Author Topic: List of Oldest living Catholic Bishops and Cardinals: (Read 6423 times)

DecemRationis · « **Reply #60 on:** May 30, 2020, 06:41:15 AM »

Quote from: Struthio on May 29, 2020, 02:34:40 PM

I agree.

But I don't say that this happened.

You say that the Fathers of the robber council were universally recognized as the living Magisterium of the Catholic Church, hence the living Magisterium (would have) set forth the (heretical) docuмents of that robber council.

I say:

a) The Fathers of the robber council were recognized as the living Magisterium of the Catholic Church by an overwhelming majority of Catholics, but that does not prove that there were no heretics among them.

b) The Fathers of the robber council were recognized as the living Magisterium of the Catholic Church by an overwhelming majority of Catholics, but whatever, all who approve heresy (already are or) in the process become heretics.

Excommunication for heresy or apostasy ipso facto or latae sententiae is a consequence of divine law, which exactly makes sure that no heretic ever is a member of the Church, much less has an office in the Church.

There is no circle in my reasoning. You confuse your ideas with mine. And you confuse "universal recognition as the living Magisterium" with actually holding the office.

Quote from: Struthio on May 29, 2020, 02:34:40 PM

I agree.

But I don't say that this happened.

You say that the Fathers of the robber council were universally recognized as the living Magisterium of the Catholic Church, hence the living Magisterium (would have) set forth the (heretical) docuмents of that robber council.

I say:

a) The Fathers of the robber council were recognized as the living Magisterium of the Catholic Church by an overwhelming majority of Catholics, but that does not prove that there were no heretics among them.

b) The Fathers of the robber council were recognized as the living Magisterium of the Catholic Church by an overwhelming majority of Catholics, but whatever, all who approve heresy (already are or) in the process become heretics.

Excommunication for heresy or apostasy ipso facto or latae sententiae is a consequence of divine law, which exactly makes sure that no heretic ever is a member of the Church, much less has an office in the Church.

There is no circle in my reasoning. You confuse your ideas with mine. And you confuse "universal recognition as the living Magisterium" with actually holding the office.

In other words, you're saying that a moral unanimity of the bishops elected by true pontiffs of the Catholic Church in union with a pope elected and recognized by those bishops and the Church at large can become heretics or formally adopt heresy and preach it to the Church via ecuмenical council.

I say the doctrine of indefectibility as theologically adopted by the theologians of the Church (exhibited in the quote from Pius IX in Etsi Multa), if it has any value or meaning at all, means the Holy Ghost would prevent this. That is the whole point of the doctrine and the assurance it attempts to provided for our "obedience."

Otherwise, you simply have a shell game of sorts with words: the shell being the magisterium, the marble or coin under it the word "indefectibility." You try to do away with the problem of explaining how the coin (indefectibility) could vanish from under the shell (the magisterium) by simply making both the shell and indefectibility both disappear by whispering the word, "heresy." That explains the separation of the coin from under the shell, but then you're left with explaining the disappearance of both . . . and you can't.

Well, you could by saying it's " sui generis," an outrider from the way shells and coins under them act in the usual course without the miraculous intervention of the hand of God - an end times fulfillment of prophecy, an aberration foretold by Scripture that is an exception to the otherwise true and governing principle or rule, like a man being a God, a virgin birth, a chosen or elected one being lost (Judas) . . . or the indefectible Magisterium of the Catholic Church becoming defectible.

Knowing you and your wisdom in this area, I'd thought you'd go there, Struthio.

That would make a lot more sense to me, and would move this discussion onto another level that I fear to tread on.

But you want to stick with the theory of an always (NO EXCEPTIONS - not even a Scripturally forecast, divine, miraculous exception to the general spiritual law, like miraculous exceptions to the otherwise true "laws of nature") indefectible body of pope/moral unanimity of bishops in the Catholic Church to preserve your understanding of indefectibility, creating a tension between fact and reality.

Well, this is the way I see it: they were the Magisterium AND a bunch of heretics. This would be a contradiction if it weren't foretold in Scripture as an exception, as a miraculous (a "wonder" in Biblical terminology) departure from a true principle, the otherwise normal indefectiblity of the Magsterium - like the sun standing still in the sky, a man normally being just human, a virgin not giving birth, and one of the chosen/elect not being lost.

Seen this way, there is no divergence between fact (the Catholic Church and its magisterium post-V2) and the law (indefectibility), and you'd have an explanation that makes "sense," in a miraculous way.

I think, ultimately, you and I agree about the crisis and what it means - a divine end game. We just disagree on terminology or how we would explain or describe it.

2Vermont · « **Reply #61 on:** May 30, 2020, 07:33:43 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on May 29, 2020, 04:24:15 PM

This question has been discussed before for pages. During time of papal vacancy jurisdiction does not cease, as, according to theologians, Christ provides jurisdiction to the Church to continue her mission, in all areas that are not reserved to the Pope. According to the theologians cited by the sedevacantists, Christ would supply jurisdiction to the Church even through an anti-Pope through "color of title".

I think the issue is that Xavier asserts that both are needed for Apostolic Succession for the sede bishops, but seems to think it doesn't apply to the bishops that come from the SSPX. Or at least that's what it seems.....maybe he could clarify.

Struthio · « **Reply #62 on:** May 30, 2020, 10:06:22 AM »

Quote from: DecemRationis on May 30, 2020, 06:41:15 AM

Otherwise, you simply have a shell game of sorts with words: the shell being the magisterium, the marble or coin under it the word "indefectibility."

Quote from: DecemRationis

Quote from: Pius IX, Etsi multa
They obstinately reject and oppose the infallible magisterium both of the Roman Pontiff and of the whole Church in teaching matters. Incredibly, they boldly affirm that the Roman Pontiff and all the bishops, the priests and the people conjoined with him in the unity of faith and communion fell into heresy when they approved and professed the definitions of the Ecuмenical Vatican Council. Therefore they deny also the indefectibility of the Church and blasphemously declare that it has perished throughout the world and that its visible Head and the bishops have erred. They assert the necessity of restoring a legitimate episcopacy ...

Pius IX clearly states that to deny the indefectibility of the Church it is sufficient to state a) "that the Roman Pontiff and all the bishops, the priests and the people conjoined with him in the unity of faith and communion fell into heresy" or in other words, to state b) "that the Church has perished throughout the world and that its visible Head and the bishops have erred".

I neither state a) nor b).

I state that a) is not the case, since not all clerus and laity fell into heresy.

I state that b) is not the case, since the Church has not perished throughout the world.

And then Pius IX says:

Quote from: Pius IX, Etsi multa

They assert the necessity of restoring a legitimate episcopacy in the person of their pseudo-bishop, who has entered not by the gate but from elsewhere like a thief or robber and calls the damnation of Christ upon his head.

I don't assert the necessity of restoring a legitimate episcopacy. I believe we're witnessing the consummation of the age.

Quote from: DecemRationis on May 30, 2020, 06:41:15 AM

an end times fulfillment of prophecy, an aberration foretold by Scripture that is an exception to the otherwise true and governing principle or rule [...] Knowing you and your wisdom in this area, I'd thought you'd go there, Struthio.

Why not simply read the rest of Etsi multa? Pius IX quotes St. Augustine:

Quote from: Pius IX

“The Church cries to her Spouse: Why do certain men withdrawing from me murmur against me? Why do these lost men claim that I have perished? Announce to me the length of my days, how long I will be in this world? Tell me on account of those who say: it was and is no longer; on account of those who say: the scriptures have been fulfilled, all nations have believed, but the Church has apostatized and perished from all nations. And He announced and the voice was not vain. What did He announce? ‘Behold I am with you all days even to the consummation of the world.’ Moved by your voices and your false opinions, it asked of God that He announce to it the length of its days and it found that God said ‘Behold I am with you all days even to the consummation of the world.’ Here you will say: He spoke about us; we are as we will be until the end of the world. Christ Himself is asked; He says ‘and this gospel will be preached in the whole world, in testimony to all nations, and then will come the end.’ Therefore the Church will be among all nations until the end of the world. Let heretics perish as they are, and let them find that they become what they are not.”

https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius09/p9etsimu.htm

For a better translation and more of St Augustin see: newadvent.org, paragraphs 25 and 26.

