Author Topic: List of Oldest living Catholic Bishops and Cardinals: (Read 9074 times)

Nishant Xavier · « **Reply #35 on:** May 26, 2020, 09:30:17 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on May 26, 2020, 09:10:24 PM

Obviously a 3-year interregnum would not end the perpetual succesion, nor a 5-year, nor one that lasts 7 years, 6 months, 3 days, 5 hours, 43 minutes, and 52 seconds. There's no way theologically to put an arbitrary TIME limit to it.

This is a textbook strawman. The limit is when all Papally appointed Bishops die. Bishops are Appointed or Consecrated around 35 and if they die around 80, that's around 45 years. There'll be outliers, so you can add 5 to 10 years at most. Beyond that is plainly ridiculous.

We're also clearly not in 3 year or 5 year or 7 year territory anymore. That ship sailed long long ago. Again, the fact that no prominent sedevacantist group at all even tried contacting these "last remaining jurisdictional Bishops" speaks volumes about how little even they believe their own position.

As for you, Liarslaus, you're just going to keep lying about others and about the Truth. Anyone who tries to enlighten you is to be pitied. You know, deep down, that you are the schismatic. That alone could explain your bizzare behavior and your ridiculous accusations.

DecemRationis · « **Reply #36 on:** May 27, 2020, 09:58:09 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on May 26, 2020, 09:01:48 PM

That is a highly unusual position, since each side typically uses their respective major to argue against the other major as a corollary.

SVs: the See must be vacant because the Magisterium cannot become this corrupt.
R&R: the Magisterium must be able to get this corrupt because the See cannot be vacant for this long.

It may be unusual, but the times are unusual.

There is not enough thinking about the cause of V2 and the Conciliar regime that has followed. A bunch of bishops appointed by Pius XII and his predecessors - an overwhelming majority of those at V2 - approved of V2 and a pope confirmed the decrees, constitutions and declarations. These men all celebrated the TLM each day they were deliberating and deciding, and V2 was what we got nonetheless despite the graces that should have come from those masses.

There is a judgment of God here, perhaps only permissive, but He was in control. Why did it happen? Cause precedes effect and there were causes for the judgment.

It is a fact that the Magisterium has become this corrupt. You can say, well, it's not the Magisterium, but that's a bit circular: the Magisterium can't X, and the thing we are considering did X, so it's not the Magisterium. Yet they WERE (the V2 prelates and those who effected the revolution) the Magisterium.

It seems to me that the facts show us that indeed the Magisterium can become "this corrupt." Fact.

A man who embraces heresy is without the Catholic faith and ipso facto outside the Church - Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, etc. So in some sense, a de jure sense, the seat can be said to be vacant, uninhabited by a man who can rightly claim the title of pope. I hesitate to adopt this position because it, also, is circular: a pope can't X, and he whom we are considering has X'd, so he's not the pope.

So both the majors of the Sedes and the R & R crowd appear to be false under the facts.

If I had to choose, I would tend to adopt the SSPX/Resistmce position, since I think it best conforms to reality, the facts: John XXIII, Paul VI, etc. were in fact popes, and the bishops responsible were duly elected bishops - the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. Yet many of their acts, decrees, etc. are maggot ridden and full of corruption - another fact.

I have no authority or position, no warrant, to speculate as to the "why" this has happened, so I don't. I keep those musings to myself in light of my lack of shall we say gravitas and authority on this point.

But I wish those who do have authority and some gravitas would start thinking about the "why" and not just moaning about the what, and simply trying to go back to 1958, with the cause still undiagnosed and waiting again to become symptomatic.

DR

DecemRationis · « **Reply #37 on:** May 27, 2020, 10:10:03 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on May 26, 2020, 09:01:48 PM

That is a highly unusual position, since each side typically uses their respective major to argue against the other major as a corollary.

SVs: the See must be vacant because the Magisterium cannot become this corrupt.
R&R: the Magisterium must be able to get this corrupt because the See cannot be vacant for this long.

