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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 24

Author Topic: ++Lefebvre and sedevacantism  (Read 31483 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Quo vadis Domine

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 4750
  • Reputation: +2897/-667
  • Gender: Male
Re: ++Lefebvre and sedevacantism
« Reply #105 on: October 09, 2019, 06:14:04 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: hollingsworth on October 08, 2019, 10:48:19 PM
    From Pax Let’s-make-this-real-simple Vobis:
     If a barefoot, half naked pope, clad only in animal skins, wearing a berreta festooned with goat horns, were to grab a chalice of human blood, then offer it up to the image of a demon god or goddess encircled with fire, PV would warn us solemnly not “to judge (that) pope’s status.” Only a future pope can do that. Only a future conclave can do that. Only a certified board of cardinals can do that.
    You know, PV, it’s Catholics like you who have helped catapult me into sedevacantism
    👍👍👍
    Logged
    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 Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6791
    • Reputation: +3467/-2999
    • Gender: Female
    Re: ++Lefebvre and sedevacantism
    « Reply #106 on: October 09, 2019, 06:29:06 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • No matter how bad or worse the situation with Pope Francis gets, I don't believe that it justifies the sedevacantist or sedeprivationist position. I don't think that +ABL would have accepted either position in light of Pope Francis' words and deeds.

    +ABL did not see the problem of the post-conciliar popes in the same light AT ALL, as the sedevacantists and sedeprivationists. He did not care about such things as internal and external forums. And he did not constantly accuse the popes of heresy. Error, yes; heresy; no.

    He did not want to develop a schismatic mentality, and that's one of the main reasons, IMO, that he remained attached to the Pope. +ABL understood Modernism. He understood that the post-conciliar Popes were infused with Modernism. But still, he did not want to detach himself from the Popes, no matter how crazy they got. And JP2 did a lot of crazy things that upset +ABL. But +ABL still did not adopt any view that the sedevacantists or sedeprivationists have adopted. He would never have cut himself off from the Popes, no matter what. He just did not think in those terms at all. He was French, not American (thank goodness).
    Logged
    "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 SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: ++Lefebvre and sedevacantism
    « Reply #107 on: October 09, 2019, 06:35:54 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Meg on October 09, 2019, 06:29:06 AM
    He did not want to develop a schismatic mentality, and that's one of the main reasons, IMO, that he remained attached to the Pope. +ABL understood Modernism. He understood that the post-conciliar Popes were infused with Modernism. But still, he did not want to detach himself from the Popes, no matter how crazy they got. And JP2 did a lot of crazy things that upset +ABL. But +ABL still did not adopt any view that the sedevacantists or sedeprivationists have adopted. He would never have cut himself off from the Popes, no matter what. He just did not think in those terms at all. He was French, not American (thank goodness).
    :applause:
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46916
    • Reputation: +27782/-5164
    • Gender: Male
    Re: ++Lefebvre and sedevacantism
    « Reply #108 on: October 09, 2019, 08:39:26 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Thank you, Meg, for another valuable contribution.

    We can speculate all we want about WHY +Lefebvre never came out openly as sedevacantist, but it would be nothing more than guesses.

    My sense about it is that it's more along the lines of what Father Chazal had described, that there's a certain sense that the material continuity with the pre-Vatican II hierarchy means something, the same sensibility that's behind sedeprivationism.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46916
    • Reputation: +27782/-5164
    • Gender: Male
    Re: ++Lefebvre and sedevacantism
    « Reply #109 on: October 09, 2019, 08:41:38 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Yet all you R&R refuse to address this crucial issue.

    Both +Lefebvre and +Williamson have both stated that it's possible that these men have not been legitimate popes.

    Consequently, they do not uphold the legitimacy of the V2 papal claimants as dogmatic fact.

    In order to be an actual sedeplenist, one must uphold legitimacy as dogmatic fact.

    Consequently, +Lefebvre and +Williamson were actually sede-doubtists rather than sede-plenists.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46916
    • Reputation: +27782/-5164
    • Gender: Male
    Re: ++Lefebvre and sedevacantism
    « Reply #110 on: October 09, 2019, 08:43:33 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Johnson claimed earlier on this thread that the legitimacy of the V2 papal claimants is indeed dogmatic fact.

    +Lefebvre and +Williamson have both publicly stated that it's possible that they were not legitimate popes.

    It is heresy to doubt dogma.

    Consequently, Johnson accuses +Lefebvre and +Williamson of heresy.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46916
    • Reputation: +27782/-5164
    • Gender: Male
    Re: ++Lefebvre and sedevacantism
    « Reply #111 on: October 09, 2019, 08:46:25 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: hollingsworth on October 08, 2019, 10:48:19 PM
    You know, PV, it’s Catholics like you who have helped catapult me into sedevacantism

    Well, I've actually found PV to be open-minded and sincere in his pursuit of the truth.

    But, indeed, a lot of the dogmatic R&R types like Stubborn, Meg, and SeanJohnson ... with their idiotic non-Catholic defense of R&R principles ... have driven many a Catholic to sedevacantism.

    But, please be careful not to get bitter, hollingsworth.  That's a dark place you're headed to.  Trust me.  I've been there.  You don't want to go there.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46916
    • Reputation: +27782/-5164
    • Gender: Male
    Re: ++Lefebvre and sedevacantism
    « Reply #112 on: October 09, 2019, 08:48:34 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Meg on October 09, 2019, 06:29:06 AM
    And he did not constantly accuse the popes of heresy. Error, yes; heresy; no.