The point of Pius IX is that the Old Catholics, starting a new Church and a new hierarchy with the pseudo-bishop Joseph Hubert Reinkens, imply the defection of the Church inmidst of the age. Pius IX does not say that there will be no great apostasy at the end, at the consummation of the world. On the contrary:

Quote from: St. Augustine, see newadvent.org (link above)

Declare unto me, how long I shall be in this world: on account of those who say, "She has been," and is no more: on account of those who say, The Scriptures are fulfilled, all nations have believed [Mt 24,14], but the Church has become apostate, and has perished from among all nations....

26. Do you see not that there are still nations among whom the Gospel has not been preached?

St. Augustine, and Piux IX quoting him, clearly imply that a great apostaty at the consummation of the age, when the Gospel has been preached to all nations, is to be expected.

DecemRationis · « **Reply #63 on:** May 31, 2020, 08:19:33 AM »

Quote

Pius IX clearly states that to deny the indefectibility of the Church it is sufficient to state a) "that the Roman Pontiff and all the bishops, the priests and the people conjoined with him in the unity of faith and communion fell into heresy" or in other words, to state b) "that the Church has perished throughout the world and that its visible Head and the bishops have erred".

I neither state a) nor b).

Struthio,

Come on. You end the quote after the word "heresy," when the pope said this in full:

Quote

"They obstinately reject and oppose the infallible magisterium both of the Roman Pontiff and of the whole Church in teaching matters. Incredibly, they boldly affirm that the Roman Pontiff and all the bishops, the priests and the people conjoined with him in the unity of faith and communion fell into heresy when they approved and professed the definitions of the Ecuмenical Vatican Council."

You left out the part in red. You do say that the pope and bishops "fell into heresy when they approved and professed the definitions of the Vatican Council," don't you? If so, this is a pretty paltry attempt at evasion by stopping at the word "heresy" in the quote, as if you're not disagreeing with the pope here because you think a few bishops didn't fall into heresy. I think you indeed do state "a)" if the pope is accurately quoted.

The pope is saying that if you think that the pontiff and the bishops "fell into heresy when they approved and professed the definitions of the Ecuмenical Vatican Council" - and again, I believe you do, but correct me if I'm wrong - then, as a necessary consequence of that thought, you "[t]herefore . . . deny also the indefectibility of the Church and blasphemously declare that it has perished throughout the world and that its visible Head and the bishops have erred."

You can deny all you want, but according to Pope Pius IX, if you say Vatican II proclaims heresy - and, again, let me know if you don't - then you have denied the indefectibility of the Church - according to Pius IX in Etsi Multa.

Quote

And then Pius IX says:

Quote from: Pius IX, Etsi multa
Quote
They assert the necessity of restoring a legitimate episcopacy in the person of their pseudo-bishop, who has entered not by the gate but from elsewhere like a thief or robber and calls the damnation of Christ upon his head.

I don't assert the necessity of restoring a legitimate episcopacy. I believe we're witnessing the consummation of the age.

I agree, you don't assert that necessity. But that necessity, in context, clearly arose (and would arise) if the Church defected by and through "the Roman Pontiff and all the bishops, the priests and the people conjoined with him in the unity of faith and communion fell into heresy when they approved and professed the definitions of the Ecuмenical Vatican Council."

The only reasons you don't assert that necessity is because "we're witnessing the consummation of the age." The divine end game. As I said, a divine departure from the general law or rule of the indefectibility of the Magisterium, so that the Magisterium could in this Biblically based and prophesied exception "approve and profess" heresy at an ecuмenical council.

