I'm a newcomer to this community and I am noticing that there are alot of "Sedevacantists" who participate in this forum.

Sedevacantism is not an area I find myself extremely well-versed in. I know enough to know what it means and that I don't find myself in agreement with the position. I also know that there have been a number of such people who at one point decided that they, themselves, were somehow the true bishop of Rome (Gregory XVII, Pius XIII, Michael, &c).

I have two questions (and pardon me if, as a newcomer, I am attempting to begin a conversation that has already been had to death in this forum):

1. Are there former Sedevacantists here who now believe that the Chair of Peter is occupied (by someone other than Benedict XVI), and if so, how do they, personally, fit in to that man's...regime (pardon the term). Are you a layperson in fealty to him? Are you one of his priests? One of his bishops?

2. For those who remain Sedevacantists, do you find yourselves more sensible of inevitability or of futility? That is to say, do you anticipate the See of Rome will be occupied any time soon, or do you all but despair of it at this point? Furthermore, if you think the See will, indeed, be occupied soon, by whom might it be occupied, do you suppose, and approximately when might you expect it to happen? Are there any "papabile" today, in other words?

As a sedevacantist,  it is simple for me, not complicated.  I just don’t believe that a past pope can be contradicted by a future pope in matters of Faith  to the degree that even the First Commandment is cast aside as if it means nothing at all.
 
I don’t think any sedevacantist, really knows, even if they think they know.   Most want to believe we will have a true pope again and we also think it will be at the Hand of God when it happens, not at the hand of man.

Because at the Hand of God, the world will know the True Pope, because He is God and will make sure of it. It won't be a self proclaimed pope somewhere, or even someone that a particular group of people elected, it will be a Pope that the whole world, or what is left of it will know.

None pretend to know when it will happen although they may speculate about how and when.  It really comes down to trust in Jesus Christ, He is the Head of His Church and the only thing we know for sure is the end of the story.  The Church will survive.  

So, MyrnaM, no one waiting in the wings, then, so far as you seem to discern. And, furthermore, no one who is going to convince you he's pope because a sedevacantist coffee klatch somewhere "elected" him and gave him a new name with a regnal numeral after it and set him up with his own website from which to shepherd the flock.  

The vacancy of the See of Rome, as you see it, will involve a more universal resolution, probably Divine in character, that will be fairly obvious to the whole world, satisfying more than just a little group here or a little group there.

If this is to be resolved by the "Hand of God" as you say, will it be, do you imagine, a sort of instant, spectacular resolution, such as SpiritusSanctus has in mind?

Or do you think it might possibly involve a more subtle but obvious motion of the Almighty over time? Might it perhaps involve God working in time through human hands to accomplish the work in due course, according to His usual way? Perhaps even through Catholics of the City of Rome, itself (as opposed to, say, Catholics in small town America or in Francophone Canada or something), effecting the election, somehow, of their own bishop?

 

I don't pretend to know God's plan, I just trust Him completely.  

I don't worry about how God does it, and I also don't worry about what the next blunder will be of your "pope", that alone is a sigh of relief, a peace that only God can give.  

God bless you, Myrna !  :smile:

2. For those who remain Sedevacantists, do you find yourselves more sensible of inevitability or of futility?

Inevitability.

That is to say, do you anticipate the See of Rome will be occupied any time soon, or do you all but despair of it at this point?

Well, I suppose that I do not rule out the possibility that there is indeed a Pope who reigns currently, but who is impeded from publicly showing himself for some grave reason.  I am undecided on the question of sedeimpeditism, but I do not rule it out as such and, therefore, proceed as a sedevacantist, though one whose only option for the sacraments is with the SSPX (since I will not go to the SSPV, who I consider schismatic for their refusal to be in communion with fellow Catholics for some strange and cultish reasons).  Regardless, I think that the world is filled with signs and warnings pertaining to imminent divine punishment, and I think that a Pope will be elected soon during a series of dramatic events, as per the various prophecies on the subject.  That being said, of course I cannot know anything for sure, but I have Faith that the Church will be put at peace and liberty within my lifetime, and I pray for that and do not despair of it.

Furthermore, if you think the See will, indeed, be occupied soon, by whom might it be occupied, do you suppose, and approximately when might you expect it to happen?

I think the Sacred Heart apparitions and the Immaculate Heart apparitions at Paray-le-Monial and Fatima (and to Sister Lucía later) are a couplet of the same apparition cycle, and that, just as the warnings to the King of France in the Sacred Heart apparitions came to pass one hundred years after being given, so the warnings to the Church and the world in the Immaculate Heart apparitions will come to pass one hundred years after they were given, i.e. 2017.  I could be wrong, of course, but that is what I think will happen.  And, specifically, I think that the Great Monarch and Great Pope will both reign soon.  In any case, if all of this does not happen, it will not substantially affect my fundamental position, which is theological in nature and does not rely on prophecies.  That is to say, I cannot but believe that Fr Ratzinger is a manifest heretic, that the 1968 episcopal consecration formula is per se invalid, and that both of these things, as well as the heresies contained in the Vatican II docuмents ("men have the inalienable right not to be restrained from manifesting their religious opinions in public, the only exception being for the preservation of public order," for instance) mean that there cannot have been a Pope for at least since 1963, if not since the death of Pius XII, and furthermore that all so-called bishops and priests whose 'orders' derive from the 1968 episcopal consecration formula are not bishops and/or priests.

Are there any "papabile" today, in other words?

Hard to say.  I can't think of any off the top of my head.

Excuse me, to compare Ratzinger to Peter is to insult the Blessed St. Peter. Peter denied any affiliation with Christ

Well, that wasn't Peter's only misstep, of course, but no matter. I understand that a Sedevacantist and myself are not about to see eye-to-eye with respect to the status of Benedict XVI.

Let me ask this question, though, if I may prevail upon your patience:

You regard Benedict XVI's claim to the See of Peter as illegitimate, of course.  Can you conceive of any scenario through which his claim could be legitimized? Could the ostensible pope, under any circuмstances, become the true and authentic bishop of Rome? If so, what would those circuмstances involve, would you say?

PereJoseph:

You have a remarkable talent for providing a well-considered, multi-dimensional, and thorough response to difficult questions; I enjoy interacting with you. I wonder if I could ask you also to ponder the question I've asked of GregoryI.

Can you conceive of any scenario through which his claim could be legitimized? Could the ostensible pope, under any circuмstances, become the true and authentic bishop of Rome? If so, what would those circuмstances involve, would you say?

The first step is, of course, that the ostensible pope stop, at least, speaking and teaching heresy.  The second steop would be that the ostensible pope begin teaching the Catholic Faith.

When these things happen, it will be time to start discussing the question.

What say you Retablo can you think of a circuмstance where your current leader will make a public declaration that Vatican II is to be annulled and the men who usurped the Chair of Peter during those unhappy times, their names,  John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI are burnt along with any and all writings authored by said persons.
 
Perhaps if this was done, then a Conclave of Traditional Bishops can be called and a new Pope be restored,  Ratzingers name, because of his good deed described above, might be in the run.

But I wouldn't hold my breath that this will happen!  Yet, God does work in mysterious ways doesn't He.  

I wanted to say, that Ratzinger also order the deceased Vatican II "popes" be exhumed and tossed into the Tiber river, but decided not to say it.