Again, you read into what I said what is not there,

I did not say 'the responsibility to judge the "pope"'. I said 'the respnsibility to judge popes'.

Each of us has to decide where we stand on the issue but not to pass off our opinion as some sort of teaching to share with others. I do not make statements about my stand on the present papacy. I have my opinion and I'm keeping it!

Does that make me SSPX friendly? Or a sedeplenist? Strange logic!

Each of us has to decide where we stand on the issue but not to pass off our opinion as some sort of teaching to share with others. I do not make statements about my stand on the present papacy. I have my opinion and I'm keeping it!

There are plenty of teachings from the ordinary magisterium (infallible according to Vatican I) that say should a Pope teach heresy, and that heresy be manifest, he is no longer Pope. The ordinary magisterium has taught this over and over and over, century after century. Francis has likewise taught heresy after heresy after heresy, all posted right on the Vatican websites so that no one can deny it..

What you believe in must be the truth from your perspective or you cannot claim you believe in it. We have infallible teaching from the ordinary magisterium behind us on this, so it is not opinion, but is Church teaching.

If you read up on the Western Schism where no one knew who the Pope was for 40 years, each person studied the matter to the best of their ability, then backed the Pope of their choice 100%. Go read up on it and you will see not a single Catholic at the time held the wishy-washy stance of "I will not make statements on my stand of the papacy".

As far as other forums not welcoming us, the reason might be we stir up something within their reason they would rather not think about.

Nope, that's not the reason.

 

Quote from: Recusant Sede

Quote from: Stubborn

Quote from: MyrnaM

As far as other forums not welcoming us, the reason might be we stir up something within their reason they would rather not think about.

Nope, that's not the reason.

What's the reason......?

Not owing any forum myself, I can only surmise the different reasons some forum owners have for not welcoming sedevacantists, but being "something within their reason they would rather not think about" is not very likely to be one of them - unless that "something" is anarchy.

If I had to guess the one reason that the forum owners might all agree upon, I would guess that it boils down to sedevacantism is intrinsically anarchistic. By  this I mean that as a rule, sedevacantists argue themselves into a mentality of total lawlessness, the only consequence of which is that the total legal structure of the Church is either threatened, or it is violated or destroyed, that is the result of anarchism.

This is only my guess but it seems like a worthy reason to me.

Wait, you emphatically state: "Nope, that's not the reason.", and then you say you are guessing. Don't you think it would be better if you didn't comment at all?

Also, you have a lot of nerve to sugest that sedevacantists have a lawless mentality. Have you ever given more than one minute on really thinking about this subject?

We are far from being lawless, those of us who hold the sedevacantist position, those of us  who obey and uphold the laws of the Church and who love the pope. Rather it is those who claim that Bergoglio is the pope and ignore all of his laws he enacts, who are being lawless. When was the last time you submitted to your local diocesan bishop? See, it is you who are lawless.

Can you see why Sedevacantists  can't accept this evil institution that has apostatized and it's manifestly heretical "pope" to have any authority over us? Sedevacantists want the rule of law, we want a true pope who we can submit to and obey.

Quote from: Stubborn

Quote from: Recusant Sede

Quote from: Stubborn

Quote from: MyrnaM

As far as other forums not welcoming us, the reason might be we stir up something within their reason they would rather not think about.

Nope, that's not the reason.

What's the reason......?

Not owing any forum myself, I can only surmise the different reasons some forum owners have for not welcoming sedevacantists, but being "something within their reason they would rather not think about" is not very likely to be one of them - unless that "something" is anarchy.

If I had to guess the one reason that the forum owners might all agree upon, I would guess that it boils down to sedevacantism is intrinsically anarchistic. By  this I mean that as a rule, sedevacantists argue themselves into a mentality of total lawlessness, the only consequence of which is that the total legal structure of the Church is either threatened, or it is violated or destroyed, that is the result of anarchism.

This is only my guess but it seems like a worthy reason to me.

Wait, you emphatically state: "Nope, that's not the reason.", and then you say you are guessing. Don't you think it would be better if you didn't comment at all?

Also, you have a lot of nerve to sugest that sedevacantists have a lawless mentality. Have you ever given more than one minute on really thinking about this subject?

We are far from being lawless, those of us who hold the sedevacantist position, those of us  who obey and uphold the laws of the Church and who love the pope. Rather it is those who claim that Bergoglio is the pope and ignore all of his laws he enacts, who are being lawless. When was the last time you submitted to your local diocesan bishop? See, it is you who are lawless.

Can you see why Sedevacantists  can't accept this evil institution that has apostatized and it's manifestly heretical "pope" to have any authority over us? Sedevacantists want the rule of law, we want a true pope who we can submit to and obey.