Just as God doesn't disaffirm or contradict the laws of nature or science when He supernaturally abrogates them to achieve a miracle or wonder He has decreed to happen. If I were God and said a stone will fall when dropped but on day X and for 70 years thereafter a particular stone is going to float in mid-air I would not be making void the law of gravity that otherwise prevails for the rest of time outside of those 70 years.

The Magisterium is indefectible, but God has arranged for a wondrous - not in a positive sense - exception at the "end of the age."

Quote

Pius IX does not say that there will be no great apostasy at the end, at the consummation of the world. On the contrary:

Quote from: St. Augustine, see newadvent.org (link above)
Quote
Declare unto me, how long I shall be in this world: on account of those who say, "She has been," and is no more: on account of those who say, The Scriptures are fulfilled, all nations have believed [Mt 24,14], but the Church has become apostate, and has perished from among all nations....

26. Do you see not that there are still nations among whom the Gospel has not been preached?

St. Augustine, and Piux IX quoting him, clearly imply that a great apostaty at the consummation of the age, when the Gospel has been preached to all nations, is to be expected.

I never said Pius IX said there would be no great apostasy at the consummation. But more importantly for this discussion about indefectibility, he also didn't say it would happen, or that he believe it would.

And I agree with you about the great apostasy at the consummation of the age. We've discussed this before:

https://www.cathinfo.com/the-sacred-catholic-liturgy-chant-prayers/vatican-council-says-there-will-be-shepherds-'usque-ad-consummationem-saeculi'/60/

Struthio · « **Reply #64 on:** May 31, 2020, 09:54:58 AM »

Quote from: DecemRationis on May 31, 2020, 08:19:33 AM

Come on. You end the quote after the word "heresy," when the pope said this in full: [...] You left out the part in red.

My point there was, that I don't say that all the priests and the people fell into heresy with the bishops of the hierarchy. But now I see that Pius IX is not speaking about all priests and people, but about all priests and people minus those calling themselves Old Catholics.

I retract the first part of my post. My main point is in the second part, anyway.

If we only look at the two sentences Incredibly, they boldly affirm ... Therefore they deny also the indefectibility of the Church ..., then we might conclude that the problem of the Old Catholics is to state that the whole Church (except a few Old Catholics) has defected. But if we read on in Etsi multa, including the following paragraphs, we can see that Pius IX and St. Augustine do not have any problem with a major defection as asserted by the Old Catholics or the Donatists in principle. Their objection rather is that such a defection may only happen at the consummation of the age.

In the Donatist case, St Augustine argues that the consummation of the age has not yet come since the gospel of the kingdom has not yet been preached in the whole world (Mt 24,14).

In the Old Catholics case, Pius IX argues that the Old Catholics themselves imply that the consummation of the age has not yet come, since they start a new hierarchy with their pseudo-bishop Joseph Hubert Reinkens.

Pius IX is quoting St Augustine who is commenting on Psalm 101(102)

Quote from: Book of Psalms, Psalm 101

[25] Call me not away in the midst of my days: thy years are unto generation and generation.

http://www.drbo.org/drl/chapter/21101.htm

St. Augustine comments:

Quote from: St. Augustine, Exposition on Psalm 102

27. Let not therefore heretics flatter themselves against me, because I said, "the shortness of my days," as if they would not last down to the end of the world. For what has he added? "O my God, take me not away in the midst of my days" Psalm 101:24. Deal Thou not with me according as heretics speak. Lead me on unto the end of the world, not only to the middle of my days; and finish my short days, that You may afterwards grant unto me eternal days.

https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1801102.htm

The objection of St. Augustine against the Donatists, with respect to the question of indefectibility of the Church, is clear: They can't say that the Church fell in apostasy in the midst of her days. They can't say on the one hand that the Church fell in apostasy, and on the other hand see themselves as the continuation of the Church.

Same thing with the Old Catholics. By starting a new hierarchy, they undertake to continue the Church and thus allege a defection in the midst of her days.

In addition to the statements of the Vatican Council that there will be shepherds and a Pope usque ad consummationem saeculi, Pius IX says in Etsi multa that the problem of the Donatists and the Old Catholics is, that they assert a virtually universal apostasy before the consummation of the age.