Ladislaus,

This is a slight variation to one of the majors I disagreed with, what you had described the R & R major as: "the R & R major that the Holy See can't be vacant for this long."

The revised major above, the first part - "the Magisterium must be able to get this corrupt" - I agree with, and history (the facts) seems to me to have confirmed.

I quibble and disagree on saying "the See cannot be vacant for this long" because I do not believe any dogma prohibits that from being fact and reject Xavier's conclusions regarding "apostolicity" and what it requires.

MiserereMei · « **Reply #38 on:** May 27, 2020, 12:49:28 PM »

Quote from: XavierSem on May 22, 2020, 03:03:10 PM

The oldest living Bishops are mentioned here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oldest_living_Catholic_bishops_and_cardinals

This is a question to sedevacantists: Will any length of purported interregnum make you re-think whether we really are in an interregnum? Even if you think a 62-year interregnum is still possible, does a 65 or at least a 70 year interregnum stretch the limit?

Why does the time matter? Because, Bishops receive Appointment to Office by the Pope that Appoints them. Of every Bishop, it can be said, Bishop X received his Authority from Pope Y. Thus, the Apostolic Succession and the Petrine Succession are intimately connected.

Hence, it follows also from the Dogma of Apostolicity that the Church cannot be without Successors to St. Peter forever. For the Petrine Succession being thereby disrupted, the Apostolic Succession also will eventually cease, when all Papally-Appointed-Bishops finally die.

Take a look at the link. Only one Bishop was Consecrated in 1958. (That Bishop was Appointed only in 1960 per http://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bpinc.html) Only 4 living Bishops were Consecrated before 3 Jun 1963. Another 4, 8 in all, were Consecrated by 1965.

So has not the hypothesis of an interregnum or sede vacante starting in 1958, at least, been demonstrably falsified by this point? Will not the idea of a sede vacante starting in 1962 or 1965 be clearly disproven in just another few years? At some point, sedevacantism, being only a human opinion, and not a divine dogma, must give place to reason, and admit itself falsified by the length of interregnum. If it is true that the Church needs perpetual Successors to St. Peter, that She must always remain Apostolic not only in Orders but also in Jurisdiction or Apostolic Authority, and that Bishops receive Authority only from the Roman Pontiff, at the very least a 65 or 70 year interregnum with no pre-65 Bishops remaining must be adjudged impossible by Catholics conscious of these doctrines and dogmas.

Thoughts?

Papal appointment is not the same as Consecration so, even after the last Pius XII appointed bishop dies, the Apostolic Succesion will not be broken. Disciplinary laws can be void if they are impossible to follow. In an extreme scenario, should the pope and all cardinals die today, the bishops would have to elect a new pope. The law is at the service of the salvation of souls.

Struthio · « **Reply #39 on:** May 27, 2020, 07:30:58 PM »

@DecemRationis

You complain about circular reasoning with respect to your own depiction of what happened in the 1960s in Rome.

How about the follow reasoning?

Once upon a time there were a bunch of men who appeared to be bishops of the Church. They went to Rome and solemnly published a bunch of heretical docuмents. The docuмents showed that the perceived bishops were in fact heretics from the beginning or else had embraced heresy on the occasion. (Later, a tiny number of them stepped forward to publicly express their disapproval of what had been approved.)

The Magisterium of the Church didn't fail at all, while the heretics (had) lost their offices before or on the occasion.

What do you say? Circular or straight?

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: List of Oldest living Catholic Bishops and Cardinals: (Read 9074 times)

Nishant Xavier

Re: List of Oldest living Catholic Bishops and Cardinals:

DecemRationis

Re: List of Oldest living Catholic Bishops and Cardinals:

DecemRationis

Re: List of Oldest living Catholic Bishops and Cardinals:

MiserereMei

Re: List of Oldest living Catholic Bishops and Cardinals:

Struthio

Re: List of Oldest living Catholic Bishops and Cardinals: