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

Author Topic: J’ACCUSE  (Read 11324 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 12476
  • Reputation: +7924/-2450
  • Gender: Male
Re: J’ACCUSE
« Reply #45 on: June 29, 2024, 06:34:37 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    +Sanborn is also incorrect in stating that you must say that he definitively is NOT the pope to avoid schism if you refuse communion with him.
    This is a danger all Trads face in the current Wild West.  We’ve gotten so used to being alone and independent that it’s easy to make up arbitrary “rules” in order to “explain” a unique situation (ie Vigano coming out of nowhere) which we have no resources to confirm or time to research (is Vigano really a sincere convert?  It seems too good to be true.  And, if I’m honest, an endorsement from +Williamson has lost a lot of luster because of his openness to endorse all manner of “miracles” and dubious apparitions.  +W often “wants” to believe things, so then he finds reasons to do so.  This is a real danger.)

    I don’t blame Sanborn as it’s a defense mechanism.  But he’s also wrong.  He keeps moving the goalposts because he doesn’t want to admit Vigano is right.  But I also get his “wait and see approach.”  It’s a very complex situation. 

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12476
    • Reputation: +7924/-2450
    • Gender: Male
    Re: J’ACCUSE
    « Reply #46 on: June 29, 2024, 07:23:48 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    I'm not sure who you are criticizing here (posters or clergy), but it is unfortunate that you had to "go there".
    What does this mean?

    Quote
    As a result, this thread has now gone from what started as a positive thread regarding Vigano's latest declaration to bashing anyone who has ever questioned, criticized, or doubted him.
    Maybe those who questioned, criticized or doubted did so incorrectly?  Not all questions, criticisms or doubts are legitimate or praiseworthy.

    Quote
    As a result, old concerns have been resurrected and not even by those who had them.
    How do you know this?

    Quote
    If there are posters who are not posting in this thread, it's probably because they have been silenced from doing so (Simeon was the latest poster who was silenced last week or so).
    You are a master at playing the victim. 


    Quote
    Archbishop Vigano Accused by the Vatican of the Crime of Schism - page 3 - Crisis in the Church - Catholic Info (cathinfo.com)
    Maybe Simeon will chime in again as perhaps his latest declaration may in fact answer her questions.  But the tone in this thread certainly doesn't make it inviting to do so.
    Do you and Simeon need a "safe space" thread in order to avoid "violent disagreements"?  You need to guard against using all these political-woke-speech phrases.  Not a good look.

    Quote
    A poster could say any number of positive things about Vigano, but if they do not take the party line in all things Vigano, then they are ostracized and oftentimes accused falsely. Until that behavior stops, I suspect that these sorts of threads will only have a handful of posters who will respond.
    How does one get "falsely accused" on a anonymous message board?  More victim-speak.

    Quote
    I had every intention of giving Vigano the benefit of the doubt (and happened to like what I skimmed so far in the OP), but I still hadn't closely read through the declaration.  So the reason I hadn't responded more is because I just hadn't had a good chance yet.  Given where this thread has now gone, I'm now not sure I wish to take part.
    Cry me a river.


    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11528
    • Reputation: +6477/-1195
    • Gender: Female
    Re: J’ACCUSE
    « Reply #47 on: June 29, 2024, 07:56:11 AM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
  • I'm shocked that Pax Vobis responded the way he did.  Just shocked! One of my false accusers to the rescue! :laugh1:  I'm sure another one isn't too far behind!

    No, I don't need a "safe space" otherwise I wouldn't have thousands of posts on CI, but thanks for confirming the need for my post.

    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6791
    • Reputation: +3467/-2999
    • Gender: Female
    Re: J’ACCUSE
    « Reply #48 on: June 29, 2024, 08:27:37 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0

  • Maybe those who questioned, criticized or doubted did so incorrectly?  Not all questions, criticisms or doubts are legitimate or praiseworthy.

    True. As you say, not all questions, criticisms, or doubts are legitimate or praiseworthy. But does that mean that we cannot be allowed to express questions, criticisms, or doubts? 

    "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 Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14811
    • Reputation: +6114/-913
    • Gender: Male
    Re: J’ACCUSE
    « Reply #49 on: June 29, 2024, 09:11:15 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • This is a danger all Trads face in the current Wild West.  We’ve gotten so used to being alone and independent that it’s easy to make up arbitrary “rules” in order to “explain” a unique situation (ie Vigano coming out of nowhere) which we have no resources to confirm or time to research (is Vigano really a sincere convert?  It seems too good to be true.  And, if I’m honest, an endorsement from +Williamson has lost a lot of luster because of his openness to endorse all manner of “miracles” and dubious apparitions.  +W often “wants” to believe things, so then he finds reasons to do so.  This is a real danger.)