DecemRationis · « **Reply #65 on:** May 31, 2020, 01:50:13 PM »

Quote from: Struthio on May 31, 2020, 09:54:58 AM

My point there was, that I don't say that all the priests and the people fell into heresy with the bishops of the hierarchy. But now I see that Pius IX is not speaking about all priests and people, but about all priests and people minus those calling themselves Old Catholics.

I retract the first part of my post. My main point is in the second part, anyway.

If we only look at the two sentences Incredibly, they boldly affirm ... Therefore they deny also the indefectibility of the Church ..., then we might conclude that the problem of the Old Catholics is to state that the whole Church (except a few Old Catholics) has defected. But if we read on in Etsi multa, including the following paragraphs, we can see that Pius IX and St. Augustine do not have any problem with a major defection as asserted by the Old Catholics or the Donatists in principle. Their objection rather is that such a defection may only happen at the consummation of the age.

In the Donatist case, St Augustine argues that the consummation of the age has not yet come since the gospel of the kingdom has not yet been preached in the whole world (Mt 24,14).

In the Old Catholics case, Pius IX argues that the Old Catholics themselves imply that the consummation of the age has not yet come, since they start a new hierarchy with their pseudo-bishop Joseph Hubert Reinkens.

Pius IX is quoting St Augustine who is commenting on Psalm 101(102)
http://www.drbo.org/drl/chapter/21101.htm

St. Augustine comments:
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1801102.htm

The objection of St. Augustine against the Donatists, with respect to the question of indefectibility of the Church, is clear: They can't say that the Church fell in apostasy in the midst of her days. They can't say on the one hand that the Church fell in apostasy, and on the other hand see themselves as the continuation of the Church.

Same thing with the Old Catholics. By starting a new hierarchy, they undertake to continue the Church and thus allege a defection in the midst of her days.

In addition to the statements of the Vatican Council that there will be shepherds and a Pope usque ad consummationem saeculi, Pius IX says in Etsi multa that the problem of the Donatists and the Old Catholics is, that they assert a virtually universal apostasy before the consummation of the age.

Struthio,

You're arguing with a very tight rubber band.

The only thing that Pius IX is clearly saying is that to say that the pope and the bishops in union with him have affirmed heresy in an ecuмencial council is to declare that the Church has defected.

While you, and I, appear to agree now (see below) that this is prophesied, there is nothing in Etsi Multa to indicate that Pius IX agrees with that, and that he would not be of the opinion, the accepted and taken-for-granted opinion - some would say dogma, but I would disagree - that the "pope and all the bishops in union with him" could never, NEVER defect in the manner Pius Ix described, not in the middle of the age, nor the end of the age.

Now, show me somewhere where Pius IX actually agrees or concedes that there will be a defection at the end of the age.

And . . . you were first arguing there wasn't such a defection, 'cause them guys weren't "popes" and that wasn't, and what we have now isn't, the Magisterium. Are you now arguing that the Magisterium can indeed defect, but only at the end of the age as permitted by God and prophesied? That was my argument that you dissented from.

DR

Struthio · « **Reply #66 on:** June 01, 2020, 01:00:30 PM »

Quote from: DecemRationis on May 31, 2020, 01:50:13 PM

The only thing that Pius IX is clearly saying is that to say that the pope and the bishops in union with him have affirmed heresy in an ecuмencial council is to declare that the Church has defected.

In the Latin original of Etsi multa we have a single sentence concerning the indefectibility and the new hierarchy:

Quote from: Pius IX, Etsi multa luctuosa

Eapropter denegant etiam indefectibilitatem Ecclesiae, blasphemantes ipsam in toto periisse mundo, proindeque visibile eius Caput et Episcopos defecisse : ex quo sibi ferunt necessitatem impositam legitimi episcopatus instaurandi in suo pseudo-episcopo [...]