    That's just a lie.  You have made yourself known for lying.  He called them apostate and not merely heretical, regularly calling them non-Catholic, schismatic, and outside the Church.
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3163
    • Gender: Male
    Re: ++Lefebvre and sedevacantism
    « Reply #113 on: October 09, 2019, 09:30:10 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on October 09, 2019, 08:48:34 AM
    That's just a lie.  You have made yourself known for lying.  He called them apostate and not merely heretical, regularly calling them non-Catholic, schismatic, and outside the Church.

    This kind of toxic malice should earn one a perma-Ban.

    Why can’t she simply have made a mistake?

    Why do you have to cast a moral judgment, and impute to her an intention to deceive?

    The rest of her post was pretty good.

    These types of rash judgments are habitual and continuous in you.

    You frequently make a fool of yourself with erroneous scattergun accusations of posts on the anonymous forum being your (many) enemies coming back post-Ban to argue with you like some kind of paranoid.

    To all who oppose Ladislaus, anathema sit!!
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Online Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12466
    • Reputation: +7915/-2449
    • Gender: Male
    Re: ++Lefebvre and sedevacantism
    « Reply #114 on: October 09, 2019, 09:39:20 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    “No layperson, priest or non-jurisdictional bishop has any canonical authority to rebuke any other catholic.....” Really? Have you ever heard of the spiritual work of mercy in which we are to admonish the sinner?

    You're equating "admonishment of a sinner" with laymen making canon law judgements?  :laugh2:
    .
    Quote
    Your erroneous idea of pertinacity being determined solely in the internal forum is certainly quite bizarre.
    I don't think you have the capacity to understand the idea of pertinacity in regards to heresy.  You continually fail to make any sense when talking about it.
    Logged

    Online Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12466
    • Reputation: +7915/-2449
    • Gender: Male
    Re: ++Lefebvre and sedevacantism
    « Reply #115 on: October 09, 2019, 09:41:49 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    You know, PV, it’s Catholics like you who have helped catapult me into sedevacantism.
    The fact that you are making emotional decisions about sedevacantism based on the actions of others, shows your views aren't grounded on facts or theological principles. 
    Logged

    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6791
    • Reputation: +3467/-2999
    • Gender: Female
    Re: ++Lefebvre and sedevacantism
    « Reply #116 on: October 09, 2019, 09:56:00 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!2
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on October 09, 2019, 09:30:10 AM
    This kind of toxic malice should earn one a perma-Ban.

    Why can’t she simply have made a mistake?

    Why do you have to cast a moral judgment, and impute to her an intention to deceive?

    The rest of her post was pretty good.

    These types of rash judgments are habitual and continuous in you.

    You frequently make a fool of yourself with erroneous scattergun accusations of posts on the anonymous forum being your (many) enemies coming back post-Ban to argue with you like some kind of paranoid.

    To all who oppose Ladislaus, anathema sit!!

    Thank you, Sean.

    The reason Ladislaus considers his opinion as de fide is that he believes that he is, in his heart, a priest (or bishop?) who has ordinary jurisdiction over everyone here. Never mind that he couldn't finish the seminary.

    He won't ever be banned.
    Logged
    "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 Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46916
    • Reputation: +27782/-5164
    • Gender: Male
    Re: ++Lefebvre and sedevacantism
    « Reply #117 on: October 09, 2019, 09:57:59 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on October 09, 2019, 09:30:10 AM
    This kind of toxic malice should earn one a perma-Ban.

    Why can’t she simply have made a mistake?

    Meg has a history here.  She regular makes stuff up out of thin air to suit her agenda.  Not unlike yourself, Johnson.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46916
    • Reputation: +27782/-5164
    • Gender: Male
    Re: ++Lefebvre and sedevacantism
    « Reply #118 on: October 09, 2019, 09:58:41 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on October 09, 2019, 08:43:33 AM
    Johnson claimed earlier on this thread that the legitimacy of the V2 papal claimants is indeed dogmatic fact.

    +Lefebvre and +Williamson have both publicly stated that it's possible that they were not legitimate popes.

    It is heresy to doubt dogma.

    Consequently, Johnson accuses +Lefebvre and +Williamson of heresy.

    I'm just bumping this post until you address it.  I know you were just dodging the problem with your "perma-ban" post.  Every time you get argued into a corner, you start calling for people to be banned.  You too have a history here.

    Basically, either you need to retract your statement that the legitimacy of the V2 papal claimants is dogmatic fact or else you need to stand by your statement and admit that +Lefebvre and +Williamson were/are heretics.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46916
    • Reputation: +27782/-5164
    • Gender: Male
    Re: ++Lefebvre and sedevacantism
    « Reply #119 on: October 09, 2019, 10:07:33 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Meg on October 09, 2019, 09:56:00 AM
    The reason Ladislaus considers his opinion as de fide is that he believes that he is, in his heart, a priest (or bishop?) who has ordinary jurisdiction over everyone here. Never mind that he couldn't finish the seminary.

    Pathetic.  Here you prove once again how you make things up as you go along, aka, lie.  I have had disagreements with people here that I respect.  You and Johnson are not among them, because you fabricate information and lie and deny truth in pursuit of your agenda.  You are not of good will and sincerely seeking the truth.  I just finished posting that, were I a priest, I would not refuse Communion to anyone who had a disagreement with any of my positions.

    Also, it's not that I COULD not finish seminary.  I simply DID not.  Have you ever heard of such a thing as discerning God's will?  I could just as easily state that you COULD not handle convent life.  Would you like to attack Matthew for being unABLE to finish seminary?  You reveal yourself for the scoundrel that you truly are with comments like that.  THIS is the kind of nonsense that has made me consider you nothing but an irritant.
    Logged
    Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 24
    « previous next »