    I don’t blame Sanborn as it’s a defense mechanism.  But he’s also wrong.  He keeps moving the goalposts because he doesn’t want to admit Vigano is right.  But I also get his “wait and see approach.”  It’s a very complex situation.
    I won't admit he, or any sede is right, or even that they're likely right because first, I have no reason to say any such a thing, no reason whatsoever - and neither does anyone else for that matter even tho it is apparent that to sedes, such a thought is akin to heresy.
     Second, it (sedeism) is only his and their opinion, just their lowly, totally biased opinion and nothing more, and it is based on a confused idea of papal infallibility, papal authority, and heresy.

    For me, what I believe is that the truth stated below succinctly covers the whole issue, for me. I understand it does not do the same for you and the others, but it pretty much covers the whole issue for me....

     "...If these two Doctrines [Infallibility and Indefectibility] be true, then whatever the popes have said or done, whatever they ever say or do, will not be a violation of the Church's attribute of infallibility. And no matter what anyone does, whether from within or without, he will not succeed in destroying the Church. The enemies of Christ's Church do not believe this, which explains why they will never cease to try..." - Fr. Wathen from his book: Who Shall Ascend?
    "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: 46923
    • Reputation: +27795/-5167
    • Gender: Male
    Re: J’ACCUSE
    « Reply #50 on: June 29, 2024, 11:13:58 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • I don’t blame Sanborn as it’s a defense mechanism.  But he’s also wrong.  He keeps moving the goalposts because he doesn’t want to admit Vigano is right.  But I also get his “wait and see approach.”  It’s a very complex situation.

    I'm just perplexed by Bishop Sanborn's insistence that one has to have a basically dogmatic certainty regarding the illegitimacy of a pope in order to be absolved of schism when SURELY after all these years he knows 1) the teaching of the Canonists that it suffices to have a well-founded doubt about legitimacy to avoid being a schismatic and 2) the maxim Papa dubius, nullus papa. "a doubtful pope is no pope" (which mean that, in the practical order, he lacks authority due to the doubt about his legitimacy ... even if it turns out in the end that he was legitimate).  Bishop Sanborn has been dealing with these ideas for decades and surely couldn't be ignorant of them.

    I think that he got off on a tangent when he railed against what he called "Opinionism" many years ago, thereby putting forth the manifesto for dogmatic sedevacantism.  But he erred in failing to distinguish between the different types of certainty.  Father Jenkins called him out for this also.

    I am MORALLY certain that Jorge is not the pope, but until the Church's authority intervenes, I can never be DOGMATICALLY certain, regardless of how good a syllogism I come up with.  So one of the premises of such a syllogism is that Vatican II taught serious error to the Church.  How did I come up with this conclusion?  By my own judgment.  So all the premises of the SV position lack the Church's authority and therefore simply cannot be dogmatic.

    Offline Catholic Knight

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 802
    • Reputation: +238/-82
    • Gender: Male
    Re: J’ACCUSE
    « Reply #51 on: June 29, 2024, 11:20:34 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • I am MORALLY certain that Jorge is not the pope, but until the Church's authority intervenes, I can never be DOGMATICALLY certain.....

    Correct.

    Offline Giovanni Berto

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1396
    • Reputation: +1136/-88
    • Gender: Male
    Re: J’ACCUSE
    « Reply #52 on: June 29, 2024, 11:45:17 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • I'm not sure who you are criticizing here (posters or clergy), but it is unfortunate that you had to "go there".

    As a result, this thread has now gone from what started as a positive thread regarding Vigano's latest declaration to bashing anyone who has ever questioned, criticized, or doubted him. As a result, old concerns have been resurrected and not even by those who had them.

    If there are posters who are not posting in this thread, it's probably because they have been silenced from doing so (Simeon was the latest poster who was silenced last week or so). 

    Archbishop Vigano Accused by the Vatican of the Crime of Schism - page 3 - Crisis in the Church - Catholic Info (cathinfo.com)

    Maybe Simeon will chime in again as perhaps his latest declaration may in fact answer her questions.  But the tone in this thread certainly doesn't make it inviting to do so.

    A poster could say any number of positive things about Vigano, but if they do not take the party line in all things Vigano, then they are ostracized and oftentimes accused falsely. Until that behavior stops, I suspect that these sorts of threads will only have a handful of posters who will respond.

    I had every intention of giving Vigano the benefit of the doubt (and happened to like what I skimmed so far in the OP), but I still hadn't closely read through the declaration.  So the reason I hadn't responded more is because I just hadn't had a good chance yet.  Given where this thread has now gone, I'm now not sure I wish to take part.
     This is my post:

    Quote
    If Abp. Vigano becomes the leading Sedevacantist bishop, the existing groups will become weaker. There is a lot of "clan mentality" in Tradieland.

    Plus, I get the impression that he is not taken very seriously by Traditionalists in general because he is a former Novus Ordo prelate.

    On the first paragraph I affirm that the existing Sedevacantist groups will become weaker, if a stronger Sedevacantist leader emerges. Then I comment that Traditionalists groups tend to have rivalries. This is something pretty obvious.

    The "clan mentality" criticism is aimed specially at the clergy, since, as Abp. Lefebvre said, those who are in the top influence those who are in the bottom, and not the other way around.

    I sincerely think that we have way too much anathemas going on on Tradieland, and this is not helping anybody. If somebody is offended by this opinion, clergy or laity, I am sincerely not sorry.

    On the second paragraph I share my opinion on why some (or most) Traditionalists don't take Abp. Vigano very seriously.

    I really don't understand how this post is taking the thread to the wrong direction or encouraging people to bash one another. :confused:


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46923
    • Reputation: +27795/-5167
    • Gender: Male
    Re: J’ACCUSE
    « Reply #53 on: June 29, 2024, 12:20:44 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • I decided to watch Taylor Marshall's video on the matter.  Marshall was admittedly not prepared for the video, so I spent my time watching the comments scrolling by.  To my surprise, easily 90%+ of those who posted there were agreeing with +Vigano, saying Bergoglio is a Masonic infiltrator and not the Pope, and many saying they wished that +Vigano was pope.  Quite a few are also saying that Ratzinger was just as bad.

    This speaks to the influence that +Vigano is having on the "conservative Conciliar" crowd.

    EDIT:  As I keep watching, it's at least 95% denouncing Jorge as not Catholic, Mason, Communist, One World Order, asking "name one thing that Bergoglio has said or done that's legitimately Catholic."  It's a floodgate of support for +Vigano on the live-stream chat.  Quite a few also attacking Roncalli/Montini:  "Roncalli and Montini were both apostates."

    I am very encouraged by the feedback I'm seeing, which shows overwhelming support for +Vigano and denouncing Bergoglio.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46923
    • Reputation: +27795/-5167
    • Gender: Male
    Re: J’ACCUSE
    « Reply #54 on: June 29, 2024, 12:45:48 PM »
  • Thanks!4
  • No Thanks!0
  • Now Marshall is citing SSPX's repudiation of +Vigano.  Disgusting monstrosity the SSPX have become where they can be quoted as supporting the apostate Bergoglio against +Vigano.

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12476
    • Reputation: +7924/-2450
    • Gender: Male
    Re: J’ACCUSE
    « Reply #55 on: June 29, 2024, 02:44:47 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    I'm just perplexed by Bishop Sanborn's insistence that one has to have a basically dogmatic certainty regarding the illegitimacy of a pope in order to be absolved of schism
    Yeah.  He could’ve easily said “Vigano is correct on his conclusion here.  That’s a good sign for our views if a life-long V2 catholic converts, and finally sees conciliarism as schism.  The more people with various backgrounds who agree on something, the stronger is the conclusion.”

    This isn’t an endorsement of Vigano but simply an agreement.  Why is this so difficult?


    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12476
    • Reputation: +7924/-2450
    • Gender: Male
    Re: J’ACCUSE
    « Reply #56 on: June 29, 2024, 02:47:25 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0

  • Quote
    Now Marshall is citing SSPX's repudiation of +Vigano.
    Gatekeepers gonna gate keep.  Gotta make that $

    Offline Cera

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6618
    • Reputation: +3036/-1586
    • Gender: Female
    • Pray for the consecration of Russia to Mary's I H
    Re: J’ACCUSE
    « Reply #57 on: June 29, 2024, 02:55:44 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • He should try to unite all trads. Somebody should.
    Michael Matt tried that and learned that Trads are wont to form a circle and shoot.
    Let us pray for +Vigano.
    Pray for the consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary

    Offline Cera

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6618
    • Reputation: +3036/-1586
    • Gender: Female
    • Pray for the consecration of Russia to Mary's I H
    Re: J’ACCUSE
    « Reply #58 on: June 29, 2024, 03:17:26 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Vigano is a consolation to those of us who have been betrayed.
    Pray for the consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46923
    • Reputation: +27795/-5167
    • Gender: Male
    Re: J’ACCUSE
    « Reply #59 on: June 29, 2024, 03:20:03 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Michael Matt tried that and learned that Trads are wont to form a circle and shoot.
    Let us pray for +Vigano.

    Matt's "unite the clans" blew up because he was trying to "unite" people that are completely divided in their principles, the conservative Conciliars and then various flavors of Trads.  Despite the fact that they all attend the Tridentine Mass, in terms of doctrine, they're completely at odds.  This proves again that the Crisis is about doctrine and not smells and bells, and attempting to unite people around externals is doomed to fail.  But then Matt had financial motives for attempting to do so.

    Now that +Vigano has declared Bergoglio to be an Anti-Pope, he's being jettisoned by the SSPX.  That's why Jorge needs the SSPX, since he has them under control.  It's sad when someone like Taylor Marshall (and his audience) are more open to +Vigano than the SSPX.