Quote from: Pius IX, Etsi multa luctuosa

For that reason, they additionaly deny the indefectibility of the Church, blaspheming that the same would have perished throughout the world, and accordingly its visible Head and the bishops would have erred : wherefore they assert a self imposed necessity to restore the legitimate episcopate in their pseudo-Bishop

etiam here means additionally, since the word deny occurs for the first time. Before, the Old Catholics reject, oppose, boldly affirm, etc. But that's not all, they also deny the indefectibility. In what way do they deny the indefectibility? They do it by saying that the Church has perished, Pope and bishops have erred, and the legitimate episcopate has to be restored.

(They don't do it by saying that the Church has perished, Pope and bishops have erred, and the consummation of the age has begun.)

Quote from: DecemRationis on May 31, 2020, 01:50:13 PM

Now, show me somewhere where Pius IX actually agrees or concedes that there will be a defection at the end of the age.

Pius IX concedes that there ~~will~~ may be a defection at the end of the age in the following way:

Pius IX compares the Old Catholics to the Donatists and adopts the reasoning of St Augustine. Augustine interprets the Psalm Call me not away in the midst of my days and tells the Donatists that they can't state that the Church has apostatized, since the consummation of the age has not yet come. How could the Donatists know that (at that time) the consummation of the age had not yet come? Augustine says: Non vides adhuc esse gentes in quibus nondum est praedicatum Evangelium? (Do you see not that there are still nations among whom the Gospel has not been preached?) This refers to Mt 24,14:

Quote from: Mt 24

[14] And this gospel of the kingdom, shall be preached in the whole world, for a testimony to all nations, and then shall the consummation come. [15] When therefore you shall see the abomination of desolation [...]

Augustine's reasoning is: An apostasy is not expected before the consummation of the age (i.e. in the midst of her days). Augustine therefore implicitly concedes, that an apostasy may happen at the consummation of the age.

P.S.: St Augustine elsewhere reckons with an apostasy at the consummation of the age. He comments on 2 Thess 2:

Quote from: St. Augustine, book 20, chapter 19 of De Civitate Dei

unless he first came who is called the apostate — apostate, to wit, from the Lord God. [...] And on this account some think that in this passage Antichrist means not the prince himself alone, but his whole body, that is, the mass of men who adhere to him, along with him their prince; [...] But others think that the words, "You know what withholds," and "The mystery of iniquity works," refer only to the wicked and the hypocrites who are in the Church, until they reach a number so great as to furnish Antichrist with a great people, and that this is the mystery of iniquity, because it seems hidden;

P.P.S.: With respect to my translation above: The word eapropter occurs in the encyclical Quanta cura of the same Pope Pius IX. vatican.va has an Italian translation where eapropter is translated as conseguentemente that's consequently. The English translation on papalencyclicals.net has for this reason.
The expression ex quo is used twice in Quanta cura. Translations are whereof or from which.

vatican.va: Quanta cura, Latin
vatican.va: Quanta cura, Italian
papalencyclicals.net: Quanta cura, English

Struthio · « **Reply #67 on:** June 01, 2020, 01:18:35 PM »

Quote from: DecemRationis on May 31, 2020, 01:50:13 PM

And . . . you were first arguing there wasn't such a defection, 'cause them guys weren't "popes" and that wasn't, and what we have now isn't, the Magisterium. Are you now arguing that the Magisterium can indeed defect, but only at the end of the age as permitted by God and prophesied?

I still say that each single Father of the robber council (with very few exceptions) was ipso facto excommunicated and lost his office. Hence, the docuмents were not presented by the Magisterium, but by a bunch of non-Catholics. On the one hand, the vast majority of Catholics including shepherds defected. On the other hand, it is not the case that the Magisterium of the Church ever taught heresy.

