).
    You are right, an extraordinary definition is not required to bind us, but the truth is - it is the truth that binds us, decreed through the Church, often via the pope or council. Religious liberty is false, it is a lie of liberals which can never bind anyone -  regardless of the method. It is the truth that binds us, not the method.

    Also, Pope Pius IX at V1 decreed the necessary criteria for infallibility, if those criteria are not present, then there is no infallibility - "Anything declared or delivered [from a council?]" is not found anywhere among those criteria.
    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 Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13823
    • Reputation: +5568/-865
    • Gender: Male
    Re: I am considering sedevacantism
    « Reply #209 on: November 02, 2017, 10:15:05 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Bellator Dei on November 02, 2017, 10:06:31 AM
    Right!  You subject yourself to a heretic, knowingly and willingly...it's not complicated, mate.  
    See how you twist what I said then say I'm the twisted one?

    No, not likely I guess.
    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
    Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 28
    « previous next »