 :applause:

Quote from: Recusant Sede

Wait, you emphatically state: "Nope, that's not the reason.", and then you say you are guessing. Don't you think it would be better if you didn't comment at all?

Also, you have a lot of nerve to sugest that sedevacantists have a lawless mentality. Have you ever given more than one minute on really thinking about this subject?

We are far from being lawless, those of us who hold the sedevacantist position, those of us  who obey and uphold the laws of the Church and who love the pope. Rather it is those who claim that Bergoglio is the pope and ignore all of his laws he enacts, who are being lawless. When was the last time you submitted to your local diocesan bishop? See, it is you who are lawless.

Can you see why Sedevacantists  can't accept this evil institution that has apostatized and it's manifestly heretical "pope" to have any authority over us? Sedevacantists want the rule of law, we want a true pope who we can submit to and obey.

Well lets see, sedevacantists conclude that all those V2 cardinals and bishops lost their offices. Therefore, sedevacantists insist the elections of all the conciliar popes by the V2  and post V2 cardinals were invalid. Since the two Popes were also active at the Council, having been expelled from the Church, they could not have been validly elected.

Further still, all the conciliar bishops, having been excommunicated for their part in the Council, were automatically deprived of their dioceses. And since all the conciliar popes' elections were invalid, not only is the throne of St. Peter vacant, but all his appointments have been invalid also. Therefore, neither the Pope, nor any of the conciliar bishops, hold their offices legitimately, as such it only stands to reason that neither are there any more priests. The universal Church is without a head, and all the dioceses throughout the world are without ordinaries and all the NO priests are only heretical laymen.

Is that about right?

That's the anarchy of which I speak.

Those who folllow Vatican have left the Church.  Picture a piece of paper if you have any imagination and a small corner torn off representing  John Wycliffe and his ilk. now picture this torn off corner only bigger now, the torn off larger portion represents Martin Luther who widely acknowledged to have started the Reformation, so now the torn off portion represents a larger apostasy, and the larger portion of the paper REMAINING  represents the One, Holy, Catholic Faith with THE tear representing those who have gone their own way with a new religion.  

Here comes Vatican II, and suddenly a great big tear appears on the piece of paper, leaving only a tiny bit left.  WoW that big tear took the relics, property, valuable possessions such at Vatican City and all that it contained within.  This tiny piece left had nothing, BUT THE FAITH. Wait the Faith is everything according to Letter of St. Athanasius to his flock;  "May God console you! ...What saddens you ...is the fact that others have occupied the churches by violence, while during this time you are on the outside. It is a fact that they have the premises?but you have the apostolic Faith. They can occupy our churches, but they are outside the true Faith. You remain outside the places of worship, but the Faith dwells within you. Let us consider: what is more important, the place or the Faith? The true Faith, obviously. Who has lost and who has won in this struggle the one who keeps the premises or the one who keeps the Faith?"

Stubborn all you have is a counterfeit Church by your own admittance in past posts, you would not even say, that Francis is Catholic.  
You now believe a True Pope can deceive the faithful in Faith and Morals, the Vicar of Christ can teach not only Truth but error also.  The Marks are gone regarding doctrine, it is not necessary any longer during this time for Unity in doctrine, let every parish decide for themselves, let every faithful live according to their own will with absolutely NO ABSOLUTES.  

The faithful now walks in darkness, jumping from one parish to another to seek which one has the best Catholic culture.  Is it this priest or that one?  

Matthew said here recently, that to be sedevacantism means we do not have the fullness of the Church ... I say what is it that we are missing Matthew?  Heresy?

For your own information Stubborn, CHRIST IS THE HEAD OF THE CHURCH but I can assure you He is not the Head of Vatican II,  Francis IS!

Yes you have a Pope, Stubborn and YOU will have to answer for him.  You deny Our Lords own words when He says in Luke 18:8
"But yet the Son of man, when He cometh, shall He find, think you, faith on earth?"

 If Mr. Bergoglio were to have a complete conversion and by this I mean 100%. He would have to explicitly reject all of the errors of Vatican II, ecuмenism, religious liberty, the NO mass, etc. He would then have to be conditionally ordained and consecrated and also demand that the clergy that are deemed to profess the true faith be conditionally ordained and consecrated. All of the modernist clergy would have to be physically removed from the Church's buildings and be denounced if they do not profess the true faith.

If you say so.

In the mean time, you have no pope and no hierarchy or clergy and no means of electing a pope, hence restoring the hierarchy and Church - yet presumably have been able to keep the Catholic faith for the last 58 years without them. Makes one wonder, after 58 years without one, why sedevacantists even need a pope at all.

Which takes us back to why I said "sedevacantists argue themselves into a mentality of total lawlessness, the *only* consequence of which is that the total legal structure of the Church is either threatened, or it is violated or destroyed, that is the result of anarchism.

At least you did not deny it. Good on you for that!