Aristotl · « **Reply #68 on:** June 01, 2020, 03:27:09 PM »

I'm new to this argument but when John XXIII abrogated back past the Council of Trent this became a new church. Yes, there were 33 Bishops that refused to attend the Council due to this abrogation. The problem I have is Thuc and the others that attended this Robber Council (Vatican II) let John XXIII have a pass at the destruction of the Church and blamed Paul VI for everything. On a separate note, PiusIX had known of the message of Our of La Salette. He understood Rome would lose the Faith and become the seat of the antichrist. Even Pope Pius XII did everything he could to preserve the Church. It goes to show when so-called traditionalists attack him that they are no different than the Novus Ordo church.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #69 on:** June 01, 2020, 03:41:13 PM »

Quote from: Aristotl on June 01, 2020, 03:27:09 PM

I'm new to this argument but when John XXIII abrogated back past the Council of Trent this became a new church. Yes, there were 33 Bishops that refused to attend the Council due to this abrogation. The problem I have is Thuc and the others that attended this Robber Council (Vatican II) let John XXIII have a pass at the destruction of the Church and blamed Paul VI for everything. On a separate note, PiusIX had known of the message of Our of La Salette. He understood Rome would lose the Faith and become the seat of the antichrist. Even Pope Pius XII did everything he could to preserve the Church. It goes to show when so-called traditionalists attack him that they are no different than the Novus Ordo church.

I doubt that 33 Bishops refused to attend out of principle. Most of the no-shows were due to health reasons. I think we would have heard about these 33 Traditionalists by now.

Only one I'm aware of who refused to sign the docuмents was Bishop Arrigo Pintonello.

You seem to echo the sentiments of the nuns that you need some kind of "pure" bishop.

Where did John XXIII "abrogate back past the Council of Trent"? I have never heard any such argument put forward by even the most dogmatic of sedevacantists.

2Vermont · « **Reply #70 on:** June 01, 2020, 05:03:02 PM »

Quote from: 2Vermont on May 30, 2020, 07:33:43 AM

I think the issue is that Xavier asserts that both are needed for Apostolic Succession for the sede bishops, but seems to think it doesn't apply to the bishops that come from the SSPX. Or at least that's what it seems.....maybe he could clarify.

Still no response from Xavier. Interesting.

Aristotl · « **Reply #71 on:** June 01, 2020, 06:31:36 PM »

You will find this in the book Handboo for the New Rubrics Frederick R. McManus,J.C.D.1960

Aristotl · « **Reply #72 on:** June 01, 2020, 09:06:04 PM »

As to the Jurisdiction at the death of a Holy Father all loose jurisdiction EXCEPT the Sacred Signatura and the Roman ROTA. Once the new Holy Father excepts then the jurisdiction is supplied. Simple seminarian 101

Struthio · « **Reply #73 on:** June 01, 2020, 09:08:11 PM »

Quote from: Aristotl on June 01, 2020, 09:06:04 PM

Once the new Holy Father

Which one?

All heretics loose their offices.

Aristotl · « **Reply #74 on:** June 01, 2020, 09:29:42 PM »

Exactly a Pope cannot go bad. If he is a bad Pope then no Pope at all.

Author Topic: List of Oldest living Catholic Bishops and Cardinals: (Read 6423 times)

DecemRationis

Re: List of Oldest living Catholic Bishops and Cardinals:

2Vermont

Re: List of Oldest living Catholic Bishops and Cardinals:

Struthio

Re: List of Oldest living Catholic Bishops and Cardinals:

DecemRationis

Re: List of Oldest living Catholic Bishops and Cardinals:

Struthio

Re: List of Oldest living Catholic Bishops and Cardinals:

DecemRationis

Re: List of Oldest living Catholic Bishops and Cardinals:

Struthio

Re: List of Oldest living Catholic Bishops and Cardinals:

Struthio

Re: List of Oldest living Catholic Bishops and Cardinals:

Aristotl

Re: List of Oldest living Catholic Bishops and Cardinals:

Ladislaus

Re: List of Oldest living Catholic Bishops and Cardinals:

2Vermont

Re: List of Oldest living Catholic Bishops and Cardinals:

Aristotl

Re: List of Oldest living Catholic Bishops and Cardinals:

Aristotl

Re: List of Oldest living Catholic Bishops and Cardinals:

Struthio

Re: List of Oldest living Catholic Bishops and Cardinals:

Aristotl

Re: List of Oldest living Catholic Bishops and Cardinals: