Author Topic: Question for SSPX Resistance and similar independent types  (Read 578 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ByzCat3000

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1030
  • Reputation: +221/-80
  • Gender: Male
Question for SSPX Resistance and similar independent types
« on: September 21, 2019, 08:20:31 PM »
  • Thanks!6
  • No Thanks!2
  • Most people on this forum who are not sedevacantist are either SSPX Resistance or similar independent groups.  My question is, what exactly would any of you see as practically different if the see were vacant?

    I realize I've said this before, but it seems to me like you guys are functioning as though there's no pope, yet you, to varying degrees, insist that there is in fact a pope.

    So if there was no pope, what would be different?  I see a lot of people strongly insisting based on this or that principle that Francis must be the Pope, and yet there's a widespread ignoring of everything he says, or even of seriously attempting to wind up under his hierarchy.  So what would you lose by being Sedevacantist?

    (And to be clear, the reason the question doesn't work the opposite way is because presumably there are obligations to having a true pope, and that doesn't go the other way around.)

    Offline Meg

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3363
    • Reputation: +1660/-2686
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Question for SSPX Resistance and similar independent types
    « Reply #1 on: September 22, 2019, 05:05:12 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!2
  • Not to worry, ByzCat, there aren't many left on this forum (active posters) who aren't sedevacantist or sedeprivationist. It is, for the most part, sedevacantist here now. So really, you're preaching to the sedevacantist choir. 

    "This forum is a space for discussion to defend the Catholic Faith following Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre. It is therefore not for rallying to the conciliar church nor for sedevacantism"
    - From the French Resistance forum (Francophone forum, in France)


    Offline ByzCat3000

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1030
    • Reputation: +221/-80
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Question for SSPX Resistance and similar independent types
    « Reply #2 on: September 22, 2019, 05:33:51 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Not to worry, ByzCat, there aren't many left on this forum (active posters) who aren't sedevacantist or sedeprivationist. It is, for the most part, sedevacantist here now. So really, you're preaching to the sedevacantist choir.
    You’re definitely vocally resistance.  Are you willing to engage with the question?
    I’m neither Sedevacantist or sedeprivationist btw.  If anything you’d make the opposite accusation against me, that I’m too willing to work within the context of the established hierarchy despite frequently disagreeing with them.  I personally have no problem with Fellay, or the fssp.  All that said I’m interested in the question from
    A conceptual standpoint 

    Offline ByzCat3000

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1030
    • Reputation: +221/-80
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Question for SSPX Resistance and similar independent types
    « Reply #3 on: September 22, 2019, 05:34:42 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • This post isn’t intended for Sedevacantists to cheer it on, it’s intended for resistance members to engage with 

    Offline Meg

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3363
    • Reputation: +1660/-2686
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Question for SSPX Resistance and similar independent types
    « Reply #4 on: September 22, 2019, 05:43:30 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!3
  • This post isn’t intended for Sedevacantists to cheer it on, it’s intended for resistance members to engage with

    Why do you want to engage in something that has already been discussed many, many times on this forum? Do you think that our answers to ridiculous sede questions will magically change?
    "This forum is a space for discussion to defend the Catholic Faith following Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre. It is therefore not for rallying to the conciliar church nor for sedevacantism"
    - From the French Resistance forum (Francophone forum, in France)


    Offline ByzCat3000

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1030
    • Reputation: +221/-80
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Question for SSPX Resistance and similar independent types
    « Reply #5 on: September 22, 2019, 06:02:28 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Why do you want to engage in something that has already been discussed many, many times on this forum? Do you think that our answers to ridiculous sede questions will magically change?
    Well for one thing, I’m not a sede...

    Offline Meg

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3363
    • Reputation: +1660/-2686
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Question for SSPX Resistance and similar independent types
    « Reply #6 on: September 22, 2019, 06:03:44 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!3
  • Well for one thing, I’m not a sede...

    I don't believe that.
    "This forum is a space for discussion to defend the Catholic Faith following Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre. It is therefore not for rallying to the conciliar church nor for sedevacantism"
    - From the French Resistance forum (Francophone forum, in France)

    Offline ByzCat3000

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1030
    • Reputation: +221/-80
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Question for SSPX Resistance and similar independent types
    « Reply #7 on: September 22, 2019, 06:06:28 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0


  • Offline Pax Vobis

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5380
    • Reputation: +3094/-1376
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Question for SSPX Resistance and similar independent types
    « Reply #8 on: September 22, 2019, 06:42:46 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0

  • Quote
    I realize I've said this before, but it seems to me like you guys are functioning as though there's no pope, yet you, to varying degrees, insist that there is in fact a pope.

    So if there was no pope, what would be different? 
    Great question, Byzcat.  (Just ignore Meg...she enjoys arguing and name-calling and thinks that's an actual form of conversation.)
    .
    Practically, you are correct, generally speaking, in that this question doesn't change anything...or should I say, it SHOULDN'T change anything in the daily life of catholics.  We still all have to save our souls, still need to say the rosary, to practice charity and do our daily duties.  ...So, really, the question and debate is theoretical.  A heretic pope has the same outcome as there being no pope - the lack of leadership from rome is absent either way.  We're all on our own to save our souls either way.
    .
    However, it does matter specifically, because in the real world, even those who agree with the Resistance or who don't care about the topic of sedevacantism at all, have to find masses to attend.  And oftentimes "resistance" Trads have to go to "sede" chapels because that's the only option.  And vice versa.  And most clerics take this THEORETICAL debate and make it a PRACTICAL issue, because they constantly preach about it (and some even refuse sacraments to those who are on "the other side").  It's quite childish, uncharitable and totally at odds with the reason they became clerics to being with.  So in this sense, the question is unavoidable, because clerics on "both sides" are obsessed with the question to a degree that is unhealthy.  The devil has done a great job to split up Tradition by way of this question; a question that should be a fun theoretical and historical exercise but has turned into an Inquisition-level, Hatfields vs McCoys bloody mess.

    Offline MiserereMei

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 59
    • Reputation: +29/-9
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Question for SSPX Resistance and similar independent types
    « Reply #9 on: September 22, 2019, 07:41:56 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Most people on this forum who are not sedevacantist are either SSPX Resistance or similar independent groups.  My question is, what exactly would any of you see as practically different if the see were vacant?

    I realize I've said this before, but it seems to me like you guys are functioning as though there's no pope, yet you, to varying degrees, insist that there is in fact a pope.

    So if there was no pope, what would be different?  I see a lot of people strongly insisting based on this or that principle that Francis must be the Pope, and yet there's a widespread ignoring of everything he says, or even of seriously attempting to wind up under his hierarchy.  So what would you lose by being Sedevacantist?

    (And to be clear, the reason the question doesn't work the opposite way is because presumably there are obligations to having a true pope, and that doesn't go the other way around.)
    It might sound simplistic, but if God works the miracle of Francis' conversion then there's no need to elect a new pope to restore all things in Christ.

    Offline ByzCat3000

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1030
    • Reputation: +221/-80
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Question for SSPX Resistance and similar independent types
    « Reply #10 on: September 22, 2019, 07:45:26 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It might sound simplistic, but if God works the miracle of Francis' conversion then there's no need to elect a new pope to restore all things in Christ.
    I suppose this is fair, which would put the SSPX Resistance as *practically* Sedeprivationist, but both would differ from a pure Sedevacantist in this regard.  


    Offline ByzCat3000

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1030
    • Reputation: +221/-80
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Question for SSPX Resistance and similar independent types
    « Reply #11 on: September 22, 2019, 07:47:19 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Great question, Byzcat.  (Just ignore Meg...she enjoys arguing and name-calling and thinks that's an actual form of conversation.)
    .
    Practically, you are correct, generally speaking, in that this question doesn't change anything...or should I say, it SHOULDN'T change anything in the daily life of catholics.  We still all have to save our souls, still need to say the rosary, to practice charity and do our daily duties.  ...So, really, the question and debate is theoretical.  A heretic pope has the same outcome as there being no pope - the lack of leadership from rome is absent either way.  We're all on our own to save our souls either way.
    .
    However, it does matter specifically, because in the real world, even those who agree with the Resistance or who don't care about the topic of sedevacantism at all, have to find masses to attend.  And oftentimes "resistance" Trads have to go to "sede" chapels because that's the only option.  And vice versa.  And most clerics take this THEORETICAL debate and make it a PRACTICAL issue, because they constantly preach about it (and some even refuse sacraments to those who are on "the other side").  It's quite childish, uncharitable and totally at odds with the reason they became clerics to being with.  So in this sense, the question is unavoidable, because clerics on "both sides" are obsessed with the question to a degree that is unhealthy.  The devil has done a great job to split up Tradition by way of this question; a question that should be a fun theoretical and historical exercise but has turned into an Inquisition-level, Hatfields vs McCoys bloody mess.
    I realize at a certain level it doesn't matter much to *individuals* either way, but, for instance, it does seem that the indult or regular SSPX [or Neo-SSPX if you prefer that], while certainly not an ultramontanist "just believe whatever the Pope says", believes that Francis is in fact the Pope *and acts in a manner that accords with that belief.*  Whereas I'm not sure in what meaningful way the SSPX Resistance acts as though the see is vacant, and thus seems meaningfully no different from sedeprivationism in terms of actual action (I grant the difference with pure sedevacantism that MM pointed out.)

    Online Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5134
    • Reputation: +5876/-530
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Question for SSPX Resistance and similar independent types
    « Reply #12 on: September 22, 2019, 07:50:47 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • Alas, Our Lord has allowed for a non-canonically elected, Pope to sit on the visible Seat, to function as a "destroyer".
    "Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it underfoot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Our Lord Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor but a destroyer."  St. Francis of Assisi

    Offline Mark 79

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2087
    • Reputation: +1540/-344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Question for SSPX Resistance and similar independent types
    « Reply #13 on: September 22, 2019, 08:39:57 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Alas, Our Lord has allowed for a non-canonically elected, Pope to sit on the visible Seat, to function as a "destroyer".
    Señor "Jesus Made Himself the Devil" Bergoglio "subsists in" the Chair of Peter.


     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16