Author Topic: Papal Trivia for Sedevacantists (Read 2916 times)

MyrnaM · « **Reply #15 on:** September 05, 2016, 01:53:15 PM »

Sometime in the Bible when speaking of days, or time, it just means duration and the real meaning of a passage remains ambiguous as explained in: 2 Peter 3; 8 “a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day”.
I tend to believe there will somewhere in the world The Holy Sacrifice will always BE. Malachias Chp. 1; 2 “For from the rising of the sun even to the going down, my name is great among the Gentiles, and in every place there is sacrifice, and there is offered to my name a clean oblation: for my name is great among the Gentiles, said the Lord of hosts.

During the Great Apostasy only a pale light will shine.

songbird · « **Reply #16 on:** September 05, 2016, 03:39:07 PM »

I never said that the eternal sacrifice was from Vat II. Sorry if that was a misunderstanding. We are very close. No one knows when but we can see New Order is pagan. Anyone who does it, shows their rotten fruits against the Precious Blood, sacriledge!

songbird · « **Reply #17 on:** September 05, 2016, 03:47:32 PM »

Myrna: Do you recall an image book title "Mr. Blue"? It is novel of type. Only one priest on the earth, that tries to make wheat, because the world would not allow us to grow our own. The priest makes a host and goes up to the top of a very tall structure and begin the Mass. Helicopters come and the consecration takes place just in time before the enemy tries to stop it.

MyrnaM · « **Reply #18 on:** September 06, 2016, 10:10:38 AM »

Quote from: MyrnaM

Again, Neil no one denies any corruption and bad evil popes with their politics ever existed, as your post describes, yet, what doctrines have those mentioned popes changed regarding Faith and Morals?

This is what we have since VII, a changing of doctrines, including the omission of dogma and becoming Protestant like. THAT IS APOSTASY!

Yet you are right the Papacy is still there with the True Church, Jesus Christ is guiding us.

Upon thinking about the Papacy during an interregnum and wondering how to explain it, the words ... it is suspended... came to me.

Thoughts anyone?

Mithrandylan · « **Reply #19 on:** September 06, 2016, 11:55:53 AM »

Quote from: MyrnaM

Quote from: MyrnaM
Again, Neil no one denies any corruption and bad evil popes with their politics ever existed, as your post describes, yet, what doctrines have those mentioned popes changed regarding Faith and Morals?

This is what we have since VII, a changing of doctrines, including the omission of dogma and becoming Protestant like. THAT IS APOSTASY!

Yet you are right the Papacy is still there with the True Church, Jesus Christ is guiding us.

Upon thinking about the Papacy during an interregnum and wondering how to explain it, the words ... it is suspended... came to me.

Thoughts anyone?

The Office of the papacy is simply unoccupied during an interregnum. The office still exists, and it's powers, rights, and privileges latently await a Pope to exercise them.

MyrnaM · « **Reply #20 on:** September 06, 2016, 02:25:03 PM »

Quote from: Mithrandylan

Quote from: MyrnaM
Quote from: MyrnaM
Again, Neil no one denies any corruption and bad evil popes with their politics ever existed, as your post describes, yet, what doctrines have those mentioned popes changed regarding Faith and Morals?

This is what we have since VII, a changing of doctrines, including the omission of dogma and becoming Protestant like. THAT IS APOSTASY!

Yet you are right the Papacy is still there with the True Church, Jesus Christ is guiding us.

Upon thinking about the Papacy during an interregnum and wondering how to explain it, the words ... it is suspended... came to me.

Thoughts anyone?

The Office of the papacy is simply unoccupied during an interregnum. The office still exists, and it's powers, rights, and privileges latently await a Pope to exercise them.

I understand, and not trying to disagree, but wouldn't that be the same as saying, "The Office is suspended" ... till ... as you say await a Pope.
I am just trying to defend my position of sedevacantism in a way that some with an open mind will understand. So many want so much to believe that we are schismatic because we in their mind deny the Papacy and that is so wrong. CMRI are always quoting the Popes, and their words, both written and spoken.

Mithrandylan · « **Reply #21 on:** September 06, 2016, 04:53:28 PM »

Quote from: MyrnaM

Quote from: Mithrandylan
Quote from: MyrnaM
Quote from: MyrnaM
Again, Neil no one denies any corruption and bad evil popes with their politics ever existed, as your post describes, yet, what doctrines have those mentioned popes changed regarding Faith and Morals?

This is what we have since VII, a changing of doctrines, including the omission of dogma and becoming Protestant like. THAT IS APOSTASY!

Yet you are right the Papacy is still there with the True Church, Jesus Christ is guiding us.

Upon thinking about the Papacy during an interregnum and wondering how to explain it, the words ... it is suspended... came to me.

Thoughts anyone?

The Office of the papacy is simply unoccupied during an interregnum. The office still exists, and it's powers, rights, and privileges latently await a Pope to exercise them.

I understand, and not trying to disagree, but wouldn't that be the same as saying, "The Office is suspended" ... till ... as you say await a Pope.
I am just trying to defend my position of sedevacantism in a way that some with an open mind will understand. So many want so much to believe that we are schismatic because we in their mind deny the Papacy and that is so wrong. CMRI are always quoting the Popes, and their words, both written and spoken.

Since Vatican I defined the papal office as perpetual and uninterrupted, I think that referring to it as suspended is problematic. It is merely unoccupied, as it has been some two-handed and fifty times throughout history.

roscoe · « **Reply #22 on:** September 06, 2016, 05:18:57 PM »

Quote from: St Ignatius

Quote from: reconquest
There are a lot of Mexican Catholic who have an axe to grind with the papacy due to Pius XI's handling of the Cristero War.

That's an interesting subject in itself... but I don't think too many modern Mexican Catholics know, or even care, about the subject. Me thinks those who truly cared, are now enjoying their eternal reward with a crown of martyrdom.

Viva Cristo Rey!

Pius XI was basically in the same position with the Cristeros that Pius VII had with French Revolution. I do not believe that either can be accused of malfeasance. :reporter:

Cantarella · « **Reply #23 on:** September 06, 2016, 05:46:45 PM »

Quote from: GJC

Quote from: Cantarella
To think that there is absolutely no Precious Blood anywhere in the world from the time of VII to this day, (that is, more than half a century ago - 3 or 4 generations of Catholics without the Blood), is incorrect and goes against the promise of Our Lord.

Question for you Cantarella, since we know that our Lord promises to be with His Church until the end of times, could it be possible that in the end times "the faithful" will only be able to receive communion and confession through desire? The council of Trent defines that these sacraments can be received in desire when they are not available? Curious what your thoughts are on this.

Most Church Fathers think that the prophecy in Daniel refers to the public Sacrifice of the Mass, but that the Sacrifice will continue to exist remotely in "mountains and caves", as in the catacombs. Again, this is supposed to occur for three years and a half. The public Sacrifice will disappear; but the true Mass will continue to be said in secret. I would think that for those Catholics actually living in those times, or those who for some reason are unable to attend Mass, communion can be received effectually in desire. This prophecy actually may have been partially fulfilled already during the times of the Protestant reformation and the liturgical changes occurring after Vatican II Council.

I would want to think that God would provide somehow his "Elect" with the ability to receive Him sacramentally, His Body and Blood, in a tangible Holy Eucharist, even in those times; but we know that the Sacramental receiving of Christ's Body is not always necessary to salvation. Example, baptized children that die before First Communion; those in prison, those physically ill, those who have no Mass available to them, etc. St. Thomas also taught in the Summa that Communion can be received in desire when "they believe through the Church's faith, so they desire the Eucharist through the Church's intention, and, as a result, receive its reality".

Clemens Maria · « **Reply #24 on:** September 06, 2016, 09:31:52 PM »

Quote from: Cantarella

Quote from: GJC
Quote from: Cantarella
To think that there is absolutely no Precious Blood anywhere in the world from the time of VII to this day, (that is, more than half a century ago - 3 or 4 generations of Catholics without the Blood), is incorrect and goes against the promise of Our Lord.

Question for you Cantarella, since we know that our Lord promises to be with His Church until the end of times, could it be possible that in the end times "the faithful" will only be able to receive communion and confession through desire? The council of Trent defines that these sacraments can be received in desire when they are not available? Curious what your thoughts are on this.

Most Church Fathers think that the prophecy in Daniel refers to the public Sacrifice of the Mass, but that the Sacrifice will continue to exist remotely in "mountains and caves", as in the catacombs. Again, this is supposed to occur for three years and a half. The public Sacrifice will disappear; but the true Mass will continue to be said in secret. I would think that for those Catholics actually living in those times, or those who for some reason are unable to attend Mass, communion can be received effectually in desire. This prophecy actually may have been partially fulfilled already during the times of the Protestant reformation and the liturgical changes occurring after Vatican II Council.

I'm not trying to be contrary but if it was only the public Mass that was suppressed, why would the 3.5 years be significant when the public Mass was suppressed for many decades during the early persecutions? In other words, why would the 3.5 year suppression be a big enough deal for Daniel to prophesy about it but not about the many decades of persecution during the first few centuries of the Church? My expectation would be that the persecution of the Anti-Christ will be much worse than any prior persecution in the Church's history. And what could be worse than what happened in the first centuries of the Church's history?

songbird · « **Reply #25 on:** September 06, 2016, 11:27:58 PM »

What could be worse? No Precious Blood. IMO maybe God wants man to know what it is like without the Precious Blood.

Kiwi · « **Reply #26 on:** September 14, 2016, 04:57:40 AM »

Quote from: TKGS

The claim that previous popes were heretics was refuted at the Vatican Council.

how do we explain galatians 2 then?